I also participated in a group contemplative activity based on Nouwen’s experience with the painting. We projected a copy of the painting in front of the group and invited each of us to focus on a detail and meditate on where we saw ourselves in the painting… which figure we identified with, and which we wanted to identify with. As each shared the fruits of their contemplation, the experience of the parable became richer for all present.

-Wade

Dear Julian,
While I agree to a point, I have come to see that Jesus is more directly answering the question than most recognize. Perhaps one could say he directly answers the question in an indirect manner?

“The answer was obvious – their neighbors were the Jews among whom they lived and worshiped and carried out their daily lives. Jesus laid down a new way of looking at the concept of “neighbor” in showing how a Samaritan was the neighbor . . . .”

I think this is most true when we understand that “neighbor,” as from Lev 19:18, is defined as “fellow covenant member.” Thus I believe Jesus is directly teaching (albeit in a somewhat indirect manner) that He is the Messiah prophesied to reunite the long-divided Northern (Israel) with the Southern (Judah) parts of greater Israel (cf. Isa 11:13; Hos 1:11; Jer 3:18; Ezek 37:16, etc.).

Therefore, while this parable can be extrapolated to address the question of our relation to non-covenant members, it does not address it. There is still a determinative distinction between Christians and non-Christians. It specifically teaches about the prophesied messianic reunification of Israel.

N.T. Wright is helpful for the framework from which I developed this understanding.

Thus Jesus answers the question of “who is my fellow covenant member” by saying that the Samarian Northern Israelites are to be recognized as part of the covenant even though the exclusivist and/or racist Judaeans exclude them.

The Edz asked, “If the Bible is shown to be false in those areas that can be checked on (some history and some science), then why should the Bible be believed in the areas that cannot be checked on (the spiritual parts)?”

I ask, why not?

Writers from the biblical eras did not have the technological and social resources to investigate the details of the historical claims they made, nor did they have the scientific method and instrumens to investigate the natural world, as we have. We are unfair to hold them to the same standards we hold modern researchers.

2 Timothy 3.16-17 reads, “All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.”

Scripture prepares us for good works. It is not a history or science text. Mistaken historical and scientific claims throughout the Bible are incidental. Concerning the Bible, Charles Augustus Briggs wrote, ” It does not follow, however, that circumstantial, incidental errors, such as might arise from the inadvertance or lack of information of an author, are any impeachment to his credibility.”

The Edz makes a valid of my account of the Bible throughout Church history. I therefore briefly revise it: There has not been a singular, dominant position, conservative or liberal, concerning the Bible maintained throughout Church history. The Edz cited Augustine, whose position differs quite significantly from that of Origen, who came before him.

Furthermore, to bring this back to several posts prior to this one, I am arguing that Augustine’s, as cited by The Edz, and the positions of modern fundamentalists’ and Evangelicals’ is not biblical. In other words, their statements regarding the Bible do not actually find support in the Bible – at least, as the Bible is objectively and thoroughly interpreted.

A biblical statement regarding the Bible might read something like this: The biblical texts were written over several centuries by men guided by God’s inspiration and are valuable resources for spiritual formation and for understanding the ways God has directed God’s people.