So much here I have never considered before. Thanks for opening this up.
In my mind, I have always seen these four men as traveling alone on a dangerous road. Quite likely the victim was, but what about the others?
Being high-up muckety-mucks, the Pharisee and the Levite were probably traveling with numerous companions, maybe even with hired guards, to eliminate any threat from the robbers. This possibility, if true, only heaps more guilt on them as others in their party could have helped the wounded man and they would not have had to touch him personally. They could have left part of their retinue behind to care for the man and traveled on. However, they did not and reaped their judgment.
The Samaritan, who might have been a businessman, was certainly wealthy enough to pull a large amount of cash from his wallet without depriving him of necessary operating capital. In addition, he wrote a promissory note for the extra expenses and did not quibble about the amount. This tells me that he had the means to also travel with a company of others and probably did so for his own protection. He must have been an influential person who had the authority (at least the ability) to halt the procession while the wounded man was tended to.
Admittedly, I am reading into this story, but this seems logical and consistent with human nature. At any rate, it definitely brings your description of love to life in a personal way.
"Love is a verb, an action word. It means to enter into the situation of the other, and do what can be done to help. In the parable, the Samaritan uses both his time and money for this purpose: putting love in action."
Good stuff!
So much here I have never considered before. Thanks for opening this up.
In my mind, I have always seen these four men as traveling alone on a dangerous road. Quite likely the victim was, but what about the others?
Being high-up muckety-mucks, the Pharisee and the Levite were probably traveling with numerous companions, maybe even with hired guards, to eliminate any threat from the robbers. This possibility, if true, only heaps more guilt on them as others in their party could have helped the wounded man and they would not have had to touch him personally. They could have left part of their retinue behind to care for the man and traveled on. However, they did not and reaped their judgment.
The Samaritan, who might have been a businessman, was certainly wealthy enough to pull a large amount of cash from his wallet without depriving him of necessary operating capital. In addition, he wrote a promissory note for the extra expenses and did not quibble about the amount. This tells me that he had the means to also travel with a company of others and probably did so for his own protection. He must have been an influential person who had the authority (at least the ability) to halt the procession while the wounded man was tended to.
Admittedly, I am reading into this story, but this seems logical and consistent with human nature. At any rate, it definitely brings your description of love to life in a personal way.
"Love is a verb, an action word. It means to enter into the situation of the other, and do what can be done to help. In the parable, the Samaritan uses both his time and money for this purpose: putting love in action."