The Samaritan had compassion on the wounded man; and the emotion is
known to be genuine by the fruits which it immediately bears: he bound
up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine. These methods doubtless
represent the opinions and practice of the time and place as to the
treatment of wounds. They constituted the expression of the Samaritan's
painstaking compassion; and for our present purpose no further notice of
them is needful.[64]
[64] The Samaritan was riding; for he set the wounded man "on his
own beast." What of the priest and the Levite?--were they riding, or
performing the journey on foot? If they were both pedestrians, while
the Samaritan had a mule or an ass, it is obvious that the two
parties were not on equal terms, and that consequently no fair test
of their benevolence could in that transaction be obtained. On that
very ground I think it is certain that they were riding as well as
he. The parable is not a history, containing the simple facts of any
given case, without respect to the lessons which the facts may
contain; it is a picture, constructed according to its Author's
mind, and constructed for the purpose of expressing a particular
lesson which the Author already had in his mind, and desired to
teach. The doctrine which the Teacher intended to declare obviously
requires that the two parties whose compassion is compared and
contrasted should be on equal terms. The lesson which he meant to
convey would slip through and be lost, like water through a leaky
vessel, if the priest and Levite were walking when they found the
wounded man: we must, therefore, if we would not do violence to the
parable, assume that both were mounted. With this conclusion,
resulting from the nature of the case, the expressions in their
minutest details correspond. The journey of the priest is narrated
in the same terms as that of the Samaritan: "A certain priest came
down that way," and "A certain Samaritan as he journeyed came where
he was:" we never learn that the Samaritan had a beast of burden
until he sets the half-dead traveller upon its back. There was no
occasion for mentioning the priest's mule, for he made no special or
remarkable use of it.
The inn to which the patient was conducted must have been more than a
khan built on the way-side, and left empty, a free shelter to each party
of travellers who chose to occupy it for a night. It must have been
something more nearly allied to our modern system; for there was a
resident manager, who kept in store such provisions as travellers
needed, and supplied them to customers for money.
The Samaritan remained all night with his patient, and then intrusted
the case to the care of the inn-keeper, paying a sum to account, and
pledging his credit for the balance, if the expense should ultimately
exceed the amount of his deposit. Two denaria (pence) were at the time
and in the circumstances of value sufficient to meet the probable
outlay.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account