the beatitudes and good samaritan

I have also always found the Beatitudes to be a particularly problematic set of directions outlined by Jesus. Not only that, but the implications of these commandments are also relatively confusing. On one hand, Jesus claims “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God” (154). On the other hand, Jesus claims “woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation” (154). It is difficult to imagine that individuals should be condemned simply because they are being ‘consoled’ (to use the verbage of the passage). Jesus even continues by claiming, “Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep” (154). I remember the Church explaining these verses as Jesus condemning those who are selfish or greedy, not necessarily those who are simply wealthy. I am not entirely comfortable with this assertion. The blessings that Jesus bestows are to groups of people who are suffering, whereas the ‘woes’ are granted to different categories of people who are free from suffering. Not only is this problematic because those individuals certainly have their own demons that they are struggling with, but also their wealth is not correlative with their other interactions with individuals.

all about the benjamins, baby

The Parable of the Good Samaritan reminded me of the discussion about love that occurred at the end of the previous class. Moreover, it is also reminiscent of the many discussions about compassion that we had in the fall semester. This parable is the response of an individual asking what he should do “to inherit eternal life” (156). Context must be given to this passage regarding who the Samaritans were in the times of the New Testament. The point of this passage is to illustrate that an injured man “is helped not by a Jewish priest or Levite (ministers of the Jerusalem temple) but rather by a despised Samaritan (who, by definition, rejects the Jerusalem temple)” (Meier 227). This gives greater meaning to the parable. Rather than merely being descriptive of compassion for everyone, it also claims that even an individual who rejects the Jerusalem temple still has the ability to be good in God’s eyes because of their actions. Also important is that the Samaritan was willing to spend his own wealth to help the stranger. As opposed to how many individuals use their wealth to pretend that suffering exists, the Samaritan uses his wealth to alleviate suffering. Those who spend money to erect large gated communities and ramp up police enforcement relegate to the periphery “poverty, old age, and death so that we need not confront them in our daily lives. The poor are off in ghettos, the elderly in retirement homes, the dying in terminal care wards. We pay to push suffering away” (Dass 57). This response to suffering can even be extended to animals. Just as Blake pronounces, “Can I see another’s woe/And not be in sorrow too?” (167). The poem later makes references to God as “He who smiles on all” yet “becomes a man of woe” (167). Blake is contextually responding to the witnessing of the sorrow of another. The Good Samaritan seems to indicate that our love for a creator is expressed through our actions with each other. 1 John 4 argues that “If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar” (162). It is impossible to have a love for God according to the New Testament without also expressing that compassion to other human beings.

samaritan helping the guy that got jumped

John Meier. “The Historical Jesus and the Historical Samaritans”. Biblica 81 (2000).