[Trapped]

Wow, JJ, yes, I just read the verses and then read some of Lee's "interpretation" in the Life-Study. It is a shockingly bad reading of the passage.

Lee says "In the parable that follows, the Lord answered the lawyer by showing him that he [the lawyer] did not need a neighbor to love. Instead, he needed a neighbor to love him. Because he is not able to love, he needs someone to love him. As we shall see, this neighbor is the good Samaritan."

That is the dead opposite of what Jesus is saying!! Jesus is SAYING the lawyer needs to love his neighbor! But Lee says that the lawyer didn't need a neighbor to love because he isn't able, and so the Lord was trying to show the lawyer that the lawyer needed someone to love him instead. I literally don't even understand......did Lee stand on his head when reading these verses?

Lee says, "The “certain man” in verse 30, in the Savior’s intention, signified the self-justified lawyer as a sinner fallen from the foundation of peace (Jerusalem) to the condition of curse (Jericho)......The words “going down” indicate falling from the city of the foundation of peace to the city of curse. Therefore, the certain man in this parable was falling from the foundation of peace to a place of curse."

As Drake used to say, Nnn...nnnoo....nooo. The wounded man is NOT the laywer, and the origin and destination do NOT have that significance in the story. Another, in my opinion, much, much better non-Lee analysis of that I have come across says:

"Jericho was one of the priestly cities, so that there would be frequent travellers on ecclesiastical errands. The priest was ‘going down’ {that is from Jerusalem}, so he could not plead a ‘pressing public engagement’ at the Temple. The verbal repetition of the description of the conduct of both him and the Levite serves to suggest its commonness. They two did exactly the same thing, and so would twenty or two hundred ordinary passers by. They saw the man lying in a pool of blood, and they made a wide circuit, and, even in the face of such a sight, went on their way. Probably they said to themselves, ‘Robbers again; the sooner we get past this dangerous bit, the better.’ We see that they were heartless, but they did not see it. We do the same thing ourselves, and do not see that we do; for who of us has not known of many miseries which we could have done something to stanch, and have left untouched because our hearts were unaffected? The world would be a changed place if every Christian attended to the sorrows that are plain before him."

This makes much more sense. An even further level-headed commentary says this (it recognizes that Jesus Himself binds up our wounds, but that He is the example for us to follow, NOT that we are not to love our neighbor as Lee seems to be saying!): "It is not spiritualising this narrative when we say that Jesus is Himself the great pattern of the swift compassion and effectual helpfulness which it sets forth. Many unwise attempts have been made to tack on spiritual meanings to the story. These are as irreverent as destructive of its beauty and significance. But to say that Christ is the perfect example of that love to every man which the narrative portrays, has nothing in common with these fancies. It is only when we have found in Him the pity and the healing which we need, that we shall go forth into the world with love as wide as His."

Lee keeps going: "The man going down from Jerusalem to Jericho fell among robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. These robbers signify the legalistic teachers of the Judaic law (John 10:1), who used the law (1 Cor. 15:56) to rob the lawkeepers like the self-justified lawyer. The word “stripped” signifies the stripping by the law misused by the Judaizers. The Greek word translated “beat” literally means “laid blows upon.” This beating signifies the killing by the law (Rom. 7:9-10). Furthermore, the robbers leaving the man half dead signifies the Judaizers’ leaving the lawkeeper in a dead condition (Rom. 7:11, 13).All the Pharisees, legalistic teachers of Judaism, are here likened to robbers. The lawyer is likened to the one going down from Jerusalem to Jericho who fell among these robbers and was stripped and beaten by them. The legalistic teachers of the Jewish religion stripped people and beat them and then left them half dead. This was the situation of the lawyer, although he did not realize that he was in such a condition."

HOLY READING BETWEEN THE LINES BETWEEN THE LINES BETWEEN THE LINES, BATMAN!! I think a more level-headed explanation is literally that THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED ON THAT ROAD DURING THAT TIME!! People were literally beaten and stripped because it was a dangerous stretch of road, and there was no additional significance to it! The beaten up guy is just a beaten up guy who needs help!

To finish, I like what another non-Lee commentary also said:
"The story is not, properly speaking, a parable, or imaginary narrative of something in the physical world intended to be translated into something in the spiritual region, but it is an illustration {by an imaginary narrative} of the actual virtue in question. Every detail is beautifully adapted to bring out the lesson that the obligation of neighbourly affection has nothing to do with nearness either of race or religion, but is as wide as humanity."

As an aside, when I was young and tried to read the Bible (recovery version with footnotes, as I was a church kid), I literally always found it impossible to follow because I would read the footnotes to help me understand, but each footnote always lead me down all these unrelated paths I didn't understand. Now as an adult using my mind, I see that the problem wasn't me.........

Trapped