The Parable of the Good Samaritan: Summary, Verses, and Lesson

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

If you ever find yourself in Saint Petersburg, Russia, visiting the renowned Hermitage Museum is well worth your time. Among its vast collection of masterpieces, you’ll find a striking painting by the Dutch artist Jan Wijnants (1632-1684), simply titled Parable of the Good Samaritan.

The scene is both dramatic and evocative: A wounded traveler lies on the ground, vulnerable and in desperate need of help, while another figure leans over him, offering aid. Even without knowing the biblical story, the painting itself speaks to something deeply human — compassion and altruism. 

This visual depiction captures the essence of a parable that has echoed through centuries of moral and ethical thought. The parable of the good Samaritan is more than just a Biblical passage. It has become a cultural touchstone, referenced in literature, legal traditions, and even modern healthcare ethics.

And yet, for all its widespread recognition, few stop to consider the historical and social layers beneath the story.

Where is this parable located in the New Testament? What is the meaning behind this powerful story? Can we even determine whether the historical Jesus actually spoke these words, or is this a later addition to the Gospel tradition? These are the kinds of questions we’ll explore in this article. So, stay tuned!

For those fascinated by the historical complexities of the Gospels (how they were written, who authored them, and whether they preserve authentic traditions of Jesus), Bart D. Ehrman’s course, The Unknown Gospels, offers a deep scholarly exploration. In it, he examines the earliest Gospel traditions, shedding light on their authorship, dating, and historical reliability. If you want to understand how stories like the Parable of the Good Samaritan took shape over time, this course is an excellent place to start.

Parable of the Good Samaritan: Summary

The New Testament contains four Gospels, but they don’t all share the same stories about Jesus and his public ministry. According to the widely accepted Four-Document Hypothesis, both the Gospels of Luke and Matthew drew from the Gospel of Mark as one of their primary sources.

However, they also incorporated material from other sources that haven’t survived. One such lost source is commonly referred to as Q (from the German Quelle, meaning “source”), which is believed to have contained a collection of Jesus' sayings.

Additionally, both Luke and Matthew include unique material not found in any other Gospel. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is an example of such unique material. It appears only in the Gospel of Luke (Luke 10:25-37) and is absent from the other three Gospels.

The parable is introduced within a broader narrative in which Jesus is engaged in a discussion with a legal expert, often identified as a scribe or lawyer. The expert asks Jesus a fundamental question: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”

Instead of providing a direct answer, Jesus responds with a counter-question: “What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” The expert correctly summarizes the Jewish law by citing two key commandments: To love God with all one's heart, soul, strength, and mind, and to love one's neighbor as oneself. Jesus affirms his answer, saying, “Do this, and you will live.”

However, the legal expert, seemingly seeking further clarification, poses a follow-up question: “And who is my neighbor?” It’s in response to this question that Jesus tells the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

The beginning of the Parable of the Good Samaritan summary describes a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho, a dangerous route known for its rocky terrain and susceptibility to bandit attacks. The traveler is assaulted by robbers, who remove his clothes, beat him, and leave him half-dead by the roadside.

Three individuals encounter the wounded man. First, a priest passes by, sees the man, and continues on his way. Next, a Levite (another religious figure) does the same, offering no assistance. Finally, a Samaritan (a member of a group historically despised by many Jews) comes upon the man, has compassion for him, and takes action.

He tends to the wounded man’s injuries, places him on his animal, brings him to an inn, and pays for his care. 

The parable concludes with Jesus asking the legal expert which of the three men acted as a true neighbor. The expert, unable to bring himself to say “the Samaritan,” instead replies, “The one who showed him mercy.” Jesus then instructs him, “Go and do likewise.”

While the story is simple in its structure, its implications are profound. In the next section, we’ll explore how scholars analyze and extract meaning from the parable in light of first-century Jewish society.

Examining the Parable of the Good Samaritan

Interpreted through a historical and literary lens, the Parable of the Good Samaritan meaning goes beyond a simple moral tale about kindness.

The story is framed within a legal debate about the nature of the commandment to love one’s neighbor, but Jesus shifts the discussion from theoretical obligation to ethical action. Instead of defining who qualifies as a neighbor, the parable reframes the issue — emphasizing that a neighbor isn’t determined by identity but by one’s capacity for mercy. 

As Arland J. Hultgren notes in his The Parables of Jesus: A Commentary, this parable belongs to a category of “exemplary stories,” meaning its purpose isn’t to conceal deeper allegorical meanings but to provide a direct model for ethical behavior.

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

The priest and Levite (both esteemed religious figures) fail to act according to their presumed moral obligations. Some have suggested they avoided the wounded man for fear of ritual impurity, as contact with a corpse would have rendered them unclean. 

However, as Hultgren points out, Jewish law permitted exceptions in cases of life-or-death situations, meaning that their inaction cannot be justified on religious grounds.

The contrast is striking: the very individuals expected to uphold the ethical teachings of the Torah fail to embody them, while the Samaritan (an outsider reviled by mainstream Jewish society) becomes the true moral exemplar.

This hostility stemmed from deep historical and religious divisions. Samaritans were often regarded as ethnically and theologically impure by many Jews due to their mixed ancestry and how their worship centered on Mount Gerizim rather than Jerusalem. 

Michael Wolter, in his Commentary on Luke, argues that the fundamental division between Jews and Samaritans in the first century centered on proper worship, whether it should take place in Jerusalem (Jewish view) or at Mount Gerizim (Samaritan view).

In his book Backgrounds of Early Christianity, Everett Ferguson further explains:

By making a Samaritan the hero of the story, Jesus in Luke’s Gospel deliberately subverts expectations, challenging ingrained biases and redefining what it means to act righteously.

Joseph A. Fitzmyer, in his Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, further highlights the rhetorical and narrative strategies at play.

One of the most compelling elements of the narrative is the lawyer’s response. As noted, when Jesus asked which of the three men proved to be a neighbor, the lawyer cannot even bring himself to say “the Samaritan.” Instead, he replied, “The one who showed mercy.”

The Samaritan’s actions (binding wounds, pouring oil and wine, paying for the man’s stay) aren’t just gestures of kindness but acts of profound generosity and risk-taking. He doesn’t simply help from a distance; he invests himself fully in the suffering of another.

Beyond its immediate historical setting, the Parable of the Good Samaritan has far-reaching ethical implications. In other words, there are lessons from the good Samaritan we could all use!

The legal expert’s original question (“Who is my neighbor?”) suggests a desire to define the limits of one’s moral responsibilities. By contrast, Jesus’ response eliminates the very notion of limitation. The call to compassion shouldn’t be based on shared ethnicity, religion, or social standing.

Not surprisingly, Fitzmyer sees the Samaritan as embodying the universalism of Luke’s Gospel, which emphasizes concern for outcasts and the marginalized. Similarly, John P. Meier, in his book A Marginal Jew, points out:

However, Dr. Amy-Jill Levine offers a slightly different perspective, cautioning against reading the Parable of the Good Samaritan primarily as a lesson in universalism. 

According to Levine, such an interpretation risks overlooking the parable’s central challenge. But what, then, is the main point and meaning of the Samaritan in this parable? To explore this question in depth — and to gain a richer understanding of Jesus’ parables from a Jewish perspective — be sure to check out her captivating course, The Parables of Jesus: Jewish Insights into Gospel Ethics, Humor, and Provocation.

Regardless of how one interprets its central message, the Parable of the Good Samaritan remains one of Jesus’ most famous teachings. But can we actually trace this story back to the historical Jesus himself? Or is it a later addition to the Gospel tradition? Let’s now turn to the question of authenticity and explore what scholars have to say.

The Parable of the Good Samaritan: The Issue of Authenticity?

Since the Enlightenment, scholars have recognized that we cannot take the Gospel stories at face value as straightforward historical accounts. The Gospels were written approximately 35 to 65 years after Jesus' death by authors who weren’t eyewitnesses, relying instead on earlier oral and written traditions.

These traditions, in turn, went through multiple layers of transmission — some of which we can detect, but many of which are irretrievably lost to history. 

As Bart D. Ehrman explores in Jesus Before the Gospels, oral traditions are especially prone to change. While the gist of a story may remain intact, details often shift in ways that make reconstructing an “original” version practically impossible.

This raises a crucial question: How can we determine whether a particular story or saying in the Gospels goes back to Jesus himself?

To address this problem, historical Jesus scholars have developed criteria of authenticity, a set of methodological tools used to distinguish later Christian traditions from material that may plausibly be traced back to Jesus.

This brings us to the Parable of the Good Samaritan. As noted earlier, this parable belongs to Luke’s unique material and was likely derived from an earlier (oral or written) source that Luke then incorporated and redacted for his Gospel. But does this mean that Jesus actually said it?

John P. Meier, in his monumental work A Marginal Jew, carefully leans toward the possibility that the parable predates Luke, writing:

However, not all scholars agree. Bernard B. Scott, for instance, argues that the Parable of the Good Samaritan is possibly a post-Easter creation of the early Christian community, heavily edited by Luke to reach its final form. 

I contend that we simply can’t know for sure. Subjecting each individual Gospel story to rigid tests of authenticity may be a futile endeavor. As research on human memory and oral tradition has shown, transmission is complex, and uncertainty is inevitable.

Dale C. Allison, in Constructing Jesus, describes the problem perfectly:

Whether one likes it or not, the Parable of the Good Samaritan falls within this massive category of material that is both possibly authentic and possibly not authentic. We see the historical Jesus, to use Allison’s phrase, “in a mirror darkly,” which reminds me of Peter Brown’s words:

In the end, as E. P. Sanders insightfully pointed out, the best we can do is reconstruct general impressions of Jesus’ ministry, his teachings, and his death. Beyond that, we are often left standing on shifting sands, locked in eternal scholarly debates with no certainty in sight.

Of course, this uncertainty might be frustrating — especially for those who long for definitive answers about the ancient past. But if absolute certainty is what you're after, historical Jesus studies might not be the most satisfying hobby.

Conclusion

The Parable of the Good Samaritan has endured as one of the most compelling and frequently cited passages from the New Testament, inspiring ethical reflection across cultures and historical periods.

Whether interpreted as a radical call to boundless compassion, a critique of religious exclusivism, or a model of moral action, the story continues to challenge assumptions about social and religious boundaries.

Scholars have debated its historical authenticity, its theological significance, and its narrative function within Luke’s Gospel, but its influence remains undeniable.

Whether or not the historical Jesus told this specific parable, the message it conveys has resonated through centuries as an ethical ideal, urging listeners to expand their understanding of neighborly love beyond conventional limits. In the end, its lasting cultural impact, rather than its precise historical origins, may be what matters most.