Go and Do Likewise

Politically obsessed Christian pundits, from all ends of the political spectrum, are unsurprisingly arguing about the stated policy positions of the second Trump administration. Also unsurprisingly, the argument over immigration immediately devolved into an eisegetical, back-and-forth weaponization of the parable of the Good Samaritan. I care far less about the politics than I do the eisegesis of Scripture for political ends, and this conversation is a whopper of an example.

It all began with the kinist podcaster Dave Greene discussing what he called the “progressive propaganda term ‘racism’” with apologist Neil Shenvi. Greene argued his position along the standard kinist line of order of affections, to which Shenvi responded, “Why? Do you love U.S. citizens more than you love your actual neighbors?” This would have remained a typical social media spat with a kinist, if Daily Wire reporter Megan Basham—who just spoke at the conference of a group whose leaders claim there is a conspiracy to replace white people in America—had not answered Shenvi’s question. Basham’s response included the conspicuous statement, “I am not sure why it should be different [to not have more love] when I look at my countrymen. Should I not have more desire to promote the interests of my fellow US citizens than for those who might live near me but are not US citizens?”

In response, left-wing Christian pundit Tim Whitaker reacted with, “Jesus answered this with the parable of the Good Samaritan. Christian nationalism preaches a false gospel.” Firstly, though Basham is missing a key commandment from Christ in her analysis, Whitaker is eisegeting the parable for his Social Gospel ends. The parable of the Good Samaritan is not about the legislative policies towards immigration that should be advocated for, or opposed, by Christians, it’s a commandment to show direct, individual care for our fellow human beings, regardless of who they are, even should they be of a class our culture considers despicable. No one is violating the teachings of Christ by solely “promoting the interests of their fellow US citizens” over immigrants, within the political realm. A better and more accurate rebuke of Basham’s statement that we should “have more love” for citizens above immigrants comes from the Sermon on the Mount. Note Christ’s call to action to meet the perfect standard of the Father, because we’ll return to it with the Good Samaritan.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they? So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
—Matthew 5:43-48 NET

Basham continued down this troublesome eisegetical path in her response to Whitaker, saying, “I just said you have to love them ALL. The question was, for whom will you have the greater love—fellow Christians and fellow citizens or unbelievers and non-citizens?” Here, she conflates the spiritual kingdom with the temporal and misses the greater point that, at any moment of our lives, God may require us to exert all of our immediate energy to showing the perfect love of Christ to someone who meets none of these supposedly preferable categories, at the expense of the immediate affections we give to church and family. Whitaker, in the typical fashion of a politically obsessed individual, rather than explaining Basham’s error, glibly responded, “Read the parable again, Megan.” Here is where we come to the aforementioned whopper, not just because of what Basham then wrote, but because, as you will see, it was wholeheartedly affirmed by a Southern Baptist pastor. It’s worth quoting her response in full:

Well, the discussion wasn’t about the parable, but if you wanna talk about that, I’m happy to do that. What you seem to be missing is that the love shown by the good Samaritan is so extravagant that every single person on this planet fails to meet that standard. Only one has ever shown that kind of love.

And that was the point of the parable. To show us how far we are from God’s standard so that we realize that only by taking on the righteousness of Christ, could we ever meet it.

It’s not actually a story just telling you to be nice to people. It’s a story pointing you to your need for a perfect Savior.

Firstly, Basham is correct in her analysis that the parable, like all of Scripture, points to Christ, but she’s dead wrong—and dishonestly arguing—by framing the issue with immigrants around “be[ing] nice to people.” She undermines that statement herself, with the argument that the love shown by the Good Samaritan is so above and beyond that we are unable to meet its standard (something I disagree with). At this point, I would have dismissed the whole conversation as the usual, dumb, political punditry of Christian social media, if a SBC pastor and the Director of Expository Workshops for G3 Ministries, Tom Buck, hadn’t responded to Basham with the following:

That’s exactly the right interpretation. The parable ends with the Samaritan leaving an open tab promising to pay for everything that’s needed for the man.

If you read the parable closely, you will say, “This standard is impossible. No one could ever do that. Everyone falls short of this and no one has ever truly loved his neighbor then.”

And the answer is, “Exactly! No one has ever lived in this way except Jesus. Only He has met this perfect standard. And He paid it all.”

The exact right interpretation of the parable of the Good Samaritan would never leave out its very last sentence, directed to the lawyer who prompted the story, which echoes the instruction found in Matthew 5:48, “So Jesus said to him, ‘Go and do the same’” (Luke 10:37). The example of going above and beyond to pay for someone’s entire care in a dire situation, while an image of God’s care for us, is not an impossible standard! I’m not a rich man, but God has blessed me with enough material abundance that I’d perhaps be able to literally live out this parable—note that there is no mention from Christ of how much the Samaritan could afford his action. Surely, a person who makes his living teaching exposition to pastors should know that. Even if it was an impossible standard, “be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect” is a commandment from our Lord and Savior to daily make the attempt to perfectly emulate Him, even though we know we will fail. We are not given the room to excuse ourselves and say, “Well, I’ll never equal God’s perfection, therefore I can accept not meeting that standard, as He defines it.” As Basham stated, only by taking on the righteousness of Christ could we ever meet the standard, but, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, that’s exactly what we’re to attempt.

You were taught with reference to your former way of life to lay aside the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires, to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and to put on the new man who has been created in God’s image—in righteousness and holiness that comes from truth.
—Ephesians 4:22-24

As the Westminster Shorter Catechism answers the question, What is sin?, “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.” When we fail to meet God’s perfect standard, we sin. When we excuse ourselves from the attempt to meet that standard, for worldly political purposes, we egregiously sin. When we selectively exposit Holy Scripture to do it, we take the Lord’s name in vain.