Luke 10 29

Luke 10:29 kjv

But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour?

Luke 10:29 nkjv

But he, wanting to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

Luke 10:29 niv

But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

Luke 10:29 esv

But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

Luke 10:29 nlt

The man wanted to justify his actions, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

Luke 10 verses

Luke 10 29 Meaning

Luke 10:29 depicts the lawyer's self-serving motive following Jesus' affirmation of the Greatest Commandment. After Jesus praises his correct summary of the Law—to love God and neighbor—the lawyer, instead of humbly accepting the truth, immediately asks, "And who is my neighbor?" This question is born from a desire to justify himself, to define the scope of his obligations in a limited way that he could claim to already fulfill, thus upholding his own perceived righteousness rather than acknowledging the breadth of God's command or his personal shortcomings.

Luke 10 29 Context

Luke 10:29 is part of a direct interaction between Jesus and a nomikos, a lawyer or expert in Mosaic Law. This encounter begins in Lk 10:25 when the lawyer tests Jesus by asking, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus responds by turning the question back to him, asking what the Law says and how he interprets it. The lawyer correctly identifies the two greatest commandments: love for God (Deut 6:5) and love for neighbor (Lev 19:18). Jesus affirms his answer, saying, "You have answered correctly; do this, and you will live." At this point, rather than simply accepting Jesus' commendation and reflecting on the depth of the command, the lawyer's true motivation is revealed in verse 29. He is not genuinely seeking clarity for sincere obedience but rather attempting to "justify himself" by defining the Law in a narrow way that fits his pre-existing conduct or allows him to find an exception. This question sets the stage for Jesus' revolutionary Parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-37), which thoroughly redefines the meaning of "neighbor" and active compassion beyond ethno-religious boundaries.

Luke 10 29 Word analysis

• But (Greek: Ho de): This connective particle marks a contrast or transition from the previous statement. Jesus has just affirmed the lawyer's correct understanding. "But he" signifies a shift from agreement to the lawyer's self-interested agenda.
• he, (Greek: ho - article used as pronoun): Refers to the lawyer (nomikos). His identity is important—an expert in the very Law he is attempting to delimit.
• desiring (Greek: thelōn - from thelō): A participle indicating strong will, intention, or desire. It is not merely a passing thought but a deliberate motivation guiding his actions and question.
• to justify (Greek: dikaiōsai - from dikaioō): To declare righteous, to make righteous, to put right, to be vindicated. This word implies a legal or ethical vindication. The lawyer wants to be seen as blameless or in compliance with the Law. This stands in theological opposition to God's justification, which is by grace through faith.
• himself (Greek: heauton): The reflexive pronoun emphasizes that the motivation for the question originates entirely from within the lawyer, for his own benefit and perceived righteousness. He isn't seeking clarity to love better, but to excuse himself.
• said (Greek: eipen - from legō): A straightforward past tense verb indicating speech.
• to Jesus, (Greek: pros ton Iēsoun): Indicates direct address, confronting Jesus with his intended query.
• "And (Greek: Kai): Can be translated as "and" or "but." Here it introduces a consequential question, a follow-up prompted by his internal desire to justify.
• who (Greek: tis): An interrogative pronoun, a direct question about identity. The lawyer is seeking to define the person rather than the act of loving.
• is (Greek: estin - from eimi): Simple present tense verb.
• my (Greek: mou): The possessive pronoun highlights the lawyer's self-centered focus—he wants to know whose responsibility it is to him.
• neighbor?" (Greek: plēsion - adverb used substantively): Literally "one who is near." In the Mosaic Law (Lev 19:18), this generally referred to a fellow Israelite, or resident alien. Jewish legal debates had long concerned the precise scope, often limiting it significantly. The lawyer is leveraging this ambiguity.

Words-group analysis:

• But he, desiring to justify himself: This phrase reveals the lawyer's underlying, unstated agenda. He isn't asking a theological question for spiritual growth, but a strategic one to confirm his own moral standing or find a loophole. His motivation stems from human pride and self-sufficiency, seeking righteousness by works rather than admitting dependence on God or his own sinfulness. This sets up the stark contrast between human attempts at justification and God's call to unconditional love.
• "And who is my neighbor?": This question, stemming from his self-justifying desire, transforms the meaning of Jesus' command "do this, and you will live." Instead of embracing the boundless call to love, the lawyer seeks to limit it to a definable, manageable, and likely narrow group of people, thus diminishing the challenge of the command and ensuring his perceived compliance. This highlights the human tendency to restrict God's commands to avoid radical self-sacrifice.

Luke 10 29 Bonus section

The expert in the law (nomikos) was not merely a legal professional but a theologian, tasked with interpreting and teaching the Mosaic Law. Their profession involved deep study of scripture, oral tradition, and casuistry, aiming to apply God's commands to every aspect of life. Given this background, the lawyer's knowledge was impeccable, as evidenced by his perfect recitation of the commandments in Luke 10:27. However, his "desire to justify himself" exposes a core failing that Jesus frequently challenged in religious leaders: an external observance of the Law often decoupled from the internal spirit of love and humility that the Law intended to cultivate. His question wasn't out of ignorance of scripture, but out of a resistance to its boundless implication, specifically the requirement for radical, inclusive love that threatened his carefully constructed framework of righteousness. Jesus’ response shifts the paradigm entirely: instead of seeking to limit to whom love should be shown, the parable highlights what it means to show love, rendering the lawyer’s initial query about identity irrelevant compared to the responsibility of action.

Luke 10 29 Commentary

Luke 10:29 marks a pivotal moment in the Parable of the Good Samaritan narrative, shifting the focus from the correctness of the lawyer's answer to the depth of his character and understanding of the Law. His desire "to justify himself" reveals the profound disconnect between head knowledge and heart posture. He possesses accurate doctrinal understanding—he correctly identifies the two greatest commandments—yet his subsequent question demonstrates a spiritual blindness rooted in pride. He isn't seeking to understand how to love his neighbor more fully but who he is obligated to love, implying a desire to limit his responsibility and perhaps exclude those he disliked or deemed unworthy.

This motivation represents a polemic against legalism and self-righteousness prevalent in some religious circles of Jesus' day, where salvation or favor with God was sought through meticulous adherence to prescribed rituals and rules, often without genuine heart transformation. The lawyer's question is essentially an attempt to game the system, to find a minimalist interpretation of "neighbor" that would allow him to assert his own fulfillment of the Law. Jesus directly confronts this self-justifying attitude not by giving a legal definition, but by telling a story (the Parable of the Good Samaritan) that challenges his fundamental assumption. Jesus compels the lawyer to define "neighbor" not by identity (who qualifies for my love?) but by action (to whom should I be a neighbor?). The Samaritan, an outsider and often despised by Jews, becomes the model of active love, demonstrating that compassion knows no ethnic, social, or religious boundaries. The ultimate commentary of this verse, then, is that true love for neighbor—which reflects love for God—is boundless, inconvenient, and sacrificial, not limited by human prejudice or attempts at self-justification.

For practical application, consider:

• Self-reflection: Are there areas in our lives where we subtly try to "justify ourselves" by limiting our spiritual or ethical obligations?
• Boundary pushing: Does our definition of "neighbor" truly include the marginalized, the inconvenient, or even those who might oppose us?
• Action over definition: Do we prioritize demonstrating sacrificial love over merely intellectually defining who deserves it?