Luke 10 36

Luke 10:36 kjv

Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?

Luke 10:36 nkjv

So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?"

Luke 10:36 niv

"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

Luke 10:36 esv

Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?"

Luke 10:36 nlt

"Now which of these three would you say was a neighbor to the man who was attacked by bandits?" Jesus asked.

Luke 10 verses

Luke 10 36 Meaning

Luke 10:36 is Jesus' rhetorical question posed to the inquiring lawyer, drawing the crucial conclusion from the Parable of the Good Samaritan. It redirects the lawyer's initial query from "Who is my neighbor?" to "To whom must I become a neighbor through merciful action?" The verse thereby redefines neighborliness not as an identity or fixed relationship but as an active, compassionate response to another's need, transcending social, ethnic, or religious boundaries.

Luke 10 36 Context

Luke 10:36 concludes Jesus' powerful Parable of the Good Samaritan, told in response to a lawyer's challenge. The lawyer, intending to "test" Jesus, asked, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus answered with the Great Commandment to love God and neighbor. When the lawyer then sought to justify himself by asking, "And who is my neighbour?" (Lk 10:29), Jesus told the parable. The parable describes a man beaten and left for dead on the dangerous road from Jerusalem to Jericho. A priest and a Levite (religious figures who should have known and embodied neighborly love) passed by on the other side. Only a Samaritan—a person despised by Jews for their mixed ancestry and religious differences—stopped, showed compassion, rendered aid, and bore the cost for the injured man's recovery. This verse, then, is Jesus' direct follow-up question, compelling the lawyer to confront the stark contrast between legalistic duty and true, compassionate action.

Luke 10 36 Word analysis

• Which (τίς, tis): This interrogative pronoun demands a specific identification among the options presented. It is not asking for an abstract definition but for the practical agent.
• now (νῦν, nun): This temporal adverb emphasizes immediacy and finality, bringing the point home. It indicates "in light of what I have just told you," demanding a conclusion here and now.
• of these three: Refers explicitly to the three characters in the parable who encountered the wounded man: the priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan.
• thinkest thou (δοκεῖ σοι, dokei soi): Literally, "it seems to you." This phrase makes the question personal and direct. It challenges the lawyer to use his own discernment and moral compass, compelling him to answer from conviction rather than rote knowledge, thus avoiding a mere theological debate.
• was neighbour (πλησίον γέγονεν, plēsion gegonen): This is the crucial linguistic shift.
  • plēsion (πλησίον): Means "near," and in this context, "neighbor" or "fellow man."
  • gegonen (γέγονεν): Is the perfect active indicative of ginomai (γίνομαι), meaning "to become," "to be born," or "to come into being." This is distinct from the lawyer's original question "who is (εστιν, estin) my neighbor." Jesus changes the verb from "to be" (a static identity) to "to become" (a dynamic action). This fundamentally redefines neighborliness as an active role taken, not a status enjoyed. The Samaritan became a neighbor through his compassionate deeds.
• unto him that fell among the thieves: This phrase identifies the specific beneficiary of the neighborly action – the man in dire need. It directs the focus from abstract theological definitions to concrete human suffering, establishing the condition for true neighborly response.

Words-group analysis:

• "Which now of these three, thinkest thou,": This collective phrase directly presses the lawyer for a personal, unavoidable verdict on who demonstrated true neighborliness based on the recounted actions. It leaves no room for evasion, placing the burden of conclusion squarely on him.
• "was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves": This highlights that genuine neighborliness is not about proximity or shared identity, but about actively showing compassion and aid to anyone in a state of distress, regardless of who they are or their background. It transforms the concept from one of "being near to me" to "being one who acts mercifully towards another in need."

Luke 10 36 Bonus section

The lawyer's indirect answer in Luke 10:37, "He that shewed mercy on him," avoiding the despised term "Samaritan," implicitly acknowledges Jesus' point while subtly revealing his own persistent prejudice. Jesus' strategy here demonstrates His masterful teaching method, using a parable to reveal deeply ingrained societal biases and guide individuals towards a profound, uncomfortable, yet undeniable truth about God's call to love. This approach directly contrasts with polemics against the Jewish legalism that emphasized outward purity laws over inner compassionate action. The Samaritan's actions reveal that being "clean" for worship (a common concern for priests and Levites regarding a potentially dead or unclean person) should not override the divine command to be merciful. This also resonates with God's character throughout the Bible, demonstrating universal care (Ps 145:9, Jon 4:11), and aligns with Jesus' consistent teaching to seek first God's kingdom and His righteousness, often prioritizing love and mercy over strict adherence to tradition.

Luke 10 36 Commentary

Luke 10:36 marks the culmination of the Parable of the Good Samaritan, serving as Jesus' powerful redefinition of "neighbor" and "neighborliness." Instead of directly answering "who is my neighbor," Jesus redirects the question to challenge the lawyer's understanding. The parable illustrates that one's neighbor is not limited to those within a specific ethnic, social, or religious group, nor is it merely a geographical proximity. True neighborliness is demonstrated by actively showing mercy and compassion to anyone in need, even—and especially—to those one might culturally despise, as the Samaritan did for the Jew. The priest and the Levite, embodying the legalistic and religious strictures of their day, failed to act, revealing a gap between adherence to rules and the fulfillment of God's greater call to mercy. Jesus compels the lawyer to acknowledge that genuine righteousness is evidenced by deeds of love that transcend prejudice and self-interest. The verse ultimately serves as a call for active, unconditional love towards all humanity, mirroring God's boundless compassion.

• Examples: Providing assistance to a stranded motorist regardless of their background, donating to aid organizations helping refugees from another culture, actively listening to and supporting someone in emotional distress without judgment.