Open Bible Data Home  About  News  OET Key

OETOET-RVOET-LVULTUSTBSBBLBAICNTOEBWEBBEWMBBNETLSVFBVTCNTT4TLEBBBEMoffJPSWymthASVDRAYLTDrbyRVWbstrKJB-1769KJB-1611BshpsGnvaCvdlTNTWyclSR-GNTUHBBrLXXBrTrRelatedTopicsParallelInterlinearReferenceDictionarySearch

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary

IntroIndex©

SAMARITANS

Schismatic group from the Jews. The group resided north of Judea and south of Galilee in hostile tension with its Jewish neighbors. Jesus’ attitude toward this despised group radically contrasted with contemporary sentiment.

Preview

• Origins of the Sect

• Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews

• Samaritan Beliefs

• Jesus and the Samaritans

• Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church

Origins of the Sect

It is difficult to determine precisely when the Samaritan sect arose and when the final break with Judaism occurred. The OT conception of the origin of the Samaritan sect is that they stemmed from repopulated foreign peoples whose worship of God was only a veneer for underlying idolatry. According to 2 Kings 17, the Samaritan sect arose from the exchange of peoples following Israel’s defeat by Assyria in 722 BC. Removing the Israelites from the land, the king of Assyria repopulated the area with conquered peoples from Babylon, Cuthah, and various other nations.

The Samaritans offer a vastly different interpretation of their origin. They claim descent from the Jewish tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see Jn 4:12) and hold that the exile of Israelites in 722 BC by Assyria was neither full-scale nor permanent. To account for the mutual hostility that developed between their group and the Jews, the Samaritan version holds that the Jews were guilty of apostasy, setting up heretical sanctuaries during the time of Eli, rather than staying with the only holy place on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans therefore considered themselves true Israelites in descent and worship.

From Assyrian records of this period, an exchange of population is in fact affirmed for the northern kingdom, but apparently a total deportation was not carried out (see 2 Chr 34:9). This would suggest that there were two elements in the land: first, the native Israelite remnant not exiled; and second, the foreign exiles who were gradually won over to the faith of the native residents, although syncretism no doubt existed during the early period of assimilation.

Relations between the Samaritans and the Jews

The history of relations between the Samaritans—situated on the north around Mt Gerizim (their holy mountain), Shechem, and Samaria—and Jewish populations in Judea and then later in Galilee is one of fluctuating tensions. The ancient tension between the northern and southern kingdoms was revived with the return of exiles to Jerusalem under the Persian ruler Cyrus’s edict (c. 538 BC). The entire southern area was at the time being governed from Samaria in the north by Sanballat, a native ruler of Palestine under Persian authority. The return of exiles to Jerusalem, particularly with their intentions of rebuilding the Jerusalem temple, posed an obvious political threat to his leadership in the north (Ezr 4:7-24; Neh 4:1-9).

Opposition was at first politically motivated but became religious when sometime later, possibly in the fifth century BC, a rival temple was erected on Mt Gerizim. An example of Jewish hostility toward the Samaritans about this time comes from Ecclesiasticus 50:25-26 (written approximately 200 BC), where the Samaritans are placed below the Edomites and Philistines in esteem and are termed a “foolish people” (cf. Test. Levi 7:2).

Jewish disregard for the Samaritans was increased by the Samaritans’ lack of resistance to Antiochus Epiphanes’ campaign (c. 167 BC) to promote Hellenistic worship in the area. While part of the Jewish community resisted the transforming of the Jerusalem temple to a temple for Zeus (1 Macc 1:62-64) and eventually followed the Maccabees in revolt (1 Macc 2:42-43), sources suggest that the Samaritans did not (see 1 Macc 6:2).

Poor relations came to a climax during the brief period of Jewish independence under the Hasmoneans, when the Jewish ruler, John Hyrcanus, marched against Shechem, conquering and destroying the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim (c. 128 BC).

Under Herod the Great, Samaria’s fortunes improved, although animosity still continued between the Samaritans and Jews in Judea and Galilee. Holding the Jerusalem temple to be a false cultic center, and excluded from the inner courts by the Jerusalem authorities, a group of Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem temple in approximately AD 6 by spreading human bones within the temple porches and sanctuary during Passover. Hostility toward Galilean Jews traveling through Samaria on the way to Jerusalem for various feasts was also not uncommon (Lk 9:51-53).

This animosity continued in Jesus’ day. Both groups excluded the other from their respective cultic centers, the Jerusalem temple and the Samaritan temple on Mt Gerizim. The Samaritans, for example, were forbidden access to the inner courts of the temple, and any offering they might give was considered as if it were from a Gentile. Thus, although probably more accurately defined as “schismatics,” it appears Samaritans were in practice treated as Gentiles. All marriage between the groups was therefore forbidden, and social relations were greatly restricted (Jn 4:9). With such proscribed separation, it is not surprising that any interaction between the two groups was strained. The mere term Samaritan was one of contempt on the lips of Jews (8:48), and among some scribes it possibly would not even be uttered (see the apparent circumlocution in Lk 10:37). The disciples’ reaction to the Samaritan refusal of lodging (9:51-55) is a good example of the animosity felt by Jews for Samaritans at the time.

Although there is less evidence for similar attitudes from the Samaritan side, we can assume they existed. It is probable to speculate, therefore, that the Samaritan shunning of hospitality in Luke 9:51-55 was not uncommon toward other Jews whose “face was set toward Jerusalem.”

Samaritan Beliefs

The main beliefs of the Samaritans demonstrate both the close affinities with and obvious divergences from mainstream Judaism. They held in common with Judaism a strong monotheistic faith in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In contrast, however, there was an elevating of Mt Gerizim in the north as the only holy place for sacrifice, based on several divergent passages in Deuteronomy and Exodus in the Samaritan text. Mt Gerizim came to be identified with the site of Abel’s first altar (Gn 4:4), the site of Noah’s sacrifice after the Flood (8:20), the meeting place of Abraham and Melchizedek (14:18), the site of Isaac’s intended sacrifice (ch 22), and many other associations.

The Samaritans held only the first five biblical books (Pentateuch) to be inspired and based their dogma and practice exclusively on these books. Such a narrow canon not only determined the direction of Samaritan theology but further separated them from contemporary Jewish thought. Moses, for example, was more highly exalted by the Samaritans than by the Jews. He was considered not only the chief prophet but also, in later thought, was described as the choicest of men, preexisting from Creation, interceding with God for Israel, and being to man “the light of the world.” The messianic hope of Samaritan theology also reflects this narrow canon. A Messiah from the house of David could not be anticipated, as no evidence for such could be found in the Pentateuch. Rather, the Samaritans awaited a “prophet like Moses” based on Deuteronomy 18:15-18. This anticipated prophet was also designated the “Taheb,” the Restorer, for he would in the last days restore proper cultic worship on Mt Gerizim and bring the worship of the heathen to that site.

It is clear, therefore, that it was primarily the claim of supremacy for Mt Gerizim that separated this group theologically and culturally from their Jewish neighbors.

Jesus and the Samaritans

The common Jewish perspective on Samaritans as being nearly Gentile was evidently held to some extent by Jesus as well. Jesus refers to the Samaritan leper as “this foreigner” (Lk 17:18) and prohibits his disciples, during their commissioning, from taking the message of the kingdom to either the Samaritans or the Gentiles (Mt 10:5).

Yet the overwhelming evidence in the Gospels is that Jesus’ attitude toward the Samaritans differed radically from that of his Jewish contemporaries. When his disciples display the usual Jewish animosity in asking to have the “fire of judgment” rain down upon the inhospitable Samaritans, Jesus “rebuked them” (Lk 9:55). Moreover, he did not refuse to heal the Samaritan leper but honored him as the only one of the ten who remembered to give glory to God (17:11-19). So also in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37) Jesus clearly breaks through the traditional prejudices in portraying the despised Samaritan, not the respected Jewish priest or Levite, as the true neighbor to the man in need. Here as elsewhere, Jesus, in confronting his audience with God’s demand, breaks through traditional definitions of “righteous” and “outcast.”

John 4:4-43 records not only the fascinating exchange between Jesus and the Samaritan woman but also Jesus’ subsequent two-day stay in the town of Sychar, a Samaritan city. Here we see Jesus not only risking ritual uncleanness by contact with the Samaritan woman at the well (vv 7-9) but also offering the gift of salvation to her (v 10) and the entire Samaritan town (vv 39-41). Through Jesus’ knowledge of her marital life (vv 16-18), the woman concludes he must be a “prophet.” Remembering that the Samaritans were expecting a “prophet like Moses” in the last days, it is possible that the woman was wondering if Jesus was their long-awaited prophetic Messiah (vv 19, 25-26). Jesus not only breaks through the rigid animosity of Jews toward Samaritans by doing the unthinkable in staying with this despised people, but he also accepts their faith in him as “Messiah” (v 26) and “Savior of the world” (v 42). Here, as with his association with the outcasts of Jewish society, Jesus redefines righteousness not according to descent or religious practice but according to faith in himself. In so doing, he shatters the racial and cultural distinctions of his day and lays the foundation for the gospel’s subsequent spread to the entire gentile world.

Samaria in the Mission of the Early Church

In the great commission given prior to his ascension, Jesus told his disciples to take the gospel to Samaria (Acts 1:8). The missionary activity of the early church did indeed include this region. When, following the martyrdom of Stephen, many Christians were forced to leave Jerusalem (8:1), one such Christian, Philip, spread the gospel in the city of Samaria (v 5). The response was so great to the miracles performed that Peter and John (representing the apostles in Jerusalem) were sent to investigate and to confirm the presence of the Holy Spirit among them. Evidence from the second century AD suggests, however, that Christianity did not gain a strong foothold among the Samaritans. For the most part, the Samaritans retained their own religion. A small remnant of the Samaritan sect continues to exist to this day, living near Mt Gerizim (Shechem) and in various cities in Israel.

See also Bible, Manuscripts and Text of the (Old Testament); Samaria.