The Question That Must Not Be Asked: Law, Mercy, and the Collapse of Self-Justification in Luke 10:25–37

The Parable of the Good Samaritan is among the most quoted and least understood texts in the New Testament. Commonly reduced to a sentimental appeal for kindness or a generic call to humanitarian ethics, Luke 10:25–37 is, in fact, a tightly constructed legal and hermeneutical confrontation. The Question That Must Not Be Asked recovers the original forensic force of this passage by reading it as a juridical dispute over righteousness, law, and self-justification.

In this rigorous exegetical study, Samuel Córdoba argues that Jesus does not redefine or expand the category of "neighbor." Instead, he dismantles the very question "Who is my neighbor?" as a defensive legal strategy designed to limit moral obligation. Through close philological analysis of the Greek text, careful attention to narrative structure, and sustained engagement with classical and modern scholarship, the book demonstrates how Jesus replaces a static legal category with a dynamic, performative reality: one does not identify the neighbor, one becomes the neighbor through concrete, costly action.

Special attention is given to the grammatical inversion at the heart of the passage, where Jesus shifts the debate from identity ("Who is?") to action ("Who became?"), collapsing all attempts at self-justification through definable limits. The Samaritan's mercy is shown not as spontaneous sentiment, but as a deliberate, competent, and open-ended protocol of action that leaves no room for legal alibis.

Engaging critically with patristic allegory, Reformation theology, and modern moralistic readings, this book does not dismiss tradition but carefully distinguishes theological application from textual exegesis. The result is a sober, unsettling interpretation that restores the parable's sharp legal edge.

Written for scholars, students of Scripture, and serious readers of biblical theology, The Question That Must Not Be Asked presents Luke 10:25–37 not as a comforting moral tale, but as a devastating critique of every attempt to use the law as a shield for righteousness.