36  Finding Eternal Life  (Luke 10:25–37)

And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.” But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return Iwill repay you.’ Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?” And he said, “The one who showed mercy toward him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.” (10:25–37)

Of all the questions that could be asked, none is more important than the one in this passage: “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?”That question’s significance is rooted in the reality that every human soul is immortal. Annihilationism, materialism, reincarnation, and any other view that denies that people will continue to be the persons that they are forever is false. The question is not if people will live forever, but where they will live forever—in heaven, or in hell.

As this story unfolds, Jesus was in the final months of His earthly ministry, journeying slowly to Jerusalem and blanketing Judea’s towns and villages with the message of eternal life while calling people to be His true disciples (cf. Luke 9:23). But despite His powerful preaching and miraculous signs, only a very small number of people savingly believed and embraced the gospel. Most rejected His call to humble themselves, repent of their sin and self-righteousness, receive complete forgiveness, and in faith enter the kingdom of God. They would not accept Christ’s message because they would not acknowledge themselves to be wretched sinners on their way to eternal destruction. Having rejected the diagnosis, they denied themselves the only cure.

That the Lord ministered not only to the crowds, but also often to individuals, is evident in this passage. Although it took place in a public setting, this was a personal conversation between Jesus and this man. He was a member of the religious establishment, the highly educated, prominent, powerful, and influential people who made up Judaistic apostate religion, hostile to Jesus. This unnamed scribe had a rare privilege whose value is beyond estimation—having a conversation about eternal life with the One who is Himself eternal life (1 John 5:20). In a tragic example of missed opportunity that rivals Judas, the scribe, despite asking the right question of the right person and receiving the right answer, he turned away to face eternal death.

Despite its outcome, this incident provides a valuable lesson on doing personal evangelism the way Jesus did it. Those who would have the opportunity to receive eternal life will have to grasp the truth regarding the nature of eternal life, the motivation for eternal life, the complexion of eternal life, and the acquisition of eternal life.

THE NATURE OF ETERNAL LIFE

The supremely important question of how to obtain or inherit eternal life was also asked by the rich young ruler (18:18; Matt. 19:16; Mark 10:17). Implicit in his and the scribe’s question was the Jewish belief in immortality. The Jews recognized that God had promised an eternal kingdom of blessing, joy, peace, and fulfillment. If the scribe had not shared that common belief, this conversation would never have taken place. There would have been no reason for him to ask Jesus how to inherit eternal life unless he already believed in its actuality. He knew that Adam’s fall had caused the human race to forfeit that eternal life, and he wanted to know how to personally recover it.

In today’s postmodern world, dominated by naturalism, evolution, and humanism, Christians can no longer assume that the people they evangelize understand that they will live forever. The enemy loves to propagate the lie that the present life is all there is, so there is nothing better than to “eat and drink, for tomorrow we die” (1 Cor. 15:32). Yet God has set eternity in the heart of man (Eccl. 3:11), and even those who deny its reality still feel its pull in their hearts. That universal sense of eternity has been expressed in various rituals and traditions involving burying the dead throughout history.

But general revelation was not the reason the scribe believed in the immortality of the soul. As an expert in the Mosaic Law, he knew that was the clear teaching of the Old Testament. Job understood that after he died he would personally see God (Job 19:26–27). David rejoiced in the knowledge that “in [God’s] right hand there are pleasures forever” (Ps. 16:11), and after the tragic death of his newborn son, he was comforted by the knowledge that he would see him again: “I will go to him, but he will not return to me” (2 Sam. 12:23). Daniel’s prophecy notes that “the saints of the Highest One will receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, for all ages to come” (Dan. 7:18), and that at the time of the end, “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt” (12:2; cf.2:44; Ps.21:4).

It may seem strange that a member of the religious establishment would ask this question. After all, the Jewish people were convinced that as Abraham’s children (Matt. 3:9; John 8:39), “to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers” (Rom. 9:4–5a), they were guaranteed entrance into God’s eternal kingdom. But their Jewish heritage would not save those whose religion was shallow, superficial, hypocritical, and external (Luke 3:8; Rom.2:28–29).The question about inheriting eternal life kept coming up because of the doubtsand fears caused by a nagging conscience and a discontented heart. Like this lawyer, many knew that they were not right with God; that their veneer of religious activities merely served as whitewash, covering a tomb “full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness” (Matt. 23:27). The question asked both by the rich young ruler and by the scribe reflected their fear that they might miss out on eternal life despite all their outward show of religious zeal.

In the scribe’s mind, Jesus was a logical person to ask about eternal life, because it was the constant theme of His preaching (Matt. 25:46; Mark 10:29–30; John 4:36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2–3; cf. Acts 13:48; Rom. 2:7; 5:21; 1 Tim. 1:16; Titus 1:2; 1 John 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jude 21). It is here that much modern evangelism is deficient. Talking about eternal life and especially about hell is considered uncouth, and some who profess to be evangelicals question or even openly deny hell’s existence. Jesus, however, described hell in terrifyingly graphic language (Matt. 8:12; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Mark 9:43–48) and said more about it than He did about heaven. Heaven, surprisingly, is also an unpopular topic, since the emphasis is on making things better in the present life. To that end, contemporary evangelism seeks to discover people’s felt needs and then present Jesus to them as the cure for all that is dysfunctional in their lives.

But the Bible does not guarantee that a person’s circumstances will improve after salvation. In fact, they may even become worse (Acts 14:22; Rom. 8:17; 1 Thess. 3:4; 2 Tim. 3:12; 1 Peter 4:12–16). Salvation does bring supernatural peace (John 14:27), strength to endure trials and suffering (2 Thess. 3:3; 1 Peter 5:10), and comfort (2 Cor. 1:3–5) that turns sorrow into joy (Ps. 30:5; John 15:11). But the focus of biblically-based evangelism is not on the comforts of the present life, but on the reality of eternity; on getting people’s attention off this temporary world and onto the everlasting existence by explaining in biblical detail the joys of heaven and the horrors of hell.

THE MOTIVATION FOR ETERNAL LIFE

And a lawyer stood up and put Him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (10:25)

The NASB leaves untranslated the particle idou (“behold”), which indicates that the question asked by the lawyer was a surprising development. But as noted above, he was motivated to ask this question by concern that he not miss out on eternal life. A lawyer (nomikos), or scribe, was an expert in the interpretation and application of the Mosaic

Law and the rabbinical traditions that had been formed over the centuries. Scribes are frequently seen in the Gospels accompanying the Pharisees and seeking ways to discredit Jesus (Matt. 12:38; 15:1; Mark 2:16; Luke 5:21; 6:7; 11:53; 15:2; John 8:3).This one, however, was apparently asking this question on his own, since he wanted to know what he, not people in general, needed to do to inherit eternal life. His question indicates that the emphasis on corporate salvation in Judaism had not negated the concepts of individual salvation and human responsibility.

That he stood up and interrupted Jesus was not a sign of disrespect, since he addressed the Lord courteously as teacher. While the phrase put Him to the test could often imply evil intent on the questioner’s part (cf. Mark 10:2), for this lawyer it may have been merely an effort to determine whether Jesus knew the answer for which he felt a great need.

THE COMPLEXION OF ETERNAL LIFE

And He said to him, “What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?” And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” And He said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live.” (10:26–28)

The Master responded to the lawyer’s question by asking one of His own: “What is written in the Law?” Christ’s question affirms His commitment to the Law (cf. Matt. 5:18–19)—the very thing the scribes and Pharisees accused Him of violating (cf.Matt. 15:2).The Law to which Jesus referred was the law of God given to Moses, which the Jews had embellished, but not forgotten. The Lord’s second question, “How does it read to you?” could mean, “How do you understand it?” But it is better to translate the Lord’s question, “How do you recite it?” Jesus was referring to the Jewish profession of faith known as the Shema (Deut. 6:4–5), which was recited twice daily. The first part of the lawyer’s answer, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind,” comes from the Shema. The additional clause, “and your neighbor as yourself” is quoted from Leviticus 19:18. When He was asked to name the most important of the commandments, Jesus gave the same answer as the lawyer did (Mark 12:28–31), so his answer was correct.

The command calls for total commitment to selfless love (agapaō; the highest kind of love) involving all human faculties, includingthe heart, soul, strength, and mind. These two commands sum up the Ten Commandments, the first half of which describes how to love God, while the second half describes how to love one’s neighbor. Only those who practice such self-denying love (cf. Luke 9:23) can receive eternal life.

Because the lawyer’s answer was the right one, Jesus said to him, “You have answered correctly; do this and you will live” (cf. Lev. 18:5; Deut. 6:25; Neh. 9:29; Ezek. 20:11, 13, 21). Since he knew the answer, the lawyer was accountable. But like everyone who has ever lived, he was not able to keep the law by perfectly loving God and other people. To do so is impossible, “because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20) and, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them’“ (Gal. 3:10; cf. Deut. 27:26). As a result, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23), so that “there is none righteous, not even one” (Rom. 3:10; cf. 5:12; Gal. 3:22).

Jesus, of course, was not saying that there were some people somewhere who could be saved by keeping the law. On the contrary, He was pointing out the absolute impossibility of doing so, since the law demands the impossible—perfect and complete obedience (James 2:10), and promises physical, spiritual, and eternal death to those who disobey it (Ezek. 18:4, 20; Rom. 6:23).Those realities put sinners in a hopeless situation. They are required to keep the law perfectly, but are not able to do so, and as a consequence face death. The only way out of that frightening dilemma is to acknowledge one’s sin (Ps. 32:5; Prov. 28:13; 1 John 1:9), cry for mercy (Luke 18:13), and through faith alone (John 3:16, 36; 5:24; Acts 15:9; Rom. 3:20–30; 4:5; 5:1; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8–9; Phil. 3:9; 1 Peter 1:9) embrace the Lord Jesus Christ as the Savior and only sacrifice for sin (Eph. 5:2; Heb. 9:24–28; 10:12). For such penitent believers God made His Son, “who knew no sin to be sin on [their] behalf, so that [they] might become the righteousness of God in Him”(2 Cor. 5:21).

THE ACQUISITION OF ETERNAL LIFE

But wishing to justify himself, he said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied and said, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among robbers, and they stripped him and beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. And by chance a priest was going down on that road, and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. Likewise a Levite also, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion, and came to him and bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them; and he put him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn and took care of him. On the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.’ Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?” And he said, “The one who showed mercy toward him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.” (10:29–37)

At this point in the discussion, the scribe should have acknowledged his inability to love as God required and cried out for mercy like the tax collector in Luke 18:13 did. But backed into a corner from which there was no escape, his wretched pride and self-righteousness took over, like the Pharisee’s had (vv 11–12). By wishing to justify himself, he failed to deny himself. He refused to confess the reality of his sinful heart, but disdaining the conviction of sin that he surely felt rising internally, he adamantly reaffirmed his external self-righteousness and worthiness.

Sadly, this was familiar behavior, Paul would later note, typical of the nation of Israel as a whole. In Romans 2:23–29, the apostle rebuked his fellow Jews for keeping the law superficially and externally:

In Romans 10 the apostle explained why the Jewish people were in that lost condition:

Underestimating God’s righteousness, they imagined Him to be more tolerant of sin than He is, and thus less holy than He is. That made them think they were more righteous than they were. As a result, Israel failed to realize their need for a Savior, and did not understand the truth that “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (v. 4), since “what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). Far from being a means of salvation, “the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith” (Gal. 3:24. See also the verses listed in the previous section).

In his attempt to justify himself, the scribe ignored the issue of loving God perfectly, thus implying that he believed he did. He also believed that he was loving his neighbors perfectly, unless Jesus had a different definition of neighbor. Seeking to clarify the Lord’s definition he asked Him, “And who is my neighbor?” The Lord replied with one of His most memorable and powerful illustrations, the story of the Good Samaritan.

This dramatic tale is widely used to teach the importance of helping those in need. In fact, the term “Good Samaritan” has become an idiom for those who demonstrate unusual, sacrificial kindness toward others. But while it is important to help the needy, that is not the point of the story. It is in reality a story about how one inherits eternal life, because that is the question that initiated the conversation to which this story is the conclusion.

The Lord offered this story in answer to the scribe’s question, with its somewhat cynical implication that he did love all those whom he considered to be his neighbors. Jesus graciously gave him one more unforgettable, inescapably clear insight into his wretchedness; one more opportunity to acknowledge his sinfulness and cry for mercy

As the story opens a man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho. Although it is less than fifteen miles from Jerusalem, Jericho, at about nine hundred feet below sea level, is nearly 3, 500 feet lower in elevation. Thus the road going down from Jerusalem to Jericho was steep and dangerous—all the more so because its caves and rock formations provided hideouts for robbers and highwaymen. Unfortunately for this man the predictable happened, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him, repeatedly beat him, and went away leaving him half dead. The man’s situation was desperate. He was stranded on a lonely road in critical condition and in need of immediate medical attention. Yet there was no guarantee when or if anyone would care to help him.

Having described the man’s dire situation, Jesus immediately introduced a ray of hope, noting that by chance a priest was going down on that road. This would appear to have been the best possible news. A priest was a servant of God by definition, one who offered sacrifices for the people’s sins, expected to be a paragon of spiritual virtue and the best, godliest, and most righteous of men. He would be intimately familiar with the Old Testament law and committed to living out its principles, one of which was the requirement to show mercy In Leviticus 19:34 God commanded the people of Israel, “The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God.” According to Exodus 23:4–5 they were to rescue an enemy’s donkey if it wandered off, or collapsed under its load—how much more the man himself.

The hope the Lord introduced was short-lived, however. Instead of stopping to assist the wounded and helpless man, the priest passed by on the other side. Commentators have offered many suggestions as to why the priest avoided the injured man. But all such speculation is pointless, since he was not a real person, but merely a character in the Lord’s story The point Jesus was making is that because he knew the law’s requirements, he would have been expected to stop and aid the injured man. Nor is this an indictment on Israel’s priesthood for lacking compassion, though that was often true; the priest in this story merely functions as someone who would have been expected to help, but did not.

Fortunately for the desperate man, another traveler appeared on the stretch of road. This man was a Levite, one of those who assisted the priests. He, too, would have been very familiar with the Old Testament law and its requirements to show mercy to those in need. But incredibly when he came to the place and saw the injured man, the Levite also refused to stop and help him, but like the priest had, he passed by on the other side. Despite their circumcision, knowledge of God’s law, and involvement in the religious system, both he and the priest proved themselves unqualified for eternal life. They did not love God, since they did not keep His commandments. Nor did they love their neighbor, since both passed up an opportunity to demonstrate that love.

At this point the story takes a surprising and unexpected twist. When all seemed lost, help arrived from the most unlikely of sources. A Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon the wounded man. Given the hostility between Jews and Samaritans, this man would seem to be the most indifferent to the injured man. As noted in the exposition of 9:52 in chapter 32 of this volume, the hatred between Jews and Gentiles had existed for centuries. The Samaritan could hardly have been expected to help this man; in fact, he may even have finished what therobbers had started. But amazingly, when he saw the beaten, helpless man, he felt compassion for him. His heart went out to the man in sadness, grief, and sympathy Instead of passing him by as the other two men had, he came to him and assessed the situation. Noting his traumatic injuries, the Samaritan bandaged up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. Since the robbers had stripped their victim, the Samaritan would have had to tear up some of his own spare clothes to make the bandages. He also used some of his own provisions to treat the wounds before bandaging them. Pouring oil and wine on the wounds served to sanitize them and soften them, thus relieving the pain and helping them to heal. This was generous, lavish care, certainly unexpected for one who was his enemy

But the Samaritan was not through. Instead of being content to treat the man’s wounds and then leaving, he put him on his own beast (perhaps a donkey or a mule) and brought him to an inn and took care of him. Inns offered meager fare at best, and at worst were places of prostitution and robbery Innkeepers were often unscrupulous, evil, and without compassion. But in this case there was no choice; the wounded man needed shelter, food, water, and rest. Having negotiated a place to stay, the Samaritan took the man in and continued to care for him throughout the night, since he did not leave until the next day.

When he left the next morning, the Samaritan took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper and said, “Take care of him.” Depending on the quality of the inn, that amount would have paid for the injured man’s room and board for anywhere from three weeks to two months. Here was still another example of the Samaritan’s generous, compassionate love. But he still was not finished. He promised the innkeeper, “Whatever more you spend, when I return I will repay you.” In effect, he gave him a blank check. His generosity knew no bounds. He cared for the injured stranger the way most people care for themselves. That is the kind of limitless love that it takes to earn one’s way into God’s kingdom. The scribe did not love like that.

Jesus then asked the scribe, “Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers’ hands?” He replied with the obvious answer, “The one who showed mercy toward him.” Driving home the point of the story, Jesus said to him, “Go and do the same.” The idea is that only by continuously, perfectly loving God and every neighbor on every occasion—even his worst enemy—could the scribe satisfy the first and second commandments and obtain eternal life. Obviously, Christ’s point is that neither the scribe nor anyone else is capable of such love. This is an indictment of the whole of fallen humanity, and the only proper response was for him to acknowledge his inability to save himself, and plead with God for mercyand forgiveness. Jesus, God incarnate, stood before him ready to extend forgiveness, grace, and mercy to him. But there is no indication that the lawyer did so; his pride and self-righteousness held him captive and he likely forfeited eternal life.