life, then, is not the automatic fate of all humanity simply by virtue of being born; rather, the status quo, if not altered, leads to death. Is that not your belief?”
“It is.”
“And it is this altering of the status quo through the promises of our Lord—the ‘new covenant,’ as you phrased it—which you wish to understand better, so that you will know how one may secure the promise of life eternal that awaits those who keep their end of the ‘bargain,’ as you put it?”
“Exactly!”
“Then let us look first to the old to give context to the new. As you have said, it was with Israel that God made the old covenant, to be their God and to take them as His people, called apart from the rest of the world. And as you have said, obedience to the Law of Moses was what He demanded of Israel, in return for which He offered—what?”
“As the Torah puts it, ‘to raise them high in praise and renown and glory above all other nations he has made.’”
“Do you understand this to be the same as eternal life?”
“In truth, Timothy, I am not sure. The Torah makes no mention of eternal life, not explicitly anyway. It references ‘salvation’ only in the context of deliverance of Israel from its enemies, and in the context of a long and prosperous life followed by an unending line of descendants.”
“Then unless such references are a euphemism for eternal life, the old covenant is different from the new on both sides—that which God offers, and that which man must do to demonstrate acceptance; do you agree?”
“I do indeed. But if these words were meant euphemistically, if they were intended to have a meaning beyond the literal, why the obscurity? Why would the scriptures not be direct, if this were their true meaning, rather than casting something so important in metaphor?”
“Why indeed, Mark! What shall we say, then? That a faithful Jew who observes the Law in every respect has earned God’s favor for himself and his progeny so long as they shall live, but does not have the promise of life eternal in God’s presence as his reward?”
“It would seem so.”
“And indeed, that is what the Sadducees believe. But the Pharisaic view is quite different; to varying degrees, they hold to life eternal as the reward for faithful observance, do they not?”
“It is as you say; the Pharisees interpret the Psalms, certain of the Prophets, and the apocalyptic books, particularly the Book of Daniel, as supporting the promise of eternal life for those who adhere to the Law.”
“But as we have said, this is not a necessary interpretation. And even if it were a defensible one, still, the quid pro quo—faithful adherence to the Law—is at best a difficult achievement, perhaps an impossible one given the frailties of human nature; is it not so?”
“It is. There are so many precepts to keep, and the Torah is explicit that one who fails to fulfill any of the provisions of the Law shall be accursed.”
“Is it likely, then, that God would be so mean-spirited as to set before His people so precious a prize, yet at the same time ensure that it is virtually if not completely unattainable?”
“I cannot believe that He would!”
“It must follow, then, that the Pharisaic interpretation must be wrong; that eternal life is not a reward for faithful observance of the Law, and indeed never was. Do you agree?”
“Yes, that follows.”
“At least in terms of the promise of eternal life, then—whatever other benefit there may have been, and may still be, to being a descendant of Abraham and to observing the Law—there is no advantage to being a Jew. For purposes of gaining eternal life at least, Jew and Gentile are on an equal footing.”
“So it seems.”
“And perhaps we can be even more general: If even observance of the Law—the very precepts for behavior given by God Himself as a commandment to His own chosen people—does not have as its reward eternal life, then perhaps eternal life is not strictly a reward for human behavior at all. After all, had God intended eternal life to be a quid pro quo for the performance of some set of humanly achievable acts or forbearances, surely it would have been to Israel that such a reward for conduct would have been offered; don’t you agree?”
“I do.”
“And if it is not a reward, eternal life must then simply be a gift; does that not follow?”
“I suppose it does. Still, I cannot believe that our actions are of no concern to God, that He does not care how we behave, or whether we lead just and moral lives.”
“Nor do I make any such claim, Mark. Certainly He cares! And we shall return to this subject in due course. For now, I simply mean to draw the distinction between earning salvation as a reward for a moral life, and receiving salvation as the unmerited gift of God.”
“I see the distinction. But if, indeed, eternal life is simply a gift, who receives it, and how?”
“To this subject, we will turn in earnest tomorrow. For now, however, let us break from our discussion. See, we are approaching Melos!”
Chapter 5
Early the next morning our convoy departed Melos and headed southwest to Cythera, opposite the southern tip of the Peloponnesian peninsula, and according to legend the island of Aphrodite, goddess of love and beauty, who was carried there on a giant sea shell. The sea was choppy, but again with a tailing wind that strained at the sails and creaked at the timbers of the ship. This stretch of the journey was a bit longer than yesterday’s; we would need favorable winds throughout the day if we were to make the island before darkness.
After a breakfast of cakes and honey, Timothy was ready to indulge my inquisitiveness again, and began the conversation. “We were speaking yesterday of the distinction between earning eternal life, and receiving eternal life as a gift; were we not?”
“Yes. And I questioned, on whom is the gift bestowed.”
“Ah, yes. To answer your question, let us begin by asking, what else is there besides a person’s conduct which can serve as a basis for having this precious gift bestowed upon him? What, aside from how one lives one’s life, would induce God to extend that life beyond the grave? If not one’s actions, it must be one’s beliefs, must it not?”
“That would certainly make sense. It would naturally be those who believe in God who are most likely to gain His favor, if that is what you mean.”
“But let us be more specific, Mark. To believe ‘in’ God is too amorphous. What, precisely, is it about God that must be believed? Simply that He exists? Or something more?”
“In truth, it must be something more—yet I am not sure that I could compile a complete list of the propositions that must be believed. I suppose the first such proposition must be that He is One, and supreme over all creation.”
“Ah, but the Torah already teaches that—yet as we have agreed, its precepts are not sufficient for one to gain eternal life. Focus on His gift, Mark—on what must be believed about His gift. Must we not start
