109. Chapter 50 - The Rich Young Ruler
Chapter 50 - The Rich Young Ruler Matthew 19:16-22;Mark 10:17-22;Luke 18:18-23 The Young Man
“And as he was going forth into the way, there ran one to him, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?” (Mark 10:17). Luke records that “a certain ruler” asked Jesus this question; Matthew merely says, “One came to him and said Mark’s account gives the additional details that Jesus was traveling along a highway and that this person ran in order to overtake Jesus or to intercept Him at some point, and then kneeled before Him in reverence. Matthew calls him “the young man twice (Matthew 19:20, Matthew 19:22); all three writers make plain that he was very rich. The whole picture shows the abounding energy, enthusiasm, self-confidence, and immaturity of youth.
Since he was a young man, he was probably not a member of the Sanhedrin, but a “ruler” of the local synagogue. He had lived an exemplary life, and was very lovable in personality and disposition, had an inner longing for eternal life and the idea that he could gain it by some outstanding good deed, but he lacked the courage for heroic self-dedication. He reminds one of the Pharisee praying in the temple since he was able to survey the entire Old Testament law and affirm that he had kept it all from his youth. But he did not show the supercilious air of superiority which the Pharisee revealed. He realized in a vague way that he lacked something, and he desired to provide for this lack. He had youth, wealth, position, and fame, and yet was dissatisfied with himself. There was none of this self-examination or admission of failure seen in the Pharisee in the temple. His Problem
Dissatisfaction with his own life had evidently arisen from his contact with the personality, message, and missionary campaigns of Jesus. He had considered himself a model of uprightness and virtue, but what he had heard or seen about Jesus and His wonderful spiritual power and dedication to the service of his fellow men had awakened an inner longing to undertake some truly great and heroic thing for God. He evidently was a Pharisee, as is indicated by his idea that salvation could be earned by the doing of some great, good thing and by his estimate of his success in keeping the law. But he must be classified as one of the Pharisees who was most attractive in personality and attitude.
Modernists, who attempt to rewrite the accounts out of their imagination, give numerous bizarre explanations as to why he was not a young man.” Weiss, Neander, and others maintain that Matthew mistakenly supposed that he was a young man because Christ quoted to him “honor thy father….” The phrase from myyouth is held to be out of harmony with his being a young man. Holzmann goes to the opposite extreme and holds that this is the phrase which misled Matthew into supposing he was a young man. Their fantastic theories are built upon the presupposition that Matthew, the apostle and eyewitness, was not the author of this book, but that it was written by some unknown person who used his name and was so far removed from the facts that lie could only conjecture the details. The established early date of the Gospel narratives destroys this presupposition. Matthew gives a harmonious and convincing description. Anyone who has heard a boastful young man in his twenties brag about “all his life” and “from his youth up” can readily verify this attitude of the rich, young ruler. The Rebuke of Jesus
“And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good save one, even God” (Mark 10:18). Modernists claim that by this answer Jesus confessed His own imperfections, His sins, and lack of goodness, and His inferiority to God. Such perversity puts into the words of Jesus a meaning absolutely contradictory to His whole life and teaching. Jesus’ answer is the beginning of His effort to puncture the shallow self-complacency of the young ruler, just as He did with Nicodemus. Matthew’s report shows that the young man also asked concerning some “good thing” which he could do. In other words, he spoke so glibly, using this word good twice in his request, that Jesus immediately began to uncover the chief weakness of the young man, which was his shallow character. He used words without deep thought; he viewed life without deep understanding; his blindness to his own faults was characteristic. When he approached Jesus with this address Good Teacher, what good thing, it seems almost patronizing. This is more of the flavor of Pharisaism. Jesus rebuked him instantly: “Do you know the meaning of this word you apply to me and which you use so freely? There is none good save God; if you apply that term to me and you understand what you mean, you affirm that I am God.” Plummer protests that the young man would not have understood what Jesus meant. This, however, was the very method which Jesus used in His teaching. Nicodemus, who was also a ruler and a Pharisee, had been utterly confounded by the declarations of Jesus. He had been sent home with some very perplexing problems and told to do his homework. The Deity of Christ The first thing necessary was to shock this young man into doing some honest thinking. Furthermore, it is a very large assumption and one which contradicts the Gospel narratives to say that the young man would not have understood what Jesus meant. Why not? The entire nation was in a ferment of excited expectation as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem to face the national leaders who had publicly and repeatedly charged Him with blasphemy for claiming to be the Son of God. They had decreed His death. In fact they had on a number of occasions attempted to kill Him on this charge. This young man was no ignoramus. It is impossible that he did not know of this amazing claim of Jesus and the resulting furor, which had been going on for three years, and was now coming to a swift climax. If he knew anything about Jesus (and he did), he would have known this. The fact that he kneeled to Jesus gives clear evidence that he knew of these claims. His act of reverence was undoubtedly as shallow as his words, but both the act and words say the same thing. They affirm that he knew what the national situation was with respect to Jesus. The radicals attempt to show a “development” in the account from Mark, who admits that Jesus was addressed as “good” and gave this surprising answer, to Matthew who is now developing the idea that Jesus is the Son of God and omits this remark of Jesus as giving unfortunate implications. But this procedure is based on a denial of the plain meaning of the words of Jesus. Instead of offering difficulty or indicating a development from Mark forward, it shows that Mark is giving the same strong succession of assertions of deity by Jesus as the other writers. Moreover, Luke confirms the fact which Matthew records as to the young man’s asking about some “good thing” that he desired to do. The Commandments
“Thou knowest the commandments, Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor thy father and mother” (Mark 10:19). The young man was a Jew; the Old Testament had been given to show the way of life and to answer the very question which the young man raised; hence he was referred to what God had already said on the subject. Jesus did not attempt to rebuke the young man for his false, Pharisaical idea that salvation can be earned by good works. If he was capable of its realization, Jesus’ stunning command at the close would bring the young man to see this. The reference to the Old Testament commands did not mean that Jesus had nothing further to offer, as His startling challenge at the close shows. Jesus simply began the instruction at the proper starting point. In logical fashion Jesus referred the young man to the revelation which he already possessed, before giving further guidance. The fact that Jesus did not quote all ten commandments is not significant. He cited representative commands which could be expected to cause difficulty for a rich young man. By mentioning some of the ten commandments He not only cited the whole Decalogue, but all the Old Testament as well. Matthew shows that Jesus said, “If thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments” and that the young man asked which commandments. Jesus was not suggesting to the young man that he would have to keep these selected commandments, but might omit the others. Rather, He cited a list of the commandments and necessarily implied that all were binding. All three Synoptic writers report that Jesus cited the commands against murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and the command to honor father and mother. Mark adds “Do not defraud,” which enforces by repetition the temptation of the rich to steal from the poor who are in their power. Most significant is the addition of Matthew: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” Since this command is not in the Decalogue, Jesus was selecting out of the entire Old Testament commands which would furnish a particular test to a rich, young ruler. The Young Man’s Avowal
“Teacher, all these things have I observed from my youth” (Mark 10:20). This gives a strong reminder of the Pharisee in the temple and his self-commendation. The young man evidently thought he was telling the truth. He was seeking something from God and was anxious to do something for God. He was sincere in his assertion that he had kept the Old Testament law; he had evidently lived on a high moral plane and avoided the coarser sins that so often plagued the rich. The fact that he walked into the proposition of having kept the command to love his neighbor as himself, with all his wealth and with all the poverty and need that surrounded him, shows he had not scratched the surface of what the Old Testament commanded. Like the Pharisee in the temple, he needed to qualify his assertions so as to include his thoughts and intents, in addition to his actions.
Jesus’ Challenge
Jesus did not undertake to argue with the young man as to the validity of his claim. He simply gave him such a startling entrance examination into eternal life that the young man was stunned. It he had actually kept the spirit as well as the letter of the Law, he would have been willing, as the Galilean fishermen had been, to accept the challenge of Jesus. “And Jesus looking upon him loved him.” Mark records thus a most searching look which Jesus gave to the young man. He must have been stimulating the young man to search his own heart and life anew. Peter, who according to early Christian writers directed Mark in writing this biography, had a keen recollection of the look which Jesus gave to the young man, as well as the look which Jesus gave him on several occasions.
Jesus’ Love
Mark expressly declares that Jesus loved the young man. Jesus loves all men, but the emphatic mention of His love here shows that the young man had not been hypocritically lying about his life. In spite of a tendency to boast, a blindness to his own faults, and a shallow character, the young man must have had many very admirable qualities. He had lived a clean life and was a commendable person. He was one of those “popular” persons who excite general admiration, but usually fall short of greatness. The love of Christ reached out to this young man to challenge him to gain the supreme level of self-denial and heroic dedication. He needed to go beyond his superficial obedience to the law and surrender his whole heart and life to Christ. Jesus called upon him to follow in His company, but He stated a shocking surrender of the young man’s whole way of life before he would qualify to be a disciple of Christ. The Young Man’s Lack
“One thing thou lackest; go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me” (Mark 10:21). Thus did the whole universe of his conception of his own goodness and way of life come crashing about his head! Matthew shows that Jesus also said, “If thou wouldest be perfect...” (Matthew 19:21). When He used such language, Jesus descended to the young man’s plane of thinking in order to show him the folly of his whole attitude. He evidently felt he was near perfection; almost, but not quite. He would now remedy any lack by some heroic act which would bring both fame and eternal life. He was very far from becoming as humble as a little child at the entrance to the kingdom. just how far away he was suddenly became plain. Instead of arguing with the young man, Jesus gave this startling test. The young man could figure out for himself how far away from perfection he actually was. He claimed to have kept the commandments when he did not even begin to understand what they required. He expected to earn eternal life by his own goodness, whereas it is not possible to attain absolute perfection or to earn eternal life by meritorious works. That there is a slight touch of sarcasm in “if thou wouldest be perfect” is shown by the proposition which Jesus immediately submitted. If he accepted the invitation of Jesus, he would enter upon a new life as a disciple, and by heroic self-sacrifice he would learn the truth at Jesus’ feet. If he refused, he would at least recognize how far short he fell of the perfection he believed attainable. The Principle The principle involved in the command of Jesus is that men must surrender whatever is separating them from God. Where a person is showing himself a good steward and is properly returning to God and sharing with his fellows that with which God has blessed him, he is allowed to continue in this course. Proof of this fact is seen in Jesus’ failure to repeat this command to sell all and give to the poor when he talked with the rich man, Zacchaeus. He wisely decided to give half of his possessions to the poor and keep the other half to meet any possible demands for refund of tax money by any who had been defrauded. But the rich young ruler was so in love with his wealth that his only hope was to cut loose from it completely. If the young ruler had been using his wealth wisely in the service of God and his fellowmen, the command to give it all up would not have been necessary. As he was commanded to change the center of his interest and devotion, so everyone who would follow Jesus is commanded to surrender whatever has become his idol, which separates him from God, and prevents him from doing God’s will. The Tragic Refusal
“But when the young man heard the saying, he went away sorrowful; for he was one that had great possessions” (Matthew 19:22). Mark says, “His countenance fell at the saying.” Luke says, “He became exceeding sorrowful.” The personality of Jesus was so winsome and His words so penetrating and true the young man found nothing to make him angry, but much to make him sorrowful. He desired to enter into life, he would have liked to follow Jesus, but he was not willing to pay the price. To give up his luxurious way of life and to take up a cross was too much. He had been living in a world he thought he understood and which he viewed with almost complete assurance. Now suddenly he found himself in a world whose depth he could not fathom. He had been anxious to do some adventurous, heroic thing for God, but he had never dreamed of such a complete surrender. “His countenance fell” pictures the gloom which settled upon him.
“He went away.” Where did he go? Back to his countinghouse? Where could he go when he had rejected the Prince of life? Did he repent and enter into the new life with Christ when the full gospel was preached at Pentecost? He had declared that he possessed the fundamental moral requirements set forth in the law — the essential background of a noble life. He had been commanded to surrender what separated him from God, to dedicate these possessions to God’s service instead of his own enjoyment, to give himself completely to Christ, and to go with Him, learn of Him, and live like Him and for Him. Jesus did not propose to make the young man an apostle. He had a wider group of disciples, such as the seventy; and others, who were with Him as much as possible, were always eager to do His bidding. Jesus invited the young man into close relationship and constant service.
Trust in Riches
“It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God” (Matthew 19:23, Matthew 19:24). Mark again records a stern look which Jesus gave to all of those about Him, as the young man went away sorrowing. He also specifies “those that trust in riches.” Luke shows that Jesus looked at the departing young man. He then spoke of the great peril of wealth. They tend to separate a man from God and his fellowmen, to make him feel independent of God and entirely self-sufficient, to cause him to worship worldly things and to seek them as the chief end of life. The young man had managed to escape the entanglement of the sins which so often allure and corrupt the life of the prosperous, but he had come to regard wealth as more desirable than the favor of God. The disciples received this warning with utter amazement. Plummer supposes that this warning was meant especially for Judas, to stir his conscience. This may have been a primary motive, but Jesus certainly had a wider objective in mind. The Camel and the Needle
It is surprising how many commentators have tried to explain away the hyperbole which Jesus used of a camel passing through the eye of a needle. They do not seem to perceive that this is the dramatic method Jesus continually used in His teaching. They do not seem to be disturbed about a person’s going around with a saw log protruding from his eye (Matthew 7:4), but this camel passing through the eye of a needle is too much for them. They have to change it into something which can be done by men, whereas Jesus plainly declared He was talking about something which could not be done by men. Some early copyists of the manuscripts were evidently troubled with the passage. Some manuscripts of Matthew and Luke have camilos, instead of camelos, meaning cable instead of camel. But the manuscript evidence is very slight, and the alteration was evidently made to lighten the force of a very difficult saying. The effort to interpret “the eye of a needle” as a city gate through which a camel can go only when he has been rid of his load misses entirely the point of the passage and overlooks the method of Jesus in His teaching. Certainly it is no more possible for a man to swallow a camel (Matthew 19:24) than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle. All things are possible with God. To enforce His point of the extreme difficulty of saving a rich man, Jesus used an illustration so exaggerated that man cannot even imagine it, not to mention accomplish it. But God can accomplish even so difficult a thing as the salvation of a rich man. He cannot force a rich man to do His will, but His patience and perseverance are very great, and the moral and spiritual forces at His command are beyond our comprehension. The Amazed Disciples
One of the things that caused the disciples to be so astonished at the teaching of Christ was the fact that the religious system of the day put forward the rich into the prominent places of leadership, as it often does today. Rich Pharisees represented themselves as the special objects of God’s favor and their wealth as proof of this divine pleasure in them. The declaration as to the extreme difficulty for “them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God” implies it is no easy matter for anyone to enter and extremely difficult for a rich man to escape the entanglements of the world and to give himself to God. “Who then can be saved” epitomizes the astonishment and perplexity of the disciples. Jesus seems to be making the kingdom so spiritual and inaccessible as to exclude all. Their materialistic idea of the kingdom may have been clouding their vision. The entire current system of religion was being turned upside down.
Peter’s Question
“Then answered Peter and said unto him, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee; what then shall we have?” (Matthew 19:27). Jesus’ declaration had been to the entire group, but Peter, who had been following with keen interest the conversation with the young ruler and the discussion which followed, felt impelled to answer Jesus. Peter saw the young man disappearing in the distance, returning to his riches, his worldly cares and pursuits, and closing the gates of eternal life against himself. The thought came that the apostles had done the very thing the young man refused to do. It had not been so hard for them because they had not possessed much, and it had not possessed them. Matthew was probably the former rich man of the group. One is inclined to wonder how great may have been the worldly riches Paul surrendered when he changed from Saul the persecutor to Paul the apostle. Peter’s question sounds very selfish, but he may not have intended to give that sort of content to it. If earthly riches are so perilous, of what sort is to be the reward that awaits those who renounce all for Christ?
Future Glory
“Ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). Some interpret this to refer to the setting up of the kingdom on the day of Pentecost and the fact that the apostles had the honor of proclaiming to Israel the full gospel with its redeeming grace. This interpretation has to hold as figurative “The Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory.” The final warning of the passage seems to imply that Jesus is speaking of the second coming and the judgment. The New Testament proclaims a new heaven and a new earth; God is to make all things new. This is to be the regeneration. The apostles who have sacrificed and lived for Christ shall have special places of honor in that day. The thrilling scenes depicted in the Book of Revelation confirm this interpretation.
Present Blessings
“And every one that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life. But many shall he last that are first; and first that are last” (Matthew 19:29, Matthew 19:30). Mark adds the important item “with persecutions” (Mark 10:30). This does not promise a hundredfold in kind, or it would invite the very thing which Jesus had just denounced. Wall Street brokers would find the front seat at church the surer road to earthly wealth than the vagaries of the market. The Pharisees idea of religion, and life, and their wealth as proof of God’s favor would have been verified. God does not use the poorest medium of exchange in rewarding His faithful servants. He is able to give the ultimate satisfactions of life. Jesus did not mean that if a person has to part with his father and mother in order to do God’s work, that he will literally give him a hundred fathers and mothers, but there will he a multitude of Christians who will he like a father and mother in tender love and unfailing help. The fellowship in the kingdom will more than compensate for any worldly, godless people with whom he has had to part company, no matter how close the blood relationship. The spiritual joys of the kingdom will outweigh by far the earthly riches and pleasures that have been surrendered. The Last and the First The last warning is against the peril of pride,which may assail the poor as well as the rich. They must not anticipate that Jesus will necessarily exalt them above all later disciples because they have been among the first to follow Him. One naturally thinks of the apostle Paul and his mighty career. The parable which follows in Matthew elaborates on this closing saying. The very evident reference is to eternity and not to Pentecost. They will receive future glory if they prove faithful, but not if they become puffed up with pride and take too much for granted. Notice the emphasis on the positive side of following Jesus (Matthew 19:28) as well as the negative side of leaving worldly people and things, and the emphatic “for my sake and for the gospel’s sake” (Mark 10:29).