One of the company – One of the multitude. This man had probably had a dispute with his brother, supposing that his brother had refused to do him justice. Conceiving that Jesus had power over the people – that what he said must be performed – he endeavored to secure him on his side of the dispute and gain his point. From the parable which follows, it would appear that he had no just claim on the inheritance, but was influenced by covetousness. Besides, if he had any just claim, it might have been secured by the laws of the land,

Speak to my brother – Command my brother.

Divide the inheritance – An inheritance is the property which is left by a father to his children. Among the Jews the older brother had two shares, or twice as much as any other child, Deu 21:17. The remainder was then equally divided among all the children.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Luk 12:13-14

Who made Me a Judge era divider over you?

—

Christ not a civil judge, but a Redeemer;

At first sight, Christs refusal to interfere between these brothers seems astonishing. Is there not a question of justice to be decided? And who is so competent to deal with it as the Holy and Just One?

I. THE REASON OF THIS STRANGE REFUSAL. It is sometimes said that Jesus Christ only seeks the eternal salvation of the soul, and does not concern Himself about other human interests. This explanation is specious, and is eagerly accepted by infidelity. But we cannot leave such a weapon in the hands of unbelief. Our Lord assigns the highest importance to the souls redemption from sin, and yet sympathizes with human nature in its entirety. Why, then, does Christ refuse to interfere in this dispute? There are two ways of reforming men–an external one and an internal one. The first method pronounces decisions, formulates laws, changes governments, and thus settles all moral and political questions. The second seeks, before every thing else, to renovate the heart and the will. Jesus Christ chose the latter plan. He remained steadfast to it, and this alone evinces the divinity of His mission and the permanent value of His work. Observe here one or two results. Christs refusal determines the relation of Christianity–

1. To political questions. I believe in the profound influence of Christianity on the political destiny of nations–it can help them to become free, great, and prosperous. But on what condition can it elevate them? Like Jesus Christ, it must act in a purely spiritual manner; it must free souls; it must preach justice, holiness, love.

2. To social problems. Christs work consists in uniting in common respect and affection those who are divided by their interests. This mission should be ours. Let us oppose selfish pride and levelling envy; let us summon all men to prayer, to humiliation and to mutual pardon and love–to that sanctuary of spiritual equality where rich and poor meet together, remembering that God has made them both.

II. THE PRINCIPLE WHICH CHRIST ENUNCIATED, (E. Bersier, D. D.)

Christian socialism

There is no doubt that the greatest question of the day in Europe and even in America is Socialism. Socialism ought to be carefully distinguished from Communism; but the two words are often indiscriminately used, and this confusion renders Socialism odious to many, for–

What is a Communist? One who hath yearnings,

For equal divisions of unequal earnings.

Idler or bungler, or both, he is willing

To fork out his penny and pocket your shilling.

The magic of property, says Arthur Young, turns sand into gold. It has done more in this country to produce a spirit of self-help than State aid for the whole planet ever could do. In thus teaching the duty and necessity of self-help, the Church proves herself to be the chief friend of the poor. Not so Communism. By destroying the right of personal ownership in the means of production, and by fostering dependence on State-help, it undermines the energy and self-help of all classes, and is the enemy of the poor quite as much as of the rich. But was there not, many ask, a community of goods, and were not all things in common, in the primitive Church at Jerusalem. Certainly, but this community of goods was not compulsory, but purely voluntary. It did not come about by any sort of confiscation. While it remained, was it not thine own? were the words addressed to Ananias; and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? It was a voluntary act of love rather than a duty. Still less was it a right which the majority might assert against individuals. The estimate of comparative needs recognized when these Jerusalem Christians parted their possessions to all men, as every man had need, shows clearly that property was not alienated beyond control. This, then, was very different from the Communism taught at the present day, which demands an equality enforced by a central authority, and which, so far from inculcating a spirit of self-denial, looks for the self-indulgence of all. Modern Communists affirm that Communism was the natural outcome of the Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity implied in Christs teaching. That the principle did not hold its ground is ascribed by them to the ambition and worldliness of the Church as she increased in power, especially after her official recognition as the State religion of the Roman Empire. On the other hand the defenders of the principle of individual property as opposed to Communism (which in their opinion is a mutiny against society) deny that the Church ever sanctioned officially, or that her Founder ever recommended, such a custom as that of having all things in common. As a matter of fact, we may say with an able Church historian, that the community in Jerusalem growing out of the society of the apostles, who were accustomed already to the common purse system, hit upon the daring plan of establishing a community of goods. And this was fostered by the first outburst of enthusiastic brotherly love, being all the more readily accepted in consequence of the prevailing expectation among the disciples of the approaching subversion of all things. Nowhere out of Jerusalem do we find any other early Christian community of goods. The arrangement at Jerusalem was not intended to be permanent, and perhaps those political economists are not far wrong who assert that it did more harm than good, and produced the chronic state of poverty that existed among the poor saints at Jerusalem. The Master Himself had left no definite instructions as to the future social organization of His little flock. It had been His plan all along to lay down general principles, leaving them to be worked out in the course of time, rather than to prescribe definite lines of conduct under given circumstances. The ideal of a perfect society was ever held up by Him to His most intimate disciples, he formed no plan, however, for realizing this ideal in a political polity. The working out of His principles was left to the new leaven which was to reform character, and thus indirectly society. The patrimony of the poor is not to be restored by means of violent social changes, but by moral influences working upon rich and poor alike. Christs sympathy was with all classes, and He applied remedies to individuals in preference to propounding revolutionary theories for the construction of society. Happily the rich are beginning to recognize this truth. There is obviously an immense outgrowth in the generous distribution of wealth. But the rich have difficulties as well as the poor, and one of these lies in determining how to expend their money in a way that will prove beneficial to society. The question, To whom or to what cause shall I contribute money? must be a very anxious one to conscientious men of wealth. How are we to measure, we may suppose rich men to ask, the relative utility of charities? The fact is, riches must now be considered by all good men as a distinct profession, with responsibilities no less onerous than those of other professions. And this very difficult profession of wealth ought to be learned by studying social science and otherwise with as much care as the professions of divinity, law, and medicine are learned. When in this way the rich accept and prepare themselves for the duties of their high calling, it will cease to be a cause of complaint that in the nature of things money tends continually to fall into the hands of a few large capitalists. The spirit of brotherly love which underlies Christian Socialism is being more and more understood in the present day. The great communistic principle, All for each and each for all, is practically gaining ground. (E. J. Hardy, M. A.)

Worldliness vitiating spiritual teaching

A camp-meeting incident taught us what manner of spirit was in this man. An honoured preacher was closing a moving sermon; his appeals to sinners were full of spiritual power; his voice was husky with deep feeling; the tears were streaming down his face as he urged sinners to repent and penitents to believe. A slight movement near by attracted our attention. Just outside the railing around the communion-place were two men deeply engaged. A life insurance agent, on one knee, ciphering out his arguments to his victim, who leaned toward him. The scene brought up the man who interrupted the sermon of Jesus. What would people think of a man who should, from his pew, cry out to the preacher in the midst of a mighty discourse, What is the price of cotton to-day? What is gold worth? He would perhaps be put out. Certainly he would deserve it. Such a man was he who broke in upon the sermon of Jesus with his request for the Masters intervention in the matter of a contested inheritance. How humiliating a thing it is that a mans mind could be so filled and saturated with business that the most solemn and awful words of even Jesus were heard as an idle, meaningless voice–heard and not feared. Mark our Lords answer. He dismissed the man with one sharp word: Man, who made Me a judge or a divider over you? But the lesson must not be lost. This wickedness of utter worldliness is instructive. Turning to His disciples, Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of covetousness. See what covetousness can do to the heart of man; see what it does in this man! It has consumed him! (Christian Age.)

Missionaries and litigants

Mr. Richards, missionary in India, on his journey to Meerut, halted under the shade of a tree, in the outskirts of a large village, by the roadside. As he sat there two of the Zemindars of the neighbourhood came up, and respectfully saluting him, entreated him to act as an umpire between them, and settle a dispute in which they had been long involved about the boundaries of their respective lands. Mr. Richards declined interfering in the matter, but intimated his readiness to give them information respecting the important concerns of salvation. Having read and explained the Scriptures, they listened with attention and delight. The disputants embraced each other with apparent cordiality, and avowed that they would dispute no more about their lands, but love each other, and strive to seek and serve God. (W. H. Baxendale.)

Christs refusal to interfere

It may seem strange that to so natural a request Christ should return so discouraging an answer, and, withal, apply it with such a parable. But there are two things to be considered.

1. That it was not Christs mission to reorganize society immediately, nor by a demonstrative act, but that He undertook to reorganize society by implanting those principles which should work in us reorganific wisdom. Certain great influences were to be infused into the heart, which gradually but surely would work out all needed changes, and work them out in the order of their proper succession and growth. It was for Christ to prepare the great influences and principles that the world needed, but for us to carry them out into practical execution. It is for God to bring forth the spring, and all its genial influences, upon the earth; but men must avail themselves of these influences, and by the plough, and by the seed, and by the ready hand of tillage, prepare the harvests that they are to reap. And so, in the New Testament, there are authoritatively established principles of love and justice, which, if practised, would evolve the worlds harmony. And it is our business, each in his own place, and with reference to the age in which he lives, to apply these principles, and to change the face of society, and the administration of affairs in the world. This was the reason why our Saviour did not undertake that which He was asked to do.

2. But, in the case in hand, although there might be a matter of great injustice in the partition of the estate, the elder and stronger and shrewder, perhaps, getting advantage of the younger, and defrauding him; yet it was quite possible that both of these brothers might be alike under the influence of corroding and hateful avarice. A man may demand his dues with a spirit just as selfish as that which withholds them. A man may be just as selfish in seeking his rights as another man is in withholding them from him. Both the despot and his victim–the evil-doer and the evil-sufferer–may be in a like selfishness, in a common bitterness, and in a common guilt. Human life is full of such eases and scenes. Every day, men that are hard, coarse, selfish, avaricious, envious, contentious, are striving together, and in full conflict, each sometimes wronged and sometimes wronging; but either way, and always, actor or recipient, of a worldly spirit, of a corrupt nature, of an intense selfishness, of a despotic pride, unjust and unlovely. While Christ refused, then, to assume the office of civil justice, or to interfere even by advice, He gave to both of these men, and to all upon that occasion, the instruction which the motive of the petitioner seemed to suggest. (H. W. Beecher.)

Christs judgment respecting inheritance

I. THE SAVIOURS REFUSAL TO INTERFERE.

1. He implied that it was not His part to interfere. Who made Me a Judge or a Divider? He stands aloof, sublime and dignified. It was no part of His to take from the oppressor and give to the oppressed, much less to encourage the oppressed to take from the oppresser himself. It was His part to forbid oppression. It was a Judges part to decide what oppression was. It was not His office to determine the boundaries of civil right, nor to lay down the rules of the descent of property. Of course there was a spiritual and moral principle involved in this question. But He would not suffer His sublime mission to degenerate into the mere task of deciding casuistry. He asserted principles of love, unselfishness, order, which would decide all questions; but the questions themselves He would not decide. He would lay down the great political principle, Render unto Caesar the things that be Caesars, and unto God the things which are Gods. But He would not determine whether this particular tax was due to Caesar or not. So, too, He would say, justice, like mercy and truth, is one of the weightier matters of the law; but He would not decide whether in this definite case this or that brother had justice on his side. It was for themselves to determine that, and in that determination lay their responsibility. And thus religion deals with men, not cases; with human hearts, not casuistry.

2. In this refusal, again, it was implied that His kingdom was one founded on spiritual disposition, not one of outward law and jurisprudence. That this lawsuit should have been decided by the brothers themselves, in love, with mutual fairness, would have been much; that it should be determined by authoritative arbitration was, spiritually speaking, nothing. The right disposition of their hearts, and the right division of their property thence resulting, was Christs kingdom. The apportionment of their property by anothers division had nothing to do with His kingdom. Suppose that both were wrong–one oppressive, the other covetous. Then, that the oppressor should become generous, and the covetous liberal, were a great gain. But to take from one selfish brother in order to give to another selfish brother, what spiritual gain would there have been in this? Suppose again, that the retainer of the inheritance was in the wrong, and that the petitioner had justice on his side–that he was a humble, meek man, and his petition only one of right. Well, to take the property from the unjust and give it to Christs servant, might be, and was, the duty of a judge. But it was not Christs part, nor any gain to the cause of Christ. He does not reward His servants with inheritances, with lands, houses, gold. The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Christ triumphs by wrongs meekly borne, even more than by wrongs legally righted.

3. He refused to be the friend of one, because He was the friend of both. He never was the champion of a class, because He was the champion of humanity. We may take for granted that the petitioner was an injured man–one at all events who thought himself injured; and Christ had often taught the spirit which would have made his brother right him; but He refused to take his part against his brother, just because he was his brother–Christs servant, and one of Gods family, as well as he. And this wasHis spirit always. The Pharisees thought to commit Him to a side when they asked whether it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not. But He would take no side as the Christ–neither the part of the government against the taxpayers, nor the part of the taxpayers against the government,

II. THE SOURCE TO WHICH HE TRACED THIS APPEAL FOR A DIVISION. He went to the very root of the matter. Take heed and beware of covetousness. It was covetousness which caused the unjust brother to withhold; it was covetousness which made the defrauded brother indignantly complain to a stranger. It is covetousness which is at the bottom of all lawsuits, all social grievances, all political factions. The true remedy for this covetousness He then proceeds to give. A mans life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesses. Now observe the distinction between His view and the worlds view of humanity. To the question, What is a man worth? the world replies by enumerating what he has. In reply to the same question, the Son of Man replies by estimating what he is. Not what he has, but what he is, that, through time and through eternity, is his real and proper life. He declared the presence of the soul; He announced the dignity of the spiritual man; He revealed the being that we are. Not that which is supported by meat and drink, but that whose very life is in truth, integrity, honour, purity. (F. W. Robertson, M. A.)

The bearing of the gospel on every-day life

The Word of God, my friends, affords men direction in all the circumstances of life, inasmuch, at least, as it contains general rules which may be applied to particular cases.

I. INJUSTICE AND QUARRELS BETWEEN NEAR CONNECTIONS REGARDING THE PROPERTY OF DECEASED RELATIONS ARE VERY UNSEEMLY AND UNCHRISTIAN. It sometimes happens that the head of a family, or a very near relation, is no sooner laid in the grave, than the survivors, who expect to benefit in their substance by his decease, begin to strive about what he leaves behind him. How unbecoming, in the very face of such a memento of the vanity of earthly things, to be carried away by the desire of having, and that in such a way as to overlook the ordinary proprieties of life! Common feeling, not to speak of any higher principle, should at least teach them to keep such disputes to themselves (if they do at all arise), and not to outrage decency by making them public.

II. We may remark, from this passage, that those WHO HAVE ANY PROPERTY TO LEAVE BEHIND THEM SHOULD BE CAREFUL TIMEOUSLY TO SETTLE THEIR AFFAIRS BY A LATTER WILL, SO THAT JUSTICE MAY BE DONE AND DISPUTES PREVENTED AFTER THEY ARE GONE. In some cases the law of the land may be sufficient to divide an inheritance as justice and a mans own reasonable inclination might desire. In most cases, however, there would be room for litigation; and in many cases, especially where there is much property, something that equity or mercy requires will be neglected if there be no distinct testament. How far a man is at liberty to consult his own particular wishes on such an occasion, independently on the general principles of nearness of kindred, which are usually observed, is a very difficult question. No particular rules can be laid down to meet every case. The Christian should consult conscience, the Word of God, and, perhaps, also a judicious friend or two.

III. THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS OR HUMAN LAWS. NO doubt it is intended and fitted to influence them indirectly, for everything ought to be managed in a way consistent with its holy precepts; but it gives no countenance to its adherents to disregard existing institutions or to usurp the places assigned to others. Dominion is not founded on grace. The provinces of civil and ecclesiastical government are quite distinct. Not but that they may, and should, be so managed as mutually to assist each other; but still, their office is distinct, and relates to quite different things.

IV. Once more here, THIS PASSAGE IS UNFAVOURABLE TO MINISTERS ENGAGING IN SECULAR BUSINESS, ANN ESPECIALLY IN PUBLIC CIVIL OFFICES. (Jas. Foote, M.A.)

A warning against worldliness and covetousness

I. A RUDE INTERRUPTION.

1. This suggests a sad but common occurrence. Worldly thoughts obtruding themselves at unseasonable times.

2. This suggests a constantly-needed but oft-neglected duty. To take heed how we hear.

II. A FITTING REBUKE.

1. It rebuked the man for his gross view of our Lords mission.

2. It rebuked the man for the worldliness of his spirit.

III. A MORAL LESSON.

1. The subject–covetousness.

(1) Covetousness is an inordinate desire for gain; an avaricious disposition; a disposition to have more than others.

(2) Covetousness is foolishness.

(a) For after it has attained its object there is no satisfaction.

(b) It unfits the soul to enjoy spiritual things.

2. The elucidation of the subject.

(1) A parable.

(2) A very instructive parable.

(a) It shows Gods goodness to the wicked (Luk 12:16).

(b) It shows the inadequacy of worldly prosperity to inspire gratitude (Luk 12:18).

(c) It shows the degrading influence of worldly thoughts:

(d) It shows the shortsightedness of worldliness.

(e) It shows that Gods eye is on all.

(f) It shows the uncertainty of life.

(g) It shows the relation of time to eternity.

3. The Divine application.

(1) Selfishness and godliness incompatible (Luk 12:21).

(2) Anxiety a sin (Luk 12:22).

(3) The great duty. To be rich toward God. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.)

Covetousness

I. COVETOUSNESS IN ITS BEARING UPON THE RECEPTION OF TRUTH.

1. Consider for a moment the truths which Jesus had just been uttering.

(1) The sin of hypocrisy.

(2) The sin of the man-fearing spirit.

(3) The comprehensiveness of Gods care.

(4) The blessed consequences of confessing Christ, and the dreadful consequences of denying Christ.

(5) The appalling sin–the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

(6) The Divine help promised in times of persecution.

2. In the midst of utterances such as these, this man, filled with worldly thoughts, interrupted our Lord in His address.

(1) Of how many in our day is this man a representative!

(2) The most solemn truths uttered in the sanctuary, or spoken by friends, often fall as seed upon a hard-beaten road.

II. COVETOUSNESS IN ITS BEARING UPON THE SOULS TRUE JOY. Two things are here stated.

1. That our Lords mission was not to interfere in secular affairs.

2. That a mans life, in the sense of true joy, does not arise from wealth or position or fame.

III. COVETOUSNESS IN ITS BEARING ON OUR FINAL DESTINY.

1. The parable shows that the most selfish of men may be prospered in worldly affairs.

2. The parable shows that the most abundant prosperity of the worldly-minded only intensifies their selfishness and blinds their spiritual vision.

3. This parable shows that, however farsighted and shrewd worldly-minded men may be in their business affairs, it is by their spiritual condition that God judges them.

4. This parable shows that the uncertainty of the time of death should have its legitimate weight with them.

Lessons:

1. The sin to which our attention is here called is the crying sin of our age.

2. This is one of the most subtle and unconscious of all classes of sins to which we may be exposed.

3. It is a sin the most difficult to be reached by truth.

4. It is no less heinous and damning, because it is so subtle and unconscious. (D. C. Hughes, M. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 13. Speak to my brother, that he divide] Among the Jews, the children had the inheritance of their fathers divided among them; the eldest had a double portion, but all the rest had equal parts. It is likely the person complained of in the text was the elder brother; and he wished to keep the whole to himself-a case which is far from being uncommon. The spirit of covetousness cancels all bonds and obligations, makes wrong right, and cares nothing for father or brother.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

This passage certainly is not recorded for nothing; if it teacheth us any thing, it is this, That matters of civil justice belong not to those whom Christ sends to preach his gospel: that work is enough for them. Christ here refuseth the office so much as of an arbitrator. A very learned author tells us, that the practice of bringing civil matters before ecclesiastical men, as judges, began in the captivity of Babylon, the Jews by that means avoiding the bringing their differences before pagan judges, which the apostle also persuadeth at large to the primitive Christians, in 1Co 6:1,2, &c. But that the ministers of the gospel should be employed, or might be employed, in them, doth not appear by the apostle; nay, he speaks the contrary, 1Co 6:4, Set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church: these surely were not the elders in it. Under the Romans, the Jews had more liberty, having civil courts made up of persons of their own religion, to whom our Saviour turns over this man; being not willing to move out of his calling, as a minister of the gospel. As Christs commissioners, it is most certain that no ministers of the gospel can intermeddle in civil judgments; whether those who are such commissioners of Christ may yet as mens commissioners act, it stands those in hand who are ambitious of such an employment, and can find leisure enough for it, and are called to it, to inquire: I shall not intermeddle in that controversy. To me, the proper work of the gospel is work enough.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

13. Master, c.that is, “GreatPreacher of righteousness, help there is need of Thee in thisrapacious world; here am I the victim of injustice, and that from myown brother, who withholds from me my rightful share of theinheritance that has fallen to us.” In this most inopportuneintrusion upon the solemnities of our Lord’s teaching, there is amixture of the absurd and the irreverent, the one, however,occasioning the other. The man had not the least idea that his casewas not of as urgent a nature, and as worthy the attention of ourLord, as anything else He could deal with.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And one of the company said unto him,…. Not one of the disciples of Christ, but one of the multitude, or crowd, about him, Lu 12:1

Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me: the firstborn, according to the law, in De 21:17 had a double portion: but the eider brother here, it seems, was for keeping all, and would not divide any part to his younger brother; wherefore he applies to Christ, to interpose his authority, which he imagined would have great weight with his brother, who might be a hearer of Christ, and favourer of him: or however, such was the fame of Christ, and such credit he obtained by his ministry and miracles, that he concluded a word from him, would go a great way with his brother, to engage him to make a right and proper division, as he ought; and especially, if he looked upon him, as the king Messiah the Jews expected, he might take this to be part of his work and office, to settle such civil affairs as these: we often read in the Jewish writings, of brethren dividing their substance, left by their parents; so it is said f,

“wqlxv Nyxax, “brethren that divide”, (a field,) give two corners (to the poor); if they return and become partners, they give but one.”

Where there were but two brethren, as here, the one was called

, “the firstborn”; and the other, , “simple”; having no title or character: and concerning dividing inheritances, there are the following rules g:

“the firstborn takes a double portion of his father’s goods, as is said, De 21:17 how? a man leaves five children, and one of them is the firstborn: the firstborn takes the third part of the substance, and every one of the four simple ones, takes a sixth part: if he leaves nine children, and one of them is the firstborn, he takes the fifth part, and every one of the eight simple ones, takes a tenth part; and so according to this division, they divided for ever—-he that has two sons, a firstborn and a simple one, and they both die in his lifetime, the firstborn leaves a daughter, and the simple one leaves a son; lo, the son of the simple one inherits the third part of the old man’s goods, which is his father’s part; and the daughter of the firstborn, inherits the two thirds, which is the part of her father.”

And again h,

“two brethren that “divide”, and a brother comes to them from the province of the sea: and so three brethren that “divide”, and a creditor comes and takes the part of one of them, though the one takes land, and the other money, the division is void, and they return and divide the rest equally: if any one orders at the time of death, that there should be given to such an one a palm tree, or a field out of his substance, and the brethren “divide”, and do not give such an one any thing, lo, the division is void; and how do they do? they give what he ordered the heirs, and after that they return and divide as at the beginning: brethren that divide, value what is upon them; but what is upon their sons and their daughters, which they have in possession, they do not value–he that leaves fatherless children, some that are grown up, and others little ones, and they are willing to divide their father’s goods, so that those that are grown up may take their part, the sanhedrim appoint a guardian for the little ones, and he chooses a good part for them: and when they are grown up, they cannot make it void, for lo, by the decree of the sanhedrim, they divided for them; but if the sanhedrim err in computation, and give them less, they may make it void, and make another division when, they are grown up.”

But it would be tedious to transcribe all the rules, relating to such cases.

f Misn. Peah, c. 3. sect. 5. g Maimon. Hilchot Nechalot, c. 2. sect. 1. 7. h Maimon. Hilchot Nechalot, c. 10. sect. 1, 2, 3, 4.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

      13 And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.   14 And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?   15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.   16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:   17 And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits?   18 And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods.   19 And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.   20 But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?   21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.

      We have in these verses,

      I. The application that was made to Christ, very unseasonably, by one of his hearers, desiring him to interpose between him and his brother in a matter that concerned the estate of the family (v. 13): “Master, speak to my brother; speak as a prophet, speak as a king, speak with authority; he is one that will have regard to what thou sayest; speak to him, that he divide the inheritance with me.” Now, 1. Some think that his brother did him wrong, and that he appealed to Christ to right him, because he knew the law was costly. His brother was such a one as the Jews called Ben-hamesen—a son of violence, that took not only his own part of the estate, but his brother’s too, and forcibly detained it from him. Such brethren there are in the world, who have no sense at all either of natural equity or natural affection, who make a prey of those whom they ought to patronize and protect. They who are so wronged have God to go to, who will execute judgment and justice for those that are oppressed. 2. Others think that he had a mind to do his brother wrong, and would have Christ to assist him; that, whereas the law gave the elder brother a double portion of the estate, and the father himself could not dispose of what he had but by that rule (Deu 21:16; Deu 21:17), he would have Christ to alter that law, and oblige his brother, who perhaps was a follower of Christ at large, to divide the inheritance equally with him, in gavel-kind, share and share alike, and to allot him as much as his elder brother. I suspect that this was the case, because Christ takes occasion from it to warn against covetousness, pleonexia—a desire of having more, more than God in his providence has allotted us. It was not a lawful desire of getting his own, but a sinful desire of getting more than his own.

      II. Christ’s refusal to interpose in this matter (v. 14): Man, who made me a judge or divider over you? In matters of this nature, Christ will not assume either a legislative power to alter the settled rule of inheritances, or a judicial power to determine controversies concerning them. He could have done the judge’s part, and the lawyer’s, as well as he did the physician’s, and have ended suits at law as happily as he did diseases; but he would not, for it was not in his commission: Who made me a judge? Probably he refers to the indignity done to Moses by his brethren in Egypt, with which Stephen upbraided the Jews, Act 7:27; Act 7:35. “If I should offer to do this, you would taunt me as you did Moses, Who made thee a judge or a divider?” He corrects the man’s mistake, will not admit his appeal (it was coram non judice–not before the proper judge), and so dismisses his bill. If he had come to him to desire him to assist his pursuit of the heavenly inheritance, Christ would have given him his best help; but as to this matter he has nothing to do: Who made me a judge? Note, Jesus Christ was no usurper; he took no honour, no power, to himself, but what was given him, Heb. v. 5. Whatever he did, he could tell by what authority he did it, and who gave him that authority. Now this shows us what is the nature and constitution of Christ’s kingdom. It is a spiritual kingdom, and not of this world. 1. It does not interfere with civil powers, nor take the authority of princes out of their hands. Christianity leaves the matter as it found it, as to civil power. 2. It does not intermeddle with civil rights; it obliges all to do justly, according to the settled rules of equity, but dominion is not founded in grace. 3. It does not encourage our expectations of worldly advantages by our religion. If this man will be a disciple of Christ, and expects that in consideration of this Christ should give him his brother’s estate, he is mistaken; the rewards of Christ’s disciples are of another nature. 4. It does not encourage our contests with our brethren, and our being rigorous and high in our demands, but rather, for peace’ sake, to recede from our right. 5. It does not allow ministers to entangle themselves in the affairs of this life (2 Tim. ii. 4), to leave the word of God to serve tables. There are those whose business it is, let it be left to them, Tractent fabrilia fabri—Each workman to his proper craft.

      III. The necessary caution which Christ took occasion from this to give to his hearers. Though he came not to be a divider of men’s estates, he came to be a director of their consciences about them, and would have all take heed of harbouring that corrupt principle which they saw to be in others the root of so much evil. Here is,

      1. The caution itself (v. 15): Take heed and beware of covetousness; horate–“Observe yourselves, keep a jealous eye upon your own hearts, lest covetous principles steal into them; and phylassesthe—preserve yourselves, keep a strict band upon your own hearts, lest covetous principles rule and give law in them.” Covetousness is a sin which we have need constantly to watch against, and therefore frequently to be warned against.

      2. The reason of it, or an argument to enforce this caution: For a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth; that is, “our happiness and comfort do not depend upon our having a great deal of the wealth of this world.” (1.) The life of the soul, undoubtedly, does not depend upon it, and the soul is the man. The things of the world will not suit the nature of a soul, nor supply its needs, nor satisfy its desires, nor last so long as it will last. Nay, (2.) Even the life of the body and the happiness of that do not consist in an abundance of these things; for many live very contentedly and easily, and get through the world very comfortably, who have but a little of the wealth of it (a dinner of herbs with holy love is better than a feast of fat things); and, on the other hand, many live very miserably who have a great deal of the things of this world; they possess abundance, and yet have no comfort of it; they bereave their souls of good, Eccl. iv. 8. Many who have abundance are discontented and fretful, as Ahab and Haman; and then what good does their abundance do them?

      3. The illustration of this by a parable, the sum of which is to show the folly of carnal worldlings while they live, and their misery when they die, which is intended not only for a check to that man who came to Christ with an address about his estate, while he was in no care about his soul and another world, but for the enforcing of that necessary caution to us all, to take heed of covetousness. The parable gives us the life and death of a rich man, and leaves us to judge whether he was a happy man.

      (1.) Here is an account of his worldly wealth and abundance (v. 16): The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully, chora—regio—the country. He had a whole country to himself, a lordship of his own; he was a little prince. Observe, His wealth lay much in the fruits of the earth, for the king himself is served by the field, Eccl. v. 9. He had a great deal of ground, and his ground was fruitful; much would have more, and he had more. Note, The fruitfulness of the earth is a great blessing, but it is a blessing which God often gives plentifully to wicked men, to whom it is a snare, that we may not think to judge of his love or hatred by what is before us.

      (2.) Here are the workings of his heart, in the midst of this abundance. We are here told what he thought within himself, v. 17. Note, The God of heaven knows and observes whatever we think within ourselves, and we are accountable to him for it. He is both a discerner and judge of the thoughts and intents of the heart. We mistake if we imagine that thoughts are hid and thoughts are free. Let us here observe,

      [1.] What his cares and concerns were. When he saw an extraordinary crop upon his ground, instead of thanking God for it, or rejoicing in the opportunity it would give him of doing the more good, he afflicts himself with this thought, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? He speaks as one at a loss, and full of perplexity. What shall I do now? The poorest beggar in the country, that did not know where to get a meal’s meat, could not have said a more anxious word. Disquieting care is the common fruit of an abundance of this world, and the common fault of those that have abundance. The more men have, the more perplexity they have with it, and the more solicitous they are to keep what they have and to add to it, how to spare and how to spend; so that even the abundance of the rich will not suffer them to sleep, for thinking what they shall do with what they have and how they shall dispose of it. The rich man seems to speak it with a sigh, What shall I do? And if you ask, Why, what is the matter? Truly he had abundance of wealth, and wants a place to put it in, that is all.

      [2.] What his projects and purposes were, which were the result of his cares, and were indeed absurd and foolish like them (v. 18): “This will I do, and it is the wisest course I can take, I will pull down my barns, for they are too little, and I will build greater, and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods, and then I shall be at ease.” Now here, First, It was folly for him to call the fruits of the ground his fruits and his goods. He seems to lay a pleasing emphasis upon that, my fruits and my goods; whereas what we have is but lent us for our use, the property is still in God; we are but stewards of our Lord’s goods, tenants at will of our Lord’s land. It is my corn (saith God) and my wine,Hos 2:8; Hos 2:9. Secondly, It was folly for him to hoard up what he had, and then to think it well bestowed. There will I bestow it all; as if none must be bestowed upon the poor, none upon his family, none upon the Levite and the stranger, the fatherless and the widow, but all in the great barn. Thirdly, It was folly for him to let his mind rise with his condition; when his ground brought forth more plentifully than usual, then to talk of bigger barns, as if the next year must needs be as fruitful as this, and much more abundant, whereas the barn might be as much too big the next year as it was too little this. Years of famine commonly follow years of plenty, as they did in Egypt; and therefore it were better to stack some of his corn for this once. Fourthly, It was folly for him to think to ease his care by building new barns, for the building of them would but increase his care; those know this who know any thing of the spirit of building. The way that God prescribes for the cure of inordinate care is certainly successful, but the way of the world does but increase it. Besides, when he had done this, there were other cares that would still attend him; the greater the barns, still the greater the cares, Eccl. v. 10. Fifthly, It was folly for him to contrive and resolve all this absolutely and without reserve. This I will do: I will pull down my barns and will build greater, yea, that I will; without so much as that necessary proviso, If the Lord will, I shall live, Jam. iv. 13-15. Peremptory projects are foolish projects; for our times are in God’s hand, and not in our own, and we do not so much as know what shall be on the morrow.

      [3.] What his pleasing hopes and expectations were, when he should have made good these projects. “Then I will say to my soul, upon the credit of this security, whether God say it or no, Soul, mark what I say, thou hast much goods laid up for many years in these barns; now take thine ease, enjoy thyself, eat, drink, and be merry,” v. 19. Here also appears his folly, as much in the enjoyment of his wealth as in the pursuit of it. First, It was folly for him to put off his comfort in his abundance till he had compassed his projects concerning it. When he has built bigger barns, and filled them (which will be a work of time), then he will take his ease; and might he not as well have done that now? Grotius here quotes the story of Pyrrhus, who was projecting to make himself master of Sicily, Africa, and other places, in the prosecution of his victories. Well, says his friend Cyneas, and what must we do then? Postea vivemus, says he, Then we will live; At hoc jam licet, says Cyneas, We may live now if we please. Secondly, It was folly for him to be confident that his goods were laid up for many years, as if his bigger barns would be safer than those he had; whereas in an hour’s time they might be burnt to the ground and all that was laid up in them, perhaps by lightning, against which there is no defence. A few years may make a great change; moth and rust may corrupt, or thieves break through and steal. Thirdly, It was folly for him to count upon certain ease, when he had laid up abundance of the wealth of this world, whereas there are many things that may make people uneasy in the midst of their greatest abundance. One dead fly may spoil a whole pot of precious ointment; and one thorn a whole bed of down. Pain and sickness of body, disagreeableness of relations, and especially a guilty conscience, may rob a man of his ease, who has ever so much of the wealth of this world. Fourthly, It was folly for him to think of making no other use of his plenty than to eat and drink, and to be merry; to indulge the flesh, and gratify the sensual appetite, without any thought of doing good to others, and being put thereby into a better capacity of serving God and his generation: as if we lived to eat, and did not eat to live, and the happiness of man consisted in nothing else but in having all the gratifications of sense wound up to the height of pleasurableness. Fifthly, It was the greatest folly of all to say all this to his soul. if he had said, Body, take thine ease, for thou hast goods laid up for many years, there had been sense in it; but the soul, considered as an immortal spirit, separable from the body, was no way interested in a barn full of corn or a bag full of gold. If he had had the soul of a swine, he might have blessed it with the satisfaction of eating and drinking; but what is this to the soul of a man, that has exigencies and desires which these things will be no ways suited to? It is the great absurdity which the children of this world are guilty of that they portion their souls in the wealth of the world and the pleasures of sense.

      (3.) Here is God’s sentence upon all this; and we are sure that his judgment is according to truth. He said to himself, said to his soul, Take thine ease. If God had said so too, the man had been happy, as his Spirit witnesses with the spirit of believers to make them easy. But God said quite otherwise; and by his judgment of us we must stand or fall, not by ours of ourselves, 1Co 4:3; 1Co 4:4. His neighbours blessed him (Ps. x. 3), praised him as doing well for himself (Ps. xlix. 18); but God said he did ill for himself: Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee, v. 20. God said to him, that is, decreed this concerning him, and let him know it, either by his conscience or by some awakening providence, or rather by both together. This was said when he was in the fulness of his sufficiency (Job xx. 22), when his eyes were held waking upon his bed with his cares and contrivances about enlarging his barns, not by adding a bay or two more of building to them, which might serve to answer the end, but by pulling them down and building greater, which was requisite to please his fancy. When he was forecasting this, and had brought it to an issue, and then lulled himself asleep again with a pleasing dream of many years’ enjoyment of his present improvements, then God said this to him. Thus Belshazzar was struck with terror by the hand-writing on the wall, in the midst of his jollity. Now observe what God said,

      [1.] The character he gave him: Thou fool, thou Nabal, alluding to the story of Nabal, that fool (Nabal is his name, and folly is with him) whose heart was struck dead as a stone while he was regaling himself in the abundance of his provision for his sheep-shearers. Note, Carnal worldlings are fools, and the day is coming when God will call them by their own name, Thou fool, and they will call themselves so.

      [2.] The sentence he passed upon him, a sentence of death: This night thy soul shall be required of thee; they shall require thy soul (so the words are), and then whose shall those things be which thou hast provided? He thought he had goods that should be his for many years, but he must part from them this night; he thought he should enjoy them himself, but he must leave them to he knows not who. Note, The death of carnal worldlings is miserable in itself and terrible to them.

      First, It is a force, an arrest; it is the requiring of the soul, that soul that thou art making such a fool of; what hast thou to do with a soul, who canst use it no better? Thy soul shall be required; this intimates that he is loth to part with it. A good man, who has taken his heart off from this world, cheerfully resigns his soul at death, and gives it up; but a worldly man has it torn from him with violence; it is a terror to him to think of leaving this world. They shall require thy soul. God shall require it; he shall require an account of it. “Man, woman, what hast thou done with thy soul. Give an account of that stewardship.” They shall; that is, evil angels as the messengers of God’s justice. As good angels receive gracious souls to carry them to their joy, so evil angels receive wicked souls to carry them to the place of torment; they shall require it as a guilty soul to be punished. The devil requires thy soul as his own, for it did, in effect, give itself to him.

      Secondly, It is a surprize, an unexpected force. It is in the night, and terrors in the night are most terrible. The time of death is day-time to a good man; it is his morning. But it is night to a worldling, a dark night; he lies down in sorrow. It is this night, this present night, without delay; there is no giving bail, or begging a day. This pleasant night, when thou art promising thyself many years to come, now thou must die, and go to judgment. Thou art entertaining thyself with the fancy of many a merry day, and merry night, and merry feast; but, in the midst of all, here is an end of all, Isa. xxi. 4.

      Thirdly, It is the leaving of all those things behind which they have provided, which they have laboured for, and prepared for hereafter, with abundance of toil and care. All that which they have placed their happiness in, and built their hope upon, and raised their expectations from, they must leave behind. Their pomp shall not descend after them (Ps. xlix. 17), but they shall go as naked out of the world as they came into it, and they shall have no benefit at all by what they have hoarded up either in death, in judgment, or in their everlasting state.

      Fourthly, It is leaving them to they know not who: “Then whose shall those things be? Not thine to be sure, and thou knowest not what they will prove for whom thou didst design them, thy children and relations, whether they will be wise or fools (Ecc 2:18; Ecc 2:19), whether such as will bless thy memory or curse it, be a credit to thy family or a blemish, do good or hurt with what thou leavest them, keep it or spend it; nay, thou knowest not but those for whom thou dost design it may be prevented from the enjoyment of it, and it may be turned to somebody else thou little thinkest of; nay, though thou knowest to whom thou leavest it, thou knowest not to whom they will leave it, or into whose hand it will come at last.” If many a man could have foreseen to whom his house would have come after his death, he would rather have burned it than beautified it.

      Fifthly, It is a demonstration of his folly. Carnal worldlings are fools while they live: this their way is their folly (Ps. xlix. 13); but their folly is made most evident when they die: at his end he shall be a fool (Jer. xvii. 11); for then it will appear that he took pains to lay up treasure in a world he was hastening from, but took no care to lay it up in the world he was hastening to.

      Lastly, Here is the application of this parable (v. 21): So is he, such a fool, a fool in God’s judgment, a fool upon record, that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich towards God. This is the way and this is the end of such a man. Observe here,

      1. The description of a worldly man: He lays up treasure for himself, for the body, for the world, for himself in opposition to God, for that self that is to be denied. (1.) It is his error that he counts his flesh himself, as if the body were the man. If self be rightly stated and understood, it is only the true Christian that lays up treasure for himself, and is wise for himself, Prov. ix. 12. (2.) It is his error that he makes it his business to lay up for the flesh, which he calls laying up for himself. All his labour is for his mouth (Eccl. vi. 7), making provision for the flesh. (3.) It is his error that he counts those things his treasure which are thus laid up for the world, and the body, and the life that now is; they are the wealth he trusts to, and spends upon, and lets out his affections toward. (4.) The greatest error of all is that he is in no care to be rich towards God, rich in the account of God, whose accounting us rich makes us so (Rev. ii. 9), rich in the things of God, rich in faith (Jam. ii. 5), rich in good works, in the fruits of righteousness (1 Tim. vi. 18), rich in graces, and comforts, and spiritual gifts. Many who have abundance of this world are wholly destitute of that which will enrich their souls, which will make them rich towards God, rich for eternity.

      2. The folly and misery of a worldly man: So is he. Our Lord Jesus Christ, who knows what the end of things will be, has here told us what his end will be. Note, It is the unspeakable folly of the most of men to mind and pursue the wealth of this world more than the wealth of the other world, that which is merely for the body and for time, more than that which is for the soul and eternity.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Bid my brother ( ). This volunteer from the crowd draws attention to the multitude (verses 13-21). He does not ask for arbitration and there is no evidence that his brother was willing for that. He wants a decision by Jesus against his brother. The law (De 21:17) was two-thirds to the elder, one-third to the younger.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) “And one of the company said unto him,” (elpen de tis ek tou ochlou auto) “Then someone from out of the crowd said;” Whether the one that approached was a disciple or not, is not clear. He may have even been a member of His chosen church company of disciples, traveling with Him, Joh 15:16; Joh 15:27.

2) “Master, speak to my brother,” (didaskale eipe to adelpho mou) “Master, tell my brother,” fraternal brother. It may even be that his brother was unjust in holding on to probation of the estate, Rom 1:31; Pro 18:19.

3) “That he divide the inheritance with me.” (merisasthai met emou ten kleronomian) “To divide the inheritance with me,” right away, to turn over my part of the estate to me. He had perhaps let his mind wonder, as Jesus spoke of the Father’s providential care over and provision for His own. And his mind had been “stuck on”, glued on material, estate matters, expressing a covetous nature that held priority in his thoughts and desires, 1Jn 2:17-19; 1Ti 6:10-12. He seemed in haste to secure an estate, without probate or litigation, or any delay. When two brothers were involved one third went to the younger and two thirds to the older brother, Deu 21:17. For the elder son became high priest of the family after death of the father, and was to make family sacrifices for all family members at home, from his inheritance.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

13. Bid my brother divide Our Lord, when requested to undertake the office of dividing an inheritance, refuses to do so. Now as this tended to promote brotherly harmony, and as Christ’s office was, not only to reconcile men to God, but to bring them into a state of agreement with one another, what hindered him from settling the dispute between the two brothers? (265) There appear to have been chiefly two reasons why he declined the office of a judge. First, as the Jews imagined that the Messiah would have an earthly kingdom, (266) he wished to guard against doing any thing that might countenance this error. If they had seen him divide inheritances, the report of that proceeding would immediately have been circulated. Many would have been led to expect a carnal redemption, which they too ardently desired; and wicked men would have loudly declared, that he was effecting a revolution in the state, and overturning the Roman Empire. Nothing could be more appropriate, therefore, than this reply, by which all would be informed, that the kingdom of Christ is spiritual. Let us learn from this to regulate our conduct by prudence, and to undertake nothing which may admit of an unfavorable construction.

Secondly, our Lord intended to draw a distinction between the political kingdoms of this world and the government of his Church; for he had been appointed by the Father to be a Teacher, who should

divide asunder, by the sword of the word, the thoughts and feelings, and penetrate into the souls of men, (Heb 4:12,)

but was not a magistrate to divide inheritances This condemns the robbery of the Pope and his clergy, who, while they give themselves out to be pastors of the Church, have dared to usurp an earthly and secular jurisdiction, which is inconsistent with their office; for what is in itself lawful may be improper in certain persons.

There was also in my opinion, a third reason of great weight. Christ saw that this man was neglecting doctrine, and was looking only to his private concerns. This is too common a disease. Many who profess the Gospel do not scruple to make use of it as a false pretense for advancing their private interests, and to plead the authority of Christ as an apology for their gains. From the exhortations (267) which is immediately added, we may readily draw this inference; for if that man had not availed himself of the Gospel as a pretext for his own emolument, Christ would not have taken occasion to give this warning against covetousness The context, therefore, makes it sufficiently evident, that this was a pretended disciple, whose mind was entirely occupied with lands or money.

It is highly absurd in the Anabaptists to infer from this reply, that no Christian man has a right to divide inheritances, to take a part in legal decisions, or to discharge any public office. Christ does not argue from the nature of the thing itself, but from his own calling. Having been appointed by the Father for a different purpose, he declares that he is not a judge, because he has received no such command. Let us hold by this rule, that every one keep within the limits of the calling which God has given him.

(265) “ On pourroit demander qui a empesche qu’il ne se soit entremis d’oster toute occasion de debat entre deux freres ?” — “It might be asked, what hindered him from undertaking to remove all ground of quarrel between two brothers?”

(266) “ Que le Messias regneroit a la facon des princes terriens;” — “that the Messiah would reign in the manner of earthly princes.”

(267) “ En considerant la circonstance de l’exhortation qui est ici adioustee, il est aise a iuger que cestuy-ci estoit mene d’une telle affection perverse;” —”by considering the circumstance of the exhortation which is here added, it may easily be inferred that this man was under the influence of such a wicked disposition.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Luk. 12:13. One of the company.Rather, one out of the multitude (R.V.). Perhaps the mention of magistrates and powers suggested to him Christs acting as a judge and giving a decision in his favour. Divide the inheritance.See Deu. 21:15-17. Whether the claim were just or not cannot be inferred from the narrative.

Luk. 12:14. Man.Apparently in reproof. Cf. Rom. 2:1; Rom. 9:20. A judge or a divider.The one may mean an ordinary judge, the other an arbitrator specially chosen to decide conflicting claims. There is no doubt an allusion to Exo. 2:14.

Luk. 12:15. Beware of covetousness.A better reading and translation is: keep yourselves from all covetousness (R.V.), i.e., from every kind: the unlawful desire, the selfish enjoyment, of earthly goods. For a mans life, etc.The passage is a peculiar one, and might be rendered, for not because one has abundance does his life therefore depend on the things which he hath. The meaning is, that abundance is not a necessary condition of existence: a man lives on what he possesses; all that is needed is a mere sufficiency (Speakers Commentary).

Luk. 12:16. The ground, etc.This is not a case of riches acquired in any unlawful manner, but of riches derived from industrious labours and the bounty of heaven. Mere multiplication of his wealth, and selfish enjoyment of it, take up all his thoughts. My fruits.Notice also in Luk. 12:18 my barns, my fruits, my goods, and in Luk. 12:19 my soul; as though this last were a possession of which he was equally sure.

Luk. 12:18. All my fruits.Not a word of the poor (Bengel). The word in the original is a different one from that in Luk. 12:17, and may be rendered my produce or my corn (R.V.).

Luk. 12:19. Take thine ease.The gathering together of his wealth, and his schemes for hoarding it (Luk. 12:17), had disquieted him; he would now make his wealth the basis of rest and enjoyment. In the original there are simply four words, four verbs in the imperative, for the second half of this verse. The conciseness of style gives additional vividness to the picture.

Luk. 12:20. Thou fool.Lit. senselesswise though he was in worldly wisdom and in management of his property (Luk. 12:18). This night.As contrasted with many years. Shall be required of thee.As contrasted with I will say to my soul. Lit., they require thy soul; i.e., either the angels of God as ministers of death, or, it may be, robbers who deprive him of life and carry off his wealth. No great stress need be laid on this, as the they is not emphatic: the verb is impersonal. Whose shall those things be?Not that it matters to him into whose hands they pass: it is only an emphatic way of saying that they will not be his (Bloomfield).

Luk. 12:21. For himself.I.e., for himself only. Rich toward God.Elsewhere described as laying up treasures in heaven, by almsgiving and benevolence. He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord (Pro. 19:17).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Luk. 12:13-21

The Rich Fool.Christs unusually stern and cold answer disclaims a commission, either from God or man, to decide squabbles about property, or to put such decisions in force. He lays down principles and supplies motives which dominate and purify the sphere of conduct connected with wealth; but He will not narrow Himself into a mere arbitrator of family feuds. If the man and his brother would lay to heart His next words, the feud would arbitrate itself. It is for others to trim the branches; he proceeds to dig up the root. The request is made the occasion of the general warning against covetousnessagainst all forms of undue desire after, and delight in, worldly good. Mark the only reason here assigned for the warning (Luk. 12:15). Life simply means physical life, and the one reason our Lord gives for His warning is that worldly goods cannot keep alive. The abundance of the things which he possesseth can do much for a man; but one thing they cannot do, on which all the rest of their power dependsthey cannot keep the breath in him, and, if it is out, they are of no more use. Threadbare morality, it may be saidscarcely worth coming from heaven to tell us; but Jesus did not disdain to repeat familiar truths, and no commonplaces of morals are too threadbare to be reiterated, until they are practised. There are but two stages in the parable:

I. What the foreseeing rich man said to himself; and

(II.) What God said to the blind rich man. There is something very grim and terrible in the juxtaposition of these two elements of the picture, enhanced, as it is, by the long-drawn-out statement of the mans projects, and the brevity of the Divine word which smites them to dust.

I. What the foreseeing rich man said to himself.He has made his money honestly in the innocent occupation of a farmer. Gods sun has shone on the fields of the unthankful, and his abundant harvestwhat has it done for him? It has only added to his cares. He has no gratitude and no enjoyment yet. How clear and deep an insight Jesus had into the misery of wealth when He made the first effect of prosperity on this man to be reasoning within himself and perplexity as to what he was to do! How many rich men cannot sleep for wondering how they are to invest their money! This man is provident and enterprising. He sees quickly and clearly, and makes up his mind promptly to face the necessary expenditure entailed by prosperity. He has many of the virtues which commercial communities adore. Perhaps if the farmer had looked about him he could have found some empty barns not far off and some bare cupboards that would have taken the surplus and saved the new buildings. But that does not occur to him. All my corn and my goods are to be housed as mine. Looked at from the worlds point of view, he is a model man of business. He adds to all his other claims on the worlds esteem, that he is just about to retire, on a well-earned competence, to enjoy well-deserved leisure. His ideal of enjoyment is somewhat low. But how unconsciously he acknowledges that wealth has hitherto failed to bring peace! Take thine ease confesses that there has been no ease yet in his life, and unless he has really many years to live, there will have been none. His case is that of many prosperous men nowadays, who have no tastes but the coarsest, and who, when they go out of business, are miserable. They cannot eat and drink all day, and they have killed so much in themselves, by their course of life, that they care nothing for books, or thought, or nature, or God, and so live empty lives, and try to fancy they like it.

II. What God said to the blind rich man.How awfully God said unto him breaks the thin tissue of the mans dreams! The important points, in brief speech, are the Divine designation of every such life as folly, the swift snatching away of the soul, and the unanswerable question as to the ownership of the wealth. God addresses men in their true characters. When He does, the man knows himself for what he is, and others know him. The end of every self-deceiving life will tear down the veils, and the conscience will echo the Divine voice, and feel, I have played the fool, and have erred exceedingly. All lives greedily gripping to earthly good, and making it the be-all and end-all, are folly, and so is the presumption that reckons on many years. The soul which he had called my soul is demanded from him. He called it his, but he cannot keep it. A good man, dying, commits his soul into the Fathers hands, but this fool would fain cling to life, and has reluctantly to surrender it to the stern voice which demands and will not be put off. The grim reality of death, set by the side of the shattered projects of self-indulgent life, shows what a fool he is. And the last touch which perfects the picture of his folly is the question which he cannot answer, Whose shall they be? and the bitter irony of thou hast prepared. What foresight, which did not foresee the possibility of leaving them! What preparation, which got the things ready for a moment which never came! The parable is finally pointed to a specific application. So is he refers both to the folly and the fate of the man. The same absurdity is committed and the same end is certain, though not always with the same startling suddenness and completeness. Come how it may, the separation of the worldly soul from all its goods is sure to come, and he that getteth riches, or sets his heart on them, shall leave them in the midst of his days, and at his end shall be a fool. The sin and folly lie, not only in amassing, but in doing so for self; and the only way to escape the snares of worldly wealth is to be rich toward God. Toward God is the antithesis to for himself, and the whole clause describes the only wise use of earthly good as being its consecration to the service of God.Maclaren.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luk. 12:13-21

Luk. 12:13-21. The Rich Fool.Man does not live by bread alone. Christ tells the history of a man who forgot that

1. His history is a parable; but how real! and how often has it applied! In the Bible alone we have Balaam, Achan, Nabal, Gehazi, Judas, Ananias, These men were fools, utterly being overwhelmed in their covetousness.
2. But, again, to how many does it applyto how few does it not apply, though in a less overwhelming manner, in our daily life! The very phrases that are current in mens mouths testify to this. What is he worth? they say.

3. Every good gift cometh down from above. To learn that, and never forget it, is the way to rise above covetousness. This rich fool said, my fruits and my barns, and my soul. And so it came to pass that there was no way by which God could teach him that none of it was his, except the one way, that last and terrible wayby taking away his life. Paul said to the Corinthians, All things are yours, and he named the world and life among them. But then he added, Ye are Christs.Hastings.

Luk. 12:13-15.

I. The Saviours refusal to interfere.

1. He implied that it was not His part to interfere.

2. It was implied that His kingdom was one founded on spiritual disposition, not one of outward law and jurisprudence.
3. He refused to be the friend of one, because He was the friend of both.

II. The source to which He traced this appeal for a division.Covetousness.

III. He proceeds to give the true remedy for covetousness.A mans life, etc.; a true consolation and compensation for the oppressed and the defrauded.Robertson.

Luk. 12:13. A Type of the Wayside Hearer.

1. This man who interrupted Christ while preaching on this occasion had just heard Him utter the words, Magistrates and powers, and these suggested to him the topics on which his thoughts were habitually fixedhis dispute with his brother about their patrimony.
2. And so it happened to him according to the parable of the sower. The truth he had heard did not get into his mind, hardened as it was, like a beaten path, by the constant passage through it of current thoughts about money; it was very soon forgotten altogether, caught away by the god of this world, who ruled over him through his covetous disposition.Bruce.

Misplaced Discontent.Men misplace their discontent. They are very well satisfied with what they are; they are only dissatisfied with what they have: whereas the very reverse ought generally to take place; and the only desire which we ought to set no bounds to is that of increasing in godliness.

Use of the Passing Incident.This incident becomes a text for a sermon on covetousness. And thus the Holy Spirit teaches us to consider every event of our lives as an occasion for applying to ourselves the words of Christ. He instructs us to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest the holy gospel in such a manner that we may be able to bring its precepts to bear on the principal occurrences, public and private, of our own lives and of the worlds history.Wordsworth.

Luk. 12:14. Who made Me a judge?Reasons why Christ refused to interfere

I. His interference would have encouraged the delusion that the Messiah would be an earthly ruler.

II. He wished to draw a distinction between the kingdoms of this world and the government of His Church.

III. Because he saw that this man was neglecting graver matters than the inheritance which he wished to be shared with him.

A Higher Office than Arbitrator of Property.With great propriety He declines interference with matters of this world who came not down on their account; nor does He, who was Judge of quick and dead, to whom belonged the final disposal of the souls of men, condescend to be an arbitrator in mens contentions about their property.St. Ambrose.

The Error of Moses not Repeated.Christ will not repeat the error of Moses (Exo. 2:14), and thrust Himself into matters that do not concern Him. His work was from the inward to the outward, and so He kept within the limits of that moral and spiritual world from which alone an effectual renovation of the outer life of man could proceed.Trench.

A Lesson to All Religious Teachers.

I. Their influence in the external relations of life is great, but only when it is indirectly exercised.

II. It is broken when they interfere directly with secular and political matters.When ministers of religion keep within their proper sphere, all parties look up to them, and they are often the means of mollifying the bitterest feelings and reconciling the most conflicting interests.Brown.

Luk. 12:15. Covetousness.

I. This is one of the red flags our Lord hung out which most people nowadays do not seem much to regard.Christ said a great deal about the danger of riches; but not many persons are afraid of riches. Covetousness is not practically considered a sin in these times. A man may break the tenth commandment, and be only regarded as enterprising. The Bible says the love of money is the root of all evil; but every man who quotes the saying puts a terrific emphasis on the word love, explaining that it is not money, but the love of it, that is such a terrific root.

II. To look about one, one would think that a mans life did consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.Men think they become great just in proportion as they gather wealth. So it seems, too; for the world measures men by their bank account. Yet there never was a more fatal error. A man is really measured by what he is, and not by what He HAS. You may find a shrivelled soul in the midst of a great fortune, and a grand, noble soul in the barest poverty.

III. The chief thing is to gather into our life all the truly great and noble things of character.Here are two texts which settle the question: Whatsoever things are true, honest, think on these things; Add to your faith virtue, etc.Miller.

The Fools Fourfold Mistake.

I. As to the true gauge of the worth of life.He valued his days by the money he could make in them. Men like him sell their soul for moneyabandon heart culture, the amenities of life, the choice delights of home life, for money. Now, worth means, not wealth, but quality of character, purity, sweetnees, nobility, truth. If a millionaire is of worthless character, he dies a pauper.

II. As to the true use of his superfluity.He had more than he needed. This made him think of building bigger barns. It is well to have an overplus, but to what use are we to put it? To make provision for sickness, old age, death? Yes, and after that is done to be a trustee for the orphan, the widow, the poor.

III. As to the true way of being merry.This man talks in a strange way to his soul. What does his soul say in response? I am ill at ease. I cannot be merry. I cannot eat gold or corn. It is a profound mistake that one can be made happier by a bigger house, or a place in the country. More likely to be at ease with a daily wage than as an anxious, speculating business man. Ease! Yes! get it from a clean conscience and a pure heart. Money, rank, and power, cannot give it.

IV. As to the tenure of his life.He thought of many years. He had only one day left. He had a good title for earth, but no lease, and he had no title for heaven. The soul that night crept out from it allall its wealtha poor beggar, into Gods presence. How full of warning is the record of this mans mistakes!F. B. Meyer.

A Warning Against Avarice.So far as the request had to do with secular matters Christ refused to accede to it; but so far as it revealed a faulty moral condition it entered within the Saviours province to deal with it. Though not a judge of civil questions, He was a Redeemer from sinfrom avarice no less than from hypocrisy. Nor are his followers in slight need of the warning He gives: for avarice is a sin which may attack those who have triumphed over lusts of the flesh, and who are in many other respects exemplary in spirit and life.

Covetousness. All covetousness (R.V.); both

(1) that which leads a man to desire the possessions which rightly belong to another, and
(2) that which sets an exaggerated value upon earthly goods. Whether the petitioner were in the right or the wrong, he was evidently in danger of one form or other of this sin.

A Mans Life.There is a contrast here between the earthly natural life and the true lifebetween his living and his life: the one is sustained by what he has, the other depends upon what he is. Possession of worldly goods may

(1) for a time secure a measure of ease and comfort, but
(2) it may overlay, hinder, and strangle the higher nature.

Money a Test of Character.The philosophy which affects to teach us a contempt of money does not run very deep; for, indeed, it is clear that there are few things in the world of greater importance. And so manifold are the bearings of money upon the lives and characters of mankind, that an insight which should search out the life of a man in his pecuniary relations would penetrate into almost every cranny of his nature. He who knows, like St. Paul, both how to spare and how to abound, has a great knowledge; for if we take account of all the virtues with which money is mixed uphonesty, justice, generosity, charity, frugality, forethought, self-sacrificeand of their correlative vicesit is a knowledge which goes near to cover the length and breadth of humanity: and a right measure of manner in getting, saving, spending, giving, taking, lending, borrowing, and bequeathing, would almost argue a perfect man.H. Taylor.

Possessions and Life.Not from the possession of many goods, but from the will of God, who lengthens or shortens the thread of life, does it depend whether one remains long and quietly here in life or not. One may be preserved in life without possessing goods, and also remain in the possession of goods and unexpectedly lose life.Van Oosterzee.

Luk. 12:16-21. This Parable Teaches

I. That God maketh His sun to shine and His rain to fall on the just and on the unjust.
II. That the increase of riches increaseth care.
III. That worldly mens possessions are their good thingssuch they esteem them, and such is their whole portion from God.
IV. Great estates and enjoyments of this life have a very enticing quality in them:

1. They make us loth to die, and willing to think we shall live many years.
2. They lull the soul to sleep.
3. They entice us to sinful mirth and luxury.

V. He that hath most may have his soul taken from him in a night.
VI. A man is no longer owner of the goods of this life than he can keep an earthly possession of them.
VII. When he dies he knoweth not where these things shall be.
VIII. That it is the greatest folly imaginable to spend all ones time and strength in getting and laying up treasure upon earth, and in the meantime neglecting to be rich towards God.Pool.

Luk. 12:16. A parable.To teach

(1) how short and transitory life is;
(2) that riches are of no avail for prolonging it; and
(3) that the great duty of all, both rich and poor, is to be rich toward God.

A Fault often Condemned in the New Testament.There are more parables, I believe, in the New Testament against taking no thought about heavenly things, and taking too much thought about earthly things, than against any other fault whatsoever.Hare.

The Ground, etc.Christ selects the most innocent method of acquiring riches, that which most obviously tended to lead the mind constantly to thankful acknowledgment of God, and thus makes this wretched harvest-joy all the more frightful and all the more impressive a warning to every man.Stier.

A Certain Rich Man.The character here drawn is exactly that of a prudent worldly man, who rises from inferior circumstances to great affluence by assiduous industry and good management, and then retires from business, to spend the latter part of his life according to his own inclinations. His is the sort of life which is often held up as a model to young men. He figures here as a warning. All who desire to be successful in business, as he was, should keep in mind the words of the Psalmist: He gave them their request, but sent leanness into their soul.

Luk. 12:17-20. The Miseries of the Worldly Rich Man:

I. Discontent.
II. Anxieties and cares.
III. False hope.
IV. The terror of losing all his goods.

Luk. 12:17-19. The Worldly Character.

1. Activity in promoting his own temporal interest.
2. Selfish love of ease and pleasure. The soul which he addresses is the seat of the emotions and of the power of enjoymentnot the spiritual element in man.

Luk. 12:17. What shall I do?Not what should I do? Scarcely any other words could more vividly depict his utter and unconscious selfishness. That all he has is to be secured for himself and for his own exclusive benefit is assumed as a matter of coursethe only difficulty is as to the precise method of doing this.

I have no room.Thou hast barnsthe bosoms of the needy, the houses of the widows, the mouths of orphans and of infants.St. Ambrose.

My fruits.Compare the speech of Nabal (1Sa. 25:11), who says, Shall I take my bread, and my water, and my flesh that I have killed for my shearers? And on the very next day his heart died within him, and he became as a stone; and in ten days after he died. Contrast the words in Deu. 8:10-18, and Davids language, 1Ch. 29:12-14.

Luk. 12:18. This will I do.Man proposes.

I. How boastful!He speaks of his barns and fruits as though he, and he only, had any share in producing them, any right of ownership in them.

II. How shortsighted!He speaks of the many years as a matter of certainty, when he must have known the uncertainty of life.

III. How selfish!His aims are all selfish. There is no provision made for others. His life is entirely self-centred.

IV. How unworthy!His idea of life is a low one. Indolent ease, eating, drinking, and merrymaking. Pity for the sorrows of others; charity for the aged and poor; provision for those who had helped to make him rich;all these are forgotten.W. Taylor.

Luk. 12:19. I will say to my soul.What folly! Had thy soul been a sty, what else couldst thou have promised to it? Art thou so bestial, so ignorant of the souls goods, that thou pledgest it the foods of the flesh? And dost thou convey to thy soul the things which the draught receiveth?St. Basil.

Thou hast many goods.The devil does not now endeavour to deceive us by saying, Ye shall not surely die. He knows that so notorious a cheat would never pass upon us; but yet for fear, lest we should undervalue the allurements of the world, he whispers in our ears, Ye shall not die so soon. And Although thou hast not all that thou canst wish for, thou hast many goods; and Though thou canst not enjoy them always, yet they are laid up for many years; and what hast thou to do but take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry, as if thou wert to live for ever? Behold the best that we can make of the most happy state we hope for here.

Little Satisfaction Yielded by Wealth.He unconsciously confesses how little satisfaction his wealth has brought him; he looks for rest, but it is only in the distant future, when the intended work shall have been completed, that he can hope to obtain it.

This Parable found in Germ in Ecclesiasticus.Cf. Sir. 11:17-19 : The gift of the Lord remaineth with the godly, and His favour bringeth prosperity for ever. There is that waxeth rich by his wariness and pinching, and this is the portion of his reward: whereas he saith, I have found rest, and now will eat continually of my goods; and yet he knoweth not what time will come upon him, and that he must leave those things to others, and die.

Luk. 12:20. Thou fool.Why is this man called a fool?

I. Because he deemed a life of secure and abundant earthly enjoyment the summit of human felicity.
II. Because, having acquired the means of realising this, through prosperity in his calling, he flattered himself that he had a long lease of such enjoyment, and nothing to do but to give himself up to it. Nothing else is laid to his charge.Brown.

Loss.He comes before the judge with a lost name, for God calls him Thou fool; with a lost soul, for it is taken away from him by force; with a lost world, for it he has to leave behind him; and with a lost heaven, for in heaven he has laid up no treasure.

Contrasts.Note the contrasts:

1. Thou fool, though he has manifested worldly prudence.

2. This night, as opposed to many years.

3. The soul in the one case, at its ease, eating, drinking, and making merry; in the other, demanded, rendered up, judged.

Vain Preparation.Preparedmade ready; but not for thyself.

Fourfold Folly.His folly is fourfold:

1. He forgets God, the giver of his wealth.
2. He appropriates all he receives for himself.
3. He counts these things the food of his soul.

4. He does not think of the daily possibility of death.

Moderation.A wise man will desire no more than what he can get justly, use soberly, distribute cheerfully, and leave contentedly.Bacon.

Riches Without Godliness.The gloom of barrenness has besieged your mind; and while the light of truth hath departed thence, the deep and profound darkness of avarice has blinded your carnal heart. You are the captive and slave of your money; you keep your money, which, when kept, does not keep you; you heap up a patrimony which burdens you with its weight; and you do not remember what God answered to the rich man, who boasted, with a foolish exultation, of the abundance of his exuberant harvest. Why do you watch in loneliness over your riches? Why, for your punishment, do you heap up the burden of your patrimony, that, in proportion as you are rich in this world, you may become poor to God?Cyprian.

Shall be required.From the righteous his soul is not required, but he commits it to God and the Father of spirits, pleased and rejoicing, nor finds it hard to lay it down, for the body lies upon it as a light burden. But the sinner who has enfleshed his soul, and embodied it, and made it earthy, has prepared to render its divulsion from the body most hard; wherefore it is said to be required of him, as a disobedient debtor that is delivered to pitiless exactors.Theophylact.

The Parable brings vividly before us Four Considerations:

I. The embarrassment which wealth, and especially a sudden accession of wealth, may bring to a man who is not under the guidance of high and true principles.
II. Here is an example of the love of property, as such, and apart from anything that can be done with it.
III. There is that in the human soul, even when most forgetful of its true destiny, which refuses to take pleasure for ever in the mere handling money or any sort of matter, as a thing to be rejoiced in for its own sake.
IV. The whole scheme of definite enjoyment may collapse: no man has a right to presume upon the future.Liddon.

Luk. 12:21. False and True Riches.The contrast between the false and the true riches is implied in the two phrases, to lay up treasure and to be rich.

I. The one is to hoard up laboriously things which are outside ones self.

II. The other is an actual condition of wealth and happiness.

Rich Towards God.There is a contrast between laying up treasure for oneself and being rich towards God. God cannot be enriched or impoverished. That man is rich toward God who lays up treasure in heaven, and so he is rich indeed (cf. 1Ti. 6:17). By being rich towards God he becomes rich for ever.

He who is rich for himself, laying up treasures for himself, is by so much robbing his real inward life, his life in and toward God, of its resources; he is laying up store for, providing for, the flesh; but the spirit, that which God looketh into and searcheth, is stripped of all its riches (Alford).

The evil is not in the treasure, nor in laying up treasure, but in laying up treasure for oneself. A case like this, where the sinner is respectable, honest, and prosperous, shows the true nature of sinit is a devotion to self, not to God; and laying up solely for self is, therefore, a sin, according to the judgment of Christ.

Change the Place of Riches.God desires not that thou shouldst lose thy riches, but that thou shouldst change their place. He has given thee a counsel, which do thou understand. Suppose a friend should enter thy house, and should find that thou hadst lodged thy fruits on a damp floor, and he, knowing by chance the tendency of those fruits to spoil, whereof thou wert ignorant, should give thee counsel of this sort, saying, Brother, thou losest the things which with great labour thou hast gathered; thou hast placed them in a damp place; in a few days they will corrupt.And what, brother, shall I do?Raise them to a higher roomthou wouldst listen to thy brother, suggesting that thou shouldst raise thy fruits from a lower to a higher floor; and thou wilt not listen to Christ, advising that thou raise thy treasure from earth to heaven, where that will not, indeed, be restored to thee which thou layest upfor He bids thee lay up earth, that thou mayest receive heaven, lay up perishable things, that thou mayest receive eternal.Augustine.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Appleburys Comments

The Man God Called a Fool
Scripture

Luk. 12:13-21 And one out of the multitude said unto him, Teacher, bid my brother divide the inheritance with me. 14 But he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you? 15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and keep yourselves from all covetousness: for a mans life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. 16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: 17 and he reasoned within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have not where to bestow my fruits? 18 And he said, This will I do; I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my grain and my goods. 19 And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry. 20 But God said unto him, Thou foolish one, this night is thy soul required of thee; and the things which thou hast prepared, whose shall they be? 21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.

Comments

And one out of the multitude.The lessons of this section were primarily for the disciples, but the crowds were listening also. This incident became the occasion for further instruction to the disciples on being rich toward God.

A man from the crowd asked Jesus to tell his brother to divide the inheritance with him. Jesus did not become involved in the family problem, for there was another issue before them that was of vastly greater importance. The eternal inheritance was being neglected. What He said about that became the basis upon which the man could settle his own problem with his brother. Jesus was the Savior, not just a social reformer; but in saving man from his sins, He pointed to the only effective way to overcome all kinds of injustice, social or otherwise. When we let the Word of Christ rule in our hearts we will be ready and willing to treat all men as God intended that they should be treated (Mat. 7:12; Col. 3:16).

for a mans life consisteth not in the abundance of the things he possesseth.Jesus had just reminded the one who volunteered to follow Him that the Son of Man had no place to lay His head. He had also taught the disciples that God was mindful of their physical needs and that they were to ask Him for their daily bread. The point of Jesus lesson was this: There is more to life than a material inheritance; life is not made up of possessing things. This life is temporary; the eternal inheritance is infinitely more important. To illustrate His point, Jesus told about the man God called a fool.

What shall I do?He was completely selfish; he had not thought for the needs of others. The only thing he could think of was to build larger barns and store up more grain.

take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry.Jesus did not say that the possession of wealth was wrong; it was the wrong use of it that He condemned. Neither is there anything wrong about rest, food, and proper enjoyment of life unless this be the only end in view. The rich fool prepared for the earthly life as if it were to continue forever.

Thou foolish one, this night is thy soul required of thee.God called him fool because he had taken no thought for this eventuality. He had neglected the basic truth for all men, It is appointed unto man once to die and then cometh the judgment (Heb. 9:27). In the very night in which he was prepared to live forever on this earth they were requiring him to give account of his life.

whose shall these be?This question seems to be directed to the man who had asked Jesus to settle his problem about his inheritance. What if he did get the brother to divide their inheritance? A more important question: Was he rich toward God?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

Butlers Comments

SECTION 2

Astuteness in Alertness (Luk. 12:13-34)

13 One of the multitude said to him, Teacher, bid my brother divide the inheritance with me. 14But he said to him, Man, who made me a judge or divider over you? 15And he said to them, Take heed, and beware of all covetousness; for a mans life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions. 16And he told them a parable, saying, The land of a rich man brought forth plentifully; 17and he thought to himself, What shall I do, for I have nowhere to store my crops? 18And he said, I will do this: I will pull down my barns, and build larger ones; and there I will store all my grain and my goods. 19And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; take your ease, eat, drink, be merry. 20But God said to him, Fool! This night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be? 21So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.

22 And he said to his disciples, Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat, nor about your body, what you shall put on. 23For this life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. 24Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! 25And which of you by being anxious can add a cubit to his span of life? 26If then you are not able to do as small a thing as that, why are you anxious about the rest? 27Consider the lilies, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin; yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these, 28But if God so clothes the grass which is alive in the field today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you, O men of little faith! 29And do not seek what you are to eat and what you are to drink, nor be of anxious mind. 30For all the nations of the world seek these things; and your Father knows that you need them. 31Instead, seek his kingdom, and these things shall be yours as well.

32 Fear not, little flock, for it is your Fathers good pleasure to give you the kingdom. 33Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys. 34For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Luk. 12:13-21 Foolishness: One of the multitude was very alert. He caught quickly the authoritative manner of Jesus. Jesus had spoken with the presence of a rabbias one who honestly and clearly stood for truth and fairness. When He paused, a man in the crowd ordered Jesus (Gr. eipe, imperative mood verb, Tell!) bid his brother to divide the inheritance with him. The Greek word kleronomia means literally, to portion by lots and is translated, inheritance (cf. Mat. 21:38; Mar. 12:7; Luk. 20:14) or birthright (cf. Gal. 4:30; Heb. 1:4; Heb. 12:17). This man may have been a younger brother, dissatisfied with the handling of his fathers estate (cf. Luk. 15:11-32). Oftentimes an elder brother, according to Jewish custom, was given a double portion (cf. Deu. 21:15-17). Perhaps this man was being cheated in the division of the family estate. Whatever his complaint, he recognized in Jesus a teacher who would judge fairly. In Jesus day it was Jewish practice to have rabbis make civil and judicial decisions. Moses appointed leading men to help him make such judgments at the founding of the nation of Israel (cf. Exo. 18:13-27; Deu. 16:18 ff.). This authority probably passed to the scribes as early as the days of Ezra (cf. Ezr. 7:1-28). In orthodox Judaism today a few similar judgments are still made by rabbis.

But this Rabbi will not be drawn into the mans family dispute. Why did Jesus refuse, almost curtly, this opportunity to rectify an apparent injustice? Actually, Jesus provided the only real solution to the mans problem with His subsequent admonition. Jesus refused to make a judgment because:

a.

His primary mission on earth was not to personally judge in social things. He was no social activist. His primary mission was to save, to regenerate the hearts of men.

b.

He refused to make a moral judgment or force a moral action that the individual should make for himself. To do so would violate freedom of the human will and preclude the possibility of moral development of the individual.

c.

He has already spoken about the most important inheritancethe eternal inheritance. Men were neglecting that. Had they given that first priority, they could easily settle all earthly disputes about material things.

d.

He will speak of the heavenly treasure more explicitly. If men will only become true members of the kingdom of God they will treat all men as God intended they should be treated (cf. Mat. 7:12; Col. 3:16, etc.).

Jesus went right to the heart of the mans problemcovetousness. The Greek text translated literally would have Jesus command the crowds, Be continually on the lookout and guard yourselves from all desires to have more. The Greek word pleonexia is from pleion (more) and echo (to have), and is translated covetousness. Covetousness is the all-consuming desire to have more of something. It is the urge to acquire gone mad, unrestrained, unconcerned with the will of God. It is the attitude that material possessions will satisfy all human needs. Covetousness is called idolatry (Col. 3:5) because the covetous person worships (depends on) thingsnot the Person, God. One out of every six verses of the Gospels has to do with man and his possessions! That is because acquisition of wealth is the chief ambition of the majority of men. Wealth impresses men with its pseudo-power. Covetousness is probably the chief barrier to mans acceptance of the Lords philosophy of what life is all about. The Lords truth about life is this: There is more to life than a material inheritance. Life does not consist (hold-together) in the abundance of material possessions. This life and this world is temporary; the eternal treasure is infinitely more to be desired (cf. 2Co. 4:16-18). To illustrate His truth, Jesus told a parable about a farmer God called a fool.

The man Jesus told about was rich but he was a fool. The Greek word translated fool is aphron and means literally, without mind. Someone has defined the word as the lack of commonsense perception of the reality of things natural and spiritualor the imprudent ordering of ones life in regard to salvation. The farmer certainly made serious mental and moral misjudgment about the priorities of life.

a.

His life centered in himself. Twelve times in five verses, I, My and Mine appear in this tiny tragedy, The Greek text translated literally would stress his self-centered ego even more.

b.

He thought to feed his soul on things. He exchanged truth, generosity, conscience, love and helpfulness for things. He made earth and its riches his business so completely, heaven and spirituality would have bored him.

c.

In seeking a way to deal with his prosperity he reasoned with his natural inclinations and did not seek Gods word on the subject. Even the Old Testament could have given him divine guidance in proper use of his wealth.

Someone has rightly observed, This parable shows an honest man in the act of being executed by his own estate. It was where he thought it came from and what he did with it that made him forfeit his life for it. Jesus did not say that the possession of wealth was wrong; it was the wrong use of it that He condemned. It is all right for a man to possess thingsbut not right for things to possess a man.

Covetousness is the desire for the wrong things. Men are not to covet their neighbors possessions (Exo. 20:17). Christians are to seek and to rejoice at the gain of a neighbor like we would at our own gain (Rom. 12:15; Rom. 15:2; 1Co. 10:24; 1Co. 10:33; 2Co. 12:15). Men are not to desire worldly possessions for their own sake to the neglect of higher things. Men are not to desire worldly possessions for their own use only, for . . . those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and hurtful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction . . . (1Ti. 6:9). The love of money is the root of all evils . . . (1Ti. 6:10):

a.

It caused Judas to betray Christ, lose his life, his self-respect and his eternal soul (Joh. 12:4-6; Mat. 26:14-16).

b.

It caused Ananias and Sapphira to lie to God and receive sudden death (Act. 5:1-11).

c.

It caused Achan to steal at Jericho and all Israel to be defeated at Ai, and for it he and his family were destroyed (Jos. 7:1 ff.).

d.

It caused a young man to reject Christ and to go away sorrowful (Mar. 10:17-22).

e.

It caused some to teach things they ought not (Tit. 1:11; 2Pe. 2:1-3).

f.

It caused some to turn Gods house into a house of merchandise (Joh. 2:14-15) and a den of robbers (Mat. 21:12-13).

g.

It caused Elishas servant to lie, and to be made a leper (2Ki. 5:22-27).

h.

It caused Saul to disobey God who gave him victory in war (1Sa. 15:9-23), and for it Saul was rejected.

i.

It is the root of all kinds of evil (1Ti. 6:10); including murder (Eze. 22:12), and many foolish and hurtful lusts (1Ti. 6:9).

j.

It is the cause of domestic troubles (Pro. 15:27).

k.

It causes some to be led astray from the faith (1Ti. 6:10).

l.

It causes some to be pierced through with many sorrows (1Ti. 6:10).

There is great gain in godliness with contentment (1Ti. 6:6). The man of God (every Christian) must shun all covetousness (1Ti. 6:11), because covetousness:

a.

Chokes the word of God in many hearts and causes the life to be unfruitful (Mat. 13:22; Mar. 4:19).

b.

Robs God (Mal. 3:7-10).

c.

Neglects the needy (1Jn. 3:17).

d.

Leaves many unevangelized, to die without God and without hope; it defies the great commission.

e.

Will drive the love of God out of our hearts (Luk. 16:13).

f.

Makes a man unfit to be an overseer in the church (1Ti. 3:3; Tit. 1:7).

g.

Is not to be tolerated and overlooked in one that is named a brother, but to be rebuked and corrected (1Co. 5:10-13).

h.

It is mentioned in the N.T. as among the worst of sins (Eph. 5:3; 2Ti. 3:2).

i.

Is idolatry (Col. 3:5).

j.

Will damn the soul (1Co. 6:10; Luk. 16:19-31).

k.

Is certainly unnecessary and unfitting for a follower of Christ (Mat. 6:33; Heb. 13:5-6; Php. 4:11-19).

1.

Consider: Balaam (Num. 22:1-41; Num. 23:1-30; Num. 24:1-25; Num. 31:16; Rev. 2:14; Jud. 1:11); and Ahab (2Ki. 21:1-26).

As for the rich in this world, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on uncertain riches but on God . . . (1Ti. 6:17). Covetousness or the desire to be rich with this worlds goods is foolishness in the light of eternity. Every man and woman fares the certainty of death. Of course, if there is no life after death, then we should eat and drink, for tomorrow we die . . . (1Co. 15:32). However, the certainty of life after death has been established historically and empirically by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Therefore, we ought to come to our right mind and sin no more (1Co. 15:34), realizing that sooner or later, our soul will be required of us. We brought nothing into this world, neither can we carry anything out of this world (1Ti. 6:7). What then is the point in devoting all our time, energy and capabilities to accumulating things of this world? This worlds goods certainly are not an end in themselves. The only reason for worldly possessions is that through them a man might serve the Lord by serving his fellow man! To accumulate worldly possessions for any other reason is foolishness!

We may even covet (be greedy for more) time. Christians must use time wisely (Eph. 5:15-16; Col. 4:5; Joh. 9:4). We are not to covet the past (Luk. 9:62); we are not to covet the future (Mat. 6:34); now is the time with which we are to be concerned (2Co. 6:2). How we invest our time in the bank of eternity will determine the dividends of the future. Every person has the same twenty-four hours, Time comes indiscriminately and simultaneously to every inhabitant of earth. We may covet time by spending it mostly on ourselves, or we may be rich toward God with it by spending it in His service by serving others. Time is a possessiontime is a stewardship!

Being rich is never condemned by the Lordnor even growing richer. Poverty does not necessarily insure righteousness. The man is a fool who is not rich toward God whatever his financial situation in this life may be. How is one to conquer covetousness and be rich toward God?

a.

Believe that what Gods word says about it is right and to be obeyed!

b.

Pray that you enter not into temptation.

c.

Give generously, cheerfully and systematically to the Lords church (2Co. 8:1-24; 2Co. 9:1-15; 1Ch. 29:6-19; 1Co. 16:1-4, etc.).

d.

Invest your time and money in people by helping their needs (Luk. 16:9; Jas. 1:27; Jas. 2:1-26; 1Jn. 4:7-21; Heb. 13:1-6).

e.

Be content with what you have (Luk. 3:14; Php. 4:11 ff.; 1Ti. 6:7; Heb. 13:5).

Luk. 12:22-34 Faithfulness: The Greek word for anxious is merimna and is probably connected with merizo which means, to draw in different directions, to be distracted. The anxious person is one who is mentally tossed to and fro like a leaf in the wind. The anxious person is one who rides an emotional roller-coasterup and down, up and down. Anxiety is a result of divided loyalty. Covetousness is really at the bottom of all avarice and anxiety. The covetous rich man is filled with avarice; the covetous poor man is overcome with anxiety. It is only a matter of circumstances whether covetousness shows itself as greed or worry. A survey taken in a national periodical found that seventy percent of all our worries are about money! A Gallup poll indicated that most people believe they would have no more financial worries if they could increase their income by only ten percent. Some physicians believe that anxiety causes or contributes to a myriad of physical illnesses such as ulcers, colitis, asthma, migraine, stroke, paralysis, arthritis, fatigue, hypertension, diabetes. Researchers have stated that more than half our hospital beds are occupied by anxiety-ridden patients. Doctors think that one out of every twenty Americans now living will spend part of his life in an institution for the mentally-ill because of anxiety. Covetousness, greed, and anxiety are causes for much of our social evil such as theft, embezzlement, robbery, murder, suicide, marital problems, even war (Jas. 4:1-3).

When Jesus says, Be not anxious . . . He is not advocating financial dereliction. The disciple of Jesus is not permitted to be shiftless, reckless or thoughtless. Believers are admonished to work, if physically able, to provide their own living (cf. Pro. 6:6-8; 2Co. 12:14; 1Ti. 5:8; 2Th. 3:6-15; 1Th. 4:10-12; Col. 3:22-25; Eph. 6:5-9, etc.). They are also taught by Jesus to be wise stewards of their material possessions (Luk. 16:1-13). Jesus and His apostles taught that honest labor deserves honest wages (cf. 1Co. 9:3-14; Mat. 10:10; Luk. 10:7-8). But the lust for accumulating things which would distract the believers mind and heart from his first prioritythe revealed will of Godis the anxiety Jesus forbids. It is significant that the Greek word merimnate is in the imperative mood and means that Jesus is commanding us, Be not anxious! If we say we know Him and we are anxious, we are not being truthful (1Jn. 2:4) because we are not keeping His commandment. What Jesus says to His disciples about anxiety is more than just suggestionit is an order!

Anxiety is unnecessary. Jesus appeals to our reason to tell us so. Any honest-minded meditation will tell us that Life is more than the body. The psyche is more than soma (flesh). The spirit of man is sustained without anxiety over food and clothing. Jesus proved that in His incarnation. Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God (Mat. 4:4). Jesus points to nature to demonstrate that anxiety is unnecessary. Birds and flowers do not worry, and God sustains them. They function according to their God-given capacities and He provides their needs. Men are of more value than these. Finally, the Lord says experience should teach man that anxiety is unnecessary. In all our fretting and fuming and worrying we do not add one cubit to the length of our lives. As a matter of fact, worrying probably shortens life!

Anxiety is unworthy. It is unacceptable for a Christian to be distracted. The disciple who is anxious about worldly affairs is not fit for the kingdom (cf. Luk. 9:57-62). Anxiety is a display of faithlessness and disobeys the specific commandment of Christ prohibiting it. It is shameful for a Christian to worry because it is pagan. The heathen are tossed about by their anxiety over sustaining the flesh. The Greek word meteorizesthe is translated anxious mind. This word is used nowhere else in the N.T. In classical Greek it is used to mean, tossed up and down, or suspended, like a boat in a stormy sea. Christians must not be in suspense about life. Anxiety is characteristic of heathen unbelief. Ceremonial orthodoxy and evangelistic zeal are only hypocrisy if in the financial affairs of life we do not trust God completely. The Christian is a citizen of Gods kingdom. His King is absolutely beneficent. The heavenly Father is infallibly aware of His childrens needs, He has infinite power to equip every individual with everything needed. He promises to do so. If the Christian will seek the kingdom of God as his first (cf. Mat. 6:33) priority, God promises to make possible all the physical necessities for such seeking. The cure for anxiety is simplybelieve God keeps His promises!

Why would Jesus say Fear not little flock? Because there will be few who will ever take seriously His admonitions about worldliness and anxiety! Does Jesus intend His command, Sell your possessions . . . to be taken literally? Yes! That should be qualified, however, by a consideration of other scriptures. The Lord does expect us to earn our own living (2Th. 3:12). He does expect us to work at our jobs with our best craftsmanship (cf. Col. 3:22-23). The Lord expects us, if we are able, to earn our own food, our clothing and our shelter. He will provide health and opportunities to do so. And whatever is necessary (a house, tools, transportation, etc.) to earn our living we should not feel compelled to sell. Should we have more than this, more than we may use for our living, we should sell and give to the poor, or to the work of the kingdom. Anything above what we need is riches. Jesus counsels every would-be follower of His to sell his riches and give them as alms, so the poor may be fed both; physical and spiritual food. We certainly cannot hoard riches in order to buy our way into His kingdom. It is His good pleasure to give us the kingdom. All of His kingdom we shall ever have shall be that which is given as a gift.

The Christian is to have a purse that does not grow old. In other words, he is to wear his purse out rapidly from continually opening it to give alms or dispense his riches to others, The Christian is to provide himself with a treasure in heaven that never depreciates, is never lost, never stolen and lasts forever. The only way the Christian can do that is to invest his riches (everything he has left from his basic living) in people (cf. Luk. 16:9), because people are all that shall survive this world. The rich man who died and went to torments realized too late that he should have invested his riches in the salvation of others (cf. Luk. 16:27-31), rather than squander them on himself. It is a fundamental principle that man gives his life to that which he values most. If one values spiritual things most, his whole heart will be devoted to acquiring spirituality. If a man values the same things heaven values, he will invest his life in things, and heaven is where his desires will focus. We must look to Jesus, who for the joy that was set before Him, endured the cross (Heb. 12:1-2). Let us set our minds on things above (Col. 3:1-4). As one commentator has said, . . . it is the Masters will that his followers should sit loose to all earthly possessions, possessing them as though they possessed not. The Christian will pray that the Lord give him neither poverty nor riches (Pro. 30:8-9)!

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(13) And one of the company.Better, one of the multitude. The request implied a recognition of our Lords character as a scribe or Rabbi, but it was for the purpose of asking Him to assume that office in its purely secular aspect. As interpreters of the Law, the scribes were appealed to as advocates and arbitrators in questions of property or marriage. The precise nature of the case is not stated here, but the words of the petitioner suggest that he was a younger son, who, on his fathers death, claimed from his elder brother more than the share which, according to the usual practice of a double portion for the first-born (2Ki. 2:9), of right belonged to him, and expected apparently a full moiety.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

III. The worldling’s ill-timed interruption brings out the parable of the Rich Fool.

13. One of the company From the vast and crowded congregation a voice now comes interrupting the words of Jesus, who pauses to hear and then answer. The interruption slightly deflects the train of Jesus’s remarks; but they still pursue the same general current, namely, the little importance of earthly suffering in comparison with our account at the day of judgment. Master The man is not probably a follower of Jesus. He has not much if any religious interest; but he looks upon Jesus as a great Rabbi who has a solemn sense of responsibility and justice. He will, therefore, be a good and impartial arbiter in the contested case.

Divide the inheritance It is said to have been the custom for the older brother to divide, and the younger take his choice; but this brother had taken all and refused to divide.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And one out of the crowd said to him, “Teacher, bid my brother divide the inheritance with me.” ’

The passage opens with a man coming to Jesus in order to have the problem of his inheritance situation sorted out. It was commonplace in those days for such matters to be dealt with by religious teachers, and he probably thought that as a prophet Jesus’ word would carry even more punch. (Or perhaps the Rabbis had refused to assist him because they recognised the falseness of his claim). But what a contrast he is with those who came asking, ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life’. This man was only interested in this life. Luke may well have expected us to make the contrast which reveals that the question about eternal life was central, while that about earthly inheritance was dismissed as irrelevant.

Furthermore the man’s motives were probably even more selfish. For the situation could well have been that the elder brother was striving to keep the family and its land together as one inheritance for the good of all, while this man, like the prodigal son, wanted to separate his part off so that he could do what he liked with it, or claim compensation in respect of it, so that he could have a good time regardless of how it affected the family. And he was asking Jesus to use His authority to help him in his selfish purpose. He was going totally contrary to the principles of Psalms 133.

We should note that the approach is not one of genuine arbitration. The two brothers do not appear to have come together for that purpose. It is one of a disgruntled man trying to curry the Lord’s favour on his behalf, and asking Him to force his brother into a situation not of his choosing.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Danger of Riches (12:13-21).

We now come to the first of a series of parables in this section. It is the first demonstration of how distorted Israel (and the world) is and how it needs to be made straight (Luk 13:10-17). This passage results from the approach of a man who, while being among His audience, has not been listening very carefully. For his father has died recently, and his heart is taken up with the question of his inheritance. Significantly it deals with the grip that riches have on men’s lives, and is therefore in strong contrast with what has gone before. There Jesus has faced His disciples with life and death decisions, decisions which were vitally connected with the question of how to inherit eternal life as mentioned in Luk 10:25. He has faced them with God and with the Kingly Rule of God. And now here is this man who, instead of being deeply stirred, comes to talk with Him about his inheritance of a few paltry earthly riches which demonstrates only his love of Mammon (see Luk 16:13; Mat 6:24).

The passage commences with his approach to Jesus concerning his inheritance, which is immediately followed by the parable of the fool who built up wealth and then decided that he could sit back and enjoy rich banquets, totally ignoring the needs of the poor. The latter was clearly completely bereft of the love of God and his neighbour, and it was only on his death bed that he again thought about God and realised what a fool he had been. It was there that he awoke to the folly of his choice, and the result was that he suffered the unforeseen consequences of losing his wealth to others who benefited unexpectedly. By his life he had denied Jesus on earth.

It will be noted that in the chiasmus for the Section this passage was placed in parallel with an example which Jesus gives of inviting the poor to dinner (the opposite of the acquisitiveness of the man seeking his inheritance, and the opposite of the selfish and greedy fool), which is followed by the parable of a rich banquet which resulted in the unforeseen circumstance that it became a banquet for the poor, because those for whom it was intended excused themselves from it and lost out (Luk 14:12-24). There we find the opposite picture to that of the fool. The poor were fed because it was the Lord’s banquet.

Analysis of this passage.

a One out of the crowd said to him, “Teacher, bid my brother divide the inheritance with me” (Luk 12:13).

b He said to him, “Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?” (Luk 12:14).

c He said to them, “Take careful note, and keep yourselves from all covetousness, for a man’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things which he possesses” (Luk 12:15).

d He spoke a parable to them, saying, “The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully (Luk 12:16).

e And he reasoned within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have not where to bestow my fruits?” (Luk 12:17).

d He said, “This will I do, I will pull down my barns, and build greater, and there will I bestow all my grain and my goods” (Luk 12:18).

c And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have much goods laid up for many years, take your ease, eat, drink, be merry” (Luk 12:19).

b But God said to him, “You foolish one, this night is your soul required of you, and the things which you have prepared, whose shall they be?” (Luk 12:20).

a So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich towards God” (Luk 12:21).

Note that in ‘a’ the man is covetous for his inheritance, and in the parallel such laying up of treasure for oneself is warned against. In ‘b’ Jesus refuses to judge and divide, while in the parallel it is God Who questions men’s attitudes. In ‘c’ man’s life does not consist in the abundance of what he possesses, and in the parallel the man enjoys the abundance of what he possesses. In ‘d’ the rich man’s ground produces plentifully and in the parallel he makes plans for his plenty. Centrally in ‘e’ he asks himself the crunch question, ‘what shall I do with what I have received?’

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jesus Corrects a Person over Covetousness In Luk 12:13-21 Jesus is asked by a person in the crowd to judge between him and his brother over an inheritance. He corrects this person by dealing with the covetousness of his heart. The remedy for covetousness that Jesus gives him is to fear the Lord because of His impending judgment.

The Parable of the Rich Fool Jesus Christ told this parable because someone from the crowd asked Jesus to help him recover a portion of an inheritance that rightfully belonged to him. Jesus responded by telling him a parable that taught about the dangers of covetousness because Jesus knew the heart of the person asking the question.

This parable tells the story of a man who worked hard to achieve great wealth but died suddenly and did not get to enjoy that for which he had worked so hard. How many people do we know that have worked hard in life at the expense of costing them their health in order to acquired wealth and died soon after retirement and did not get to enjoy it. Wealth gained by human achievement brings more stress than it does peace. This stress shortens a person’s life. But when we serve the Lord and let His blessings abound in our lives, we have peace while enjoying the wealth. A person can be wealthy without covetousness as was Abraham and Job.

Luk 12:20 “But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee” – Word Study on “shall be required of thee” Strong says the Greek word (G523) means, “to demand back.” The Enhanced Strong says this word is used 2 times in the Old Testament. In the KJV, it is translated, “ask again 1, requite 1.”

God gives us life and He takes it away. God gives man his life in order to be a steward of it, for one day, each person will have to give an account of how he has used this gift of life. He requires an account of this life on the Day of Judgment. We see this day of reckoning in the Parable of the Talents (Mat 25:14-30).

Mat 25:19, “After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.”

Comments It is God who speaks and commands the soul to leave the body.

Luk 12:20 “then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided” – Comments The transfer of an inheritance can be very unpredictable, even when planned. In Africa the brothers of the deceased man often come and take their dead brother’s possessions, even the home, leaving the widow and children destitute. In the U.S. siblings often squabble over the inheritance, selling the assets for cash to pay off debts or squandering it, while the material possessions are transferred into the hands of strangers.

Luk 12:21  So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures