Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 19:16

And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

16. one came ] “Came one running, and kneeled to him” (Mark). “A certain ruler,” i. e. one of the rulers of the synagogue, like Jairus. The “decemvirate” (see ch. Mat 4:23) of the synagogue were chosen from “men of leisure” (Hebr. Batlanin, cp. our “ scholars ”), who were free from the necessity of labour, and could devote themselves to the duties of the synagogue, and to study; of these the first three were called “Rulers of the Synagogue.”

Good Master ] According to good MS. authority simply “Master.”

what good thing shall I do ] In this question ‘what shall I do ’ the ruler touches the central error of the Pharisaic system that goodness consisted in exact conformity to certain external rules of conduct Jesus shews that it is not by doing anything whatever that a man can inherit eternal life, but by being something; not by observing Pharisaic rules, but by being childlike.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

16 22. The Young Rich Ruler

Mar 10:17-22. Luk 18:18-23.

From Luke alone we learn that he was a “ ruler; ” from Matthew alone that he was young. Each of the three Synoptists states that “he was very rich” (Luke); “had great possessions” (Matthew and Mark).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

This account is found also in Mar 10:17-31; Luke 18:18-39.

Mat 19:16

One came – This was a young man, Mat 19:20. He was a ruler (Luke); probably a ruler in a synagogue, or of the great council of the nation; a place to which he was chosen on account of his unblemished character and promising talents. He came running (Mark); evincing great earnestness and anxiety, He fell upon his knees (Mark); not to worship him, but to pay the customary respectful salutation; exhibiting the highest regard for Jesus as an extraordinary religious teacher.

Good Master – The word good here means, doubtless, most excellent; referring not so much to the moral character of Jesus as to his character as a religious teacher. It was probably a title which the Jews were in the habit of applying to their religious teachers. The word Master here means teacher.

What good thing shall I do? – He had attempted to keep all the commandments. He had been taught by his Jewish teachers that people were to be saved by doing something – that is, by their works; and he supposed that this was to be the way under every system of religion. He had lived externally a blameless life, but yet he was not at peace: he was anxious, and he came to ascertain what, in the view of Jesus, was to be done, that his righteousness might be complete. To have eternal life means to be saved. The happiness of heaven is called life, in opposition to the pains of hell, called death, or an eternal dying, Rev 2:2; Rev 20:14. The one is real life, answering the purposes of living – living to the honor of God and in eternal happiness; the other is a failure of the great ends of existence – prolonged, eternal suffering, of which temporal death is but the feeble image.

Mat 19:17

Why callest thou me good? – Why do you give to me a title that belongs only to God? You suppose me to be only a man, yet you give me an appellation that belongs only to God.

It is improper to use titles in this manner. As you Jews use them they are unmeaning; and though the title may apply to me, yet, you did not intend to use it in the sense in which it is proper, as denoting infinite perfection or divinity; but you intended to use it as a complimentary or a flattering title, applied to me as if I were a mere man – a title which belongs only to God. The intentions, the habit of using mere titles, and applying as a compliment terms belonging only to God, is wrong. Christ did not intend here to disclaim divinity, or to say anything about his own character, but simply to reprove the intention and habit of the young man – a most severe reproof of a foolish habit of compliment and flattery, and seeking pompous titles.

Keep the commandments – That is, do what God has commanded. He in the next verses informs him what he meant by the commandments. Jesus said this, doubtless, to try him, and to convince him that he had by no means kept the commandments, and that in supposing he had he was altogether deceived. The young man thought he had kept them, and was relying on them for salvation. It was of great importance, therefore, to convince him that he was, after all, a sinner. Christ did not mean to say that any man would be saved by the works of the law, for the Bible teaches plainly that such will not be the case, Rom 3:20, Rom 3:28; Rom 4:6; Gal 2:16; Eph 2:9; 2Ti 1:9. At the same time, however, it is true that if a man perfectly complied with the requirements of the law he would be saved, for there would be no reason why he should be condemned. Jesus, therefore, since he saw he was depending on his works, told him that if he would enter into life that is, into heaven – he must keep the commandments; if he was depending on them he must keep them perfectly, and if this was done he would be saved. The reasons why Christ gave him this direction were, probably:

1.Because it was his duty to keep them.

2.Because the young man depended on them, and he ought to understand what was required if he did – that they should be kept perfectly, or that they were not kept at all.

3.Because he wanted to test him, to show him that he did not keep them, and thus to show him his need of a Saviour.

Mat 19:18, Mat 19:19

He saith unto him, Which? – In reply to the inquiry of the young man, Jesus directed him to the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and fifth Exo 20:12-16, as containing the substance of the whole – as containing particularly what he intended to show him that he had not kept. See notes at Mat 5:21, Mat 5:27.

Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder – See the notes at Mat 5:21-26.

Thou shalt not commit adultery – See the notes at Mat 5:27-32.

Thou shalt not steal – To steal is to take the property of another without his knowledge or consent.

Thou shalt not bear false witness – Give testimony contrary to truth. This may be done in a court of justice, or by private or public slander. It means to say things of another which are not true.

Honour thy father … – That is,

1. Obey them, keep their commands, Col 3:20; Eph 6:1-3.
2. Respect them, show them reverence.
3. Treat their opinions with respect – do not despise them or ridicule them.
4. Treat their habits with respect. Those habits may be different from ours; they may be antiquated, and to us strange, odd, or whimsical; but they are the habits of a parent, and they are not to be ridiculed.
5. Provide for them when sick, weary, old, and infirm. Bear with their weakness, comply with their wishes, speak to them kindly, and deny yourselves of rest, and sleep, and ease, to promote their welfare.

To this he added another – the duty of loving our neighbor, Lev 19:18. This Christ declared to be the second great commandment of the law, Mat 22:39. A neighbor means:

1.Any person who lives near to us.

2.Any person with whom we have dealings.

3.A friend or relative, Mat 5:43.

4.Any person – friend, relative, countryman, or foe, Mar 12:31.

5.Any person who does us good or confers a favor on us, Luk 10:27-37,

This commandment means, evidently:

1.That we should not injure our neighbor in his person, property, or character.

2.That we should not be selfish, but should seek to do him good.

3.That in a case of debt, difference, or debate, we should do what is right, regarding his interest as much as our own.

4.That we should treat his character, property, etc., as we do our own, according to what is right.

5.That, in order to benefit him, we should practice self-denial, or do as we would wish him to do to us, Mat 7:12.

It does not mean:

1.That the love of ourselves, according to what we are, or according to truth, is improper. The happiness of myself is of as much importance as that of any other man, and it is as proper that it should be sought.

1. It does not mean that I am to neglect my own business to take care of my neighbors. My happiness, salvation, health, and family are committed especially to myself; and, provided I do not interfere with my neighbors rights or violate my obligations to him, it is my duty to seek the welfare of my own as my first duty, 1Ti 5:8, 1Ti 5:13; Tit 2:5. Mark adds to these commandments, Defraud not; by which he meant, doubtless, to express the substance of this to love our neighbor as ourselves. It means, literally, to take away the property of another by violence or by deceiving him, thus showing that he is not loved as we love ourselves.

Mat 19:20

All these things have I kept from my youth up – I have made them the rule of my life.

I have endeavored to obey them. Is there anything that I lack – are there any new commandments to be kept? Do you, the Messiah, teach any command besides those which I have learned from the law and from the Jewish teachers, which it is necessary for me to obey in order to be saved?

Mat 19:21

If thou wilt be perfect – The word perfect means complete in all its parts, finished, having no part wanting.

Thus a watch is perfect or complete when it has all its proper wheels, and hands, and casements in order. Job was said to be perfect (see the notes at Job 1:1), not that he was sinless, for he is afterward reproved by God himself Job 38; 39; Job 40:4; but because his piety was properly proportioned, or had a completeness of parts. He was a pious father, a pious magistrate, a pious neighbor, a pious citizen. His religion was not confined to one thing, but it extended to all. Perfect means, sometimes, the filling up, or the carrying out, or the expression of a principle of action. Thus, 1Jo 2:5; Whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected. That is, the keeping of the commandments of God is the proper expression, carrying out, or completion of the love of God. This is its meaning here. If thou wilt be perfect, complete, finished – if thou writ show the proper expression of this keeping of the commandments, go, etc. Make the obedience complete. Mark says Mar 10:21, Jesus, beholding him, loved him. He was pleased with his amiableness, his correct character, his frankness, his ingenuousness. Jesus, as a man, was capable of all the emotions of most tender friendship. As a man, we may suppose that his disposition was tender and affectionate, mild and calm. Hence, he loved with special affection the disciple John, eminently endowed with these qualities; and hence he was pleased with the same traits in this young man. Still, with all this amiableness, there is reason to think he was not a Christian, and that the love of mere amiable qualities was all the affection that was ever bestowed on him by the Saviour.

One thing, adds Mark, thou lackest. There is one thing missing. You are not complete. This done, you would show that your obedience lacked no essential part, but was complete, finished, proportionate, perfect.

Go and sell that thou hast … – The young man declared that he had kept the law. That law required, among other things, that he should love his neighbor as himself. It required, also, that he should love the Lord his God supremely; that is, more than all other objects. If he had that true love to God and man – if he loved his Maker and fellow-creatures more than he did his property, he would be willing to give up his wealth to the service of God and of man. Jesus commanded him to do this, therefore, to test his character, and to show him that he had not kept the law as he pretended, and thus to show him that he needed a better righteousness than his own.

Treasure in heaven – See the notes at Mat 6:20.

Follow me – To follow Jesus then meant to be a personal attendant on his ministry; to go about with him from place to place, as well as to imitate and obey him. Now it means:

1.To obey his commandments.

2.To imitate his example, and to live like him.

Mat 19:22

He had great possessions – He was very rich.

He made an idol of his wealth. He loved it more than God. He had not kept the commandments from his youth up, nor had he kept them at all; and rather than do good with his treasures, and seek his salvation by obeying God, he chose to turn away from the Saviour and give over his inquiry about eternal life. He probably returned no more. Alas, how many lovely and amiable young persons follow his example!

Mat 19:23

A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven – Shall with difficulty be saved.

He has much to struggle with, and it will require the greatest of human efforts to break away from his temptations and idols. and to secure his salvation. Compare the notes at 1Ti 6:9-10.

Mat 19:24

It is easier for a camel … – This was a proverb in common use among the Jews, and is still common among the Arabians.

To denote that a thing was impossible or exceedingly difficult, they said that a camel or an elephant might as soon walk through a needles eye. In the use of such proverbs it is not necessary to understand them literally. They merely denote the extreme difficulty of the case.

A camel – A beast of burden much used in Eastern countries. It is about the size of the largest ox, with one or two bunches on his back, with long neck and legs, no horns, and with feet adapted to the hot and dry sand. They are capable of carrying heavy burdens, will travel sometimes faster than the fleetest horse, and are provided with a stomach which they fill with water, by means of which I they can live four or five days without drink. They are very mild and tame, and kneel down to receive and unload their burden. They are chiefly used in deserts and hot climates, where other beasts of burden are with difficulty kept alive.

A rich man – This rather means one who loves his riches and makes an idol of them, or one who supremely desires to be rich. Mark says Mar 10:24 How hard is it for them that trust in riches. While a man has this feeling – relying on his wealth alone – it is literally impossible that he should be a Christian; for religion is a love of God rather than the world – the love of Jesus and his cause more than gold. Still a man may have much property, and not have this feeling. He may have great wealth, and love God more; as a poor man may have little, and love that little more than God. The difficulties in the way of the salvation of a rich man are:

1.That riches engross the affections.

2.That people consider wealth as the chief good, and when this is obtained they think they have gained all.

3.That they are proud of their wealth, and unwilling to be numbered with the poor and despised followers of Jesus.

4.That riches engross the time, and fill the mind with cares and anxieties, and leave little for God.

5.That they often produce luxury, dissipation, and vice. that it is difficult to obtain wealth without sin, without avarice, without covetousness, fraud, and oppression, 1Ti 6:9-10, 1Ti 6:17; Jam 5:1-5; Luk 12:16-21; Luk 16:19-31.

Still, Jesus says Mat 19:26, all these may be overcome. God can give grace to do it. Though to people it may appear impossible, yet it is easy for God.

Mat 19:27

We have forsaken all – Probably nothing but their fishing-nets, small boats, and cottages.

But they were their all – their living, their home; and, forsaking them, they had as really shown their sincerity as though they had possessed the gold of Ophir and lived in the palaces of kings.

What shall we have, therefore? – We have done as thou didst command this young man to do. What reward may we expect for it?

Mat 19:28

Verily I say unto you – Jesus in this verse declares the reward which they would have.

They were not to look for it now, but in a future period.

That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration – This word occurs but once elsewhere in the New Testament, Tit 3:5. It literally means a new birth, or being born again. Applied to man, it denotes the great change when the heart is renewed, or when the sinner begins to be a Christian. This is its meaning, clearly, in the passage referred to in Titus; but this meaning cannot be applied here. Christ was not born again, and in no proper sense could it be said that they had followed him in the new birth; but the word also means any great change, or a restoration of things to a former state or to a better state. In this sense it is probably used here. It refers to that great revolution – that restoration of order in the universe – that universal new birth which will occur when the dead shall rise, and all human things shall be changed, and a new order of things shall start up out of the ruins of the old, when the Son of man shall come to judgment. The passage, then, should be read, Ye which have followed me shall, as a reward in the great day of the resurrection of the dead, and of forming the new and eternal order of things – the day of judgment, the regeneration – be signally honored and blessed.

When the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory – That is, to judge the world. Throne of glory means glorious throne or a splendid throne. It is not to be taken literally, but is used to denote his character as a king and judge, and to signify the great dignity and majesty which will be displayed by him. See Mat 24:30; Mat 26:64; Act 1:11; Act 17:31.

Sit upon twelve thrones – This is figurative. To sit on a throne denotes power and honor, and means here that they would be distinguished above others, and be more highly honored and rewarded.

Judging the twelve tribes of Israel – Jesus will be the Judge of quick and dead. He only is qualified for it, and the Father hath given all judgment to the Son, Joh 5:22. To be a judge denotes rank, authority, power. The ancient judges of Israel were people of distinguished courage, patriotism, honor, and valor. Hence, the word comes to denote not so much an actual exercise of the power of passing judgment, as the honor attached to the office; and as earthly kings have those around them dignified with honors and office – counselors and judges, so Christ says that his apostles will occupy the same relative station in the great day. They will be honored by him, and by all, as apostles, as having, in the face of persecution, left all; as having laid the foundations of his church, and endured all the persecutions of the world.

The twelve tribes of Israel – This was the number of the ancient tribes. By this name the people of God were denoted. By this name Jesus here denotes his redeemed people. See also Jam 1:1, where Christians are called the twelve tribes. Here it means also, not the Jews, not the world, not the wicked, not that the apostles are to pronounce sentence on the enemies of God, but the people of God, the redeemed. Among them Jesus says his apostles will be honored in the day of judgment, as earthly kings place in posts of office and honor those who have signally served them. Compare the notes at 1Co 6:2.

Mat 19:29

And every one that hath forsaken houses … – In the days of Jesus, those who followed him were obliged, generally, to forsake houses and home, and to attend him.

In our time it is not often required that we should literally leave them, except when the life is devoted to him among the pagan; but it is always required that we love them less than we do him, that we give up all that is inconsistent with religion, and that we be ready to give up all when he demands it.

For my names sake – From attachment to me. Mark adds, and for the gospels; that is, from obedience to the requirements of the gospel, and love for the service of the gospel.

Shall receive a hundred-fold – Mark says a hundred-fold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, etc. A hundred-fold means a hundred times as much. This is not to be understood literally, but that he will give what will be worth 100 times as much in the peace, and joy, and rewards of religion. It is also literally true that no mans temporal interest is injured by the love of God. Mark adds, with persecutions. These are not promised as a part of the reward; but amid their trials and persecutions they should find reward and peace.

Mat 19:30

This verse should have been connected with the following chapter

The parable there spoken is expressly to illustrate this sentiment. See it explained in the notes at Mat 20:16.

Remarks On Matthew 19

1. We should not throw ourselves unnecessarily in the way of the enemies of religion, Mat 19:1. Jesus, to avoid the dangers to which he was exposed, left Jerusalem, and passed over to the other side of the Jordan. If duty calls us to remain in the presence of our enemies and the enemies of religion, we should do it. If we can do them good, we should do it. If our presence will only provoke them to anger and bitterness, then we should turn aside. Compare the notes at Mat 10:23.

2. People will seek every occasion to ensnare Christians, Mat 19:3. Questions will be proposed with great art, and with an appearance of sincerity, only for the purpose of leading them into difficulty. Cunning men know well how to propose such questions, and triumph much when they have perplexed believers. This is often the boast of people of some standing, who think they accomplish the great purposes of their existence if they can confound other people, and think it signal triumph if they can make others as miserable as themselves.

3. We should not refuse to answer such persons with mildness, when the Bible has settled the question, Mat 19:4-6. Jesus answered a captious question, proposed on purpose to ensnare him. We may often do much to confound the enemies of religion, and to recommend it, when without passion we hear their inquiries, and deliberately inform them that the question has been settled by God. We had better, however, far better, say nothing in reply, than to answer in anger or to show that we are irritated. All the object of the enemy is gained if he can make us angry.

4. People will search and pervert the Bible for authority to indulge their sins and to perplex Christians, Mat 19:7. No device is more common than to produce a passage of Scripture known to be misquoted or perverted, yet plausible, for the purpose of perplexing Christians. In such cases, the best way, often, is to say nothing. If unanswered, people will be ashamed of it; if answered, they gain their point, and are ready for debate and abuse.

5. We learn from this chapter that there is no union so intimate as the marriage connection, Mat 19:6. Nothing is so tender and endearing as this union appointed by God for the welfare of man.

6. This union should not be entered into slightly or rashly. It involves all the happiness of this life and much of that to come. The union demands:

(1)Congeniality of feeling and disposition;

(2)Of rank or standing in life;

(3)Of temper;

(4)Similarity of acquirements;

(5)Of age;

(6)Of talent;

(7)Intimate acquaintance.

It should also be a union on religious feelings and opinions:

(1)Because religion is more important than anything else;

(2)Because it will give more happiness in the married life than anything else;

(3)Because where one only is pious, there is danger that the religion of the other will be obscured and blighted;

(4)Because no prospect is so painful as that of eternal separation;

(5)Because it is paganish, brutal, and mad, to partake the gifts of God in a family and offer no thanksgiving; inexpressibly wicked to live from day to day as if there were no God, no heaven, no hell;

(6)Because death is near, and nothing will soothe the pangs of parting but the hope of meeting in the resurrection of the just.

7. No human legislature has a right to declare divorces except in one single case, Mat 19:9. If they do, they are accessories to the crime that may follow, and presume to legislate where God has legislated before them.

8. Those thus divorced, or pretended to be divorced, and marrying again, are, by the declaration of Jesus Christ, living in adultery, Mat 19:9. It is no excuse to say that the law of the land divorced them. The law had no such right. If all the legislatures of the world were to say that it was lawful for a man to steal or to commit murder, it would not make it so, and, in spite of human permission, God would hold a man answerable for theft and murder. So, also, of adultery.

9. The marriage union demands kindness and love, Mat 19:6. The husband and the wife are one. Love to each other is love to a second self. Hatred, and anger, and quarrels are against ourselves. The evils and quarrels in married life will descend on ourselves, and be gall and wormwood in our own cup.

10. Infants may be brought to Jesus to receive his blessing, Mat 19:12-15. While on earth, he admitted them to his presence and blessed them with his prayers. If they might be brought then, they may be brought now. Their souls are as precious; their dangers are as great; their salvation is as important. A parent should require the most indubitable evidence that Jesus will not receive his offspring, and will be displeased if the offering is made, to deter him from this inestimable privilege.

11. If children may be brought, they should be brought. It is the solemn duty of a parent to seize upon all possible means of benefiting his children, and of presenting them to God to implore his blessing. In family prayer, in the sanctuary, and in the ordinance of baptism, the blessing of the Redeemer should be sought early and constantly on their precious and immortal souls.

12. Earnestness and deep anxiety are proper in seeking salvation, Mat 19:16. The young man came running; he kneeled. It was not form and ceremony; it was life and reality. Religion is a great subject. Salvation is important beyond the power of language to express. Eternity is near, and damnation thunders along the path of the guilty. The sinner must be saved soon, or die forever. He cannot be too earnest. He cannot press with too great haste to Jesus. He should come running, and kneeling, and humbled, and lifting the agonizing cry, What must I do to be saved?

13. We should come young, Mat 19:20. No one can come too young. God has the first claim on our affections. He made us, he keeps us, he provides for us, and it is right that we should give our first affections to him. No one who has become a Christian ever yet felt that he had become one too young. No young person that has given his heart to the Redeemer ever yet regretted it. They may give up the frivolous world to do it; they may leave the circles of the dance and the song; they may be exposed to contempt and persecution, but no matter. He who becomes a true Christian, no matter of what age or rank, blesses God that he was inclined to do it, and the time never can come when for one moment he will regret it. Why, then, will not the young give their hearts to the Saviour, and do that which they know they never can for one moment regret?

14. It is no dishonor for those who hold offices, and who are people of rank, to inquire on the subject of religion, Luk 18:18. Men of rank often suppose that it is only the weak, the credulous, and the ignorant that ever feel any anxiety about religion. Never was a greater mistake. It has been only profligate, and weak, and ignorant people that have been thoughtless. Two-thirds of all the profound investigations of the world have been on this very subject. The wisest and best of the pagans have devoted their lives to inquire about God and their own destiny. So in Christian lands. Were Bacon, Newton, Locke, Milton, Hale, and Boerhaave men of weak minds? Yet their deepest thoughts and most anxious inquiries were on this very subject. So in our own land. Were Washington, Ames, Henry, Jay, and Rush men of weak minds? Yet they were professed believers in revelation. And yet young men of rank, and wealth, and learning often think that they show great independence in refusing to think of what occupied the profound attention of these men, and fancy they are great only by refusing to tread in their steps. Never was a greater or more foolish mistake. If anything demands attention, it is, surely, the inquiry whether we are to be happy forever, or wretched; whether there is a God and Saviour; or whether we are in a forsaken and fatherless world.

15. It is as important for the rich to seek religion as the poor, Mat 19:22. They will as certainly die; they as much need religion. Without it they cannot be happy. Riches will drive away no pain on a death-bed – will not go with us when we die – will not save us.

16. It is of special importance that wealthy young persons should be Christians. They are exposed to many dangers. The world – the happy and flattering world – will lead them astray. Fond of fashion, dress, and amusement, as many of them are, they are exposed to a thousand follies and dangers, from which nothing but religion can secrete them. Besides, they may do much good; and God will hold them answerable for all the good they might have done with their wealth.

17. The amiable, the lovely, the moral, need also an interest in Christ, Mar 10:21. If amiable, we should suppose they would be ready to embrace the Saviour. None was ever so moral, so lovely, so pure as he. If we really loved amiableness, then we should come to him – we should love him. But, alas! how many amiable young persons turn away from him, and refuse to follow him! Can they be really lovers of that which is pure and lovely? If so, then why turn away from the Lamb of God?

18. The amiable and the lovely need a better righteousness than their own. With all this, they may make an idol of the world; they may be proud, sensual, selfish, prayerless, and thoughtless about dying. Externally they appear lovely; but oh, how far is the heart from God!

19. Inquirers about religion usually depend on their own works, Mat 19:16. They are not willing to trust to Jesus for salvation, and they ask what they shall do; and it is only when they find that they can do nothing – that they are poor, and helpless, and wretched that they east themselves on the mercy of God and find peace.

20. Compliments and flattering titles are evil, Mat 19:17. They ascribe something to others which we know they do not possess. Often beauty is praised where we know there is no beauty – accomplishment where there is no accomplishment – talent where there is no talent. Such praises are falsehood. We know them to be such. We intend to deceive by them, and we know that they will produce pride and vanity. Often they are used for the purpose of destruction. If a man praises us too much, we should look to our purse or our virtue. We should feel that we are in danger, and the next thing will be a dreadful blow – the heavier for all this flattery. They that use compliments much, expect them from others; are galled and vexed when they are not obtained; and are in danger when they are.

21. If we are to be saved, we must do just what God commands us. Mat 19:17-18. This is all we have to do. We are not to invent anything of our own. God has marked out the course, and we must follow it.

22. We are easily deceived about keeping the law, Mat 19:17. We often think we observe it, when it is only the outward form that we have kept. The law is spiritual, and God requires the heart.

23. Riches are a blessing if used aright; if not, they are deceitful, dangerous, ruinous, Mat 19:23-24. Thousands have lost their souls by the love of riches. None have ever been saved by it.

24. It is our duty to forsake all for Christ, Mat 19:27-29. Be it little or much, it is all the same to him. It is the heart that he looks at; and we may as really show our love by giving up a fishing-boat and net, as by giving up a palace or a crown. If done in either case, it will be accepted.

25. Religion has its own rewards, Mat 19:28-29. It gives more than it takes. It more than compensates for all that we surrender. It gives peace, joy, comfort in trial and in death, and heaven beyond. This is the testimony of all Christians of all denominations of all that have lived, and of all that do live that they never knew true peace until they found it in the gospel. The testimony of so many must be true. They have tried the world in all its forms of gaiety, folly, and vice, and they come and say with one voice, Here only is true peace. On any other subject they would be believed. Their testimony here must be true.

26. Those eminent for usefulness here will be received to distinguished honors and rewards in heaven, Mat 19:28. They that turn many to righteousness shall shine as stars in the firmament forever. See the notes at Dan 12:3.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Mat 19:16-22

And, behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do?

Formal obedience insufficient

It is certainly the doctrine of Scripture that moral integrity alone can never benefit us with God; that even the offering of our prayers is accounted worthless except as it is perfumed with love. Evidently, then, his confidence is false and dangerous indeed who, because he keeps unbroken the great laws of social morality, imagines his claim to mercy and salvation secure. Besides being unscriptural, such a theory is not rational.

I. It ignores the very design of mans creation, viz., the glory of God. Social morality is at best a very inferior virtue. It is only the submission of one part of mans nature to an inferior series of Gods laws. If this world were all, that might be enough. Man is endowed with faculties which can only be exercised toward the unseen world. As well might the planet, obeying the one law of its propulsion around the earth, break away from the other which binds it to the sun, and yet hope to escape, as he who, fulfilling his duty to man, neglects his duty to God.

II. It is founded on a false idea of religion. God seeks not mere abject obedience, but the devotion of the heart. Without a distinct movement of the will and affections towards Him, all religious observances are worse than naught. They are the casket without the diamond-the body without the sustaining, invigorating, glorifying life.

III. It makes the sacrifice of Christ an unnecessary thing. If man by being honest and upright and humane and gentle could merit heaven, no need for Calvary. Yet Jesus laid aside the robes of His Deity and came to earth, and offered Himself a sacrifice on the cross. To rely for salvation on natural morality is, then, to mock Christ in His sufferings; it is to go up, as it were, upon the blood-stained slopes of Calvary, and, beholding Him in His agony, to cry aloud, We need not Thy blood, we despise Thine aid! (W. Rudder, D. D.)

Coming to Jesus

A right thing to come to Jesus, in a right way, for a right thing, in a right spirit. This last element of coming rightly was here left out.

I. How he came.

1. Publicly.

2. Eagerly-running.

3. Humbly-kneeling.

4. Respectfully-good Master.

II. Why he came: inherit eternal life.

1. Belief in a future state.

2. Concern to obtain it; in this he differed from many.

3. Thought something must be done; many think not of this, and

consequently do nothing.

4. Thought he was willing and able to do anything needful; but did not know himself; had not counted the cost.

III. Learn-

1. Salvation not by works.

2. Works an evidence, not a cause of grace. (The Hive.)

The rich youths application to Christ

I. The character and pretensions of the youthful applicant who approached our Lord. Something in his character exceedingly favourable, interesting external appearance, air of sweetness about his address, correct in morals, of ample means, fair reputation, he entertained proper views of our Lord; he had serious regard for religion. But-

1. He was ignorant of his moral inability.

2. He displays an ignorance of his actual guilt.

3. He was ignorant of the prevailing disposition of his heart.

II. THE manner in which the application was diet.

1. Our Lord repels his adulatory address.

2. Our Lord shows the imperfection of his obedience.

3. The youth went away sorrowful.

III. Those important lessons which naturally arise out of this interesting case.

1. Learn the danger and prevalence of self-deception.

2. The great responsibility which the ministerial office involves.

3. The dangerous situation which the rich occupy. The subject guards us against the following: Low thoughts of God, high thoughts of ourselves, slight thoughts of sin, and mean thoughts of Christ. (J. Thorp.)

Mens persuasions of their own obedience

Whence this ariseth.

1. Ignorance of the total, deep, and universal pollution of our natures.

2. Ignorance of the spiritual exactness and obligation of the law.

3. Attention only to the negative commandments.

4. Not understanding either positive or negative precepts in their comprehensive sense.

5. Neglecting self-reflection and self-examination.

6. From the abominable self-love, and self-flattery, which cleaveth to every man.

7. Fear of guilt makes men hoodwink their eyes that they may neither look into the law, nor into their hearts.

8. Ignorance of regeneration and the necessity for being born again.

9. The devil hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts.

10. Every man is naturally destitute of the Spirit, without which we are all devoid of light and life. (Anthony Burgess.)

The rich young ruler

I. Examine the young mans roast. He boasted that his obedience was:

1. Extensive.

2. Exact.

3. Constant.

II. Answer his question. He lacked:

1. A new heart.

2. A sense of guilt and sin.

3. Faith in Christ.

4. Spirituality and self-denial. (G. Brooks.)

I. How entirely even an intelligent man may misapprehend his own spiritual attainment.

II. And his willingness to attain.

III. Between our present attainment and perfection there may be a sacrifice equivalent to cutting off a right hand, or plucking out a right eye.

IV. The one thing essential, if we are to attain perfection, is the following of Christ.

V. Other things may also be lacking, as, for example, determination to be holy. Conclusion: The lack of one thing may make all other attainments useless. (M. Dods, D.D.)

The young ruler

I. A hopeful meeting. It was-

1. A young man-special promises to the young.

2. A meeting with Christ-patient and physician.

3. One who was in earnest. Mark says, he came running.

4. One who had many rare qualities. Jesus loved him.

5. One who was bold (compare Nicodemus); yet reverent, for he kneeled.

II. An important conversation. It reveals:

1. Our simpleness-unable to keep the law.

2. Our pride-trusting to our own works.

3. Our idolatry-loving other things better than Christ.

4. Our only hope of salvation-willing to leave all, take the cross and follow Christ.

III. A sorrowful parting.

1. It was parting with Christ, therefore no hope.

2. It was a deliberate parting-not a sudden step.

3. It was a final parting.

IV. Important lessons. How far some may advance and yet not be saved. Abandon at once that which keeps us from Christ. (D. Macmillan.)

Morality made a snare

Take heed that thy morality be not thy snare. The young man in the gospel might have been a better man if he had not been so good. (Gurnall.)

Youths obstructions in their way to Christ and eternal life

I. Self-conceit, This young man thought that he had kept all the law. Young people with a smattering of knowledge soon imagine themselves competent judges of all truth and conduct. They have righteousness to recommend themselves to Gods favour.

II. The pleasures and vanities of youth; especially when they are fed by great possessions. These unreasonable sordid pleasures are not to be compared with the exalted substantial delights that are to be found in the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

III. A false prejudice, as if the ways of Christ were nought and melancholy. Thus the young man thought when Christ told him to take up his cross and follow Him. Grace would give new tastes and make the burden easy. Christ will never let you be a loser by Him.

IV. An inconsiderate, heedless temper. To be heedless about small matters is a blemish; about essential, a reproach without excuse.

V. A presumptuous, daring rashness of spirit. Young persons are most sanguine, even to foolhardiness.

VI. The companions of youth.

VII. An apprehension of long life, They have a long day before them and can put away the thought of death. (John Guyse, D.D.)

A sorrowful departure

1. He was sorry at the thought of giving up those large possessions of which he was naturally proud.

2. He was also grieved at the idea of losing heaven.

3. Thus opened to the young mans mind some of the difficulty which there always is in the attainment of everything which is really worth having.

4. Part of his sorrow was the discovery which he was making at that moment of his own heart.

5. But he was most sorrowful of all in the wretched sense he had of his own guilty hesitation and inexcusable weakness. Many worldly people are sorrowful in the midst of their worldliness; it indicates life and struggle. In any state of life the characteristic of the Christian is self-renunciation. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

Jesus answer to the young rulers address

I. What we may infer from our Lords question.

1. That our Master was not fond of flattering titles.

2. The language affords a remarkable instance of our Lords modesty and humility.

3. Our Lords question contains a proof of His reverence for His Father.

II. Explain and enforce our Lords answer.

1. There is none good in comparison of God; and consequently, our sentiments of regard and devotion should not stop short of Him.

2. God alone is absolutely good. His goodness is from Himself, independently of all others.

Application-

1. Our Lord hath set us an example for our imitation.

2. Our Lord will not finally approve of any pretended reverence and respect paid to Himself which in the least lessens the glory due to His Father. (Thomas Twining.)

The way to happiness

I. We have the example of one who was solicitous and inquisitive after his future condition, and desirous to know upon what terms he might hope for happiness,

II. We have the ordinary way to happiness marked out to us.

III. In some extraordinary cases God does require some extraordinary things of particular men, which are not generally necessary to the salvation of all men.

IV. We have the sad example of one that went far towards happiness, and yet fell short. (Samuel Johnson.)

W/mr are the senses in which none is good but God?-

I. God is the only necessarily good being.

II. God is the only originally good being.

III. God is the only self-subsistently good being.

IV. God is the only immutably good being.

1. If God is alone supremely good, He alone is to be glorified and adored.

2. If He alone is supremely good, it is sin, and the very essence of it, not to glorify Him. (Dr. Shedd.)

What he lacked

1. A sense of guilt. He was self-complacent. He had obedience, self-respect, morality. He rested in these and boasted of them. He did not know the estimate which heaven places upon the righteousness which is of the law. He was under condemnation, and thought himself justified.

2. Faith in Christ. As the only Saviour. He did not know that Christ was the end of the law for righteousness.

3. A new heart. An essential. He loved the world, etc. This shows the old heart.

4. Self-denial. He loved ease and riches. He had no heart to give these up for Christ. He had much to give up, and the surrender would be hard; but a Christian spirit is willing to give up all; even life if needs be for Christ, and the needs be is Christs word. (Anon.)

A new years personal inquiry

I. There may be many excellences, and much that is amiable in man, without true religion. Morality, benevolent and social virtues, orthodoxy, reverence for Divine ordinances, etc.

II. There are various evils which keep men from being entirely the Saviours. Self-complacency, favour of the world, attachment to riches, unwillingness to deny self, etc.

III. The inquiry of the text is one which is worthy of personal consideration. Ask the question as in Christs presence, with all possible seriousness, with perfect deference to Gods word, in the spirit of prayer and with a resolution to obey the answer. (J. Burns, LL. D.)

Good things to do

Sidney Smith tells us that he cut the following from a newspaper, and preserved it for himself: When you rise in the morning, say that you will make the day blessed to a fellow-creature. It is easily done; a left-off garment to the man who needs it; a kind word to the sorrowful; an encouraging expression to the starving-trifles as light as air-will do at least for the twenty-four hours. And if you are young, depend upon it, it will tell when you are old; and, if you are old, rest assured it will send you gently and happily down the stream of tiptoe to eternity. By the most simple arithmetical sum, look at the result. If you send one person away happily through the day, that is three hundred and sixty-five in the course of a year. And, suppose you live forty years only after you commence that course of medicine, you have made fourteen thousand six hundred persons happy-at all events, for a time.

Heaven won by being, not doing

Very likely the question involved a mass of confusions. The young man thought, perhaps, that heaven was to be won by external actions and quantitative merit. He did not understand that we must enter into heaven by being, not by doing. He held perhaps the vulgar notion that eternal only means endless, so that eternity becomes the infinitude of time instead of its antithesis. He very likely did not know that every holy soul has entered already into eternal life; that to all who are in Christ it is now as the invisible bright air they breathe. He certainly did not realize that this is life eternal, to know Thee, the only God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent. But yet, because the question was sincere and noble, and did not spring from Pharisaism-the one thing which the Lord detested most-but from the Divine dissatisfaction of a struggling soul which God alone can fill, Christ answered it. (F. W. Farrar, D. D.)

Man not left in doubt as to the good

Why dost thou ask Me about the good? that seems to have been our Lords answer, not Why askest thou Me? as it is often read-for whom else should the young man ask? but Why dost thou ask Me about the good? Has God left you in any doubt as to what is good? Have you in your heart no voice of conscience? Has duty never uplifted within you that naked law of right, so imperial in its majesty, so eternal in its origin, which you know that you ought to follow even unto death? If not, and if experience has had no lessons for you, and history no teaching, was there no Sinai? Do not the cherubim of your temple veil with their golden wings the tablets-alas! the shattered tablets of your moral law? And there Jesus might have stopped. But, being unlike us, being infinitely patient with mans irritating spiritual stupidity, not loving, as we do, to be cautious and reticent, and to steer through the channel of no meaning between the Scylla and Charybdis of yes and no, He added, but, if thou wouldst enter into life, keep the commandments. (F. W. Farrar, D. D.)

The first step towards righteousness

Christ did not begin with the injunction, Go, sell all that thou hast. He began very much lower; He said, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Let us learn to flutter as sparrows, before it is worth considering whether we ought also to soar as eagles. Let us cease to be very guilty before we can be righteous. Let us be righteous before we can attain to the greatness of good men. Let us be but ordinary good men before we ask Christ for His counsels of perfection, or attempt to attain to the stature of His saints. Christ knew this well. We come to Him, and say, O Saviour, whom I love, tell me what I must do to inherit eternal life. And so long as we are all standing ankle-deep, chin-deep, in the worlds mire, would it be of any use for Him to point to some shining cloud in the deep blue, and say, You must stand there? Ah, no! He says to you, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Until you have learnt to plant firm feet on the green lower slopes, how can you breathe the difficult and eager air, or stand in the glory of the sunrise on the splendour of the snowy heights? (F. W. Farrar, D. D.)

The commandment regarded as ordinary

The young ruler, not being so familiar as we are with those accumulated cobwebs of two thousand years which priests, and churches, and sects, and theologians, and theorists, and system-mongers, and schoolmen, have spun over wellnigh every simple word of Christ; the young ruler, whose natural instincts were not crushed under hundreds of ponderous folios of human doctrines and commandments of men, which, with inconceivable arrogance and a bitterness which has become universally proverbial, would fain palm themselves off as infallible theology; the young ruler, hearing the answer from the lips of Jesus, in all its bare, naked, unqualified, unmistakable simplicity, was quite frankly amazed. He was like the child Charoba in the poem, who, having been talked to about the majestic glory of the sea, and being led to the shore, innocently exclaimed, Is that the mighty ocean? Is that all? Keep the commandments. Is that all that Jesus has to tell him? Surely there must be some mistake! It did not need a prophet to tell us that! This youth had gone to Christ seeking for some great thing to do, and secret thing to know. The great Teacher could not mean anything so commonplace, so elementary, so extremely ordinary, as those old ten words which He had learned to lisp, ever so many years ago, when He was a little child, at His mothers knee? (F. W. Farrar, D. D.)

Self-satisfaction

This young man thought himself somewhat beforehand, and that God, perchance, was in his debt. Truly, many nowadays grow crooked and aged with over-good opinions of themselves, and can hardly ever be set right again. They stand upon their comparisons-I am as good as thou; nay, upon their disparisons, I am not as this publican. No, for thou art worse; yea, for this, because thou thinkest thyself better. This arrogant youth makes good that of Aristotle, who, differencing between age and youth, makes it a property of young men to think they know all things, and to affirm lustily their own placits. (John Trapp.)

What lack I?-

I. Examine his boast. His obedience was:

1. Exact.

2. Extensive.

3. Constant.

II. Show his deficiencies.

1. A sense of guilt.

2. Faith in Christ.

3. A new heart.

4. Self-denial. (Pulpit Germs.)

This query must not be regarded as an expression of satisfied self-righteousness, as if it implied, In that case I lack nothing. It is, indeed, true that the young man was still self-righteous. He had no conception of the spirituality, the depth, or the height of the commandments of God. Taking only the letter of the law, he considered himself blameless, and perhaps even righteous, before God. Yet his heart misgave him, and he felt that he still lacked something. Under this sense of want, he put the question to the Saviour, as if he would have said, What is it then that I yet lack? All these things have not given me peace of mind. (J. P. Lange, D. D.)

Self-righteousness

The various forms of self-righteousness.

1. Of the head and of the heart (of doctrine and of sentiment); or, Pharisees in the strictest sense.

2. Self-righteousness of the heart with orthodoxy of the head, as in the case of some in the Church who seem to be zealous for soundness of doctrine.

3. Self-righteousness of the head, combined with a deep sense of spiritual need, although its grounds may not be fully understood, as in the case of this young man and of many Christian legalists. (J. P. Lange, D. D.)

Why wealth is to be renounced

What did our Lord mean by this reply? Did he mean that the mere giving up his wealth to the poor would make this man acceptable with God? Certainly not. The cattle on a thousand hills are His. He asks no sacrifice from human hands. Man can give Him nothing that is not His already. This, therefore, could not have been His meaning. Did He, then, mean that the voluntary poverty caused by this distribution of his wealth would render him meritorious with God? Poverty in itself is no more a merit than riches. To this question, therefore, we must say, as to the other, certainly not. Well, then, what did He mean? Evidently this: that whatever may be our moral excellence; however exactly we may fulfil the law toward our neighbour; unless there is, besides this and behind all this and originating all this, an ardent love of God-a love fulfilling the first and great commandment, and fastening upon God with all the heart and soul and mind; a love born of faith, and yet increasing faith-unless there is such a love as this seated on the very throne of our being, originating all our motives and our acts; making our purpose not expediency, but the glory of God; causing us to be ready if need be to sell all that we have-unless there is such a love ruling in our hearts, our moral excellences, however great, are, in the sight of God, of no account. This unquestionably was His meaning; this was the doctrine which He designed to teach. (W. Rudder, D. D.)

The true spirit of renunciation

To the question What lack I yet? Christ answers in substance, This: the temper that counts property worthless beside true life. You come to me with your money, with)our sense of complacency, of consequence, of power, and you want to bring these with you into the kingdom of God. You are not indeed satisfied with things as they are. How can you be, so long as you are vainly striving to feed your immortal nature upon husks and chaff? You want to be enlarged into a life nobler, fuller, worthier of your better self. But you would come as Dives, not as Lazarus. What you have, you think, ought to be reckoned in with what you are. You and your estate are in your own conception too entirely identified to be separated. Believe me, my young brother, the kingdom of Jesus can not know you upon any such terms. It is not necessary that you should be stripped bare of all your belongings in order to enter it. But you should be willing to be stripped bare. You must come to look upon what you call yours as though it mattered not, when you set your face toward the kingdom of God, whether it were yours or no. The spirit of renunciation must be so deep in you that you must be ready to give up all for Christ. And this not from any arbitrary reason, but simply because a human heart is not large enough to hold two thrones. If Christ is to be in it at all, He must be king of the whole domain; and if He is to be king, the money power, the sense power, the brain power must go to the rear. There will be a place for each of these in every sanctified life, but it must be a subordinate place. Go, or at least, if it be a question between your securities and your Saviour, be ready to go, and sell all that thou hast, and follow Me! (Bishop H. C. Potter.)

Obedience to this command not necessarily literal

It is not to be hastily concluded from this, that the rich man is to give all that he has to the poor. If, in deference to any narrow and superficial interpretation of Christs language, a man should take his wealth and distribute the whole of it in largesses to the poor to-morrow, he would be doing the poor an incalculable evil and not a benefit. Men ask, Why do not you, as a believer in Jesus Christ and the Sermon on the Mount, make common cause in the things of this world with the destitute around you, and trust for the needful food and raiment to Him who feeds the birds and clothes the lillies? Why not, indeed! Is it merely because such an act would be fanatical and enthusiastic, or because political economy forbids it? Or, because, whatever else I ought or ought not to do, I ought not to do my brother man a wrong? Is anybody ignorant of the fact that every human life needs the discipline of forethought and self-denial, of responsibility and self-help; and that if I by my ill-judged kindness enable another to escape things, I am degrading and hurting him as well as abusing my own power? What would be the effect of the announcement that half a dozen rich men had disinherited themselves, and that to-morrow morning fifty millions of dollars would be distributed to the poor? Does anybody care to contemplate the pandemonium that New York would become-the idleness, the licentiousness, the fierce hatreds, the bitter discords, the mad license that would be engendered: and ought a Christian man to do an act that would make his brother men incalculably worse instead of better? (Bishop H. C. Potter.)

Great possessions a hindrance in the way to heaven

How nimbly does that little lark mount up, singing, towards heaven in a right line! whereas the hawk, which is stronger of body and swifter of wing, towers up by many gradual compasses to his highest pitch. That bulk of body and length of wing hinder a direct ascent, and require the help both of air and scope to advance his flight; while the small bird cuts the air without resistance, and needs no outward furtherance of her motion. It is no otherwise with the souls of men in flying up to their heaven. Some are hindered by those powers which would seem helps to their soaring up thither: great wit, deep judgment, quick apprehension, send about men with no small labour, for the recovery of their own incumbrance; while the good affections of plain and simple souls raise them up immediately to the fruition of God. Why should we be proud of that which may slacken our way to glory? Why should we be disheartened with the small measure of that, the very want whereof may (as the heart may be affected) facilitate our way to happiness? (Salter.)

The worth of heaven

Far beyond the treasures of Egypt, which yet is called Rahab because of the riches, power, and pride thereof. Oh! get a patriarchs eye to see the wealth and worth of heaven, and then we shall soon make Mosess choice. In the year of grace 759, certain Persian magicians fell into that madness, that they persuaded themselves and sundry, others that if they sold all they had and gave it to the poor, and then afterwards threw themselves naked from off the walls into the river, they should presently be admitted into heaven. Many were cast away by this mad enterprise. How much better (if without superstition and opinion of merit) Amadeus, Duke of Savoy, who being asked by certain ambassadors that came to his court what hounds he had, for they desired to see them, showed them next day a pack of poor people feeding at his table, and said, These are the hounds wherewith I hunt after heaven. (John Trapp.)

Deteriorating influence of riches

Many a Christian do you find among the rich and the titled, who, as a less encumbered man, might have been a resolute soldier of the cross; but he is now only a realization of the old Pagan fable-a spiritual giant buried under a mountain of gold. Oh! many, many such we meet in our higher classes, pining with a nameless want, pressed by a heavy sense of the weariness of existence, strengthless in the midst of affluence, and incapable even of tasting the profusion of comfort which is heaped around them. (F. W. Robertson, M. A.)

The danger and misery of self-deception

I. The state and character of the person who here addresses the Lord.

1. We discover many circumstances which are calculated at first sight to impress us with very favourable sentiments of his state and character. He was young; engaging manners; amiable disposition. He exhibits a pleasing combination of many attractive qualities.

2. How inadequate his conception of the corruption of his own heart. What good thing can he do?

3. The defective views which he entertains of his own guilt.

4. He is not better acquainted with the secret bias of his affections than with his depravity and guilt.

II. The conduct of our Lord on this occasion.

1. He does not promote the self-deception and thus augment the danger. He does not compliment the young man on his moral attainments. He acts the part of a true Physician and Friend; palliatives will only increase the disorder.

2. Compassionate regard.

3. Admirably suited to the peculiar circumstances of his case. Christ mentions the law as a corrective to his pride and self-sufficiency.

4. Eminently calculated to prove in the highest degree beneficial to his most important interests.

(1) The misery of a state of self-deception.

(2) That in removing the specious covering which self-deceit imposes, and in disclosing the sinner to himself, consists one important part of the duty of a minister.

(3) Reflect on that disposition of heart which Christ requires of His people. Follow Me. (E. Cooper.)

The Christians life-long work after confirmation

What lack I yet?

1. A thorough devotion to Gods service.

2. A spirit of prayer.

3. A due appreciation of the work that God has appointed you to do.

4. You may lack patience.

5. You require to be incited to perseverance. (J. H. Norton, D. D.)

The great question answered

The path a soul treads when it comes to Christ is one of beauty. To come to Jesus is a noble and manly act. It is a soul drawn by the good; rising above sinful forces which have enslaved it; of special interest to see the young come to Christ. The conditions necessary to such an approach are illustrated in the young man-

1. He believed that the character of this life determines that to come.

2. He believed that obedience to God was the first principle of religion.

3. He desired to exhaust his powers in perfecting his character.

4. He had faith that Christ would show him the way of salvation. What lack I yet?

I. Self-renunciation. Sell that thou hast. This embraces a recognition of the supreme right of God over the soul. God gave all; this leads to an abandonment of selfish pursuits. Why religion makes this demand.

1. Selfishness is deceitful and delusive; it does not see mans real interests; it does not comprehend the Divine relations of man;it looks only at things seen.

2. Selfishness and self-love dwarf manhood; narrow the thought and corrupt the affections; they shut out noble sentiment which leads men to deeds of daring.

3. There must be this self-abandonment to allow a higher ideal of life to possess the soul. That man who is full of himself can contain nothing beside. He must forget himself who would live after the pattern shown him on the mount.

II. Religion demands Christ consecration.

1. Supreme affection for Christ. The heart must be first given to Him.

2. The purposes of the heart must be turned to Christs cause.

3. The influence must be for God.

4. Human passions must be at Gods disposal. Is the demand too rigorous, and does it embrace too much?

It may encourage us to yield full submission to call to mind a few precious facts.

1. It assimilates us to a likeness of Christ. His soul exceeded all bounds and barriers, and poured out its life an immortal benediction upon His enemies. The widowed mother, whose midnight toil earns bread and raiment for her darling ones, is embalmed in poetry and song; the artist weaves a crown of glory about her brow. But such labour and consecration is yet only that of a true heart and human impulses. But he who is consecrated to Christ is Godlike.

2. It brings peace to the heart. Men who are vacillating are unhappy. No soul rests so perfectly at ease as that one which has its home on Gods altar.

3. It centralizes and makes the man strong. Scattered men are weak. A consecrated man is a felt man.

4. It enlivens and sets the life on fire. Men go to sleep and are frozen, as the fairy city celebrated in story. God breathes on the powers of the man consecrated; he is set on fire by the breath of Jehovah. Such a life will have given back to it from God, in its new realm, a better being. The curtains are now withdrawing. See, yonder the field is fairer and the sward is all green! There that life runs on and on and on for ever! It gathers to itself all that was of possible value on earth in the years of its pilgrimage, and, having yielded obedience to the conditions of its noble being, enters upon that higher life of love and joy for which it has been fitted by a faithful stewardship. (J. W. Holt.)

Christ and good people

The gospel indicates three particulars in regard to their mutual relations.

I. There is a point which attracts them to each other. A noble young man; although surrounded by great wealth, he has not yielded himself to youthful frivolities, but has kept his spirit intent on higher aims than earthly qualifications. He is modest enough to be conscious of imperfection, and to make inquiry where there is an opportunity to learn. He retains enthusiasm, and the object of his enthusiasm is no inferior one. Such people must feel the attraction of the person of Jesus Christ. They love the good, and Christ is the good One. All their ideals are realized in Jesus. The rich young man felt this. But this attraction was mutual. Jesus came to seek the lost and to save the sinner; much more would the purity of this naturally noble heart receive His recognition. Neither is this mutual attraction for a moment merely; the attraction remains, though the discipline required is hard to understand; an inner impulse draws us to Him.

II. There is a point which separates them from each other. At the very point where the Lord exerts the strongest power of attraction upon the naturally noble, their separation begins. It is a necessity of the case. Our Lords word about the good, and the mention of the commandments, had been designed to awaken distrust of self. Then comes the unheard-of demand, Sell all, etc. He was touched in his hearts core. Christ exposes the point in which this good person was not good. Christ wants complete persons for His followers; it takes a complete person to win the prize of eternal life. If you want to be perfect you must renounce the secret reservations you oppose to the rigour of the Divine commands, put away the lusts which hamper the inner man. Renew your heart; put a new object in its centre. But for the sake of one thing you will turn away from your Saviour, in spite of all your noble efforts and ideal endowments.

III. This separation must be realized in order truly to find the Lord. When the physician performs an operation, it is because he wants to heal; and when our Lord seems to discourage nearer approach it is because He wants to deepen the reason for it, so that after they unite nothing shall be able to separate them. Hence we believe this young mans separation was not final. He will return, no longer fiery and with a surplus of power; for with God all things are possible. It was necessary that he should be impressed with the requirements of Christ, for as long as he can say, All these things have I kept, a Redeemer is superfluous-a Moses or a Socrates would suffice. But when he learns to despair of his own strength, then he arrives before the gate of salvation and stretches imploring hands for a Redeemer. Therefore Christ first destroys this young mans merit; and this is the more difficult from his high virtue. In the light of Jesus little sins becomes great. To sacrifice for Him for love is to lose nothing. His yoke is easy. (E. Dryander, D. D.)

What lack I yet?

This young man was hungry for improvement; that was all right. But there were other things for which he had a stronger hunger. Morality is the endeavour according to a mans power to obey laws, and I will divide moralities into five different kinds.

1. We call that physical morality which consists in the knowledge of men, and of those physical laws which surround them. Thus a man is immoral who violates law in eating and drinking and sleeping.

2. Next is social morality. Men are obliged to obey those laws which connect them with their fellow men; also as members of the household; as neighbours.

3. Next comes civil morality. Men are organized into states and nations.

4. Business morality.

What is the relation of obedience in these different spheres to the nature and character of men?

1. All these observances are external. They are not in their nature internal at all. They leave out entirely the vital question of character. A man may be obedient to physical law, and yet be proud. Man is a creature of two worlds; so that when he is called to the other sphere the physical elements which he has accumulated here drop off. The spiritual only he carries with him.

2. This lower morality leaves out of view the higher human relations to God. A man may be an atheist and yet good in lower respects; but it is not fair to measure his genial qualities by his atheism as he has been brought up amidst Christian influences. A man has an immortal self as distinguished from his physical, social, and civil self; what about that part of him which is to live for ever? Are there no laws higher than those which belong to secular affairs, which apply to the higher reason and the moral sense. Are there no laws for faith, imagination in its dealings with religion, which connect a man with the invisible, universal, and infinite? Is there no morality which reaches beyond the earthly sphere? Morality is not complete without religion. There are practical uses in the inferior forms of morality; from them we learn the typical forms of the higher religion. If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar, etc. The lower moralities are schools, as it were; it is a great preparation for religion. Generally speaking the higher you go the more difficult is the achievement. Few men are competent to be eminent artists. In realizing the higher conceptions of religion there are inherent difficulties: but some make it harder than they need. The sun may shine on a slate roof for ever, and yet the garret beneath it may be dark; but make the roof of glass and the sun Will shine through. Let your higher life have the best care. (H. W. Beecher.)

The centred principle of character

There are multitudes of men who live moral lives, generous lives, lives that are good in a thousand respects; but it does not come to this, that their whole being is centred in God and spiritual things. It is centred, rather, in the possession of wealth. (H. W. Beecher.)

Selfishness may be associated with many virtues

I remember watching, last summer, spiders that burrowed in the crevicess of a trellis where the wind had borne much dust. I noticed that the hole where they lay lurking looked dark and ugly. I also noticed, as I sat one day watching, a vagrant spider taking a morning glory, in full blossom, and spin his web over the mouth of it. And there never was a prettier nest in this world-a nest more richly gemmed with beauty-than this was. But, after all, it was the same spider, whether he lay in the dark hole at the corner of the trellis, or in the blossom of that exquisite flower. Now, selfishness may weave its web in the dusky places, or in the hideous-looking recesses of a mans disposition, or about the mouths and graces of sweet affections; but it is the same selfishness after all. The place is changed, and the appearance of the surroundings is changed, but the spider is not changed. So, the point to be remembered is that in every man there is a centre around about which his life really swings. There is a balance-point, and it preponderates one way or the other. The great influences of life weigh down toward the flesh, or else they go toward the spiritual. You may change the circumstances of a mans life, and it may be modified one way or the other; but after all there is a predominant force in his character, and that controls all the minor forces. (H. W. Beecher.)

Morality not to be despised

Again, a selfish-centred man, clothing himself with all manner of Christian graces and aspirations, is not to be condemned as if these graces and aspirations were of no account. Here is a point where ministers have trouble in preaching to men. When we see men embowered under external moralities, and attempt to teach that morality is not enough, the impression arises that we undervalue morals. I do not undervalue morals any more than the taxcollector undervalues a hundred dollars, when I go to pay my taxes, and offer him that amount, when my bill is five hundred. He says: I will not take it. It is not enough. He does not despise the hundred dollars. He merely says: You must put more with it. And I do net despise morality because I say that it does not rise high enough. It is good as far up as it goes. So is a grape-vine good as far up as it goes, when it is two or three feet high: but it does not arrive at what it was planted for until it reaches that point where it has blossoms and clusters. It is the cluster that determines its value. (H. W. Beecher.)

Refined selfishness

A man may love poetry and music, and have generous impulses which draw him toward a higher range of life; but after all, it is only a polished form of selfishness, or selfness that is manifesting itself in him. It is self that is at the bottom. I do not say that it is not better that a man should be refinedly selfish than coarsely selfish. It is a great deal better. It is better that man should be intellectually selfish than coarsely selfish. It makes social intercourse easier. It makes it easier for men to get along with each other. And if the centre of a mans disposition is selfish, and at the same time he has aspirations and refinements, and generosities and kindnesses, I do not say that he is no better for having these things: I say that as a member of society he is a great deal better. He energizes society. He adds something to those elements which take away attrition and harshness and rudeness from society. But he is not inwardly better; for nothing makes a man better within until the centre of his life and character are changed. Every blossom that you put upon a man who is radically selfish, and is going to be selfish, the worse you make it for him. The prettier you make a mans selfishness, the more music there is that accompanies it, the more flowers there are that decorate it, the more balm there is along with it, the more sunlight there is shed upon it, the more it is painted with glowing colours, the better is it for society; but the worse it is for him, because these things delude; because they are satisfying; because they bide the mischief; because they do not let him see what an unforgiveable and what a demoralizing quality selfishness is. (H. W. Beecher.)

The need of an inner spiritual change

What is that change? It does not consist in doing a few more things, or in adding a few more excellences, as the young man thought it did. Good Master, what new thing shall I do? What new prayer shall I say? What extra morality shall I take on? What other charities and bounties shall I bestow for mans relief? I should be glad to add to my stock of excellences. That was the purport of the young mans inquiry. The Master said to him, in substance: Your whole character is wrapped up in your position. You are rich, you have large estates, and you know it and you stand centred in them. And now, with this centre, you want to add various excellences. Go sell all these, give them away, and take up)our cross and follow Me. That brought him to a decision instantly. Choosing between the higher and the lower, he took the lower, and went away sad and grieved. And Christ everywhere brought men to this choice. If you are to be Christians, Christianity does not mean having some few things on a selfish basis. You must change the foundation of your life. You must pass over from the animal, up from the lower, away from the predominantly self-seeking life that is in all of us by nature. You must come into the kingdom of God, which is the kingdom of love. Beneficent love, love for others, and not for yourself, must be the predominant, the governing tendency. (H. W. Beecher.)

Religion more than an outward addition

Being possessed of all that could gratify his senses, he did not mean to be over-indulgent in it, but he did not want to give it up. Being in this position, he wanted, not to exchange it for anything else, but simply to have sprouting up around about him, over-arching him, and embowering him, flowers of spiritual and poetical aspirations, and all manner of Divine feelings, so that he should have both things-his feet rooted in this earth, and his head placed in the other life. He wanted to take this world first, and then superadd the kingdom of God as a polish to it. He wanted all spiritual excellence to sit, as it were, in the clouds above him, like an orchestra, and play sweet music to him, while he sat below, on a level with the earth, sensuous, and indulging himself selfishly. (H. W. Beecher.)

The spiritual must supplant the physical life

Men have wanted, in every age, to have both worlds-a thing which Christ said was impossible. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Our Saviour taught this young man that the spiritual life must supplant the physical life. The two can co-exist; but the spiritual life must be in the ascendency, and must control the lower physical life. Our Saviour taught all the way through His life that spirituality cannot be simply the complement of secularity. It cannot be a parasite growing on the boughs of worldly prosperity. If a man is to have the kingdom of God, he must make that first, and that must be supreme. Or, to change it to a more psychological statement, if a man is to be truly a Christian, his spiritual nature must predominate and bear rule over everything else that is in him. You cannot have the temporal, lower nature strongest, and then expect the spiritual nature to please it and play down to it. And yet, that is what men are attempting to bring about everywhere. Every person has some dominant point. There is no uncentred character anywhere. There is a point in every mans character which rules, and to which everything is brought for comparison and settlement. This point often seems to shift and change; but, after all, there is some point in a mans character which you may say is the dominant point, and before which all things above it and below it have to come into judgment. It is this that gives character to a man, and determines whether he is high or low, good or bad.

Religious impressions soon shaken off

After a shower in the night, if you go out in the morning, it is scarcely safe for you to go near a bush or a tree, because if you touch it, there will rain down such multitudes of drops on you. I sometimes think this church is like a tree that has stood out in the open air, and collected the dew. Every leaf is covered with it. If you shake the tree, down comes a shower of drops. I see you moved to tears every Sunday. I know that you follow and enjoy the service of prayer and of song and of preaching. You have much deep religious feeling, and a great deal of thought. The pews are full of young men and young women who are going to Christ and saying: Master, what good thing shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Christ says, by me, to-day, to every one of you, It is not adding one good thing to another that you need but that you should rise from the centre of selfishness, and go over to the centre of true Divine benevolence, by the power of the Holy Ghost, without which power no man can rise to the higher level. (H. W. Beecher.)

The price of a great ambition

Yours is a great ambition, and, withal, a very noble ambition: are you prepared to pay the price for your great ambition? You are a man of the very finest impulses, but you live in a fine house and know nothing of hardship, and while these things may do for your old life, the new to which you aspire demands sacrifice and surrender. Sell up all, and let us know how much is due to an impulsive temperament and how much to inherent nobility. If it be due to that no change of circumstances will matter. It was a Spartan-like call to duty, but did he not look, like a Spartan youth, equal to it? (J. W. Thew.)

Nobility worthy of the highest culture

I apprehend that here lay the chief reason of our Saviours great demand upon him. Is it not precisely because he is so good that that demand is so great? Is it venturesome to say the Master would not have made such a demand upon an inferior mind to his? That was not simply because, being a young man, he was better able to bear it: it was because, standing already, as he does, so high, occupying such a vantage ground-shall I put it this way-the Masters ambitions are fired, He sees him on such a level, and He would have him, at one grand stride, take the highest level of all. As when you have a lad at school of more than ordinary promise, you keep him longer there, you say the lad shows signs of genius, and the opportunity of becoming a genius shall not be wanting. Here are signs of uncommon goodness and greatness, and the opportunity should be afforded for accomplishing good. This view is borne out by the story. Sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, is not given in answer to the question, What good thing shall I do? but in answer to the question, What lack I yet? It is not, If thou wouldst be saved, sell all that thou hast; it is, If thou wouldst be perfect. It is not merely a question of eternal life, but of eternal distinction. It is not a mere matter of getting through the curriculum, but of getting through it with honours. (J. W. Thew.)

The whole surrender

I. There is a certain spurious sort of religion which because it is not complete (or perfect) is useless. A vessel may look very well, but if it have a hole in the bottom, it will hold nothing-useless for want of being perfect.

II. The whole surrender. The decisive act which consecrates all to the kingdom:-must be done by the man himself. Not even God can do it for you. It was useless for Christ to say Follow Me as He was, for his body only could have followed, his anxieties would still have been with his possessions. It was also a prudent provision against approaching persecution.

III. How can I go and sell? By a full consecration to God. Like the whole burnt-offering, every portion must be consumed on the altar.

IV. It is an awful consideration that the word of life itself is powerless to persuade a covetous will, (W. I. Keay.)

On being right in the main.

1. He displayed a degree of moral earnestness.

2. He employed the language of veneration.

3. He was well instructed in Biblical ethics.

4. He was inordinately attached to worldly possessions.

Christs conduct showed:

1. That He compels men to look at the logical consequences of their own admissions.

2. That personal regard may be entertained where full moral approbation cannot be expressed.

I. The necessary limitations of the most careful religious training.

II. That the final attainment of education is the conquest of the heart.

1. That Christ-following involves self-abnegation.

2. That Christ-following must be the expression of the souls supreme love.

3. That Christ-following means self-giving.

III. That lack of one thing may be lack of everything.

IV. That the sincerity of men must be tested according to their peculiar circumstances. What is a test to one man may be no test to another. A man must be prepared to surrender what he values most. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The lack of one thing the lack of all

The garden is beautifully laid out: the straight lines and the curves are exact; the terraces are arranged with artistic taste; but no seed is sown,-and the summer says, One thing thou lackest. The machinery is perfect: cylinder, piston, valve, are in excellent order; no flaw is in the wheel, no obstruction in the flue; finer engine never stood on the iron way; everything is there but steam,-and the intending traveller says, One thing thou lackest. The watch has a golden case, the dial is exquisitely traced and figured, the hands are delicate and well-fixed; everything is there but the mainspring-and he who inquires the time says, One thing thou lackest. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Sins as great possessions

There are sins so rooted, so riveted in men, so incorporated, so consubstantiated in the soul, by habitual custom, as that those sins have contracted the nature of ancient possessions. As men call manners by their names, so sins have taken names from men, and from places; Simon Magus gave the name to a sin, so did Gehazi, and Sodom did so. There are sins that run in names, in families, in blood; hereditary sins, entailed sins; and men do almost prove their gentry by those sins, and are scarcely believed to be rightly borne, if they have not those sins. These are great possessions, and men do much more easily part with Christ than with these sins. But then there are less sins, light sins, vanities; and yet even these come to possess us, and separate us from Christ. How many men neglect this ordinary means of their salvation, the coming to these exercises, not because their undoing lies on it, or their discountenancing, but merely out of levity, of vanity, of nothing, they know not what to do else, and yet do not this. You hear of one man that was drowned in a vessel of wine, but how many thousands ill ordinary water! And he was no more drowned in that precious liquor than the)-in that common water. A gad of steel does no more choke a man than a feather or a hair. Men perish with whispering sins, nay with silent sins, sins that never tell the conscience they are sins, as often as with crying sins. And in hell there shall meet as many men that never thought what was sin, as that spent all their thoughts in compassing sin; as many who, in a slack inconsideration, never cast a thought upon that place, as that by searing their conscience, overcame the sense and fear of that place. Great sins are great possessions, but levities and vanities possess us too; and men had rather part with Christ than with any possessions. (J. Donate.)

Estimate of the ruler

He was not a spiritual man; there was really nothing spiritually good and loveable in him: nothing truly gracious, as a Puritan divine would call it. He was but a natural man after all-a beautiful specimen of the natural man, as Dr. Chalmers said of some one, but still only a natural man. Nature had indeed done much for him, all it could for him; it had endowed him with riches, power, a high moral nature, an amiable, warm, frank, loving, loveable disposition. See here what nature can do; she can raise her favourites very high in the scale of humanity, so as to compel the homage even of the Saviours love and admiration. See here what nature cannot do; she cannot carry any one across the boundary that separates the kingdom of God from the world; she can bring him to the very threshold, but there she leaves him; there she is powerless; there her weakness is made known. (A. L. R. Foote.)

Giving up all for Christ

The words are terribly clear, sharp, and stern. Francis of Assisi heard them once. Straying into a church, they were in the lesson for the day which was read. The words seized on his conscience; they haunted him, they tormented him. He sold everything but the bare garment which clothed him. Still the obedience seemed to fall short of the Saviours command. So he stripped himself even of his poor raiment; and they clothed him there in the church, for very shame, in a peasants tunic, which he wore on till death. (J. B. Brown.)

Human perfectibility

It is as if our Lord had said, Thou aimest at perfection and on the footing of this thou art looking for eternal life; thou indulgest the dream of human perfectibility. Well, I will put thee here to the test: sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. What! dost thou hesitate? What, then, becomes of thy favourite doctrine of perfectionism? Ah! thy fond idol is dashed to pieces, and by thine own hand, too; and wilt thou still indulge in such a golden dream? Is this all the length thy doctrine of human perfectibility can carry thee? If-an important qualification this-if thou wouldst be perfect! Who can fail to see a delicate yet severe irony here? The Saviour is not teaching the doctrine of perfection in any sense, but is trying to wean him from a theory which was deeply rooted in his mind, and which was exercising so prejudicial an influence over him. (A. L. R. Foote.)

Possessions that possess

Every man hath some such possessions as possess him, some such affections as weigh down Christ Jesus, and separate him from Him, rather than from those affections, those possessions. (Dr. Dotage.)

Not wise to go from God

That no man that ever went from Him went by good way or came to good end. There is none good but God; there is centrical, visceral, gremial gold, goodness in the root, in the tree of goodness, God. (Dr. Dotage.)

The regulation of conduct

Conduct may be regulated in two ways:-

1. By the hand.

2. By the heart: as with a watch so with the life. The face of the watch may be made to represent the truth by simply altering the hands, or it may be corrected by touching the interior works. Here is a young man who says, What shall I do to make my watch tell the hour accurately? He is answered, Thou knowest the great clocks by which time is kept in the city. He replies, All these have I observed. He is then told to open his watch and correct the regulator. So is it with human life: many seek to correct it by the outside; they search for models, they inquire for foot-prints; but they neglect the life-spring within, and consequently never get beyond the affectation of artificialism, or the stiffness of Pharisaic conceit. (Dr. Parker.)

But how is this spiritual lack to be supplied?

How is this hiatus in human character to be filled up? How shall the fountain of holy and filial affection towards God be made to gush up into everlasting life, within your now unloving and hostile heart? There is no answer to this question of questions, but in the person and work of the Holy Ghost. If God shall shed abroad His love in your heart by the Holy Ghost which is given unto you, you will know the blessedness of a new affection, and will be able to say with Peter, Thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. You are shut up to this method and this influence. To generate within yourself this new spiritual emotion which you have never yet felt is utterly impossible. Yet you must get it, or religion is impossible, and immortal life is impossible. (W. G. T. Shedd, D. D.)

The remorse occasioned by enlightened reason on the rejection of Christ

There is no misery comparable to that which follows after a near access to happiness; nor any sorrow so quick and pungent as that which succeeds a preconceived, but disappointed joy. Neither was the proposal unreasonable, because usually practised, even by the most worldly, it being frequent with men to sell an estate in one place to buy another in a more convenient. We may observe in this passage these four things considerable-

1. The person making the address to Christ, who was one whose reason was enlightened to a solicitous consideration of his estate in another world.

2. The thing sought for in this address, viz., eternal life.

3. The condition upon which it was proposed, and upon which refused; viz., the sale and relinquishment of his temporal estate.

4. His behaviour upon this refusal. He that deliberately parts with Christ, though for the greatest and most suitable worldly enjoyment, if but his natural reason is awakened, does it with much secret sting and remorse.

I. I shall show whence it is that a man actuated by an enlightened reason finds such reluctancy and regret upon his rejection of Christ. It may proceed from these causes-

1. The first may be taken from the nature of conscience, that is apt to recoil upon any error, either in our actions or our choice. After a good action, though never so difficult, so grim, and unpleasant in the onset, yet what a lightsome, refreshing complacency does it leave upon the mind! What a fragrancy, what a cheerfulness, upon the spirits! So, on the contrary, an action morally evil and irregular. A man no sooner displeases God but he presently displeases himself. No sooner is the action past but conscience makes the report. As soon as David cut off a piece of Sauls robe how quickly did his heart smite him! An impure heart, like a foul gun, never vents itself in any sinful commissions but it recoils. It is impossible to sequester and divide sin from sorrow. That which defiles will as certainly disturb the soul. As when mud and filth is cast into a pure fountain, it is not so much said to pollute, as to trouble the waters. And do you think that this young man had not the experience of this? He departed indeed, but it was sorrowful, his conscience ringing him many sad peals within, hitting him in the teeth with the murder of his soul; that he had foolishly and irrationally bartered away eternity for a trifle, and lost a never-returning opportunity, in its improvement invaluable, and in its refusal irrecoverable.

2. The second cause of this trouble and reluctancy that men find in the very instant of their rejecting Christ is taken from the usual course of Gods judicial proceeding in this matter, which is to clarify the eye of reason to a clearer sight of the beauties and excellences of Christ in the very moment and critical instant of his departure. God can affect it with a sudden, instantaneous view of a good. It is like a sudden lightning that flashes in the face, but alters not the complexion; it is rather vision than persuasion; it struck his apprehension, but never changed his resolution. This is another cause that whets the sting, that enhances the vexation, and sends him away sorrowful.

3. The third and last cause of the anxiety that a sinner feels upon his relinquishment of Christ, if his reason be enlightened, is because there is that in Christ and in the gospel, even as they stand in opposition to the best of such enjoyments, that answers the most natural and generous discourses of reason. For the proof of which I shall produce two known principles of reason into which the most severe, harsh, and mortifying commands of the gospel are by clear and genuine consequence resolved.

(1) The first is that the greatest calamity is to be endured rather than the least sin to be committed.

(2) A second principle is this, that a less good is to be forsaken for a greater-an aphorism attested to by the natural, untaught, universal judgment of reason. Now to reduce this principle to the case in hand we are to demonstrate two things. 1st. That the good promised by our Saviour to the young man was really greater than that which was to be forsaken for it. Christ opposed eternal life to the young mans possessions, and what comparison is there between these upon terms of bare reason? 2nd. The second thing to be demonstrated is that the good promised by our Saviour was not only greater in itself, but also proposed as such with sufficient clearness of evidence, and upon sure, undeniable grounds.

II. To show the causes that, notwithstanding all this remorse of conscience, the soul is not brought in the issue to reject and shake hands with Christ.

1. The first cause is from this, that the perceptions of sense overbear the discourses of reason. The young man desired eternal life; but he had no notion of the pleasure of it, what kind of thing it was; but he knew and found the sweetness of an estate, so that the sensible impressions of this quickly overcame and swallowed up the weak and languid conceptions that he had of the other.

2. The second cause or reason of this final rejection of Christ is from the prevailing opposition of some corrupt affection, which being predominant in the soul, commands the will and blears the eye of the judgment, showing it all things in its own colour by a false and partial representation. Come to the sensual and voluptuous person and convince him that there is a necessity of his bidding farewell to all inordinate pleasure in order to his future happiness; perhaps you gain his reason, and in some measure insinuate into his will; but then his sensual desire interposes and outvotes and unravels all his convictions. As when by much ado a vessel is forced and rowed some pretty way contrary to the tide, presently a gust of wind comes and beats it further back than it was before.

3. The third cause, inducing men to relinquish Christ contrary to the judgment of their conscience, is the force and tyranny of the custom of the world. And amongst other dissuasives from following Christ the young man could not but be assaulted with such as these: What! part with all for a new notion of another world? Sell land to buy hope, be preached out of my estate, and worded out of such fair farms and rich possessions? He would do like the world though he perished with it; swim with the stream, though he was drowned in it; rather go sociably to hell than in the uncomfortable solitude of precise singularity to heaven-the jollity of the company made him overlook the broadness and danger of the way. Now the inferences and deductions from the words thus discussed are these:

(1) We gather hence the great criterion and art of trying our sincerity, which is by the test of such precepts as directly reach our peculiar corruptions.

(2) The issue of the whole action in the young mans not closing with Christs proposals about eternal life, and his sorrowful departure thereupon, lays before us a full account of that misery which attends a final dereliction of Christ.

(a) Of that which is eternal.

(b) But it bereaves even of temporal happiness also, even that which it promises, and which only it designs, and for the retaining of which it brings a man to part with his hopes of that which is future and eternal. (R. South, D. D.)

Man ruled by his affections

In sum, the economy of the soul in this case is like a public council sitting under an armed force; let them consult and vote what they will, yet they must act as the army and the tumult will have them. In this sense every soldier is a commander. In like manner, let both the judgment and the will be for Christ, yet the tumult of the affections will carry it; and when they cannot out-reason the conscience, they will out-cry it. (R. South, D. D.)

If Christ ever wins the fort of the soul, the conquest must begin here: for the understanding and will seem to be like a castle or fortified place; there is strength indeed in them, but the affections are the soldiers who manage those holds, the opposition is from these: and if the soldiers surrender, the place itself, though never so strong, cannot resist. (R. South, D. D.)

The evil temper varied

Now, as in a tree, it is the same sap and juice that spreads itself into all that variety of branches: some straight, some crooked, some of this figure, some of that: so it is the same stock and furniture of natural corruption that shoot forth into that great diversity of vices, that exert such different operations in different tempers. And as it is the grand office of judgment to separate and distinguish, and so to proportion its applications; so herein is the great spiritual art of a prudent ministry, first to learn a mans proper distemper, and then to encounter it by a peculiar and suitable address. Reprehensions that are promiscuous are always ineffectual. (R. South, D. D.)

Sincerity tested

Observe the excellent method that Christ took to convince this person. Had he tried him by a precept of temperance, chastity, or just dealing, He had never sounded the bottom of his heart: for the civility of his life would have afforded a fair and satisfactory reply to all these: but when He came close to him, and touched upon his heartstring, his beloved possessions, the man quickly shows himself, and discovers the temper of his spirit more by the love of one particular endeared sin, than by his forbearance of twenty, to which he stood indifferent. (R. South, D. D.)

Every mans sincerity is not to be tried in the same way. He that should conclude a man pious, because not covetous, would bring but a short argument; for perhaps he may be lustful or ambitious, and the stream be altogether as strong and violent, though it runs in a different channel. (R. South, D. D.)

Sins of omission

When the archer shoots at the target, he as really fails to strike it if his arrow falls short of it, as when he shoots over and beyond it. (Dr. Shedd.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 16. One came] Instead of one, several MSS., the Slavonic version, and Hilary, read , a certain young man.

Good, c.] Much instruction may be had from seriously attending to the conduct, spirit, and question of this person.

1. He came running, (Mr 10:17,) for he was deeply convinced of the importance of his business, and seriously determined to seek so as to find.

2. He kneeled, or caught him by the knees, thus evidencing his humility, and addressing himself only to mercy. See Mt 17:14.

3. He came in the spirit of a disciple, or scholar, desiring to be taught a matter of the utmost importance to him – Good teacher.

4. He came in the spirit of obedience he had worked hard to no purpose, and he is still willing to work, provided he can have a prospect of succeeding – What good thing shall I do?

5. His question was the most interesting and important that any soul can ask of God – How shall I be saved?

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

This history is reported by Mark, Mar 10:17-23 and by Luke, Luk 18:18-25. Mark saith, When he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do, that I may inherit eternal life? Luke saith, A certain ruler asked him. Our Lord was now in his way from Galilee to Judea and to Jerusalem. There cometh a person, a ruler, whether of some of the synagogues, or in some place of civil magistracy, the Scripture saith not. He runs, he kneels to him, (paying him at least a civil homage, as to his superior), he salutes him with the ordinary title they gave to their teachers, Master, Good Master; he propounds a grave question to him, what he should do that he might get to heaven; but yet he doth not propound the question in those terms, but,

What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? It appeareth by his respect showed to Christ at his coming, and by the question proposed, and by his going away sorrowful when our Saviours answer did not satisfy him, that he did not come upon any captious design to entrap our Saviour, but out of a desire to learn; but yet it appeareth plainly that he was a Pharisee, or a disciple of the Pharisees; and thought his life was in his own hands, that he had a power in himself to do some good thing by which he might merit eternal life, or upon the doing of which he might at least obtain everlasting life, though not as a strict reward for his work, without any consideration of a Messias. He grants an eternal state, he declares his desire of an eternal happiness, he declares his readiness to do some good thing that he might obtain it.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

And behold, one came,…. The Persic version reads, “a rich man”; and so he was, as appears from what follows: Luke calls him, “a certain ruler”; not of a synagogue, an ecclesiastical ruler, but a civil magistrate: perhaps he might be one of the sanhedrim, which consisted of “twenty one” persons; or of that which consisted only of “three”, as in some small towns and villages Mark represents him as “running”; for Christ was departed out of the house, and was gone into the way, the high road, and was on his journey to some other place, when this man ran after him with great eagerness; and, as the same evangelist adds, “kneeled to him”; thereby paying him civil respect, and honour; believing him to be a worthy good man, and deserving of esteem and veneration:

and said unto him, good master: some say, that this was a title which the Jewish doctors were fond of, and gave to each other, but I have not observed it; he seems by this to intimate, that he thought him not only to be a good man, but a good teacher; that he was one that came from God, and taught good doctrine, which induced him to run after him, and put the following question to him:

what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? Or, as in the other evangelists, “inherit eternal life”; a phrase much in use with the Jewish Rabbins a:

“Judah confessed, and was not ashamed, and what is his end?

, “he inherits the life of the world to come” (i.e. eternal life); Reuben confessed, and was not ashamed, and what is his end? “he inherits the life of the world to come”.”

This man was no Sadducee, he believed a future state; was a serious man, thoughtful about another world, and concerned how he should enjoy everlasting life; but was entirely upon a legal bottom, and under a covenant of works; and speaks in the language and strain of the nation of Israel, who were seeking for righteousness and life by the works of the law: he expected eternal life by doing some good thing, or things; and hoped, as the sequel shows, that he had done every good thing necessary to the obtaining it.

a T. Bab. Sota, fol. 7. 2.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Rich Ruler’s Enquiry; The Rich Ruler’s Disappointment.

      16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?   17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.   18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,   19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.   20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?   21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.   22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

      Here is an account of what passed between Christ and a hopeful young gentleman that addressed himself to him upon a serious errand; he said to be a young man (v. 20); and I called him a gentleman, not only because he had great possessions, but because he was a ruler (Luke xviii. 18), a magistrate, a justice of peace in his country; it is probable that he had abilities beyond his years, else his youth would have debarred him from the magistracy.

      Now concerning this young gentleman, we are told how fair he bid for heaven and came short.

      I. How fair he bid for heaven, and how kindly and tenderly Christ treated him, in favour to good beginnings. Here is,

      1. The gentleman’s serious address to Jesus Christ (v. 16); Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? Not a better question could be asked, not more gravely.

      (1.) He gives Christ an honourable title, Good Master—Didaskale agathe. It signifies not a ruling, but a teaching Master. His calling him Master, bespeaks his submissiveness, and willingness to be taught; and good Master, his affection and peculiar respect to the Teacher, like that of Nicodemus, Thou art a Teacher come from God. We read not of any that addressed themselves to Christ more respectfully than that Master in Israel and this ruler. It is a good thing when men’s quality and dignity increase their civility and courtesy. It was gentleman-like to give this title of respect to Christ, notwithstanding the present meanness of his appearance. It was not usual among the Jews to accost their teachers with the title of good; and therefore this bespeaks the uncommon respect he had for Christ. Note, Jesus Christ is a good Master, the best of teachers; none teaches like him; he is distinguished for his goodness, for he can have compassion on the ignorant; he is meek and lowly in heart.

      (2.) He comes to him upon an errand of importance (none could be more so), and he came not to tempt him, but sincerely desiring to be taught by him. His question is, What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? By this it appears, [1.] That he had a firm belief of eternal life; he was no Sadducee. He was convinced that there is a happiness prepared for those in the other world, who are prepared for it in this world. [2.] That he was concerned to make it sure to himself that he should live eternally, and was desirous of that life more than any of the delights of this life. It was a rare thing for one of his age and quality to appear so much in care about another world. The rich are apt to think it below them to make such an enquiry as this; and young people think it time enough yet; but here was a young man, and a rich man, solicitous about his soul and eternity. [3.] That he was sensible something must be done, some good thing, for the attainment of this happiness. It is by patient continuance in well-doing that we seek for immortality, Rom. ii. 7. We must be doing, and doing that which is good. The blood of Christ is the only purchase of eternal life (he merited it for us), but obedience to Christ is the appointed way to it, Heb. v. 9. [4.] That he was, or at least thought himself, willing to do what was to be done for the obtaining of this eternal life. Those that know what it is to have eternal life, and what it is to come short of it, will be glad to accept of it upon any terms. Such a holy violence does the kingdom of heaven suffer. Note, While there are many that say, Who will show us any good? our great enquiry should be, What shall we do, that we may have eternal life? What shall we do, to be for ever happy, happy in another world? For this world has not that in it that will make us happy.

      2. The encouragement that Jesus Christ gave to this address. It is not his manner to send any away without an answer, that come to him on such an errand, for nothing pleases him more, v. 17. In his answer,

      (1.) He tenderly assists his faith; for, doubtless, he did not mean it for a reproof, when he said, Why callest thou me good? But he would seem to find that faith in what he said, when he called him good Master, which the gentleman perhaps was not conscious to himself of; he intended no more than to own and honour him as a good man, but Christ would lead him to own and honour him as a good God; for there is none good but one, that is God. Note, As Christ is graciously ready to make the best that he can of what is said or done amiss; so he is ready to make the most that can be of what is well said and well done. His constructions are often better than our intentions; as in that, “I was hungry, and you gave me meat, though you little thought it was to me.” Christ will have this young man either know him to be God, or not call him good; to teach us to transfer to God all the praise that is at any time given to us. Do any call us good? Let us tell them all goodness is from God, and therefore not to us, but to him give glory. All crowns must lie before his throne. Note, God only is good, and there is none essentially, originally, and unchangeably, good, but God only. His goodness is of and from himself, and all the goodness in the creature is from him; he is the Fountain of goodness, and whatever the streams are, all the springs are in him, Jam. i. 17. He is the great Pattern and Sample of goodness; by him all goodness is to be measured; that is good which is like him, and agreeable to his mind. We in our language call him God, because he is good. In this, as in other things, our Lord Jesus was the Brightness of his glory (and his goodness is his glory), and the express image of his person, and therefore fitly called good Master.

      (2.) He plainly directs his practice, in answer to his question. He started that thought of his being good, and therefore God, but did not stay upon it, lest he should seem to divert from, and so to drop, the main question, as many do in needless disputes and strifes of words. Now Christ’s answer is, in short, this, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

      [1.] The end proposed is, entering into life. The young man, in his question, spoke of eternal life. Christ, in his answer, speaks of life; to teach us, that eternal life is the only true life. The words concerning that are the words of this life, Acts v. 20. The present life scarcely deserves the name of life, for in the midst of life we are in death. Or into life, that spiritual life which is the beginning and earnest of eternal life. He desired to know how he might have eternal life; Christ tells him how he might enter into it; we have it by the merit of Christ, a mystery which was not as yet fully revealed, and therefore Christ waives that; but the way of entering into it, is, by obedience, and Christ directs us in that. By the former we make our title, by this, as by our evidence, we prove it; it is by adding to faith virtue, that an entrance (the word here used) is ministered to us into the everlasting kingdom,2Pe 1:5; 2Pe 1:11. Christ, who is our Life, is the Way to the Father, and to the vision and fruition of him; he is the only Way, but duty, and the obedience of faith, are the way to Christ. There is an entrance into life hereafter, at death, at the great day, a complete entrance, and those only shall then enter into life, that do their duty; it is the diligent faithful servant that shall then enter into the joy of his Lord, and that joy will be his eternal life. There is an entrance into life now; we who have believed, do enter into rest, Heb. iv. 3. We have peace, and comfort, and joy, in the believing prospect of the glory to be revealed, and to this also sincere obedience is indispensably necessary.

      [2.] The way prescribed is, keeping the commandments. Note, Keeping the commandments of God, according as they are revealed and made known to us, is the only way to life and salvation; and sincerity herein is accepted through Christ as our gospel perfection, provision being made of pardon, upon repentance, wherein we come short. Through Christ we are delivered from the condemning power of the law, but the commanding power of it is lodged in the hand of the Mediator, and under that, in that hand, we still are under the law to Christ (1 Cor. ix. 21), under it as a rule, though not as a covenant. Keeping the commandments includes faith in Jesus Christ, for that is the great commandment (1 John iii. 23), and it was one of the laws of Moses, that, when the great Prophet should be raised up, they should hear him. Observe, In order to our happiness here and for ever, it is not enough for us to know the commandments of God, but we must keep them, keep in them as our way, keep to them as our rule, keep them as our treasure, and with care, as the apple of our eye.

      [3.] At his further instance and request, he mentions some particular commandments which he must keep (Mat 19:18; Mat 19:19); The young man saith unto him, Which? Note, Those that would do the commandments of God, must seek them diligently, and enquire after them, what they are. Ezra set himself to seek the law, and to do it, Ezra vii. 10. “There were many commandments in the law of Moses; good Master, let me know which those are, the keeping o which is necessary to salvation.”

      In answer to this, Christ specifies several, especially the commandments of the second table. First, That which concerns our own and our neighbour’s life; Thou shalt do no murder. Secondly, Our own and our neighbour’s chastity, which should be as dear to us as life itself; Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thirdly, Our own and our neighbour’s wealth and outward estate, as hedged about by the law of property; Thou shalt not steal. Fourthly, That which concerns truth, and our own and our neighbour’s good name; Thou shalt not bear false witness, neither for thyself, nor against thy neighbour; for so it is here left at large. Fifthly, That which concerns the duties of particular relations; Honour thy father and mother. Sixthly, That comprehensive law of love, which is the spring and summary of all these duties, whence they all flow, on which they are all founded, and in which they are all fulfilled; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Gal 5:14; Rom 13:9), that royal law, Jas. ii. 8. Some think this comes in here, not as the sum of the second table, but as the particular import of the tenth commandment; Thou shalt not covet, which Mark is, Defraud not; intimating that it is not lawful for me to design advantage or gain to myself by the diminution or loss of another; for that is to covet, and to love myself better than my neighbour, whom I ought to love a myself, and to treat as I would myself be treated.

      Our Saviour here specifies second-table duties only; not as if the first were of less account, but, 1. Because they that now sat in Moses’s seat, either wholly neglected, or greatly corrupted, these precepts in their preaching. While they pressed the tithing of mint, anise, and cummin,–judgment, and mercy, and faith, the summary of second-table duties, were overlooked, ch. xxiii. 23. Their preaching ran out all in rituals and nothing in morals; and therefore Christ pressed that most, which they least insisted on. As one truth, so one duty, must not jostle out another, but each must know its place, and be kept in it; but equity requires that that be helped up, which is most in danger of being thrust out. That is the present truth which we are called to bear our testimony to, not only which is opposed, but which is neglected. 2. Because he would teach him, and us all, that moral honesty is a necessary branch of true Christianity, and to be minded accordingly. Though a mere moral man comes short of being a complete Christian, yet an immoral man is certainly no true Christian; for the grace of God teaches us to live soberly and righteously, as well as godly. Nay, though first-table duties have in them more of the essence of religion, yet second-table duties have in them more of the evidence of it. Our light burns in love to God, but it shines in love to our neighbour.

      II. See here how he came short, though he bid thus fair, and wherein he failed; he failed by two things.

      1. By pride, and a vain conceit of his own merit and strength; this is the ruin of thousands, who keep themselves miserable by fancying themselves happy. When Christ told him what commandments he must keep, he answered very scornfully, All these things have I kept from my youth up, v. 20.

      Now, (1.) According as he understood the law, as prohibiting only the outward acts of sin, I am apt to think that he said true, and Christ knew it, for he did not contradict him; nay, it is said in Mark, He loved him; so far was very good and pleasing to Christ. St. Paul reckons it a privilege, not contemptible in itself, though it was dross in comparison with Christ, that he was, as touching righteousness that is in the law, blameless, Phil. iii. 6. His observance of these commands was universal; All these have I kept: it was early and constant; from my youth up. Note, A man may be free from gross sin, and yet come short of grace and glory. His hands may be clean from external pollutions, and yet he may perish eternally in his heart-wickedness. What shall we think then of those who do not attain to this; whose fraud and injustice, drunkenness and uncleanness, witness against them, that all these they have broken from their youth up, though they have named the name of Christ? Well, it is sad to come short of those that come short of heaven.

      It was commendable also, that he desired to know further what his duty was; What lack I yet? He was convinced that he wanted something to fill up his works before God, and was therefore desirous to know it, because, if he was not mistaken in himself, he was willing to do it. Having not yet attained, he thus seemed to press forward. And he applied himself to Christ, whose doctrine was supposed to improve and perfect the Mosaic institution. He desired to know what were the peculiar precepts of his religion, that he might have all that was in them to polish and accomplish him. Who could bid fairer?

      But, (2.) Even in this that he said, he discovered his ignorance and folly. [1.] Taking the law in its spiritual sense, as Christ expounded it, no doubt, in many things he had offended against all these commands. Had he been acquainted with the extent and spiritual meaning of the law, instead of saying, All these have I kept; what lack I yet? he would have said, with shame and sorrow, “All these have I broken, what shall I do to get my sins pardoned?” [2.] Take it how you will, what he said savoured of pride and vain-glory, and had in it too much of that boasting which is excluded by the law of faith (Rom. iii. 27), and which excludes from justification, Luk 18:11; Luk 18:14. He valued himself too much, as the Pharisees did, upon the plausibleness of his profession before men, and was proud of that, which spoiled the acceptableness of it. That word, What lack I yet? perhaps was not so much a desire of further instruction as a demand of the praise of his present fancied perfection, and a challenge to Christ himself to show him any one instance wherein he was deficient.

      2. He came short by an inordinate love of the world, and his enjoyments in it. This was the fatal rock on which he split. Observe,

      (1.) How he was tried in this matter (v. 21); Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast. Christ waived the matter of his boasted obedience to the law, and let that drop, because this would be a more effectual way of discovering him than a dispute of the extent of the law. “Come,” saith Christ, “if thou wilt be perfect, if thou wilt approve thyself sincere in thine obedience” (for sincerity is our gospel perfection), “if thou wilt come up to that which Christ has added to the law of Moses, if thou wilt be perfect, if thou wilt enter into life, and so be perfectly happy;” for that which Christ here prescribes, is not a thing of supererogation, or a perfection we may be saved without; but, in the main scope and intendment of it, it is our necessary and indispensable duty. What Christ said to him, he thus far said to us all, that, if we would approve ourselves Christians indeed, and would be found at last the heirs of eternal life, we must do these two things:

      [1.] We must practically prefer the heavenly treasures before all the wealth and riches in this world. That glory must have the pre-eminence in our judgment and esteem before this glory. No thanks to us to prefer heaven before hell, the worst man in the world would be glad of that Jerusalem for a refuge when he can stay no longer here, and to have it in reserve; but to make it our choice, and to prefer it before this earth–that is to be a Christian indeed. Now, as an evidence of this, First, We must dispose of what we have in this world, for the honour of God, and in his service: “Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor. If the occasions of charity be very pressing, sell thy possessions that thou mayest have to give to them that need; as the first Christians did, with an eye to this precept, Acts iv. 34. Sell what thou canst spare for pious uses, all thy superfluities; if thou canst not otherwise do good with it, sell it. Sit loose to it, be willing to part with it for the honour of God, and the relief of the poor.” A gracious contempt of the world, and compassion of the poor and afflicted ones in it, are in all a necessary condition of salvation; and in those that have wherewithal, giving of alms is as necessary an evidence of that contempt of the world, and compassion to our brethren; by this the trial will be at the great day, ch. xxv. 35. Though many that call themselves Christians, do not act as if they believed it; it is certain, that, when we embrace Christ, we must let go the world, for we cannot serve God and mammon. Christ knew that covetousness was the sin that did most easily beset this young man, that, though what he had he had got honestly, yet he could not cheerfully part with it, and by this he discovered his insincerity. This command was like the call to Abraham, Get thee out of thy country, to a land that I will show thee. As God tries believers by their strongest graces, so hypocrites by their strongest corruptions. Secondly, We must depend upon what we hope for in the other world as an abundant recompence for all we have left, or lost, or laid out, for God in this world; Thou shalt have treasure in heaven. We must, in the way of chargeable duty, trust God for a happiness out of sight, which will make us rich amends for all our expenses in God’s service. The precept sounded hard and harsh; “Sell that thou hast, and give it away;” and the objection against it would soon arise, that “Charity begins at home;” therefore Christ immediately annexes this assurance of a treasure in heaven. Note, Christ’s promises make his precepts easy, and his yoke not only tolerable, but pleasant, and sweet, and very comfortable; yet this promise was as much a trial of this young man’s faith as the precept was of his charity, and contempt of the world.

      [2.] We must devote ourselves entirely to the conduct and government of our Lord Jesus; Come, and follow me. It seems here to be meant of a close and constant attendance upon his person, such as the selling of what he had in the world was as necessary to as it was to the other disciples to quit their callings; but of us it is required that we follow Christ, that we duly attend upon his ordinances, strictly conform to his pattern, and cheerfully submit to his disposals, and by upright and universal obedience observe his statutes, and keep his laws, and all this from a principle of love to him, and dependence on him, and with a holy contempt of every thing else in comparison of him, and much more in competition with him. This is to follow Christ fully. To sell all, and give to the poor, will not serve, unless we come, and follow Christ. If I give all my goods to feed the poor, and have not love, it profits me nothing. Well, on these terms, and on no lower, is salvation to be had; and they are very easy and reasonable terms, and will appear so to those who are brought to be glad of it upon any terms.

      (2.) See how he was discovered. This touched him in a tender part (v. 22); When he heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

      [1.] He was a rich man, and loved his riches, and therefore went away. He did not like eternal life upon these terms. Note, First, Those who have much in the world are in the greatest temptation to love it, and to set their hearts upon it. Such is the bewitching nature of worldly wealth, that those who want it least desire most; when riches increase, then is the danger of setting the heart upon them, Ps. lxii. 10. If he had had but two mites in all the world, and had been commanded to give them to the poor, or but one handful of meal in the barrel, and a little oil in the cruse, and had been bidden to make a cake of that for a poor prophet, the trial, one would think, had been much greater, yet those trials have been overcome (Luk 21:4; 1Ki 17:14); which shows that the love of the world draws stronger than the most pressing necessities. Secondly, The reigning love of this world keeps many from Christ, who seem to have some good desires toward him. A great estate, as to those who are got above it, is a great furtherance, so to those who are entangled in the love of it, it is a great hindrance, in the way to heaven.

      Yet something of honesty there was in it, that, when he did not like the terms, he went away, and would not pretend to that, which he could not find in his heart to come up to the strictness of; better so than do as Demas did, who, having known the way of righteousness, afterward turned aside, out of love to this present world, to the greater scandal of his profession; since he could not be a complete Christian, he would not be a hypocrite.

      [2.] Yet he was a thinking man, and well-inclined, and therefore went away sorrowful. He had a leaning toward Christ, and was loth to part with him. Note, Many a one is ruined by the sin he commits with reluctance; leaves Christ sorrowfully, and yet is never truly sorry for leaving him, for, if he were, he would return to him. Thus this man’s wealth was vexation of spirit to him, then when it was his temptation. What then would the sorrow be afterward, when his possessions would be gone, and all hopes of eternal life gone too?

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

What good thing ( ). Mark (Mr 10:17) has the adjective “good” with “Teacher.”

May have (). Ingressive aorist subjunctive, “may get,” “may acquire.”

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Mat 19:16

. And, lo, one. Luke says that he was a ruler, ( ἄρχων,) that is, a man of very high authority, not one of the common people. (616) And though riches procure respect, (617) yet he appears to be here represented to have been held in high estimation as a good man. For my own part, after weighing all the circumstances, I have no doubt that, though he is called a young man, he belonged to the class of those who upheld the integrity of the Elders, by a sober and regular life. (618) He did not come treacherously, as the scribes were wont to do, but from a desire of instruction; and, accordingly, both by words and by kneeling, he testifies his reverence for Christ as a faithful teacher. But, on the other hand, a blind confidence in his works hindered him from profiting under Christ, to whom, in other respects, he wished to be submissive. Thus, in our own day, we find some who are not ill-disposed, but who, under the influence of I know not what shadowy holiness, (619) hardly relish the doctrine of the Gospel.

But, in order to form a more correct judgment of the meaning of the answer, we must attend to the form of the question. He does not simply ask how and by what means he shall reach life, but what good thing he shall do, in order to obtain it. He therefore dreams of merits, on account of which he may receive eternal life as a reward due; and therefore Christ appropriately sends him to the keeping of the law, which unquestionably is the way of life, as I shall explain more fully afterwards.

(616) “ Que c’estoit un prince ou seigneur; c’est a dire, un homme d’estat et de grande authorite;” — “that he was a prince or lord; that is to say, a man of rank and of great authority.”

(617) “ Combien que les richesses rendent un homme honorable au monde;” — “though riches render a man honorable in the world.”

(618) “ Non point par trahison, et pour surprendre Christ;” — “not by treachery, and to take Christ by surprise.”

(619) “ Pource qu’ils sont enveloppez de ie ne scay quelle ombre de sainctete;” — “because they are covered by I know not what shadow of holiness.”

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Mat. 19:16. Good Master.The better MSS. omit the adjective, and it has probably been added here by later copyists to bring the passage into a verbal agreement with the narrative of St. Mark and St. Luke. From the prominence given to it in the form of our Lords answer, as reported by them, we may reasonably believe that it was actually uttered by the questioner (Plumptre).

Mat. 19:17. Why callest thou me good?Here again the older MSS. give a different form to our Lords answer (See R.V.). Keep the commandments.The questioner is answered as from his own point of view. If eternal life was to be won by doing, there was no need to come to a new Teacher for a new precept (Plumptre).

Mat. 19:20. From my youth up.Omitted in R.V., as in oldest MSS., but not in the parallel passages.

Mat. 19:21. If thou wilt be perfect.If thou wishest to be characterised by full-orbed goodness (Morison).

Mat. 19:23. Hardly.I.e., with difficulty (see R.V.).

Mat. 19:24. It is easier for a camel, etc.It has been suggested that the needles eye was an expression in common use for a narrow gate into a city intended for foot-passengers only, and through which, if a camel could squeeze at all, it would first need to be unladen and entirely stripped of trappings and encumbrances. Very possibly this explanation may be right, but it is not necessary to scrutinise closely what is so obviously the language of hyperbole. The object is to stamp on the mind and memory the idea of extreme difficulty, and it has been shown by Dr. John Lightfoot that a Talmudist used for the same purpose a phrase still more hyperbolical: an elephant going through the eye of a needle (Fraser).

Mat. 19:25. Who then can be saved?Since everyone has more or less of the same love of the world (De Wette). The question shows that the disciples took their Master to be referring not to men of great wealth alone, but to a much larger class (Canon Duckworth).

Mat. 19:27. What shall we have therefore?There is something in Peters question that abundantly betrays his spiritual imperfection. There was too great eagerness for reward. Arnot somewhat plainly says, His eye was on the main chance. But still there was transparency of character and ingenuousness manifested by the question which he put. And then, too, it must be borne in mind that regard to reward is right in its own place; although, assuredly, its place ever has been, and must for ever be, as it deserves to be, in a very subordinate sphere of moral motives (Morison). The answer of Christ shows that all true sacrifice shall have its reward, but all that looks like sacrifice is not really such; therefore many that are first shall be last. Among the Twelve there was a Judas (Carr).

Mat. 19:28. The regeneration.The renewal of things, the return to a perfect state, otherwise called the restitution of all things, nearly = the kingdom of God (cf. Mat. 17:11) (Carr). There is to be a new birth for mankind as well as for the individual (Plumptre). Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones.What approximations to a literal fulfilment there may be in the far-off future lies behind the veil (ibid.). In at least one instance the words, absolute as they were in their form, failed of their fulfilment. The guilt of Judas left one of the thrones vacant. The promise was given subject to the implied conditions of faithfulness and endurance lasting even to the end (ibid.).

Mat. 19:30. Many that are first, etc.See on Mat. 19:27.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Mat. 19:16-30

The perils of wealth.Long as this passage is, it will be found to turn on one topic throughout, viz., on that love of money of which the Apostle tells us that it is the possible root of all ill. It will be found also to tell us, in regard to this evil, almost all we requireits special malignity, e.g. on the one hand, and its only cure, on the other.

I. Its special malignity.We may see this, first, in the kind of cases attacked by this evil. They are often such as appear to be proof against everything else. See this exemplified in the young man who here comes to the Saviour (Mat. 19:16). How earnest and right his desires! How perfect his aim! That which was good (Mat. 19:16). How well ordered his life! Even if we suppose his testimony about himself (Mat. 19:20) to refer only to externals, what a record it was! No impurity, no falsehood, no dishonesty, no failure in duty towards his parents; nothing, in short, for which even the Saviour could, so far, reprove him! How simply lovely, in short, such a life! We can hardly wonder at what we are told about it in Mar. 10:21. What we do wonder at is that there was yet one form of excellence in which this young man was lacking (Mat. 19:21)one form of evil before which he was found to succumb. How deadly an evil, therefore, this form of evil must be in itself! We may see this, also, in the next place, in the kind of results it produced. Consider what was actually done by this subtle evil in this, so far, eminent case. This is very soon told. When things were put here to the testwhen this most exemplary youth (in so many respects) was invited to be perfect indeed, and to show that he was ready to do anything rather than fail in his aim in any directionthen he fell at a stroke. Then his inward faith in the all-surpassing importance of worldly gain came out of its secret hiding place, and stood, as it were, in his way (Mat. 19:22). From one point of view, he was asked, no doubt, to do much. But he was promised still more. He was to part with treasure on earth. But he was to gain treasure in heaven. He was asked to do, therefore, what he knew in his heart to be both the good and the wise. But he was unable to do it. The deceitfulness of riches bewildered his judgment and benumbed his desires, so that he could not do, therefore, what it yet made him bitterly sorrowful to be unable to do. See the effect, therefore, in this most pitiable sorrow, of this wide fountain of evil. Never, surely, were fairer hopes more disastrously shattered. Never, surely, goodlier vessel wrecked so near to its port! What evil, therefore, can be greater than that which brought about such an end?

II. The only cure of this evil.Where alone, for example, on the one hand, an available remedy can be found, viz., in something, of course, which should be of greater strength than the greatest strength of mankind. The Saviour will be found to bring His disciples to this conclusion by degrees. How hard it is, He says first, for those who have riches at all to enter the kingdom of heaven (Mat. 19:23). How hard it is because of the fact that, where this is the case, the man who has once, in consequence, tasted their sweetness and seen their effect is always tempted to trust in them too (Mar. 10:24); and to think of them, therefore, as this young man did, as though nothing could stand in their place. In which case, of course, it becomes impossible for him to suppress the love of them in his heart (Mat. 19:24). How should a man be able to give up that which he believes to be all? Only God Himself can bring his bewitched steps into the pathway of life (Mat. 19:26). How alone, next, the benefits of the remedy in question can be secured by ourselves. We see this by the way in which, in this passage, in the case of some who had overcome the evil in question (Mat. 19:27), the Saviour strengthens them in their decision. He does so, on the one hand, by solemnly assuring them that all shall be well with such in the end; that a time is coming in which there shall be a wholly altered condition of things on the earth, in which He Himself shall be seated on the throne of His glory, and all those who have truly followed Him shall have their share in the same (Mat. 19:28). He does so, on the other hand, by assuring them that, even meanwhile, things shall be for their real good in a most pre-eminent way, all that they may so have to lose in this life for His sake being made up to them a hundredfold more (Mat. 19:29). This is, therefore, how He would have us resist this temptation, viz., by working at these counterbalancing gains. To avoid thinking too much of the present and transitory, think more of the future and permanent. To avoid being deceived by earthly riches, fix your eyes on the true. Set your affections, in a word, on things above, where they ought to be fixed. Nothing else is so sure! Nothing else so safe! Nothing else so transcendently gainful in the very best sense! And nothing else, therefore, so able to deliver us from this most insidious and most fatal of snares!

One other thought, to conclude. These solemn cautions are not addressed to rich men, but to poor. The love of money is not a danger to those only who possess it. To no men, probably, does affluence sometimes seem more alluring than to those who see it afar off. Does not the last commandment also teach us the same? It is not to those who have, but to those who desire to have, that its language is addressed. Let all men, therefore, beware of covetousness, whoever they are!

HOMILIES ON THE VERSES

Mat. 19:16-22. A sad story.We have here one of the saddest stories in the Gospels. It is a true souls tragedy. The young man is in earnest, but his earnestness has not volume and force enough to float him over the bar. He wishes to have some great thing bidden him to do, but he recoils from the sharp test which Christ imposes. He truly wants the prize, but the cost is too great; and yet he wishes it so much that he goes away without it in deep sorrow, which perhaps, at another day, ripened into the resolve which was too high for him then. There is a certain severity in our Lords tone, an absence of recognition of the much good in the young man, and a naked stringency in His demand from him, which sound almost harsh, but which are set in their true light by Marks note, that Jesus loved him, and therefore treated him thus. The truest way to draw ingenuous souls is not to flatter nor to make entrance easy by dropping the standard or hiding the requirements, but to call out all their energy by setting before them the lofty ideal. Easy-going disciples are easily madeand lost. Thorough-going ones are most surely won by calling for entire surrender.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat. 19:16-26. The requirements of the King.I. We have the picture of a real though imperfect moral earnestness, and the way Christ dealt with it.Matthew tells us that the questioner was young and rich. Luke adds that he was a ruler,a synagogue official, that iswhich was unusual for a young man, and indicates that his legal blamelessness was recognised. Mark adds one of his touches, which are not only picturesque, but character-revealing, by the information that he came running to Jesus in the way, so eager was he, and fell at His feet, so reverential was Hebrews 1. His first question is singularly compacted of good and error. The fact that he came to Christ for a purely religious purpose, not seeking personal advantage for himself or for others, like the crowds who followed for loaves and cures, nor laying traps for Him with puzzles which might entangle Him with the authorities, nor asking theological questions for curiosity, but honestly and earnestly wanting to be helped to lay hold of eternal life, is to be put down to his credit. He is right in counting it the highest blessing. Where had he got hold of the thought of eternal life? It was miles above the dusty speculations and casuistries of the Rabbis. Probably from Christ Himself. He was right in recognising that the conditions of possessing it were moral, but his conception of good was surface, and he thought more of doing than of being good, and of the desired life as payment for meritorious actions. In a word, he stood at the point of view of the old dispensation. This do, and thou shalt live, was his belief; and what he wished was further instruction as to what this was. He was to be praised in that he docilely brought his question to Jesus, even though, as Christs answer shows, there was error mingling in his docility. Such is the charactera young man, rich, influential, touched with real longings for the highest life, ready, so far as he knows himself, to do whatever he is bidden, in order to secure it. We might have expected Christ, who opened His arms wide for publicans and harlots, to have welcomed this fair, ingenuous seeker with some kindly word. But He has none for him. We adopt the reading of the Authorised Version, in which our Lords first word is repellent. It is in effect, There is no need for your question, which answers itself. There is one good Being, the Source and Type of every good thing, and therefore the good, which you ask about, can only be conformity to His will. You need not come to Me to know what you are to do. He relegates the questioner, not to his own conscience, but to the authoritative revealed will of God in the law. On another occasion He answered a similar question in a different manner (see Joh. 6:28-29). Why did He not answer the young ruler thus? Only because He knew that he needed to be led to that thought by having his own self-complacency shattered, and the clinging of his soul to earth laid bare. The whole treatment of him here is meant to bring him to the apprehension of faith as preceding all truly good work.

2. The young mans second question says a great deal in its one word. It indicates astonishment at being remanded to these old, well-worn precepts, and might be rendered, What sort of commandments? as if taking it for granted that they must be new and peculiar. The craving for more than ordinary good works shows a profound mistake in the estimate of the ordinary, and a fatal blunder as to the relation between goodness and eternal life. So Christ answers the question by quoting the second half of the Decalogue, which deals with the homeliest duties, and appending to it the summary of the law, which requires love to our neighbour as to ourselves. Why does He omit the earlier half? Probably because He would meet the error of the question by presenting only the plainest, most familiar commandments, and because He desired to excite the consciousness of deficiency, which could be most easily done in connection with these.
3. There is a touch of impatience in the rejoinder, All these I have kept, with more than a touch of self-satisfaction. The law has failed to accomplish one of its chief purposes in the young man, in that it has not taught him his sinfulness. Still he was not at rest.
4. His last question is a plaintive, honest acknowledgment of the hungry void within, which no round of outward obedience can ever fill.

II. Now comes the sharp-pointed test, which pricks the brilliant bubble. Mark tells us that Jesus accompanied His words with one of those looks which searched the soul, and bore His love into it. If thou wouldst be perfect takes up the confession of something lacking and shows what that is. The principles involved in the precept is medicine for all, and the only way of healing for any.

III. Then comes the collapse of all the enthusiasm.His earnestness chills at the touch of the test. One sign of grace he does give, in that he went away sorrowful. He is not angry nor careless. He cannot see the fair prospect of the eternal life, which he had in some real fashion desired, fade away, without a pang. If he goes back to the world, he goes back feeling more acutely than ever that it cannot satisfy him. He loves it too well to give it up, but not enough to feel that it is enough. Surely, in coming days, that godly sorrow would work a change of the foolish choice, and we may hope that he found no rest till he cast away all else to make Christ his own. A soul which has travelled so far on the road to life eternal as this man had done, can scarcely thereafter walk the broad read of selfishness and death with entire satisfaction.

IV. Christs comment on the sad incident.He has no word of condemnation, but passes at once from the individual to the general lesson, of the difficulty which rich men (or, as He explains it in Mark, men who trust in riches) have in entering the king dom. The reflection breathes a tone of pity, and is not so much blame as a merciful recognition of special temptations which affect His judgment, and should modify ours.Ibid.

Mat. 19:17. The goodness of God.The notion of goodness is inseparable from the notion of a God. We cannot own the existence of God, but we must confess also His goodness.

I. What this goodness is.

1. The bounty of God.

2. The goodness of God comprehends all His attributes. All the acts of God are nothing else but the effluxes of His goodness, distinguished by several names, according to the objects it is exercised about; as the sea, though it be one mass of water, yet we distinguish it by several names, according to the shores it washes and beats upon. When He confers happiness without merit, it is grace; when He bestows happiness against merit, it is mercy; when He bears with provoking rebels, it is long-suffering; when He performs His promise, it is truth; when He commiserates a distressed person, it is pity; when He supplies an indigent person, it is bounty; when He succours an innocent person, it is righteousness; and when He pardons a penitent person, it is mercy; all summed up in this one name of goodness.

II. The nature of this goodness.

1. He is good by His own essence.

2. He is the prime and chief goodness.

3. This goodness is communicative.Without goodness He would cease to be a Deity, and without diffusiveness He would cease to be good (Psa. 119:68).

4. God is necessarily good.

5. He is also freely good.It would not be a supreme goodness, if it were not a voluntary goodness. It is agreeable to the nature of the highest good to be absolutely free, to dispense His goodness in what methods and measures He pleaseth.

6. This goodness is communicated with the greatest pleasure (Psa. 21:3).It is the nature of His goodness to be glad of mens solicitations for it.

III. The manifestations of this goodness.

Conclusion:

1. If God be so good, how unworthy is the contempt or a buse of His goodness (Jer. 2:5).

2. It is matter of comfort in afflictions.

3. Imitate this goodness of God (Mat. 5:44-45).Anon.

Mat. 19:21. Christs demand of the young ruler.Commentators stumble over the difficulty of this command. But it came to others, and they stood the test. It came to Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, when Christ bade them leave all to follow Him, to become fishers of men. It came to Paul, when Christ bade him crucify his pride, and go into Damascus, and take his instructions from one of the despised and persecuted Christians, who would tell him what he should do. It came to Luther, when Christ bade him forsake the church of his fathers and of his childhood; to Coligny, when Christ bade him abandon wife and home and peace; to William of Orange; to the Puritans; to John Howard; to David Livingstone. In one form or another it comes to every Christian; for to every would-be Christian the Master says: Give up your property, your home, your life itself, and take them back as Mine, and use them for Me in using them for your fellow-men. He who cannot, does not, do this, is no Christian. He can do naught but go away sorrowful: in this life, if he is keen of conscience; in the life to come, if a false education has lulled his conscience into uneasy slumber, but slumber so deep that only the judgment day can awaken it.L. Abbott, D.D.

Christs demand.There seems to be a twofold danger.

1. On the one hand, lest while trying to explain the words of Christ, we should find ourselves to be only explaining them away.
2. On the other hand, lest by insisting on their literal and universal application, we should destroy Christian liberty, should put the letter for the spirit, rules for principles, and so degrade the gospel into a system of purchase in which a certain outlay secures unfailing return.Canon Duckworth.

A surgical case.Clearly it is a surgical case; the medicine of the commandments will not do; there must be the insertion of the knife, Go and sell, etc.J. M. Gibson, D.D.

St. Anthony.It was from the story of the rich young man in the gospel that the famous Anthony, the very patriarch of Monachism, inferred that it was his duty to abandon his ancestral estate and live in solitude and poverty. There is no question of the ardour and sincerity of the man; but as we read what history has to tell of the moral and social effects of Monachism, we cannot but reflect how much better it would have been for all Christendom if Anthony had lived on the estate which he inherited, and used his means and position for the honour of Christ and the gospel among the ignorant peasantry around, rather than have passed his life in the desert, injuring his own body by gratuitous hardships, maintaining mysterious combats with fiends, and so leading hundreds and thousands of misguided men into a similar pursuit of an illusive, ascetic perfection.D. Fraser,D.D.

Hindered by one thing.It is the things which are apparently the smallest that prevent the greatest results. A slight defect in the finest bell and it ceases to sound, a lost key and the richest money-chest is useless. The day of battle has arrived, the troops are admirably disposed, the despatches of the general fly here and there; suddenly the horse of the adjutant stumbles on a stone; he arrives a quarter of an hour too late, and the battle is lost. So it is in spiritual matters. Many a man who has got safely over the Rhine has been drowned in a little brook. Sin has no more dangerous delusion than to convince a man that he is safe if only he avoids the so-called flagrant transgressions.A. Tholuck, D.D.

Mat. 19:20-21. Christs test.The rich young ruler presented fine certificatesof his own composition. Christ didnt tear them up, but He did what you tradesmen do with an applicant for a vacancy; He gave him a bit of work to try his hand on. The gentlemanly commandment-keeper wrote no more certificates.John McNeill.

Mat. 19:22. Self-inflicted sorrow.I. Who was He?

1. A young man.
2. A well-to-do young man.

3. A young man of considerable Mark 4. A pre-eminently virtuous young man.

5. A young man who was anxious about the life to come.

II. Where had he been of late?He went away. From whom, or from what place? Christ has answered the mans interrogation; Christ has responded to his entreaty; Christ has given him a definite and conclusive answer. He came running, he goes lagging. He came complacently; he goes resentfully. He came as one who would lay a giants hold upon eternal life; he goes with no shadow of a hold upon eternal life. He was sorrowful as he went away; but go away he did, right clean away. And Jesus, looking intently after him, as he went, intimated to His disciples that he was gone for good and all; that of his ever entering into the kingdom of God there was little hope now. In vain his acknowledged moral excellence. In vain his religious anxiety. In vain his fellowship with the good Master. In this, the momentous crisis of his being, something had interposed which had marred and ruined all. What could it be?

III. Why had he gone away?

1. Had Christs behaviour to him been unkindly? Some teachers are morose, ungenial, supercilious, austere.
2. Had Christs treatment of the case been inconsiderate?
3. Had Christs direction to him been unreasonable? Then, why did he go away? Alas! he loved his possessions more than he loved his soul! He would not forego the present for the future. He would not cease to be what he was that he might become something better. Whatever his solicitude about eternal life, that solicitude was secondary, not supreme. And what a thing it was to let go! what a thing it was to determine to let go! You are struck with the infatuation of the man! But mind that you are not infatuated too! Think now.
1. In character you resemble him.
2. In procedure you resemble him.
3. In disposition you resemble him.W. Brock, D.D.

Going away from Christ.He went away. What more, what else could he do? He faced alternatives stubborn and fixed when that reply came to him from Jesus. He must decide for himself now. He did decide.

I. Why did he go? He had great riches, and the alternative seemed hard. But this was not a reason; it was only a test. Jesus did not want his money. He said, And give to the poor. No, there were two reasons why the young man failed.

1. What Jesus required involved the entire revolution of his life. He was a member of the Sanhedrin; he must now become instantly a true Christian. He must immediately avow Jesus as the Messiah, and become a defender of the faith which that whole nation hated. All this involved a sudden change in his history. He was not ready for it.
2. The other reason, however, was probably the critical one; it was his unregenerate heart that lay at the bottom of the refusal.

II. How did he go?

1. In low dejection of heart. This young ruler, under pressure of spiritual need, had come to find a path out from his sense of guilt and leading to eternal salvation. He only met heavier admonitions laid on his already sore conscience. Formerly he imagined he had done his entire duty, and still he had wondered why he was not safe and easy in his mind; now he saw that he was as hollow as a hypocrite, and his trouble of heart was explained by the fact that he might have known bettor; so the trouble was worse.
2. He went away thoroughly unsettled as to his future. There remains for him nothing possible except a religious compromise, and that will never give him rest.
3. He went away pitied and mourned by those who loved him.

III. Where did the young ruler go?

1. He went back to the world. It would be a question whether he idolised his old treasures as he once did, whether he was as amiable or as popular as he had once been. Men who stifle their best emotions, and try to hush their noblest convictions, are sure to get soured after a while, and grow unhappy and cynical; and then they are not agreeable. He went back to his old companions. It would be likely to sting in his mind a little, this recollection of the time when he went forth to find Jesus, and actually kneeled down in the road before Him. Some of his Jewish comrades would taunt him, too, with having once set out to become a Nazarene.
2. He went on to his grave. It was to be expected that there should be a proud funeral at his abode some while after this, and that he should be laid with his fathers ostentatiously, with much pomp and attention of social show.
3. He went on to the judgment. The will that refused, the heart that was hard, the pride that was unsubdued, the avarice that was imperious, the determination which fixed his future destiny where he is now, never were put into his coffin for a moment, never had any place whatsoever in the ashes of his tomb.
4. He went to his own place. Character decides destiny. If any one is ready to turn away from the Lord where is he going next?C. S. Robinson, D.D.

Christ left sorrowfully.It was, we may suppose:

1. The sadness of loss. And cannot I have eternal life? Is the way so hard? Are the terms so difficult? Must I relinquish so great a prize, bear so heavy a cross?

2. The sadness of disappointment. Must all I sought and thought I saw in prospect vanish thus?

3. The sadness of self-conviction. Ah! He is right. I did not know myself. It is I, not He, that is to blame, etc.

4. The sadness of shame. And I have gone to Him, and He has seen me through. Oh! that look of gentle pity; those tender tones; that hard but loving invitation. He said not go, but come. And I have left Him, declined His offer, spurned His precepts, etc. But the sorrow did not prevent his going; did not make Christ relent; did not keep Him from saying, How hardly, etc. There are special times when we may be said to leave Christ; when we are brought very near to Him, and have to make an election, and perhaps for ever. Such a time is that of deep religious conviction. Such a time is that when we are obliged by outward circumstances to take a stand. A new position in life compels us to come out afresh, and either as His servants or His foes. Some painful enterprise of sin forces on conscience a decision. A companionship promising pleasure and advantage, requires by its rejection that we honour, or by its acceptance that we renounce, the Saviour. It matters not what we leave Him in spite of, if we leave Him. The greater the difficulties in leaving Him the more sad and fearful the forsaking. And in leaving Christ we leave all.A. J. Morris.

Hindrances to inquirers.Sometimes the inquirer may not himself suspect just what the hindrance is until he is probed. In some cases it is a besetting sin that has got a mastery of the heart. In other cases it is an evil habit, or a course of sinful practices or secret sensualities, or dishonest methods in business, or something else that must go out before Jesus Christ will come in. Dr. Charles G. Finney tells us that he once had a man on his knees beside him, and the man promised to surrender everything to God until it came to his business. The man bolted at that test point, and said: I cant give that to God, for I am a liquor seller.T. L. Cuyler, D.D.

Mat. 19:23. The perils of wealth.Who ever heard, exclaims Paulus de Palacio, such theology? It was unknown, he adds, to the Stoics. It was unknown to the Platonics. It was unknown to the Peripatetics. It is true theology, nevertheless. It is one of the most difficult things in the world to deal conscientiously with richesthat is, to keep a good conscience and be rich. It is easy to be rich and honest in the human plane of things. But to take up riches to the higher plane, in which the will and wish of God are recognised and adopted as the rule of life, and consequently as the rule of giving and of keeping, is one of the severest possible tests to which the human heart can be subjected. Happy is the man of opulence who does not shrink from ascending to that platform.J. Morison, D.D.

Mat. 19:25. The great question.Who then, etc.? an admission that all men share the same guilt and love of the world. How may a rich man enter heaven?

I. It is always difficult in his peculiar circumstances.

II. It is impossible, if in mind and heart he cleaves to his wealththe Pharisees.

III. It becomes possible by a miracle of Divine graceJoseph of Arimathea.J. P. Lange, D.D.

Mat. 19:27-29. What shall we have therefore?

1. Albeit it be little that we suffer for Christ, yet we think much of it.
2. Howsoever it be not worthy to speak of what we do or suffer for Christ, yet the least thing done in sincerity is not despised by Christ, but highly esteemed and richly rewarded, for Christ promiseth a reward.
3. Christ doth not narrowly mark the infirmitics of His own, but doth cherish the smallest beginnings, and fomenteth the smoking flax, as here may be seen in His answer to Peter. Peters speech smelleth of pride, yet He passeth it over, saying, Verily I say unto you, etc.
4. Although Christ doth not always answer His peoples expectation by giving them the very thing which they look for, yet He will not fail to give them a better thing; as here the Apostles dreamed of an earthly kingdom and of earthly honours to be given unto Christ and themselves. This He will not give them, but He leadeth them higher, showing them that what they loved to have in this life should be given them in substance, and in a more eminent way, in the life to come.
5. The day of judgment shall be a sort of regeneration, wherein our bodies and souls shall be renewed perfectly, for glory and immortality.
6. At that day Christ, even in His human nature, shall be seen to reign in glory, suitable to His Divine majesty.
7. Such as follow Christ must be resolved for Christs sake to be deprived of what is dear unto them in this life, if He shall be pleased to put them to trial. That is imported in Every one that forsakes houses, etc.
8. What men do lose for Christ shall breed them gain a hundredfold even in this life, because the comforts and privileges of Christs kingdom are a hundredfold better than anything they can be deprived of.
9. Besides what spiritual gain is gotten in this life to such as suffer for the gospel, life eternal is also given for an inheritance in the world to come, which is able to make up all losses sustained for Christ.David Dickson.

Mat. 19:29. The hundredfold.What is the meaning of the promise, that which gathers into itself all its various senses and aspects, and reconciles them? Perhaps it may be summed up and expressed under these three heads:

I. We find in Christ, in loving and serving Him, all that makes our natural kinships and our possessions of real worth to us.Our kinships and possessions are valuable to us and reach their true end only as they minister to our welfare and culture, as they develop our various faculties and powers, as they furnish us with opportunities of serving our fellows, and both enable and incline us to avail ourselves of them.

II. We find in Christ corresponding, yet superior, relationships and pos sessions to those which we resign for His sake.Houses and lands, kinsfolk and friends, are intended for our culture in virtue and righteousness and charity; they are also the express types of higher kinships which are open to us, and of more enduring riches. From the father of our flesh we derive our first and best conception of the Father of our spirits. The love of woman helps us to apprehend and trust the love of Christ. The obedience and simplicity of childhood speak to us of the wiser simplicity and nobler obedience of discipleship. The corruptible treasure on earth symbolises, in many ways, the immortal treasure in heaven. And if we leave, or lose, any of these typical relationships and possessions for Christs sake, we gain that which they typify.

III. In virtue of our oneness with Christ we possess all things and persons in a deeper, truer way.Strictly speaking, a mans property is exactly what he can appropriate; that, and not a jot more. But on what does the power of appropriation depend? Obviously on the kind of life that is in us, on its volume and quality, on the vigour and variety of its faculties, and on the manner in which these faculties have been trained and developed. He who has most life in him, and in whom this life has been best cultivated, will infallibly possess himself of most that is really valuable and enduring. He will see farther into men, and be able both to do more for them and to get more from them, than those can do in whom there is less life, or a life less cultivated and accomplished. All events and all changes, all kinships and possessions, will have more to say to him, and will more variously and profoundly minister to his culture and to his welfare. And it is precisely this great blessing which the Lord Jesus offers to us. He offers us life of the highest quality, in the richest abundance.S. Cox, D.D.

Self-denial and its reward.I beg leave to think that only a hearty recognition of the Divinity of Jesus Christ can save both the claims and the promises from the charge of absurdity and blasphemy.

I. What Christ demands from us.He seems to divide the thing into two, and between them He places all the more sacred and precious things of lifefamily ties, brother and sister, wife and children, and all these He says we are to surrenderfor His sake. Well, if there is any one thing that modern Christianity does not need to be taught it is that the New Testament is not to be translated literally, as people say. It is a vast deal easier for a man outwardly to abandon than to abandon in his heart and desire. Christ explains the words of my text in another of His sayings. If any man loves so and so more than Me he is not My disciple. As a man thinketh in his heart so is he. The life is the man.

1. The inward abandonment of everything we possess.That is to say that honestly we shall put all these things of which we can say, I have themhouses, lands, mills, factories, balances at our bankers, pictures, home, honestly we shall put all these second, and put Jesus Christ first.

2. An inward abandonment of all the people that we love is as imperative as an inward abandonment of all the possessions that we have, and just in the same position as in regard to the former so in regard to this. A mothers tenderness; a fathers care; a wifes self-sacrifice; childrens love; all these are to be rigidly subordinated to the supreme love of Christ and all these are to be put aside, to be put aside gently and tenderly, with a very loving hand, but yet with a very firm one, to be put aside if they would at all avail to cross the path along which our eye should travel, and our heart with our eye, unto Him.

II. The great and wonderful promise which our Lord sets forth.It falls into two parts. A hundredfold they shall receive; eternal life shall inherit.

1. How, in regard to the thought shall receive a hundredfold?I suppose the ordinary interpretation given to such a promise as that is something like this, which is perfectly true and very beautifulto point out how after a man does keep earthly brethren or earthly love second, and make Christ first, all the things He so gives away become more precious; how religion puts a new spirit into everything; how the love of home held in subordination to the love of Christ, and all illuminated and irradiated by that love, derives a higher sweetness than under any other circumstances, etc. And in like manner outward thingshouses and lands and so on, held as from Him and subordinated to Him, used according to His will and for His sakehow they all become to be enjoyed with a higher power and blessedness, and how better is the dinner of herbs with God there than great revenues without Him; and all that is wonderfully and beautifully true. But that I do not think goes to the bottom of the words here, and it would be a self-contradictory assertion to a man to say, Do not care so much about the world, because if you will only do that you will make a great deal more out of it. I think, therefore, we must go a great deal deeper than that thought and see what is the hundredfold compensation that the text promises to us. What? Jesus Christ. If you will give up houses and lands for Me, you will get Me, and I am a hundredfold or, as it is in some places, manifold, I am infinitely more than you would give up.

2. And shall inherit everlasting life.As I take it, the language of my text points rather to the everlasting ages inherited beyond the grave. There is one point that strikes me as significant, and that is the variety of the expressions of these two clauses, shall receive a hundredfold; shall inherit everlasting life. Receive, as the result of a certain course of conduct, inherit, not as the result of a certain course of conduct. The Bible does not represent that eternal life is given to a man by reason of anything that he does. The Bible represents to us that eternal life is given to us by reason simply and solely of Gods great love in Jesus Christ, and that all we have to do is simply to take the gift which is freely given to us.A. Maclaren, D.D.

The joy of giving up all for Christ.A friend once told me what had been the happiest time in his life. It was soon after his conversion from infidelity; but that conversion involved the loss of friends and fortune. For all, however, he found amends in Christ; in Christ who had saved his soul, who had awakened in him the hope full of immortality, and with whom he could walk and talk the live-long day, telling Him all that was in his heart, and feeling his own being refined and exalted by the ennobling fellowship. And the happiest hour was in the city of Paris, when he sat down on a stone in the Champs Elyses, with no friend in all the place, and with just two sous in his pocket. For now, he felt, Christ is all to me. I have no other friend; I have no other joy. The equipages rolled past; the gay people shouted and laughed, but none of them all felt so rich or so happy as the stranger who, there on the stone, sat under Christs shadow with great delight; not another friend in all the place, but the Saviour at his side; just a penny in his pocket but so rich in his new friendship, that happiness flowed from every feature, and he felt I have all and abound.The Church.

The power of supreme love to Christ.There is no way of getting away from the tyrannous dominion of the world except by having given ourselves to our dear Lord and letting His love rise up in our souls, and then just as the electric light in our streets makes the gas we thought to be so bright look red and smoky and dim, so this better light in our hearts will dwarf the beauty and dim the brightness of all other lights by reason of its purity and strength.A. Maclaren, D.D.

Mat. 19:30. Reversals.I. Enforce this saying with respect to the final judgment.

1. In the judgment of reason many things that were first come to be last, and the last first.

2. The judgment of life also illustrates the text.

3. Our text is still more confirmed by the judgment of history.

4. We turn for the chief illustration of our text to the judgment of eternity. The final judgment will in many cases be the opposite of human judgment, because of the difference of its rule, and because of the difference of its manner of judgment.

II. A few practical inferences.

1. In view of this first judgment, we may be patient in the midst of the inequalities and injustice of the present time.
2. Let us be prepared, through Christ, for this strict and just judgment.
3. In view of such a judgment how intensely true we should be.
4. Let us beware how we seek to be first at that day. He is most likely to be first who seeks not to be first, who forgets such seeking in the anxiety of his desire to be and to do good.A. Goodrich, D.D.

The last shall be first.I. Consider some illustrations of this truth.

1. Historical.Jews cast out, etc.

2. From social life.Those with religious disadvantages often go to the front.

3. With regard to mental acquisitions.The last in Bible knowledge often the first in rich experience and Christian usefulness.

4. From human character.The worst become the best, while the good often make but little progress.

II. Make an application of this truth.

1. It may check presumption.Let not those boast who think themselves first now.

2. It may prevent despair.Let those who feel themselves among the last persevere.J. C. Gray.

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

Section 49

JESUS TESTS RICH YOUNG RULER AND ENCOURAGES DISCIPLES (Parallels: Mar. 10:17-31; Luk. 18:18-30)

TEXT: 19:1630

A. The Demands of Discipleship

16 And behold, one came to him and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him, Why askest thou me concerning that which is good? One there is who is good: but if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments. 18 He saith unto Him, Which? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. 20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wouldest be perfect, go, sell that which thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. 22 But when the young man heard the saying, he went away sorrowful; for he was one that had great possessions.

B. The Dangers of Possessions

23 And Jesus said unto his disciples, Verily I say Unto you, It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through a needles eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25 And when the disciples heard it, they were astonished exceedingly, saying, Who then can be saved? 26 And Jesus looking upon them said to them, With men this is impossible: but with God all things are possible.

C. The Dividends of Faithfulness

27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee; what shall we have? 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, that ye have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And every one that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for my names sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life. 30 But many shall be last that are first; and first that are last.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

a.

What do you think is the motive(s) behind the rich young rulers request?

b.

Why did this Jew make this particular request, i.e. what point of view is back of the wording of his question?

c.

Why did Jesus hold him off at arms length at first, quibbling over the word good, or would you consider this a quibble? If not, what is the point of Jesus shifting the emphasis from the deed to do, to the good that would qualify such a deed to inherit eternal life?

d.

Do you think Jesus meant to deny His own essential goodness by asking: Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is who is good, i.e., God?

e.

Since Mark and Luke both report Jesus as saying: Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone, do you think Jesus meant to deny or affirm anything about His own essential deity and goodness? What would be the point of making these remarks before getting down to the young mans initial question?

f.

If selling all that the young man possessed was the one thing he lacked to inherit eternal life, as Jesus later shows, what could have prompted Jesus to cite the commandments first? Was this a mere diversion, or an essential part of the total answer? If you think it was essential, explain why you think so.

g.

Do you think the young man was sincere when he affirmed: All these I have observed from my youth? What makes you think this?

h.

How would the sale of his possessions, alms and discipleship to Jesus make the young man perfect? What does this teach us about our own road to perfection?

i.

Jesus said, If you would be perfect . . . in answer to the young mans assertion, All these (commandments) I have observed; what do I still lack? Do you feel a touch of irony in His words? Why?

j.

As the price of our eternal life must we sell all we possess in order to have treasure in heaven? Is there no lesson or principle in this incident for us? If so, what? If not, why not?

k.

The young man went away sorrowful, but not angry. Why?

l.

What kind of discipleship do you think Jesus was offering him? Was it eventual apostleship or some other function? On what basis would you decide this?

m.

While the Scripture says he went away sorrowful for he had great possessions, is it not also correct to say that he went away sorrowful for great possessions had him? Of what fundamental sin is he guilty?

n.

Why do you suppose it is so difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom? To what phase or expression of the Kingdom is Jesus referring here? How does ones understanding of the Kingdom help to see why wealth makes entrance hard?

o.

What picturesque figure of speech did Jesus use to illustrate the rich mans difficulty of entering the Kingdom? Did Jesus mean difficulty or impossibility? How do you know?

p.

Why were the disciples so stunned to hear Jesus pronouncements about the hindrances blocking the entrance of wealthy people into the Kingdom? Name some wealthy AND godly people whom the disciples could have cited as certainly in the Kingdom. What is the point of view behind their astonishment?

q.

What motivation prompted Peters reaction to Jesus surprising pronouncements on wealth, Lo, we have left everything and followed you. What then shall we have?? Is it selfish calculation? Genuine curiosity motivated by interest in spiritual rewards? Are there any clues in the text that would help you decide whether his is a wrong-headed question or else perfectly proper?

r.

Some teachers of ethics and moral philosophers insist that good deeds based upon hope of reward are thereby vitiated. To what extent does Jesus answer prove that rewards for Christian service are not ethically wrong?

s.

How could the future, glorious, messianic age be referred to as the regeneration? Do you think Jesus means the Christian age on earth., or the post-judgment new world of eternity? On what basis do you decide this?

t.

Does not Jesus promise of a hundredfold actually promote the kind of materialistic calculation for selfish ends, that He had so obviously denounced in affirming the impossibility of rich men to enter the Kingdom? In what sense, then, does He promise a hundredfold what had been surrendered for His sake?

u.

Why did Jesus sound the warning that many that are first will be last, and the last first? Why is this aphorism appropriate at precisely this point?

v.

How does the section on the rich young ruler speak to the larger human problem of the relations between rich and poor, or does it? If so, what is the message?

w.

What else did Jesus teach about money, the desire for it and the use of it? What did He say about how to have treasure in heaven, and about why we should have it there?

x.

Have you noticed the connections between the latter part of this section (Mat. 19:27-30) and the parable which immediately follows in chapter Mat. 20:1-16? What are the points of connection which illuminate Jesus thinking even in our present section? How would this present section tend to mold our conclusions as. we proceed to interpret the next?

y.

Of what principles in Jesus Sermon on Personal Relationships in Matthew 18 is this section an illustration?

PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY

Jesus was resuming His journey when something remarkable happened; a certain ruler came running up to Him and, kneeling before Him, requested: Good Teacher, what good deed should I do to guarantee myself eternal life?
Jesus pulled him up short, Do you realize what you are saying when you refer to me as good? Why ask me about what is absolutely good? After all, nobody is perfectly good, but God alone . . . You already know the commandments, so if you really desire to enter life, keep them!
Which? he asked, What kind of commandments do you mean?
These: Jesus replied, You must not kill. You must not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not cheat, Honor your parents, and, You must love your neighbor as you would yourself.
The young man objected, But, Teacher, I have kept all these rules ever since I was a boy! What do I still need?
As Jesus looked at him, He loved him. Hearing his reaction, He told him, There is just one thing you still need. If you really want to go all the way to perfection, go sell everything you own and distribute the proceeds among the needy, thus transforming your earthly wealth into spiritual riches. Then come back and follow me.
But when the young man heard that, he was appalled. Visibly shaken, he went away grieved, because he was very wealthy, since he owned a great deal of property. When the Lord saw the mans reaction, He looked around at His disciples, and commented, Believe me, it will be extremely difficult for men of wealth to enter Gods Kingdom!
The disciples were amazed to hear this. Nevertheless Jesus insisted: Boys, how tough it is for ANYONE to get into the Kingdom of God! 1 repeat: a camel could more easily squeeze through a needles eye than a monied man make it into Gods Kingdom!
When the disciples heard this, they were even more dumbfounded, and exclaimed to each other, In that case, who can possibly be saved, if a wealthy man cannot?
But Jesus looked them in the face when He declared, Men just cannot save themselves, but God can save them. This is because anything is a possibility for God.
Relieved, Peter began to say in reply to this, Look, Lord, we, in contrast to the rich, have left everything we could call our own, to follow you . . . Uh, what are we going to get out of it?
Jesus answered them, Truthfully I can guarantee you that in the Kingdom of God when all is made new, during the glorious reign of the Messiah, you Twelve Apostles who have been my followers will also rule with me over the true Israel of God. Further, ANYONE who has given up house, or wife, or brothers or sisters or parents, children or farms on my account, for the gospel and the Kingdom of God will be repaid a hundred times whatever he gave up. He will receive it even now in this present time: houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and lands,though not without persecutionsand in the coming age, eternal life will be his inheritance too! Many people who are so important here and now will be put in last place. Others who count for nothing here and now will be considered great then and there.

SUMMARY

A ruler requested of Jesus the one magic deed that would guarantee him eternal life. Jesus turned him toward God and His Word, but the young man considered that all a past accomplishment and demanded more. Jesus demanded that he dismantle his central idol, wealth, distribute his wealth and disciple his heart, but he balked and left in disappointment.
The Lord commented that earthly wealth makes salvation difficult. The disciples, aware of everyones desire for possessions, wonder who can be saved. Self-earned salvation is impossible for men, but God makes things possible.
Peter asked what the disciples sacrifices for Christ deserved in payment. Jesus announced high, glorious rewards for everyone, especially the Twelve, but earthly value systems will be overturned.

NOTES
III. THE LORDSHIP OF GOD IN RICH-POOR RELATIONSHIPS (19:1630)
A. SITUATION: RICH MAN ASKS ABOUT THE ONE GOOD DEED ALL-ESSENTIAL TO BUY ETERNAL LIFE. (19:16)

Note the theological connections that link the instruction about children (Mat. 19:13-15) with the teaching regarding wealth (Mat. 19:16 to Mat. 20:16):

1.

Each supplements the other. Like the tax collector confessing his sins to God (Luk. 18:13 f), the children were closer to the Kingdom than each could have dared dream himself to be. But the rich young ruler, like the Pharisees congratulating God on His good fortune to have such a worthy citizen as he, was miles farther from entering it than he imagined. When Jesus preferred the children, He honored those who could not be ruined by such glory. When he humbled the rich man, He abased one who should have been helped by his humiliation.

2.

Each contrasts with the other. Jesus had insisted that Gods Kingdom must be received humbly as an unpurchased, unearned gift of God. (Mat. 10:15 = Luk. 18:17) The Kingdom belongs to children only on this basis. But the rich man showed by his question how little he understood the essential basis on which eternal life in the Kingdom is to be enjoyed, since he thought the blessings of grace could be bought and sold for one nobly heroic deed unthinkable for little children.

3.

Whatever the rich young ruler thought he wanted, his question carries forward another theme seen in Jesus comments on the childrens possession of the Kingdom of God: eternal life. The Kingdom and eternal life are coextensive. (Cf. Mat. 18:8-9 with Mar. 9:42; Mar. 9:47, as well as the basic presupposition underlying the Matthew 18 discourse.) In fact, Jesus final answer on inheriting eternal life or being perfect requires total surrender to the will of God, and this is the Kingdom. (Mat. 19:16; Mat. 19:21) And when the young ruler turned it down, he turned down the Kingdom. (Mat. 19:23)

Mat. 19:16 And behold one came to him. Mark (Mar. 10:17) and Luke (Luk. 18:18) fill in graphic details of his approach:

1.

As He was setting out on his journeyis this the departure for Jerusalem? (See on Mat. 20:17.) Not too many more events are going to occur before Jesus arrives in Jericho for the final ascent to the bittersweet Last Week. (Matthew 19, 20; Mark 10; Luke 18, 19)

2.

The man, whom Luke identifies as a ruler, ran up and respectfully knelt before the Lord. These are not merely signs of youthful vigor (Mat. 19:20), but especially of earnestness: did he sense that with Jesus departure he was about to lose the invaluable opportunity to learn the secret of life? No Nicodemus this man, heedless of others bad opinion of him, he publicly appealed to Jesus for answers in the daylight.

3.

His wealth, surprisingly mentioned last by all three Evangelists even, though it is really the turning point of the story, may well explain his position as ruler at his unusually early age. (See on Mat. 19:20.)

Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? On the form of his question, see Mat. 19:17. What, exactly, is this person really seeking?

1.

Is he offering himself for discipleship? By seeking this kind of information from Him whom he designates Teacher, it would certainly lead to virtual discipleship, if he accepted even the answer he expected. If so, what kind of discipleship would he have expected? (Study Jesus treatment of another, a rabbi. Mat. 8:19 f notes) Is this his way of offering himself and his power and influence to enhance the public image of Jesus cause? Does he suppose that the intrinsic worth of Jesus program surpasses the superficial impression one might get of it by estimating it on the basis of His ragged, rough-hewn followers? Does he conclude that the cause needs more substantial window-dressing such as he has to offer? If so, he may be hoping to keep his wealth and power and have the Kingdom too.

2.

This rich man, who had grown accustomed to use his wealth to secure and guarantee himself everything, perhaps very sincerely believed that even the inheritance of eternal life could be assured only by means of the scrupulous fulfilment of certain special rules or the mathematical result of doing certain, unusually pious deeds, in short, paying the price. At any rate, the outcome was always in his own hands, something he could control, something over which he would always be master, never servant, never dependent, never needy. But the Kingdom belongs to God who is a King who royally dispenses His gracious favors, not a merchant haggling over prices with those who think they can buy His priceless wares!

3.

Did he recognize that the standard righteousness of rabbinism (Mat. 19:20) and his own unusual wealth were inadequate to satisfy lifes deepest longings? Had this person who enjoyed the energy and enthusiasm of youth, a lovable personality, wealth and social status and an exemplary life, felt dissatisfaction in it all? Had he been superficially satisfied with life in general until he came into contact with the personality and teaching of the Master? Did that message give him self-knowledge that spurred him to higher thingsyes, even the enthusiasm to attempt something really worthwhile, even heroic, for God? If so, his insight into the insufficiency of those mainstays of Jewish society should warn Jesus disciples against any ideological dependence upon earthly power (wealth or any other) or upon any human, self-authenticating aristocracy (religious or philosophical or other).

4.

Does his question request some special, meritorious deed that would guarantee him what he presumptuously supposes cannot be had in normal obedience to God in all that He requires? If so, his supercilious attitude toward common faith and obedience to the revelations of God applicable to his life MUST be called to his attention. (Mat. 19:17) It is important to notice, however, that Jesus assigns him something to DO which, of course, will help him to BE what he must BECOME. (Cf. Jesus approach in Luk. 10:25; Luk. 10:28; Luk. 10:37) This is not merely a Jewish approach to his goal that equates righteousness with deeds rather than character, since what Jesus requires would be no merely mechanical, esoteric, meritorious deed whereby he could earn the Kingdom, but a practical act of faith that left the outcome entirely in Gods hands. (See on Mat. 19:21.)

B. JESUS RESPONSE (19:1719)

1. Jesus challenges his understanding of Jesus position and his own comprehension of what is really good: On what basis do you call me what is absolutely true only of God, and desire to know from me what only God can know?

Mat. 19:17 Why askest thou me concerning that which is good? As reproduced in the Paraphrase and Harmony, the rich mans question may have actually used good twice, once to distinguish Jesus as Good Master (according to Mark and Luke), and once to ask what good deed must be done (according to Matthew). Then, in Jesus reaction there were two rapid questions, not just one: Why do you call me good? Why do you ask me about what is good? This is the simplest, least problematic harmonization of the seemingly contradictory, even confusing, wording which scribes and scholars of Matthews Gospel have attempted to eliminate by assimilating Matthews original text to that of Mark and Luke. The scholars who see the Synoptics reporting as bristling with difficulties need to see that Jesus two questions are both valid and important.

1. Why do you call me good? (Mar. 10:17-18; Luk. 18:19)

a.

That the title good teacher was utterly unknown to the Jews, as some affirm because it does not occur even once in the Talmud, proves nothing about what this young man could have thought, because the so-called un-Jewishness of such a title is but a generalization about what Jews generally think and do, not an inflexible, intellectual straitjacket that invariably governed their every thought. In fact, Jesus answer does not condemn the un-Jewishness of his flattering title, but the thoughtless-ness of it.

b.

Some take the skeptical view of these words that Jesus, embarrassed by the rulers over complimentary title which appropriately referred only to God, intended to deny any pretense of absolute goodness. This view is so far out of harmony with Jesus own self-understanding (Joh. 8:46) and other Scriptural declarations (e.g. 1Jn. 3:5; 1Pe. 1:19; 1Pe. 2:22 f; 1Pe. 3:18; 2Co. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; Heb. 7:26-28; Heb. 9:14), that it cannot be taken seriously. Although it is true that Jesus is not affirming anything about His own character or identity and is merely reproving the rulers flattery that could not seriously intend what is implied by his terms, the following syllogisms illustrate how Jesus could not be rejecting His own goodness:

EITHER:

There is none absolutely good but what shares in deity.

Jesus Christ is absolutely good.

Therefore, Jesus Christ shares in deity.

OR:

There is none absolutely good but God.

Jesus Christ is not divine.

Therefore, Jesus Christ is not absolutely good.

But can we so lightly reject the absolute sinlessness of our Lord, without, at the same time, jeopardizing our own salvation that depends upon what, in such a case, would be His no longer perfect sacrifice?

c.

Jesus challenge has been expressed syllogistically like this:

EITHER:

God alone is good,

OR:

God alone is good.
You do not believe me to be God
You call me good.
So, do not call me good.
So, call me God, and be prepared to take the consequences.

d.

Jesus method of dealing with the young man is immediately to draw his attention to his own superficial use of words: On what basis do you call me what upon reflection you would admit is true absolutely only of God, You throw that word good around so loosely, that you need to examine your idea of good ness. Do you really care about goodness? If there is none good but God, to apply that term to me with this understanding is to affirm that I am Godbut do you believe this? The objection of some that the ruler could not have understood this kind of reasoning fails to nullify Jesus right to argue this way and lead the man to think along lines he had never before considered. It is not unlikely that the self-righteous ruler considered Jesus to have arrived at His goodness in the same way he had merited HIS. Thus, he is complimenting himself in conceiving of the Son of God as a man very much like himself, even if possessed of a far higher degree of the same kind of goodness. Jesus could no more tolerate the title good in this sense, than He could permit others to call Him Christ, when intended in a mistaken sense. He refused to be accepted on the level of a merely good teacher. In fact, since He was not just a good teacher, but the Word of God incarnate, for anyone to refer to Him as an especially holy sage and then to seek from such a man only God could be trusted to know for certain, is all a terrible error. In this sense, the rich young ruler is turning aside from the true, divine foundation of Moses and the prophets to what he supposes, without any reasoned basis, is but an admirable, quite human rabbi renowned for his unusual wisdom. AND NO MAN, ANCIENT OR MODERN, CAN HAVE JESUS OF NAZARETH ON THESE TERMS! SO, while Jesus instant rebuttal points the rich man to God alone who is good, this is His deliberate thrust to prod this rulers conscience to reflect upon what basis he addresses Him with a title that unquestionably belongs to God. He is scolding His careless use of titles.

2. Why do you ask me about what is good? (Mat. 19:17)

a.

Since the ruler thinks of Jesus as only a man, he is asking Jesus to play God for him. This, because his inconsiderate question demands that Jesus be wiser than God by proposing a step the merit of which would surpass all preceding divine revelations. Now, whatever else may be said about the specific wording of the Evangelists reports, if Jesus goes along with the game and furnishes ANY answer in harmony with this kind of request, He automatically exposes Himself to the accusation of having given information on a problem that only God could be competent to decide. But this is precisely what He did! (See on Mat. 19:21.) Thus, even if Jesus deity and goodness are not clearly expressed, but rather seemed to be denied in His opening words, they are definitely not absent from the ultimatum He handed the young man, since He acts like God by requiring of him what only God could require.

b.

The point is: would the man really depend upon God to furnish him the true answer to his question? If so, why come to Jesus? By coming to Him, does he hope to circumvent the undoubted revelations of God or obviate obedience to them? If so, the only possible answer of a prophet faithful to God is: Go back to what God has already said in the commandments. (Cf. Isa. 8:20 ASV)

Thus, on the rulers assumption that Jesus is a mere human, Jesus MUST refuse both to be called good teacher and hand out private nostrums supposedly leading to eternal life. The only right answer to Jesus question is: I call you Good Teacher and ask you about the good, because I know you are a teacher come from God, since no man can do these miracles you do, unless God be with him. But the ruler gave no such answer at this point in our text. The dull silence of the young man serves to underline his shallowness. Jesus had proven that his complimentary title good teacher was mere flattery and his interest in the good an attempted side-stepping of Gods will.
Whether you are asking for the source of human goodness or for the one good thing essential to have eternal life, One there; is who is good. Will you trust him to tell you? Observe how carefully, almost meticulously Jesus worked with him. He is in no hurry to make a glib convert who can repeat all the correct phrases but with no real understanding of what is involved in his statements. Although this meditation is the slower route, nevertheless to arrive at correct concepts of what is involved in goodness, eternal life, God and commandments is the essential task of true discipleship.

But if you would enter life, keep the commandments. To the modern Christian accustomed to the NT doctrine of the inadequacy and imperfections of the Mosaic Law with its inability to give life or make anyone perfect, this command of Jesus must sound little short of unbelievable. In fact, how can ANYONE enter into life by keeping the commandments He means? (Gal. 3:21; Gal. 5:4; Heb. 7:18 f; Heb. 10:1) Yet, when the young man asked for illustrations, Jesus cited some typical, Mosaic legislation. Good stuff, of course, but why that?!

1.

Because this demand is the all-essential first step to the conversion of anyone. Everyone must come face to face with the divine standard to see his sinfulness and be led by this realization to confess his need of divine grace. Keep the commandments demands perfection, not just relative goodness, because any admission of failure is enough to damn the person who depends upon perfect performance of law for salvation. (Rom. 2:13; Jas. 1:22-25; Jas. 2:8-11) Keep the comments means: Do not just listen to them or play at observing them! This should drive the man to his knees before God in the painful awareness of his own sins, in desperate need of a Savior. In fact, had the young man been more severely honest with himself, he need not have gone any further than this answer, because it was Gods answer for him. Sincerity would have compelled him to cry out with Peter, concerning Moses law, Neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear it. (Act. 15:10) His answer should have been, NONE of these things have I kept from my youth up: God, be merciful to me a sinner! The critical importance of this part of Jesus strategy will be vindicated later. Since the ruler so easily breezed past the Law with its stern demand of perfection, his failure to admit his need for a Redeemer may well explain his failure to accept Christs invitation. Not having really faced the. Law, he was not really ready for the Gospel.

2.

Another reason why Jesus referred him to the commandments might be that these commands find their origin in a divine initiative. They are no merely human codification. Jesus turns his attention to the One there is who is good who is, at the same time, Author of the commandments, hence Author of that which by doing a man shall live (Lev. 18:5). Since the young man had asked for something based on deeds that would lead to life, Jesus is perfectly in order to point him to God and His Law. (Cf. Gal. 3:11-12) But even this points him to Him who alone is Judge and Standard and who alone can enable him to live by such a standard. But to admit this turns ones attention beyond mere deeds of law to see Him who alone can make him good enough to inherit eternal life. In fact, by saying that only God is good, He warns that no man can observe the Law absolutely perfectly, because to be good one must be perfect. If the young man were really thinking now, he must see that his own imperfection damns him and he must cry out for grace. If he is to have this kind of goodness, he must receive it from God as a gift of grace.

3.

Another reason Jesus can safely point this Jew to the commandments is that the overconfident young man might manage to claim perfect observance of some of the Decalogue, but would eventually hang himself on Thou shalt not covet! And, worse, he would prove that he really knew nothing about the First Commandment: Thou shalt have no other gods before me!

So this is the only route, if you would enter life. Nor is this somehow a different route than that which leads to perfection, indicated later. (See Mat. 19:21.) On the assumption that life and perfection represent the same thing in Jesus mind, we may safely conclude that the commandments (v. 17) and the demand of absolute consecration (v. 21) are closely related too. Otherwise, we would have the false dichotomy that common, ordinary people can squeeze into life by keeping ordinary commandments, whereas special perfection is only available for informed insiders who can make extravagant sacrifices in response to personally tailored asceticism. Jesus preliminary answer, then, means that the way to eternal life is not based on the extraordinary or something not already widely known, but rather on the obedience to well-established commands of God.

Whereas Jesus is dealing with one mans personal problem, He nevertheless furnishes him the proper sort of credentials proper for a true prophet. He urges obedience to other well-authenticated revelations, the commandments. This very step is essential for Jesus as much as for the man himself. (Study How to Avoid Becoming a Pharisee after Mat. 15:20, where prophetic credentials are discussed more fully.) From this standpoint, Jesus appeal to the Law as a true beginning point was but one more evidence to the ruler why He should be believed. The Nazarene had not laid another foundation, had not pointed him to other gods or other laws, but significantly directed him to the undoubted Word of God.

2. Jesus furnished him commandments God had already revealed. (19:18, 19)

Mat. 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Because the man asked, What kind of (poas) commandments?, it may be that he anticipated some mysterious precept with such an esoteric excellence that it differed radically in kind from the usual sort of thing ordinary people could learn in the Law. And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19 Honor thy father and thy mother; and Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. The Evangelists listings furnish no secure basis for critical conclusions about liturgical order of the commandments in the early Church. The order of the commandments here is probably unimportant to Jesus, since He is only furnishing the rich young ruler a handful of typical commandments of Gods, extraneous to the Ten Commandments. Attempts to see special significance in the choice of the commandments cited note the following points:

1.

Placing the Fifth Commandment to honor thy father and thy mother after VI-IX does call some attention to it, especially where the Jewish mind would have expected Him to cite the Tenth. Was there some shortcoming in the young mans life with respect to his parents that Jesus could see? Had he dedicated his goods to the temple by the diabolical Corban formula? (See on Mat. 15:3-6.)

2.

Do not defraud (Mar. 10:19) This is found in Lev. 19:13, although the Greek wording is not that of the LXX for this Hebrew text, but of two manuscripts of the LXX of Deu. 24:14, followed by Sir. 4:1 : m aposterses. Defrauding would be the standard businessmans temptation to shrewdness in his transactions, hence quite appropriate to cite for the rich young ruler. However, some see this commandment as a summary reminiscence of Exo. 20:17, the Tenth Commandment, since defrauding presupposes a covetous desire that would do anything to gain what belongs to another.

3.

You shall love your neighbor as yourself. (Lev. 19:18) Plummer (Matthew, 266) decides that Jesus could not have cited Lev. 19:18 on this occasion, because, had He done so, the rich man could not so easily have affirmed, All these have I observed. But this fails to grasp just how shallow the human heart can be, especially if its attention is fixed on some supremely excellent deed and the persons mind is already impatient with familiar precepts like Lev. 19:18! In fact, it is easy to affirm that we have always done this from childhood, until we crash head-on into some unpleasant, uncomfortable or unwanted duty, as this young ruler so abruptly discovered. In fact, it was precisely this commandment that Jesus later chose to test the sincerity of his affirmed desire to be perfect. (Mat. 19:21) Despite all the poverty and suffering all around him, he could still justify piling up wealth. He apparently loved his poor neighbor in the abstract, but not in the concrete, because, when faced with the practical opportunity to meet the immediate needs of some poor people and enlist himself in the service of Christ, which often involves going out of ones way to be of service to others, he balked.

Just because Jesus did not refer here to any particular command related to his relationship to God, we may not assume that Jesus considered the man to have properly ordered his religious life. In fact, by emphasizing his duty in the field of human relations where only truth in the heart can satisfy the conscience, He would show that he was not really in harmony with God either, because failure in human relations deeply affects ones relation to God. (1Jn. 3:14-18; 1Jn. 4:20 f) The Lord did not cite anything from the law of worship or ceremonies, because He knew how relatively easy it is to absolve oneself on the basis of perfect performance of rituals, justifying oneself by saying, If God be appeased by the religious ritual, it does not matter greatly about my personal relationships. After all, my fellows are not going to be my final judge. Rather, with Lenski (Matthew, 750), we may think that Jesus cited these commandments, because they would be the ones of which the rich man might feel surest of his own perfect compliance. Ironically for this way of thinking, God judges us not so much on how orthodox is our ritual (The right mode of baptism is immersion, the Lords Supper every Lords Day, and nothing but Welchs grape juice and Mandelbaums matzos on the communion table, please!), as on how truly seriously we take our relationship to other people. This is the old problem of not just right ritual, but right relations too! (See notes on Mat. 9:13 and Mat. 12:7.) Unconfused by his assertions of his own goodness, Jesus will place before him a simple order that will unmask the legalism of all his previous care for others, And because he will turn down that requirement, this orthodox Jew will prove once more just how difficult it is for Jesus to do anything with the righteous, In fact, Jesus came to call sinners to repentance, not the self-satisfied, self-justifying righteous,

C. THE YOUNG MAN INSISTS ON PERFECTION (19:20)

Mat. 19:20 The young man (neanskos) was not necessarily a mere boy, since a person was considered a youth from about the 24th to the 40th year. (Arndt-Gingrich, 536; cf. neanou of Act. 7:58) All these things have I observed. Attitudes of commentators tend to range themselves into two positions regarding this young businessmans assertions: charity and realism.

1.

With charity we might say that he had observed the Mosaic Law, to the extent that he understood its meaning and to the extent he had fathomed himself. As Staton (Servants Call, 9f) points out, so many religious homes are without real love for God and ones fellows, where its members live by regulations and judge their happiness by their ability to follow certain rules, without ever bothering to wonder to what purpose the rules were given in the first place. So they tell themselves and others that they have performed Gods will merely because they have punctiliously kept a set of memorized rules.

The tragic reality represented by this young man is his unfeigned sincerity in affirming his faithful observance of the Law. His is a position actually possible for the person who accepts the presupposition upon which his statement is based, i.e. eternal life and righteousness can actually be attained by perfect observance of divine law. (Study Pauls own position as a Pharisee: as to righteousness under the lawblameless! Php. 3:6) It just never occurred to such people that the revelation of God to Moses at Sinai depended entirely upon the gracious discretion and enterprise of God, not upon man. And if the Law itself did not depend upon human legislation, neither did the life it offered to those subject to it. Everything depended upon God from start to finish. (Isa. 26:12; 1Ch. 29:10-16) And it is still that way. (Heb. 13:21; Php. 2:13; Php. 1:6; 1Th. 2:13; Joh. 15:4 f; Rom. 7:18; 2Pe. 1:3-11)

Charitably, we may see his declaration, not so much conceited as disappointed that Jesus had nothing more stimulating to tell him than what he had heard all his life. He had expected to be shown something heroic and inspiring and is reminded of mundane responsibilities on which he had been busy since he was a boy. 2. More realistically we may note that he had punctiliously performed all those commandments in harmony with the way they had been understood in Pharisean circles. His answer smacks of Little Jack Horners attitude: What a good boy am I! How could anyone, who knows the holy God of heaven, have the gall to assert, as this man does in all seriousness, I have put into practice everything that Moses required, and am now ready to move on to bigger things!?! This young chap actually took the Love your neighbor as yourself in stride! His is the pride of accomplishment, the certainty that absolutely everything in his past is pleasing to God: there have been no mistakes, no slipups, no blunders, no bungling of any human relation.

Whichever view is taken of his first statement, by his own self-evaluation he should not have made the second one. That is, if Gods will had been faithfully and perfectly observed, as he affirmed, how could such a good man say: What lack I yet?

1.

Did this young fellow really desire an answer to his question? Does not his question sound like the game played by the thousands? These wring their hands in false despair, precisely because they are perfectly sure that they have lived up to the standard, they have always paid their bills, and yet, despite all their rule-keeping, their conscience does not let them rest. Nervously they ask, Whats wrong with me? What have I not done? They expect no real answer from the person asked. They expect rather the soothing confirmation of their own goodness. Should the other person fail to play the game, and, instead of saying, What more do you want? You are already the finest person we know!, he tells them the unwelcome news that they are imperfect in a deliberately ignored area, they are shattered. His statement about his faithful observance of the law exhibits great ignorance of its duties and of himself, but it is sincere. However, is his question as equally sincere?

2.

He is really one step better than the Pharisee praying in the temple (Luk. 18:9-12) who is absolutely certain he had no need for improvement, whereas this young man at least admits the possibility that he lacks something. Hendriksen (Matthew, 726) solves it best:

Here superficial smugness is struggling with deep discontent, This young man tries to make himself believe that all is well; yet on the inside he is pathetically perturbed . . . though he tried hard to believe in his own virtue and respectability, he was actually feeling ill at ease.

Mark (Mar. 10:21) registers here one beautifully tender reaction of the Master: And Jesus looking upon him loved him, Why? Because He could look beyond his shallow self-complacency to see that this promising young person had been victimized by the formalism and legalism so characteristic of a religion of superficial observance of law. He could love him for the lost sheep that he was. (Mat. 18:11-13; Mat. 9:36)

D. JESUS OFFERS PERFECTION THROUGH ABSOLUTE CONSECRATION (19:21)

Mat. 19:21 If you would be perfect means One thing you still lack. (Mar. 10:21; Luk. 18:22) It is not unlikely that, by divine insight, the Lord could have furnished him a rather substantial list of his shortcomings. Such humiliating perhaps would not have accomplished as much as the generous condescension He actually showed. With His usual tenderness He answered the rulers question exactly as asked, You ask, What do I still lack? Just one thing, which, if you desire to be perfect, will make all the difference in the world. (1Jn. 2:15-17; see notes on Mat. 13:7; Mat. 13:22.) It is the step whereby he would really come to know the true God and eternal life. (Joh. 17:3; 1Jn. 5:20 f) This would be no mere perfection in keeping the commandments as such, but perfection in arriving at the heart of ethical conduct and a right understanding of his relation to God and to the neighbor he had claimed to love as himself, which is the basis of all commandments. (See notes on Mat. 5:48.)

If you would be perfect has a touch of irony in it for the man who had just claimed to have kept the commandments, especially the love your neighbor as yourself, a command that perfectly summarizes all that is really involved in moral perfection. But the young man hardly understood all this. There is special irony in Jesus sending him back to this very commandment he had so flippantly claimed to have already kept as much as necessary. Despite the irony, Jesus demand is seriously meant, because He is really testing him on these main points: love and trust in God with all his heart, soul, mind and strength; love and service to his neighbor as himself; and his willingness to follow Jesus leadership. (Mat. 22:36-40 = Mar. 12:28-34; Mat. 16:24 ff)

I.

LOVE FOR GOD ABOVE ALL: Sell all you have . . . and you will have treasure in heaven.

A.

Furnishing this formula to the ruler, Jesus is not thereby subscribing to a doctrine of good works, as if giving away so much wealth could guarantee him so much eternal life. Rather He exacts of him an act of faith in the grace of God and a self-surrender so complete that, without faith, he could never make the leap. So far from depending upon works and leaving out faith, there is almost NOTHING BUT FAITH here. (Col. 3:1-5) In fact, the promise of treasure in heaven guaranteed by God as a result of this major sacrifice is realistic only for the person who believes Him. (Heb. 13:5 f; see notes on Mat. 6:19-34) So far from being a superhuman, esoteric act which would merit eternal life, Jesus command was the simplest, most practical, most immediately verifiable way for him to take hold of Gods grace by faith. But, as proven by the outcome, he did not believe, did not obey Jesus and so could not be saved. Thus, Jesus actually explores his real reverence for God, and so pushes him back to the First, Great Commandment of the Law, summary of the first table of the Decalogue. (Mat. 22:37 f; Exo. 20:1-8; Deu. 6:5; cf. Pro. 19:17; Pro. 14:31; Pro. 28:27; Deu. 15:7-11) The Lord aims at breaking his dependence upon his wealth, so he could learn that he could not do without God. So long as he was well supplied with this worlds goods, he could buy his way out of trouble with out Gods help, and even arrive at the point where he had eliminated all need for the constant, daily provision of the Heavenly Father.

B.

Sell all you have and give it away is an incredibly radical demand for the person who believes wealth to be essential to expansion and influence of the Messianic Kingdom. Jesus therefore asking him completely to disavow an essential article in his credo: no wonder he stumbles at it! But how many thousands of relatively. rich Christians over the centuries have hallowed that article in their practice and thinking? With half-hearted confidence in spiritual power, they substitute a show of wealth in great, barn-like edifices to the glory of God and so that the world will sit up and take notice! They form denominations and interdenominational power structures to ram needed legislation through Congress and lobby at the U.N. and smuggle military weapons to peoples movements struggling for their share in the control of the world. Power in this world is based on wealth, but Jesus shocks everyone by saying to His most promising contact in the wealthy community, Get rid of it! Unbelievable doctrine, but solidly based on Gods usual way of doing things. (Cf. Jer. 9:23-24; 1Co. 1:26 in its context of Mat. 1:18 to Mat. 2:18) Everyone needs to understand that God does not need our wealth and influence, our importance and social position to make His Kingdom function or succeed!

C.

The rich young rulers biographical by-line, he had great possessions, means that he had exceptional means at his disposal, and, whether he was a wise investor or the heir of a billionaire, his millions were locked safely away from the disturbing problems of needy people, as if the care and maintaining of possessions were the destined end-all of Gods intended blessing. As it was, he was but the slave of as many masters as he had possessions, furnishing janitorial service to polish sources of pleasure he rarely if ever used or enjoyed. This is because the, more things one possesses, the more he is obligated to protect, maintain and increase them, leaving him less and less time for the simple enjoyment of any one of them. Worse, because he must realize a wealth-oriented dream in his mind, the mammon-worshipper must turn down what comes to him unmanipulated in life. If God brings him something in life that does not fit his own preordered plans, he must ruthlessly thrust it aside, if his own scheme is to be realized. And yet, this young man had asked Jesus for something that did not fit preordered schemes! From this standpoint, his original question was destined to bring him to choose whether he would leave his own wealth-oriented dreams in order to accept the unforeseen in Gods will that risked his wealth, or hold tenaciously to his dreams and risk losing God too. So, he cannot really enjoy reality as it is, even if God Himself made it that way. Instead, he tries to force reality to conform to his limited preconceptions and dreams born of what money can buy. Thus, he misses all the interesting, richly exciting, genuinely satisfying experiences of adjusting himself to new, spiritual realities that could bless his life beyond his happiest imagining.

II.

LOVE AND SERVICE FOR HIS NEIGHBOR AS HIMSELF: Give it to the poor. How could he so carelessly pretend to love his neighbor as himself (Mat. 19:19 b), when he hoarded, despite the poor all around him? (Mat. 19:22; cf. Jas. 1:27; Jas. 2:14-16; Jas. 5:1-6; 1Jn. 3:15-18) Wealth tends to develop in the possessor the impulse to cling to possessions in order to retain them. Thus, selfishness develops, growing out of the struggle to hold what is in constant danger of slipping away through ones own neglect or through the greed of others. So Jesus strikes at the heart of his problemselfishness, not merely the abundant possessions he had. Note that not even here do we find asceticism or self-privation ordered as an end in itself. This is not poverty for povertys sake, but the ideal of brotherhood and sharing. It is rather the intelligent distribution of his goods made available to the poor, his brethren. (Cf. Lukes word, didos, distribute, Luk. 18:22. See also Act. 2:44 f; Act. 4:34 f.) Genuine love must be the motive. (1Co. 13:3)

III.

WILLINGNESS TO FOLLOW JESUS LEADERSHIP: and come, follow me.

A.

The severity of Jesus demand is softened into a sincere, affectionate invitation. Jesus actually wanted him in His service, because He could envision what this young man could become under his tutelage.

B.

The remedy for addiction to possessions does not lie in the communistic equalization of wealth or in divorcing our day-to-day existence from dependence upon some form of economic system. God knows that no man can live in a utopia where the necessities of life should not have to be paid for, because man is a sinner who has already destroyed the one utopia for which he was created, and he will not have another until he faces squarely the problem of His own sinfulness. (Study Gen. 3:16-19; 2Th. 3:6-13; 1Th. 2:9; 1Th. 4:11 f; Eph. 4:28.) Rather, the cure for wealth addiction (= covetousness = idolatry, Col. 3:5) is to be found in discipleship to Jesus. Only He can restore us to sanity by helping us to see the true value of what He calls treasure in heaven and by devaluating all our temporal value systems, all our earthly treasures. Because our treasure takes our heart with it (Mat. 6:21), earthly riches tend to shackle our hearts, our interests, efforts and hopes to this earth, causing us to lose sight of, and finally interest in, the things of God and eternity. This is worldliness. (1Jn. 2:15 ff) His discipleship, then, is not an extra without which we could get along quite satisfactorily, because if we did not take His word for the reality of our true treasures in heaven, we would not take the steps He indicates to make it ours! Unless we follow Him, finding our true security in our trust in His leadership, our dependence upon His evaluations and His advice for our investments, we are at the mercy of every other temptation floating through our consciousness.

C.

If we interpret Jesus demands as terms on which the ruler could have become an intimate follower at the level of the others, then Jesus strict impartiality becomes evident, since He subjects him to the same sacrifices the other more intimate followers had made in order to enter His service. (See on Mat. 19:27.)

The young man had supposed that he could keep his wealth and inherit eternal life too by means of some magic formula he hoped to learn from Jesus. But Jesus, acting like God, demanded that he do something that did not fit an already established moral scheme. He suddenly overturned the calculating reasoning of the man and handed him what appears to be the special, tailor-made formula he had requested. And yet it was not a formula that he had expected, because it required no monumental use of his wealth, nor did it depend upon his past deeds or goodness. Rather, it stripped him of his usual supports and economic strength, leaving him practically naked before God and the world, and enrolled by faith in the discipleship of an itinerate rabbi whose future was not yet all that clear. The ironic thing about this whole situation is that he had asked for some nearly superhuman deed whereby he could inherit eternal life, and when, in form, Jesus furnished him precisely what he had requestedalthough the substance totally overturned his own concept of ithe turned it down. He had practically asked Jesus to play God for him by furnishing an arbitrary task that did not fit the usual scheme of things (such as the commandments in the law), and Jesus gave it to Him. Yet, in essence, He demanded that the ruler simply repent of his addiction to wealth which is nothing more than the idolatry of covetousness. The specific form his repentance was to take must not obscure the fact that he was ordered to repent.

But is there nothing for the modern Christian in this special demand? Certainly, the surprising thing about Jesus stringent demand made of the rich young ruler is that it is not just a tailor-made ultimatum specially designed for that mans special situation and personal need. It is the kind of dictate that Jesus could hand ANYONE! (See notes on Mat. 13:44-46; cf. esp. Mat. 19:29. Cf. Luk. 12:33 in its total context of Jesus message on trusting God completely, Luke 12.) The concept of heavenly wealth, as opposed to earthly riches, is not new for Jesus. (See notes on Mat. 6:20 in its context of Mat. 6:19-34!)In fact, Jesus demand of the rich young ruler was nothing less than the rule that governed and explains His own matchless life in the fruitful service of God. In order to reign, He too sold all that He had and gave it to the poor! (2Co. 8:9; Rom. 5:6 ff) He too had to conquer by dying to all that was dear to Him. This is the pathway to eternal life for every disciple. (See Special Study: The Cost of Our Salvation after Mat. 16:28.)

In fact, the difference between Jesus requirement of the rich young ruler and what He demands of everyone is only a question of details: what specifically must we do with our possessions? The ruler must sell everything and distribute it and we must turn over to Christ all claimed right to our possessions and then utilize them as His administrators, i.e. considering them a stewardship for His use. On 1Co. 7:29-31, Bartchy (First-Century Slavery, 152) is correct to notice that Pauls insistence that whereas the various earthly activities and relationships in which Christians were involved were not rejected, their definitive character for Christian existence had been negated, was founded not merely upon the passing of the present world scheme or upon the shortness of the time, but upon the call of God. (1Co. 7:15 c, 1Co. 7:17-24) It is not buying as such that is called in question but rather the keeping, the seizing, the possessing . . . Also, Paul did not criticize in principle either crying or rejoicing. (See Rom. 12:15.) That is, we are to fix our attention on what God wants to do in our lives where we are with what little or much We have, rather than concern ourselves over much with the superficial, often accidental, circumstances that characterize our existence on earth, e.g. marriage, slavery, wealth, commercial activities, former religious status, etc. Accordingly, the determining attitude for Jesus disciple is a refusal to set ones heart on earth and its transient treasures, for the schema of this world is on the way out! (1Co. 7:31 b) Can you imagine the revolution in rich-poor relations that such insights must bring to people who accept them?

With insight Tolbert (Good News From Matthew, 165f) notes how Jesus statement to Nicodemus, You must be born again, has been turned into a clich to repeat to everyone who wants to become a Christian. What would be the result in our twentieth century affluent world, were we to hammer out the demand Jesus laid before the rich young ruler? How many so-called Christians on the rolls today would have ever become a Christian, if they had been required to repent of their covetousness before being baptized? How many are unquestionably rich rulers with more real concern for their possessions than for God? Since when has this idolatry become fashionably Christian? Rather than be owned by their possessions, people must be free to be able for Christs sake to utilize or dispose of them as the situation demands. The man that allows possessions to govern his thinking and activity cannot allow God to do so. (Mat. 6:24)

E BUT THE YOUNG MAN BALKED (19:22)

Mat. 19:22 But when the young man heard the saying, he went away sorrowful; for he was one that had great possessions. The rich young ruler is not like the happy farmer or the pearl merchant (see notes on Mat. 13:44-46), because, although he was faced with the supreme cost and value of the Kingdom (eternal life or perfection), he would not buy. He turned it all down and walked away, and Jesus let him go! Of what use to the Kingdom of God were his talents, his youth, his management ability, his uprightness, etc., if his claim to love his neighbor as himself (Mat. 19:19) is false? Loving ones God enough to make this kind of sacrifice for the Kingdom is what the Kingdom is all about! However, everyones will to accept must be left free to refuse, so Jesus did not detain him. If he did not really love God or his neighbor more than his gold, what kind of a disciple would he really have made? Although Jesus loved him (Mar. 10:21), He did not compromise His principle a hairs breadth to attain an influential addition to His cause. Staton (Servants Call, 10) wisely counsels:

Jesus was not just concerned about the quantity of His disciples but also about their quality. When we go about making disciples, we must not overlook the kinds of people Jesus discipled and the kinds He allowed to walk away.

Why was he sorrowful?

1.

Is he shocked, hurt and grieved that for the strength of His Kingdom the Master can so easily do without the success symbols, means, power and influence that he, as a wealthy person has to offer? He had undoubtedly envisioned a situation where he could keep his wealth, respectability, power and influence, and have his eternal life too. And, if he resembles the other disciples, he was probably convinced that the Kingdom of God was going to need his very gifts and possessions to make its influence felt in the world, for are not these the indicators of success in our world? This would have let him nourish his addiction to wealth and guarantee him a slice of eternal life too!

2.

Is it merely because he loved his possessions too much to part with them? If so, although Matthew says, he had great possessions, it is also true to say, Great possessions had him! He was accustomed to the sway over others that wealth can buy. He had heard his money talk and enjoyed its commanding voice. But what would be left of him, if he lost his voice?

3.

Or is it because he could see that Jesus had just unmasked him for the moral pauper he really was, and that, stripped of. his pseudo-respectability, he could perceive that there was nothing left inside? Could he see that, unless he made the demanded sacrifice of total consecration, he would have wasted all his other efforts at goodness? Was he shaken to see that the pain of withdrawal from his addiction only underlined that much more clearly how thoroughly he depended on wealth to provide him his sources of happiness and security? Because he dreaded to take the risk and make the plunge Jesus indicated, he was not unlikely aghast at his own cowardice, at how needy he was and how very insecure without that crutch that gave him identity and apparent importance. His sorrowfulness is a plain symptom of his addiction, because a person who is not addicted is able to do with less, or at times even without, painlessly. He probably had thought himself equal to anything the Master could demand of him, only to find himself dangling helplessly from his own money tree.

4.

He was sorrowful, because he felt deeply the rightness and reasonableness of Jesus answer. Otherwise, he would likely have scorned it as extravagant or insulting. His grief is the product of his struggle to choose between giving up his purpose to have eternal life and giving up his possessions.

He had great possessions. Why mention this so late in the incident? Up to this point his major failing seemed to have been his self-righteousness, but here he chokes on the demand to liquidate everything and make practical use of it as gifts to the poor and take up personal discipleship to Jesus. Very possibly his addiction to wealth is mentioned last, after his standard Jewish morality is made abundantly clear, so that the reader may be psychologically satisfied that his wealth is not necessarily ill-gotten gain, and perhaps actually led to the (typically Jewish) conclusion that his wealth is but the normal pay-off for his orthodox goodness. (See on Mat. 19:25.) This, then, would be for the purpose of showing that even the undoubted blessing of wealth from God can become the most exacting slavery and the most unquestionable idolatry, and although justifiable within limits, must be unmercifully sacrificed when it becomes the cause of ones own spiritual loss. (Study Mat. 18:6-9.)

F. JESUS COMMENT ON THE INCIDENT AND TEACHING ON WEALTH (19:2330)
1. Entrance into Gods Kingdom is difficult for the wealthy. (19:23)

Mat. 19:23 Verily I say unto you, It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. The young man went away sorrowful, but he left Jesus sorrowing too. The Lords quiet observation is the reaction of One who fully understands the demand He has just made and is grieved that such a fine, potential disciple could not break himself free from the one slavery, the one idolatry, that held him bound.

But why should it be so tough for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God? Two reasons suggest themselves:

1.

Simply because his unwillingness to admit that, despite all the tangible evidences to the contrary, he has not really arrived in the Kingdom. He must begin all over, as a little child. (See notes on Mat. 18:3-4; Joh. 3:3-5.) The trauma for so many self-made men would be so great that the necessary self-humiliation would always elude them. In fact, to admit as final the value system of the Kingdom of God means that they must reject the finality and the this-worldly goals of the often unethical economic systems upon which so much of their wealth is founded. But the habits of mind and practice developed to gain, maintain and increase their wealth will have become so ingrained that to admit that they are totally mistaken means literally that anyone whose whole life has been immersed in that way of life must completely start over. Nicodemus question (Joh. 3:4) is really pathetic, really pained, because it hurts deeply to admit that most, if not everything one is or has, at best, is wrongly oriented, and, at worst, is a deliberate exploitation and an abuse of others. (Jas. 2:6-7; Jas. 4:1-6; Jas. 4:13 to Jas. 5:6) The deep chagrin felt by every driver who learns that he has gone miles out of his way and yet is nowhere near his destination and must lose further time and spend extra money and effort to arrive at the proper end of his journey only faintly illustrates that inner self-accusation and humiliating disappointment burning in the soul of the man who suddenly discovers that almost everything he represented in the past was foolish and wicked in the balance of eternity. (Luk. 12:13-21; see fuller notes on Mat. 6:19-34.) Poor rich man! is no idle comment!

2.

Although God had said, You shall remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you power to get wealth, that he may confirm his covenant which he swore to your fathers, as at this day. (Deu. 8:18), this precept is easily forgotten in the temptation to bow to economic power as a supreme being in itself. Very few people are capable of keeping their head all the time in the fast-moving rush to hold and increase ones wealth. (Study 1Ti. 6:9 f, 1Ti. 6:17-19, notes on Mat. 13:7; Mat. 13:22; as also Wilson, Learning From Jesus, 273296.)

In short, the reason wealth blocks its possessors access to the Kingdom lies, not so much in the possession itself, as if wealth per se contaminated like nuclear radiation, as in the attitude of the possessor toward what he thinks wealth is and what wealth can do. The difficulty, therefore, lies primarily in what wealth does to the possessor. (See full notes on Mat. 6:19-34.) In fact, this may explain the low-profile discipleship of Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. (Cf. Joh. 19:38 f; Mat. 27:57; Mar. 15:43; Luk. 23:50) Vested interests make even good men cowardly lest they lose their grip on their investments in position, wealth; power, etc.

Enter the kingdom of heaven, in this context, means be saved (Mat. 19:25) or be perfect (Mat. 19:21) or inherit eternal life (Mat. 19:16). The Kingdom, here, means that life lived under the rule of God which begins in this life with ones salvation from sin and proceeds through his perfection in the character of Christ and culminates in life lived with God for eternity. (See notes on the Kingdom after Mat. 13:53.) It is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven means that the man addicted to wealth is an idolater who has too much at stake in his possessions to let God be the Ruler of his life, because this rule is the Kingdom.

Mark (Mar. 10:24) reports that the disciples were amazed at his words, a foretaste of their mounting astonishment that breaks out in Mat. 19:25 with their Who then can be saved? This close quizzing of the Lord by the disciples that we see taking place in this subsection (Mat. 19:23-26) is precisely what Jesus intended should happen on other occasions, when, as in the Sermon on the Mount for example, He overturned everyones expectations about the position and importance that wealth and power structures represented for the Kingdom of God. (Study note on Mat. 5:3 ff; cf. Luk. 6:20; Luk. 6:24.) Disciples are driven to decide once again whether they think Jesus view is the only tenable position, or whether their own is real. Is it really true that the blessing of the Kingdom is the possession of the poor in spirit?

2. Apostles are staggered, (Mar. 10:24), but Jesus repeats His dictum even more emphatically. (Mat. 19:24)

Mat. 19:24 Again I say to you means that Jesus is coming at His previous statement from another angle, because the hard (Mat. 19:23) is not illustrated by the camel going through the needles eye. In Mark (Mar. 10:24), Jesus actually repeated His former exclamation: How hard it is to enter the Kingdom of God! Although even in Mark Jesus stays on the subject of the perils of wealth as an obstacle to entrance into the Kingdom, it would seem that Jesus means: You are astonished that I say that it is difficult for men of means to get into the Kingdom? Let me remind you that it is difficult for ANYONE to enter the Kingdom!

On Mar. 10:24 it should be noticed that the better manuscripts do not have the expression, for those who trust in riches, a rich man, nor those who have possessions. As Metzger (Textual Commentary, 106) points out, The rigor of Jesus saying was softened by the insertion of one or another qualification that limited its generality and brought it into close connection with the context.

But Jesus meant to leave it general, because He must also deal specifically with this generality later. (Mat. 19:26) Thus, in Mark He means: No ONE can claim prior right to entrance into the Kingdom on the basis of accidental distinctions such as race, wealth and social position, or cultural acquisitions such as the external performance of a legal code.

It is easier for a camel to go through a needles eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. We need not waste pages deciding whether the camel was really a camel and the needles eye really a needles eye. These expressions need no further comment than Jesus word: impossible! (Mat. 19:26) If it be urged that Jesus did not say that it is impossible for a rich man to enter the Kingdom, then it must be answered that the term rich man is ambiguous. Does rich man mean owner, or rather steward of great wealth that really belongs to God? The monied man who answers, That wealth is MINE, cannot enter the Kingdom. The even wealthier magnate who exclaims, Why, it is only Gods: I am just His responsible administrator with no proprietary rights over these vast holdings!, understands Jesus and can enter the Kingdom. The first thinks HE is a rich man; the latter knows he owns nothing and that God is the wealthy One.

The disciples reaction (Mat. 19:25) is understandable only if we see them reacting to a paradoxical declaration that pictures a proverbial impossibility. It is a useless exercize to point to any of these words as special Biblical Greek capable of special renderings, when every one of these words (kmelon, trmatos, rhafdos, trumalis, betnes) is known to classical Greek. (Rocci, 384, 963, 1638, 1853, 1862) The explanation that camel (kmelon) should be cable (kmilon). is but a feeble human attempt to attenuate the rigor of Jesus hard saying. It does not represent the correct textual rendering of Matthew, Mark or Luke (See Metzger, Textual Commentary, 50, 106, 169.), and should be forgotten by serious NT scholarship, except as a lesson on what not to do with NT words.

3. Dumbfounded, the disciples ask: If a rich man cannot be saved, who can? (19:25)

Mat. 19:25 And when the disciples heard it, they were astonishingly exceedingly, saying, Who then can be saved? What does their question mean?

1.

Is this the anguished outcry of a pilfering Judas? (Remember Joh. 12:4-6.) Some believe Jesus unrelenting rejection of a rich man as a proper candidate for the Kingdom was not only to correct the disciples understanding about the rich young ruler, but also, even primarily, to bring Judas back to reality. In the same way other Apostles were dreaming of thrones and honors, was Judas imagining the wealth that would be his? But Matthews words is disciples (plural), because there were more than Judas who were stunned by Jesus incomprehensible rejection of the wealthy.

2.

It is not unlikely that the disciples underlying presupposition was a typically Hebrew argument: Does not God furnish man the power to get wealth? (Deu. 8:18) But would He have blessed the wicked in his greedy grasping? (Psalms 1; Pro. 3:9 f, Pro. 3:16; Pro. 10:22; Pro. 11:24 f; Pro. 15:6; Pro. 22:4; Pro. 24:3 f) Therefore, whatever other faults the rich may have, they must have some hidden merits which the all-seeing God chooses to reward. Is not wealth, then, evidence of ones righteousness? But if a rich man cannot be saved, who can?! Such an argument assumes, of course, that any amount of goodness, merits or future obedience can make up for past sins and failures. Had they been considering the licentious rich who cruelly grind the poor under their heel (cf. Jas. 2:6 f; Jas. 5:1-6), they could have more readily agreed with Jesus. But Jesus was discussing a wealthy person who was but one step away from perfection! If those whom we deem particularly qualified for the Kingdom cannot enter, then who can?

3.

The disciples question, Who then can be saved?, means: Then, no one can be saved! They rightly sense that Jesus refers to a situation possible for anyone. Their question has its proper answer: Zacchaeus can be saved in identically the same way Jesus indicates here. (Luk. 19:9 f) But this they do not see. They only guess that all people are attracted to wealth and are driven by it, whether rich or poor. Therefore, since all have the virus, all must be damned.

Does their question mean that they too are secret addicts of wealth, shocked that Jesus had just wiped out their covertly admired heroes? To admire or indulge the practices and philosophy of the wealthy because of the quantity of comforts their wealth can provide them is riot merely to acknowledge the addict in us, but also to become their accomplice by tacit or even unwitting secret agreement with them. Idolizing the money-grabber is already a latent commitment to the same paralyzing idolatry that will manifest itself when the first opportunity presents itself. Are the disciples dupes of the propaganda circulated by monied people to ease their own conscience about their own enslaving habit? Unfortunately, those accustomed to wealth often have societys communications media working full-time not only to perpetuate the concept that life is linked with wealths purchases (contrast Luk. 12:15), but also to make this the official ideology of the world. Those who are relatively poor or really so, then, when confronted with this philosophy, have the choice of rejecting the popular dogma by accepting or rationalizing their poverty and being thought fools, or of becoming Mammon-worshippers too. After all, wealth is relative: one can be as dependent upon wealth with little as with much. Trusting in riches is a question of attitude toward it, not how much one actually possesses of it. There is, of course, Jesus third alternative: that of relativizing wealth by reassigning to the means of material wealth its true economic function, by subordinating it to the things of the spirit, which, in His view, is the true treasure. As we saw taught in Matthew 18 and as this section illustrates, the present age of the world is structured in such a way as to draw exaggerated attention to the powerful and the wealthy, who are, from Jesus standpoint, the less secure, the more infantile, less scrupulous and more bulldozing members of the race.

Nevertheless, Jesus will answer the Twelves pessimistic question by showing that not everyone will be so selfish. Rather, everyone who is motivated to make the sacrifice will be saved, and at the same time, will be amply repaid all that this cost him, even in this life. (Mat. 19:29)

In this particular case, the disciples ask, If a rich man cannot be saved, who can? But other disciples with other orientations would just as easily ask: If an ecstatic charismatic cannot be saved, who can? or If an ascetic holy man cannot, who can? Or it might be a philosopher as opposed to the man on the street, or just any man as opposed to a woman, or a free man as opposed to a slave, a Jew as opposed to a Gentile, a powerful king as opposed to a lowly commonerand the list is endless. (Cf. 1Co. 1:26-31; 1Co. 2:6; 1Co. 3:18-23; 1Co. 4:8-18; 1 Corinthians , 7; Gal. 3:28) The reason for this is that, according to each ones orientation, these various groups, due to their inherent merits, are thought to have automatically attained or earned the goal coveted by all. Nevertheless, a Christians salvation and self-identity does not depend upon his earthly status, but upon what God makes possible for him to become in Christ and in accepting the challenge to be a Christian right where he is with what he has. Christs invitation to discipleship is not based on the disciples earthly situation, race, sex or social condition, but upon His own graciousness. Paul had learned this, and so could almost turn eloquent prose into poetry describing the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord! (Php. 3:8-11)

4. Jesus answers: God is lord of all possibilities. (19:26)

Mat. 19:26 With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. Whatever else the details of this wonderful declaration may mean, Jesus proclaims in dramatic terms the absolute Lordship of God: God is in absolute control of everything: with God all things are possible. This declaration has soul-stirring significance for the original hearers and readers of this Gospel, especially because they faced earth-shaking sociological, economic, philosophical and theological upheavals that threatened to leave them adrift on a chart-less sea. But to know that God is at the helm of the universe is security. But this fact also had immediate, personal ramifications for those disciples who were not a little perplexed when their Master took a hard line on divorce. (Mat. 19:10) And just now He has all but damned societys greatest, most influential citizens. (Mat. 19:23-25) Their emotions and readiness to believe are being strained to the limit, as if everything they had nailed down was coming loose. With these words Jesus anchors their souls to something solid that counts, something that is eternal, unaffected by time and change, to a God with whom all things are possible. (Cf. Luk. 1:37; Gen. 18:14; Jer. 32:17; Jer. 32:27; Zec. 8:6)

But the very proposition, with God all things are possible, may very well mean that, for the disciples as for anyone else, God may well have to take some unpredictable steps, unforeseeable by limited human conceptions. While God may be counted upon to be perfectly wise, holy and loving, He may talk and act in ways that no one on earth could have foreseen or predicted with certainty. This is because God cannot be shut in by human categories or definitions. In fact, Jesus parable of the Eleventh-Hour Laborers (Mat. 20:1-16) explicitly teaches the unexpected truth that, in contrast to the usual, human notion that recompense should be measured on the basis of work quotas met, everything depends upon the free will and mercy of God.

What is it that with men is impossible, but easily falls within the province of God with whom all things are possible? Two answers are possible, depending on what is meant by this or on what is meant by with men, with God.

1.

This refers to the disciples question, Who then can be, saved?

a.

Basically, their question meant, Who can be saved from the addiction of wealth so as to be admitted to the Kingdom? They implied that none could be saved, because all normal people are involved, in one way or another, in the preoccupation with the gaining and maintaining of possessions.

b.

Further, if those who seem to be gifted, particularly qualified personalities cannot be saved, who can?

Jesus answers either standpoint.

2.

With men, with God means in the judgment of men or God about what each can do.

a.

It is a mistake to understand the preposition with in either phrase as referring to accompaniment. With (par with the dative in both cases) does not mean to indicate the person with whom one cooperates, i.e. God or men, as determining the possibilities of the case, as if Jesus had said, If being saved depended upon other men, men cannot be saved. When men take Gods hand, they can do the impossible and be saved. Jesus did not say this.

b.

Rather, par with the dative points to the judgment seat before whom one stands figuratively: in the sight, or judgment, of someone. This meaning passes over into the simpler with and becomes almost equivalent to the dative, possible or impossible for someone. (Arndt-Gingrich, 615) He means, therefore, that what in human judgment is impossible, God judges perfectly possible. Since we cannot live with wealth and we cannot live without some possessions, we must judge salvation, perfection and eternal life to be unobtainable. But God alone can work the necessary transformation of our vision of wealth.

so that we no longer depend upon it, but upon Him.

Men just cannot merit salvation, no matter how rich or righteous they are, because no amount of human qualifications can remove sin. (Heb. 9:22; Eph. 1:7) Only a perfect sacrifice can effect that. (Joh. 1:29; 1Pe. 1:18-21; Rom. 3:21-26; Rom. 5:6-11; Heb. 7:26-28; Heb. 9:11-14; Heb. 9:23-26; Heb. 10:10; Heb. 10:26) And only God can furnish a sacrifice like that, for with God all things are possible, and, as Jesus will say later, He Himself is that sacrifice, a ransom for many. (Mat. 20:28) Salvation is in the hands, not of self-congratulating men, but of a God who, seeing the human mediocrity and incapacity to be perfect, can do precisely what Jesus did with the rich young ruler, i.e. provide an arbitrary path to eternal life. This arbitrariness, however, is apparent only to people who have carefully amassed their fortune in moral merit badges and brownie points with a view to cashing them in on eternal life at the end. But because they are sinners, they must not suppose that any quantity of merit can pay for one sin. This must be atoned for on quite another basis, because any goodness they may have expressed was totally their duty. (Luk. 17:7-10) The arbitrariness of God consists in His choice to save, not those who have carefully earned their salvation, but those who never earned it at all, but rather trusted Him to be generous and did what He asked. (See notes on Mat. 20:1-16; cf. Rom. 4:4-5.) This is but the Pauline doctrine of justification by the obedience of faith. (Cf. Rom. 1:5; Rom. 16:26; Rom. 3:25; Rom. 4:24; Rom. 5:1; Rom. 6:17 f, etc.)

The. reason wealth and religious merit may be connected in this context is that wealth is but coined life, i.e. time and energy used to produce a certain result, hence that for which a man spends his lifetime must be considered his wealth, because he considered it worth his effort to produce or pursue it. This is why excessive well-being, too many worries, any earth-bound work carried on unlimitedly, all hinder the individual from possessing the Kingdom, because these leave no space, no time, no energy, no spiritual freedom to dedicate himself to the things of God in the common things of life. Anything that occupies our whole life and leaves no time for the Kingdom of God, anything that leaves us insensitive to Christian concerns or does not permit us to feel the need of Gods salvation, is dangerous wealth. This includes that wealth that consists in religious practices punctually observed and carefully registered which salve the conscience that ones duty is done, but at the price of true love for God. (Cf. Maggioni, Luca, 237) So, even if a man spends a lifetime hoarding up a treasure of merit wherewith he may buy his soul out of hell and pay for his right to enter Gods eternal rest, his pursuit of this wealth is a striving after wind and vanity too.

The rich young ruler was a man who, by almost anyones standards, deserved to be ushered into the Kingdom on a red carpet, but, staggered by the unexpectedly high price of the Kingdom, judged it impossible for him to pay, and walked away. In glorious contrast to him; however; there is Zacchaeus, the filthy rich chief tax collector. There hardly lived a man more camelly to go through the needles eye of the Kingdom than he! And yet, during a visit with Jesus Christ, by the grace of God IN HE WENT! (Luk. 19:9) Not because rich, but because repentant.

If the Apostles question means, Who can break the spell that wealth holds over its possessors?, Jesus later answer to Peter (Mat. 19:29) will show that God had already begun to succeed in liberating the Twelve (with the possible exception of Judas) and many others from the fascination of possessions.

G. PETERS WRONG-HEADED QUESTION ANSWERED (19:2730)

1. We have sacrificed what the rich young ruler would not: what is our reward?

Mat. 19:27 Lo, we have left all. Objectively, they had sacrificed little more than a few boats and nets and the simple fisherfolk that made up their families, hardly a treasure to compare with the rulers millions. But it was their entire life: their livelihood, their loved ones. So when they turned away from these things to follow Jesus, they demonstrated as truly their dedication to Jesus as if they had renounced all the finest gold in the world or forsaken the treasured company of kings. What then shall we have? Is Peters reaction to the foregoing statements of Jesus positive or negative?

1.

Positive. Peter sees that the Twelve disciples had actually made great sacrifices to be in His personal service. They had willingly done what the rich young ruler had not, although the objective quantity was not near as great. If, then, the road of the wealthy is a dead-end street, what lies ahead on the road of sacrifice? Because the Lord does not seem to scold Peters abrupt question, it may be that He interprets Peter as asking, Lord, since we have sacrificed for the Kingdom, does this mean that we are among the recipients of Gods grace for whom He facilitates entrance into the Kingdom? What has God made possible for us? Since Jesus had pointed out the impossibility to be saved (With men this is impossible), Peter may be uncertain about whether they, in their sacrificing, were laying up heavenly, treasure. But the fact that Jesus is not openly scolding in His answer is not decisive, because even His slightest warning (Mat. 19:30; Mat. 20:16) may be thought to contain a criticism of Peters question.

2.

Negative. The rich young ruler had just been turned away because of the hold earthly possessions had on him, and now poor, grasping Peter commits the same basic error! What shall we have? means that what the Apostles even then possessed in the Person of Jesus Christ was to be judged meager in comparison with what they considered missing, and undoubtedly less than what they. expected to come.

a.

Peter and anyone who agreed with him was still addicted to wealth, because he just cannot quite stop thinking about what has been surrendered to be in Jesus service. Worse, he values too lowly the beauty and preciousness of all the compensations with which he was even then surrounded. (Cf. Mat. 13:16 f; Luk. 10:23 f; Heb. 11:13; 1Pe. 1:10-12)

b.

Further, Peters observation has the flavor of self-righteousness, because we have left all reminds the Lord of the greatness of their self-denial. So his question is colored by covetousness. Perhaps he thought, Our rare success in doing what the most amply qualified citizens find impossible to do must be a very meritorious accomplishment indeed, What shall we have?, then, hints for V.I.P. positions and preferential treatment.

c.

In the larger context, it may be that Jesus remarks on the dangerous temptations of riches had a discouraging effect on Peter, leaving him uneasy about prospects of immediate reward on earth in the Kingdom of a King who inexplicably refused to be crowned (Joh. 6:15) and steadily predicted His own judicial murder (Mat. 16:21; Mat. 17:22 f).

Though charity requires that we not condemn Peter without solid proof of his guilt, the latter interpretation seems more correctly to explain his motivation, since the warning Jesus gives in Mat. 19:30 and more especially the point of the Parable of the Eleventh Hour Laborers (Mat. 20:1-16) grows directly out of this question. Over-concern about contracts with God and the What is there in it for me? spirit endangers those who react and reason this way, because of its legalistic calculation, its putting self-interest first in priorities, and its expecting preferential treatment.

2. Jesus answers: You will be rewarded, but not on the basis you think. (19:28-20:16)

a. PROMISE: In the new world, you will reign with me, judging all Israel.

Mat. 19:28 Although His further remarks will leave the merit-counting self-seekers scratching their heads and frustrated, the interesting thing about Jesus answer here is the gentleness of His reproof of Peters self-interested question. Instead of criticizing his question, He answered it! There is a striking similarity between this reaction and His promises given in Luk. 22:28-30, despite the self-seeking dispute among the Twelve about relative rank and importance at the Last Supper (Luk. 22:24-27). A closer look at the answer in each context, however, may convince us that His promise of their future greatness intends to destroy any hope of personal gain or superiority over others. He disappoints every aspiration of personal distinction in a graduated hierarchical scale by seating them on twelve equal thrones. No one is worthy to be seated higher than another. This implies that no merit is accumulated even on the basis of the relatively differing sacrifices made by each one. (See on Mat. 20:1-16.)

You who have followed me means you who have continued with me in my trials. (Cf. Luk. 22:28) The disciples deserved high positions in the Kingdom, not because they had sacrificed so much (Mat. 19:27), but because they had been willing to be His disciples despite all the common-sense rationalizations that told them to drop Him. They would be rewarded on the basis of their well-tested but victorious faith. They had seen in Him absolutely nothing that would concretely sustain any real hope of earthly security or power. Their faith is not perfect: they would misunderstand Him and they would yet express some ambitious hopes. (Mat. 20:20-28) But these failings, in His view, were but ripples on an otherwise calm sea of deep trust in Him. He did not despise the generosity of their self-denial, however often it might misunderstand Him. Their general humility and willingness to be led was worth everything to Him: why should He fail to reward them? Only an uninformed, greedy jealousy could raise an eyebrow at the idea of rewarding them for following Him, because, as He has intimated time without number, the rewards of the Kingdom are not the sort of thing that would attract the greedy or arouse the materialistic anyway. (See The Reasonableness of the Redeemers Rewarding Righteousness, Vol. I, 198201; cf. notes on Mat. 10:41 f and Mat. 20:20-28,) And, because eleven-twelfths of their number would finally learn the critical route to true greatness (Mat. 18:1-4), He now replies to their original question in language more nearly resembling what they hoped He would use. But even then, the nearness of terminology must not be mistaken for nearness in thought!

In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. As suggested above, regardless of what attraction the Apostles thought they saw in these words as they heard them the first time, they did not receive what they anticipated. And yet the Lord did not deceive them, because it was something similar, but something which their later, maturer Christian judgment would decide far superior and far more gratifying than all their earlier, paltry dreams. But to what does Jesus refer here? Note the two possible time elements and their relative applications:

1. The regeneration:

2. The Apostles judging the 12 tribes of Israel:

a. The Christian age

a. By means of their teaching

b. The renovation of the universe

b. By decisions at the great judgment

It may well be that such neat outlining is far more precise than the Lord Himself, especially if we must make either/or choices between what in the Lords thinking may have been one continuous process that would include all of the above elements as progressive phases in the process. The details of that process, examined individually, then in harmony with each other, illustrate this.

1.

Because Jesus says in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on his glorious throne, the time element is contemporaneous with the glorious reigning of the Messiah. Elsewhere, instead of saying in the regeneration, Jesus said in my Kingdom. (Luk. 22:30) His reign was announced as an accomplished fact the first Pentecost after His ascension. (Act. 2:33-36) His Kingdom is a present reality. (Col. 1:13; 1Co. 15:24 f; Heb. 1:8; Eph. 5:5; 2Ti. 4:1; Rev. 1:9)

2.

Regeneration (palingenesa), as the Greek word suggests, refers simply to that long-awaited era when everything would begin to be made new. This would begin with the rebirth of men on the present earth. (2Co. 5:17; Joh. 3:3-5; Tit. 3:5; Rom. 6:4; Rom. 8:10; Rom. 12:2) But the process would not be completed until this transformation of the present scheme of things affected every part of the total universe itself. (Rom. 8:18-25; 2Pe. 3:7-13; Rev. 21:1; Rev. 21:5)

3.

It is to be a time when the Twelve would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Note the kind of action represented by that present participle, judging (krnontes): it is durative, representing an action as in progress and continuing during the time when the Twelve would be seated on their thrones with Jesus. If we may presume that, following the great, final judgment, the twelve tribes of Israel would have already been finally judged and their fate no longer in question, then with that act also the Apostles function as judges would come to an end. Thus, their judging must have been something in progress prior to the final judgment. Two problems should be noticed:

a.

The thrones are twelve, because Judas would be replaced by Matthias (Act. 1:15-26) and, for the time being, Jesus is not taking Paul and the Gentiles into consideration, so He does not mention thirteen thrones. But if there are at least twelve, there is not to be just one throne in the Vatican, the cathedra of Peter. We see here something far more wonderful: the college of Apostles gathered around Jesus Christ, ruling. Gods people.

b.

Should we think of the judging in modern termsonly as a strictly judicial function? Plummer (Matthew, 270; see also, Barnes, Matthew-Mark, 201) raises the interesting question whether the Apostles specific function should be thought of as reminiscent of the position and activity of the Judges in ancient Israel, who not only gave sentence in legal cases, but positively governed the nation. (Cf. Jdg. 3:10; Jdg. 10:2 f; Jdg. 12:8 f, Jdg. 8:11; Jdg. 8:13 f; etc. See Keil and Delitzsch, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 241.) Contrary to the Jewish expectation that the tribes of Israel would be ruled by the Twelve Patriarchs, the sons of Jacob (Cf. Testament of Judah Mat. 25:1), Jesus the Messiah elevates His own Apostles to that office.

4.

The twelve tribes of Israel, considered as an expression in the ears of a Jewish disciple, could have meant nothing but the ideal people of God. Certainly it may have been badly interpreted as referring only to fleshly descendants of Abraham, thus eliminating the Gentiles, as it often was. But this abuse does not deny the propriety of Jesus using it in a perfectly Jewish context. (Cf. Act. 26:6-7) It meant the ideal Israel. (Cf. Rev. 21:12) But the true Israel of God (Gal. 6:16) includes believers of every sex, race and condition (Gal. 3:28). Thus, Jesus expression is symbolic for the people of God redeemed by the Messiah. (Cf. Jas. 1:1; Jas. 2:1 shows that these are Christian.) But is there no sense in which the Apostles ever dealt with the literal tribes of Israel? Certainly, but hear their preaching as they go to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (Act. 13:46; Act. 18:6; Act. 26:6-7; Act. 28:20; Act. 28:28; Rom. 1:16) The sentencing of the Jews will depend on whether they accepted the inspired preaching of the Apostles or not. But reference to fleshly Israel must not overweigh His reference to the true Israel of God. (Cf. Rom. 9:6-8) It is mistaken to believe that the reference is not intended in any sense to include Pentecost and the Churchs establishment, a conclusion undoubtedly founded on the unwarranted identification of the twelve tribes of Israel with unbelieving Jews only, and on the too strict identification of the Church and the Kingdom. It should be noted that Jesus did not say Church in our text, but alluded to thrones suggesting regal judgment and, in the later comment of Luk. 22:28-30, said Kingdom. His reference is not exclusively to the Apostles judgment of the Messianic Community, but rather to the total rule of the King, beginning from His accession to the throne and continuing until the end of time. Thus, the Apostles could actually begin their judging of the believing and unbelieving Israel even at Pentecost, and not merely with the beginning of eternity at judgment day.

These data, taken together, lead to the conclusion that Jesus words contain no mysterious, eschatological pronouncement, but simply declare what even the youngest Christian already knows by heart:

1.

By their personal example of willing obedience to Him in whom they saw the works of God and from whose lips they heard the voice of God, these Twelve, more than any other disciple, rightly judge all Israel. They did the homework assigned to the entire nation, thus proving that it could and should have been done. (Cf. the example of Noah, Heb. 11:7 b) Their example of successful discipleship should stand for all ages as a living monument and worthy of imitation, because even without their saying one further word of condemnation, their faithfulness to Jesus in His lowest humiliation will damn the wise and understanding who thought they knew too much to believe the impossible, unreasonable claims of that eccentric Nazarene! 2. The Apostles inspired doctrine is the official standard by which not only the new Israel of God (Gal. 6:16; Gal. 3:7-9; Gal. 3:26-29) is to be judged, but the proclamation of a Gospel by which the Jew first would be justified or condemned. (Rom. 1:16) Today, in the Kingdom of God it is the Apostles doctrine (Act. 2:42) that is the standard by which everyone is to be judged faithful to God and members of the Church of the Messiah. (See notes on Mat. 16:19; Mat. 18:18 and all notes on Matthew 10.) This prophecy was already being fulfilled in the Apostolic era. In fact, Matthews book itself judges us!

In short, what Jesus promised in Mat. 16:18 f; Mat. 18:18, that the Apostles legislative and judicial voice would be considered as final, is going to be realized in all questions of faith and practice in the earthly expression of the Kingdom of God. As McGarvey (Fourfold Gospel, 548) said it:

During their personal ministry, they judged in person; and since then they judge through their writings. True, we have written communications from only a part of them, but judgments pronounced by one of a bench of judges with the known approval of all, are the judgments of the entire bench.

In the imagery, Jesus pictures the Twelve as ruling when the Son of man shall sit on his glorious throne. Some might object that Jesus presence in the scene would preclude as superfluous any legislative jurisdiction on the part of the Twelve. However, neither Jesus thought so, nor did they themselves. Undoubtedly every Apostle, during his earthly ministry, could say with Paul: It is in the sight of God that we have been speaking in Christ, and all for your upbuilding, beloved. (2Co. 12:19 b; cf. Mat. 2:17; Mat. 4:2; Mat. 5:11; 1Ti. 6:13) Like the Thessalonians, believers embrace the Apostles words as Gods word. (1Th. 2:13) Bruce (Training, 258f) exclaims:

Surely here is power and authority nothing short of regal! The reality of sovereignty is here, though the trappings of royalty, which strike the vulgar eye, are wanting. The apostles of Jesus were princes indeed, though they wore no princely robes; and they were destined to exercise a more extensive sway than ever fell to the lot of any monarch in Israel, not to speak of governors of single tribes.

b.

ENCOURAGEMENT: Sacrifice for the Kingdom is a profitable investment.

Mat. 19:29 Every one that hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father or mother, or children, or lands, for my names sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life. Not only are the Apostles in line for exalted blessings as they follow Christ, but EVERYONE who has sacrificed for Jesus sake will be rewarded even in this life with hundreds of times more than what they give up, and eternal life in the age to come. (Mar. 10:30; Luk. 18:30) Giving away, letting go, liberating oneself of possessions is the only way of keeping and multiplying them! This is incredible doctrine, if not Utopian nonsense, to our hard-nosed, business-is-business, practical-minded world, but no more so for ours than for that of Jesus original hearers. And yet, the Lord knows that this is the only way to free us from the nearly uncontrollable slavery to things and security-building relationships that distract men from the innumerable possibilities in life that do not involve possessions at all.

Everyone who has made the sacrifice, taken the risk, let go of his earthly securities, kicked the habit of addiction to possessions, says. Jesus, will receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life! Mark and Luke emphasize the this-worldly character of Jesus promise: . . . now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life, In terms of sheer reward, faith in Jesus pays far more than it requires of us, compensating for anything surrendered with 100-fold returns! (Cf. 1Co. 3:21-23; 2Co. 6:10)

Inherit eternal life is the language used by the rich young ruler (Mar. 10:17 = Mat. 19:16). What the Lord required of that potential disciple was not hopeless, profitless sacrifice, but an investment paying off handsome dividends!

If inherit eternal life sounds like a merited payoff for people whose sacrifices earn their reward, Hendriksen (Matthew, 731) shows how these who are saved by grace may truly inherit such blessings: a. They are freely given to them, not earned by them; b. the gift is based upon justice: they were earned for them and are therefore theirs by right; and c. they are theirs forever.

Why should the Lord be so lavish? Why should He NOT bless the man who loves the Kingdom so much that to gain it he would sell everything he has, and then, deciding such sacrifices inadequate, give himself? Should the Lord not give the man what he gave himself for? However, the sacrifice Jesus rewards is not the calculating self-concern of the ascetic, but the willing surrender of one who loves Jesus. We must not forget that Jesus is answering the disciples question: Who then can be saved? To this Jesus answers, in effect, EVERYONEeveryone who sacrifices whatever hinders his loyalty tome, For my names sake means for my sake and for the gospel (Mar. 10:29) and for the sake of the kingdom of God (Luk. 18:29). For other notes on suffering for Christ, see on Mat. 5:10-12; Mat. 10:16-39.

Jesus Christ puts such a high premium on sacrificing everything for Him, because He knows what earth-bound value systems do to people. He knows that riches have a shriveling effect on our spirit because they supercharge the ego with a false sense of power. This is because, when we have unlimited resources to mold our own fate, we limit our future to the low goals which we can consciously conceive, rather than take life as it comes, a day at a time, with its unforeseeables, its risks. Here is where faith is made real for the believer. But because of these risks, doubts can constrict our souls by tempting us to struggle to make life safe for ourselves, so we can, continue to enjoy our wealth unendingly. But in this very safety there is psychological stagnation, and faith in God dies, because it is in the unknowns, the risks, that real life takes on the excitement and zest that makes it worthwhile. Thus, security symbolseven the security of safe family patterns (houses, brothers, sisters, parents, children, real estate)may have to be risked in order to be able to grow into the kind of life Jesus offers. Who would have thought that in our old security systems whereby we guaranteed ourselves a constant supply of whatever houses, lands and kinfolk gave us, were already planted the seeds of our own stagnation and spiritual poverty?

Ironically, but truly, the chief symptom that we are addicted to our possessions (all that we think is ours and is of value to us) is the sensation that we are unable to meet our world without the reassurance that they are there. Our security symbol may be a well-padded bank account, a martini, a shot of a narcotic, modish clothes, business as usual, kinfolks all in their places, eating well, pleasant family surroundings, whatever. A person is hooked if he has the uneasy sensation that, IF HE SURRENDER ANYTHING HE POSSESSES TODAY, HE WILL BE INADEQUATE OR NAKED WITHOUT IT, for that it might not come back tomorrow. Notice, then, how Jesus even condescends to our all-too-human uncertainty by assuring us, on His honor as a Gentleman and a Teacher come from God, that not, only will we have a constant supply of what we really need for our real security and happiness, but it will be supplied in greatly multiplied abundance. Nor will it be merely pie in the sky by-and-by, but in this time.
There is also the soul-shrinking reality that, in inverse proportion. as our wealth grows and our interest grows in those pleasures wealth can assure us, our interest decreases in those innumerable options in the realm of the spirit that have nothing to do with wealth or possessions. In fact, it may well be that Jesus hundredfold here has only partial reference to expanded material riches or multiplied physical kinfolk. (Otherwise, He would be stimulating the very greed He has just been condemning.) Rather, He guarantees the gain of what would be valued at a hundred times the price of what was given up: the multiplied fellowship of brotherhood in Christ, righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, and much more besides that would far exceed the mundane values abandoned for Christs sake., (See Wilson, Learning From Jesus, Treasures of the Kingdom, 228ff.) Ponder Bruces further explanation (Training, 262):

Still it must be confessed that, taken strictly and literally, the promise of Christ does not hold good in every instance. Multitudes of Gods servants have had what the world would account a miserable lot. Does the promise, then, simply and absolutely fail in their case? No, for . . . there are more ways than one in which it can be fulfilled. Blessings, for example, may be multiplied a hundred-fold without their external bulk being altered, simply by the act of renouncing them. Whatever is sacrificed for truth, whatever we are willing to part with for Christs sake, be comes from that moment immeasurably increased in value.

Jesus is convinced that He is ordering us what seems like poverty, which, in reality, is itself wealth. It is a measure that is not intended to limit mans maturing, but the condition that will make maturity authentic and actually possible. This is because the man who, out of love for Jesus and the Kingdom, reverses the whole mechanism of covetousness in his life, finds that he has time for God and people like never before. Although he is money-poorer, he is rich in freedom from the cares brought by the economic struggle for just a little bit more. (Pro. 15:16; Pro. 16:8; 1Ti. 6:9) He is rich in serenity, because he has learned in whatever state he finds himself to be content with it, because his mind is fixed on God (Isa. 26:3; 2Co. 6:10; Php. 4:4-7; Php. 4:11-13; Heb. 13:5 f; 1Th. 5:18; 1Ti. 6:6-8) And, because he is now deeply involved in helping others arrive at the only authentic humanity there is that which is available only in Christ,he is rich in brotherhood. (Cf. Rom. 1:6-13; Mat. 12:48-50)

Hundredfold: where is all this going to come from? Is God going to rain down manna from heaven on His beleaguered saints? More likely He is counting on that marvelous hospitality whereby His people take care of each other. (Study Act. 2:44 f, Act. 4:34 f; Heb. 13:1-3; 1Pe. 4:9; 3Jn. 1:5-8; Rom. 12:8; Rom. 12:13; Eph. 4:28; Php. 4:14; 1Ti. 3:2; 1Ti. 5:10; Tit. 1:8; Tit. 3:14) More would come from a new work ethic that would create financial independence. (Eph. 4:28; 1Th. 4:11 f; 2Th. 3:6-13; Tit. 3:14) Above and beyond these human endeavors and resources there is the vast treasury of heaven at our disposal! (Mat. 6:33; Php. 4:19; Col. 2:2 f; 2Co. 9:8-11; Eph. 3:20)

That no easy life is indicated here is clear from Marks addition: hundredfold . . . with persecutions. (Mar. 10:30; cf. Act. 14:22) That persecution is not merely an accompanying phenomena of the Christian life or even a hindrance, but really part of our profit, is illustrated by Bruce (Training, 263):

We see further why persecutions are thrown into the account, as if they were not drawbacks, but part of the gain. The truth is, the hundredfold, is realized, not in spite of persecutions, but to a great extent because of them. Persecutions are the salt with which things sacrificed are salted, the condiment that enhances their relish. Or, to put the matter arithmetically, persecutions are the factor by which earthly blessings given up to God are multiplied an hundred-fold, if not in quantity, at least in virtue.

The fact that it is for Jesus sake that we are persecuted, is a blessing in itself, because it furnishes additional proof that we are really faithful to Him, hence assures us of our belonging to Him and eventual redemption by Him. (1Pe. 1:6-9; 1Pe. 2:12; 1Pe. 2:15; 1Pe. 2:19-25; 1Pe. 3:13-18; 1Pe. 4:1 f, 1Pe. 4:12-19; 1Pe. 5:9) This is no idle promise, either for the early Christians who, in order to share in the Gospel and be in the Kingdom of God for Jesus sake, actually abandoned family, field and fireside, or for the modern saint who is called upon to sacrifice the companionship of those nearest and dearest to him, because they refuse him for his commitment to Jesus. How many have experienced the literal truth of the Lords word, in the actual multiplication of dear ones closer than ones own ungodly kin who cast them out? How many have found in the warmth of the Christian congregation strength to accept the inevitable persecutions (Mar. 10:30; 2Ti. 3:12), and the incredible joy that comes from accepting the plundering of their property, knowing they have a better, permanent possession that enemies cannot touch? (Heb. 10:34; 1Ti. 6:17-19; Mat. 6:19-21)

The fact that Matthew and Mark omit wife in the list of things abandoned for Christs sake must not be interpreted as an antiascetic reaction on their part, any more than its inclusion by Luke (Luk. 18:29) indicates the contrary tendency on Lukes part. It may only indicate that the former Evangelists dealt with the problem of man-woman relationships in the context of Jesus teaching on marriage, divorce and celibacy (Mat. 19:3-12 = Mar. 10:2-12) hence omit wife here to eliminate any suspicion of contradiction, whereas Luke, who will treat the divorce problem alone and in a quite different context (Luk. 16:18), could include wife. In fact, as illustrated at Mat. 19:12, Matthew, in principle, does leave the door open for separation from an unbelieving spouse.

The current Gemeindetheologie school that believes that the Gospel writers wrote primarily for their own congregations (Gemeinden) and so reflected live needs and problems in their own special areas, do not hesitate to date Matthews Gospel in the 80s and 90s, long after the fall of Jerusalem. However, the heavy insistence that the rich young ruler be immediately ready to sacrifice every item of value for the sake of Christian discipleship and the promise made to any disciple of a hundred times what would be sacrificed, quite easily point to an earlier period. We must not think that such problems arose exclusively at a later age of the Church. In fact, much earlier, people already had begun to experience the suffering of loss of all things for Christ. (Php. 3:8; 1Th. 2:14-16; 1Th. 3:3 f; 2Th. 1:4 ff) Rather, if Matthews pastoral concern is to prepare his congregation for what it must faceand on the basis of what theory of pastoral theology can such a concern be denied?then the early testimonies to joyful acceptance of the plundering of Christians property because of their confidence in a better, abiding one (Heb. 10:32-36), tend to indicate a date prior to the Jewish war when the unbelievers of Judaism persecuted the Christian disciples, i.e. a date when Judaism, not yet preoccupied with war with Rome, could turn its persecuting attention upon the upstart sect of the Nazarenes.

THE REWARDS OF SELF-SACRIFICE

Meditate these lovely lines by Bruce (Training, 255ff):

The first thing which strikes one in reference to these rewards, is the utter disproportion between them and the sacrifices made. The twelve had forsaken fishing-boats and nets, and they were to be rewarded with thrones; and every one that forsakes anything for the kingdom, no matter what it may be, is promised an hundred-fold in return, in this present life, of the very thing he has renounced, and in the world to come life everlasting.
These promises strikingly illustrate the generosity of the Master whom Christians serve . . . He rather loved to make Himself a debtor to His servants, by generously exaggerating the value of their good deeds, and promising to them, as their fit recompense, rewards immeasurably exceeding their claims. So He acted in the present instance. Though the all of the disciples was a very little one, He still remembered that it was their all; and with impassioned earnestness, with a verily full of tender grateful feeling, He promised them thrones as if they had been fairly earned!

These great and precious promises, if believed, would make sacrifices easy. Who would not part with a fishing-boat for a throne? and what merchant would stick at an investment which would bring a return, not of five percent, or even of a hundred percent, but of a hundred to one?
The promises made by Jesus have one other excellent effect when duly considered. They tend to humble. Their very magnitude has a sobering effect on the mind. Not even the vainest can pretend that their good deeds deserve to be rewarded with thrones, and their sacrifices to be recompensed an hundredfold. At this rate, all must be content to be debtors of Gods grace, and all talk of merit is out of the question. That is one reason why the rewards of the kingdom of heaven are so great. God bestows His gifts so as at once to glorify the Giver and to humble the receiver.

c. WARNING: Watch for a reversal of earths value systems. (19:30)

Mat. 19:30 But many shall be last that are first; and first that are last. This paradox is true, because the logic of the Kingdom overturns the whole merit-counting methodology of those people believed to be first. Earthly estimates and evaluations, based upon mistaken premises, however popular and widely believed, cannot but be reversed by God who judges everything according to reality. To worldlings, this must appear to contradict all sense of appropriateness and right, simply because the presuppositions, on which this sense is based, are themselves false. Imagine the worlds surprise as all the most glorious prizes go to those to whom everyone would have assigned last place, the also-rans, the etceteras. But the big eye-opener will come when those judged most likely to succeed finish last! (See notes on Mat. 13:25; Mat. 13:30; Mat. 13:43.)

The Apostles had just witnessed a man, who by all counts, should have been first in the Kingdom, walk away from it to a destiny of last importance. Jesus betrayer, too, was in line for greatness among the first, but Judas would be substituted by a disciple whose name never appears among the first disciples in the Gospels, but who would move straight to the top at the beginning of the Church. (Act. 1:15-26) To reject the rich young ruler and Judas as not involved in Jesus thought is to fail to look at Jesus point from the disciples standpoint, since they would certainly have considered Judas among the elite, and, as their own reactions showed, they had been staggered at the idea that an almost perfect rich man could not enter the Kingdom. Hendriksen (Matthew, 732) agrees:

There will be surprises however, Not only will many of those who are not regarded as the very pillars of the church be last, but also many who never made the headlinesthink of the poor widow who contributed two mites (Mar. 12:42), and Mary of Bethany whose act of loving lavishness was roundly criticized by the disciples (Mat. 26:8)shall be first on the day of judgment (Mar. 12:43 f; Mat. 26:10-13). The disciples who were constantly quarreling about rank (Mat. 18:1; Mat. 20:20; Luk. 22:24) better take note!

There is presumption in Peters self assurance that takes it for granted that sacrifices should be rewarded and that the only problem is WHICH reward, He must understand that there is no sense in calculating rewards in a Kingdom in which no one deserves even to serve! Because this maxim connects the Parable of the Eleventh-Hour Laborers with Peters question (Mat. 19:27), it very likely rebukes that self-complacency and pride that haggles with God over what He can or should give us. There could be a real situation in which those who considered themselves first because of their own self-sacrifice, would find it all vitiated by pride, and actually be surpassed by those who in genuine humility had equaled them in devoted, self-giving service to the Lord, even if not as fortunate to get in on the ground floor as the early disciples. Further, if Jesus talk about handsome rewards for service might tempt some to serve merely for the prizes and not because they love the King, the Lord deflates such hopes by this prophetic epigram and the parable which follows as its illustration.

Note Jesus terminology: MANY shall be last that are first, and first that are last. This means that not everyone who labors long, faithfully and efficiently in Gods Kingdom will be contaminated with the mercenary, self-righteous spirit that congratulates itself on what it calculates as a reward for its arduous labor. God has ever had humble, unassuming, self-forgetful, generously trusting workers in His service. Many does not mean that all will be calculating and selfish. And, as Bruce (Training, 268f) astutely sees.

If there be some first who shall not be last, there are doubtless also some last who shall not be first. If it were otherwise,if to be last in length of service, in zeal and devotion, gave a man an advantage,it would be ruinous to the interest of the kingdom of God. It would, in fact, be in effect putting a premium on indolence.

For further notes, study the following parable which illustrates this point: Mat. 20:1-16.

FACT QUESTIONS

1.

Describe the man who came to Jesus. What was his character and position in society? What do his questions and answers reveal about him? What does his manner of approach to Jesus reveal about him?

2.

What question did he place before Jesus? How does the wording of Matthew differ from that of Mark and Luke? Interpret and harmonize these differences.

3.

What concept of how to obtain eternal life did he have?

4.

What preliminary response did Jesus make to the mans request? How does the wording of Matthew differ from that of Mark and Luke? Harmonize and interpret these differences.

5.

List and locate by chapter and verse the commandments Jesus cited to the man.

6.

What was the mans reaction to this repetition of the commandments?

7.

What addition does Mark make that could aid in our interpretation of this text?

8.

What did the man lack to be perfect?

9.

Explain what was really required of him, i.e. show how total liquidation of his assets, giving alms and discipleship under Jesus would have led the man to perfection. What principle(s) behind these requirements apply to everyone?

10.

Did Jesus say that rich men per se cannot enter the Kingdom, i.e. because they have the misfortune to have riches, or did He imply that those who trust in riches cannot enter? What is the evidence for the former conclusion? What is the evidence for the latter?

11.

What is meant by the figure of the camel and the needles eye?

12.

How did the disciples react to Jesus closing the Kingdom to wealthy people?

13.

How did Jesus react to their reaction?

14.

How did the disciples react to Jesus further reaction?

15.

What does Jesus mean when He says, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible?

16.

What question did Peter ask as a general reaction to Jesus firm stand on wealth and its relation to the Kingdom? What did the Apostle mean by his query?

17.

What did Jesus refer to in His promise of twelve thrones for the Apostles? When and/or how would they judge the twelve tribes of Israel?

18.

According to Jesus, what are the rewards of Christian service?

19.

With what pithy principle did Jesus punctuate His remarks? What did He mean by it?

20.

List the texts in Matthew 18 which find practical application in this section.

SPECIAL STUDY
MONEY AND MARRIAGE: MANACLES OF THE MUNDANE?

Modern apostles of the single life and semi-bohemian pushers of poverty even in the Church of Jesus Christ are making their voices heard to justify their less conventional life-styles. While each one must decide how best to react to the station in life in which he has been called by God, the disciples of Jesus Christ must see the options clearly, not being misled by popular talk that at times sounds like something straight out of the Gospels.
In our present sections we have examined Jesus reference to those who would be natural and proper exceptions to marriage: the eunuchs for the Kingdom of God, those who remain virgins in order to pursue specific goals for the advancement of Gods rule. Further, we heard Jesus urge the rich young ruler to distribute his wealth among the poor to be perfect. Now, if celibacy is to be received by those rare souls to whom it is given, and if voluntary poverty is required to be perfect, then a life-style that reflects these characteristics most nearly would have an intrinsic superiority over the married person who possesses property, would it not? And would not the freedom from these manacles permit a higher spirituality?
It is to Bruce (Training, 245254) that we are indebted for the following salient points that analyze this problem:

ASCETICISM, AS A THEORY OF CHRISTIAN VIRTUE, IS FALSE FOR THESE REASONS:

I.

IT IS BASED ON A FALSE ASSUMPTION.

A.

Asceticism assumes that abstinence from lawful things is intrinsically a virtue superior to moderation in using them.

B.

This assumption is false:

1.

Because abstinence is actually the virtue of the weak, because it is the safer way for anyone given to an uncontrollable love of a thing. Abstinence gains this safety at the expense of that disciple that develops character and strength. A self-controlled moderation is the virtue of the strong. (Cf. Rom. 14:1 to Rom. 15:7)

2.

Because abstinence is inferior to moderation for its psychological sanity.

a.

Asceticism tends to exaggerate the evil of the things avoided, developing a morbidness about contamination and a deliberate distortion of reality to justify its abstinences.

b.

Abstinence, while necessary in special circumstances, is really unnatural and inhuman, a forced withdrawal from what God created to be received with thanks giving. (1Ti. 4:3-5)

3.

Asceticism is surprisingly inferior to moderation even in the element that constitutes its character: self-denial.

a.

To eliminate at the outset everything that could ever be a source of human joy so that it could never be a temptation sounds very impressive.

b.

But to live with and fully use everything that could always be a temptation, while, at the same time, maintaining ones own spiritual freedom untrammeled is real spiritual power and character. This self-sacrifice is actually the greater, because it is ready to move, not from the sterile wilderness of empty asceticism, but from the midst of lifes dearest enjoyments, and not merely once for all, but many times and at any time. These, not the ascetics, are the greater heroes.

II. THE ASCETIC THEORY IS BASED ON ERRONEOUS INTERPRETATIONS OF CHRISTS WORDS

A.

Jesus does not state or even suggest that the single life and total self-privation of goods are essentially superior to marriage and proprietorship rightly understood and used.

B.

He teaches, rather, that, under special circumstances, the unmarried or the penniless condition offered certain advantages which facilitate a single-minded pursuing the interest of the Kingdom.

1.

Danger and hard times underline this advantage most clearly.

2.

But this forced unnaturalness is a real hindrance in the absence of such crises. (See notes on Pauls view of celibacy at Mat. 19:11.)

C.

The Christian ideal is consuming devotion to the Kingdom, regardless of what it costs or when it costs, so that everything else is placed subordinate to it.

1.

It is this sense in which all of Jesus demands of self-sacrifice must be interpreted.

2.

Any overtime duty is not asceticism for its own sake, but extraordinary demands in usual emergencies to get a job done.

D.

The reader is referred to the notes on Mat. 19:3-12 and Mat. 19:16 to Mat. 20:16.

III. OPTIONAL ASCETICISM AS AN IDEAL OF VIRTUE IS A LOGICAL CONTRADICTION:

A.

If asceticism or abstinence be a virtue essentially and unavoidably superior to moderation and self-control in the use of lawful things, then with what logic can asceticism be thought of as optional?

1.

If godliness and perfection are inexorably linked only to poverty or celibacy, then to arrive at perfect godliness there can be no thought of free options.

a.

Are we really free to choose whether we will be a perfect Christian as opposed to a more common good Christian?

b.

May we be excused from developing a given character quality merely because it is too demanding, if it be really true that that very virtue is essential to a supposedly superior Christianity?

c.

In short, if it is a virtue, it. is required: if it is optional, it is not a virtue!

B.

Were asceticism a virtue, then Jesus made a mistake not to command literal poverty and enforced celibacy for everyone. But that He did not, in fact, do so is everywhere evident in Scripture where Apostles continue to hold out perfection for everyone regardless of the condition he was in when he was called to be a Christian.

C.

Ascetic poverty necessitates, for its continued existence, that the superior ascetics depend upon those inferior Christians who still possess enough capital to support the mendicant ascetics also, or worse, it must depend upon charity from non-Christians, or else, by personal industry, compromise its absolute poverty enough to possess the tools necessary for gaining its own living.

IV. ASCETICISM, AS A THEORY OF CHRISTIAN VIRTUE, IS ABSURD, BECAUSE IT ENTAILS THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE HUMAN COMMUNITY.

A.

Even if family and possessions are not everything, mans earthly life is profoundly concerned with both.

1.

Enforced celibacy leads to disintegration of the Christian ideal.

a.

Because celibates who remain faithful to Christ and their ascetic ideal are themselves but one generation from extinction or must resort to adoption of others children to keep the community going. (Cf. the Essenes approach to this problem.)

b.

Because celibates who abandon their virginity but remain celibates, leave also their virtue and sink into a degeneracy and corruption through sensuality that destroys everything for which they had become ascetics in the first place.

2.

Enforced poverty lasts until the end of the groceries in the larder, then it falls into the logical contradiction of de pending upon those of inferior virtue to sustain it either by charity or commerce.

B.

Service to God and human life lived to the full are not mutually exclusive. Rather, it is in the crucible of true humanness that Gods original design for man is to be perfected, where every relationship, every natural ability, every desire, every earthly possession is to be turned to usefulness in Christs service and made to contribute to our maturity in the character of Christ. We must live in the earthly condition in which God has called us, resisting its temptations and overcoming by His grace. We must mingle in the worlds crowd, expose our selves to its temptations, venture within the magic circle of its attractions, but show by the power of Christ at work in us that we are men of another world, hence superior to this worlds allurements. We must dispassionately compare this worlds pleasures and prizes with those God offers, and prefer these latter out of genuine conviction of their surpassing worth. (Cf. P.H.C., XXIII, 366)

CONCLUSION: Christs stern words on marriage and possessions, poverty and celibacy anyone with family responsibilities or preoccupied with wealth. Then, shaken by his own vulnerability, he can turn to God for power to do the difficult, not impossible, task of concerning himself single-mindedly with the things of the Lord, as if he were unmarried, although he is married, and although responsible for many possessions, he may be free from the love of money, rich in heavenly treasures, humble-minded and generously devoted to Christs service.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(16) Behold, one came and said . . .The vagueness with which a man who must have been conspicuous is thus introduced, without a name, is every way significant. He was, like Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews (Luk. 18:18), i.e., probably, a member of the Sanhedrin or great Council, like Joseph of Arimatha. He was, beside this, conspicuously rich, and of high and ardent character. There is one other case in the first two Gospels which presents similar phenomena. In the narrative of the supper at Bethany, St. Matthew and St. Mark record the passionate affection which expressed itself in pouring the precious ointment of spikenard upon our Lords head as the act of a woman (Mat. 26:7; Mar. 14:3), leaving her unnamed. In St. Joh. 12:3 we find that the woman was Mary, the sister of Lazarus. The train of thought thus suggested points to the supposition that here also there may have been reasons for suppressing in the records a name which was familiar to the narrator. What if the young ruler were Lazarus himself? The points of agreement are sufficiently numerous to warrant the conjecture. The household of Lazarus, as the spikenard ointment shows, were of the wealthier class. The friends who came to comfort the bereaved sisters, were themselves, in St. Johns language, of the Jewsi.e., of the chief rulers (Joh. 11:19). The young ruler was obviously a Pharisee, and the language of Martha (Joh. 11:24) shows that she too believed in eternal life and the resurrection of the dead. The answer to the young ruler, as One thing thou lackest (as given by St. Mark and St. Luke), is almost identical with that to Martha, One thing is needful (Luk. 10:42). In such a case, of course, nothing can be attained beyond conjectural inference, but the present writer must avow his belief that the coincidences in this case are such as to carry the evidence to a very high point of probability. It is obvious that the hypothesis, if true, adds immensely to the interest both of the narrative now before us, and to that of the death and resurrection of Lazarus in John 11

Good Master.The better MSS. omit the adjective, and it has probably been added here by later copyists to bring the passage into a verbal agreement with the narrative of St. Mark and St. Luke. From the prominence given to it in the form of our Lords answer, as reported by them, we may reasonably believe that it was actually uttered by the questioner. The words show reverence and, at least, half-belief. They are such as might well come from the brother of one who had sat at Jesus feet, drinking in His words (Luk. 10:39)from one who, like Nicodemus, looked on Him as a Rabbi, a Teacher sent from God.

That I may have eternal life.In St. Mark (Mar. 10:17) and St. Luke (Luk. 18:18), and in some of the oldest MSS. of St. Matthew, that I may inherit eternal life. The question exhibits the highest and noblest phase of Pharisaism. The seeker has a firm belief in something that he knows as eternal life. He thirsts for it eagerly. He believes that it is to be won, as a perpetual inheritance, by some one good deed of exceptional and heroic goodness. The Teacher has left on him the impression of a goodness such as he had seldom, if ever, seen before, and as being therefore able to guide him to the Supreme Good.

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

105. THE RICH YOUNG MAN, Mat 19:16-22 .

16. And behold, one came The case of the young man is here brought in to show that he who would be saved must be ready to give up all for Christ in the fullest sense of the words; and that he who cannot do this is deceived in supposing that he has so kept God’s law as to be thereby saved. The conversation that follows shows that he who gives up all for Christ, will be no loser, but an infinite gainer, 27-30. The parable that follows (xx, 1-16,) shows that even he who does give up all for Christ will be saved, not by his works, but by grace. Let this connection be observed and traced, and the meaning of the whole will become more clear and striking.

Our Lord, as appears by Mark, had just come forth from the house where he had blessed the children, into the way, where this rich young ruler, as Luke calls him, (that is, ruler of the synagogue,) who had perhaps been waiting, came running and kneeling. His rapid movement indicated his earnest feeling; his kneeling indicated his reverence. Good Master This was a new and a very studied title by which to address our Lord. Others had called him Lord and Son of David; but he is a noble Jew, who must give a polite address without quite admitting that he is addressing the Messiah. What good thing He calculates to do something which will earn heaven. He will accomplish it by some bold stroke of righteousness, some grand supererogation, if he can find out what it is to be. He has kept the decalogue until he is tired of so tame a righteousness. If this good Master can inform him by what method he can pay for and justly deserve salvation, he is ready to bid for it. Try him with any task, and see if he will fail!

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

‘And behold, one came to him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” ’

In Mar 10:17 this is rendered, ‘Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ But that is simply a difference in emphasis in translation from the Aramaic. The young man had the idea of true goodness, the goodness which is God’s, in his mind. And he wanted this prophet, Whom he saw as having something of that goodness, to explain it to him. (He may well have said, ‘Good teacher, what good thing must I do –’, but trying to decide what Jesus said in the Aramaic is always a little dangerous, for we quite frankly never know. We should note that the dropping of ‘good’ before Teacher would be in accordance with Matthew’s abbreviating tendency. It may well therefore have originally been there. But once he dropped it he clearly had to slightly rephrase what followed in terms of what Jesus had said).

One reason for the different way in which Matthew presents it may well have been his awareness of the Jewish reluctance to apply the word ‘good’ to men when speaking in terms of God (compare how he mainly speaks of the Kingly Rule of ‘Heaven’ rather than God, even where the other Gospels use ‘God’). But in view of Mat 28:19 he is clearly not avoiding the term for his own theological reasons. For that verse demonstrates that he is quite clear about his own view of the full divinity of Jesus. Nor is he toning down Mark for the next verse makes quite clear that the word ‘good’ is still to be seen as connecting Jesus with God. Thus, assuming that he has Mark’s words before him, and probably the original Aramaic that Jesus spoke, which some would certainly have remembered even if he did not himself, he must have had some other motive. And that can surely only have been in order to emphasise that what the young man is really concentrating on is the question as to how he himself can become ‘good’. Matthew is not arguing about wording, he is conveying an idea.

The young man is clearly well aware that only the good can have eternal life (compare Dan 12:2-3, especially LXX). But he is also aware that he himself is not good. He knows that somehow there is something that keeps him from being able to be described as ‘good’. What supremely good thing then can he do so as cap off all his efforts and so ensure that he will have eternal life? In the way he phrases it Matthew has the ending in mind. He knows what ‘good thing’ the young man must do, trust himself wholly to Jesus. And he knows that he will refuse to do it.

For the idea of eternal life in Matthew compare Mat 7:14, Mat 18:8-9; Mat 19:17 b, 29; Mat 25:46.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Rich Young Man Who Did Not Have The Humility And Openness Of A Little Child Because He Was Too Caught Up In His Riches And Thus Could Not Enter Under His Kingly Rule (19:16-22).

In total contrast to these receptive children who have nothing to offer but themselves was a rich young man whose heart was seeking truth, and who coveted the gift of eternal life. And it is this young man who now approaches Jesus. But sadly in his case there are other things that take up his heart. He does not come in humility and total openness. He is hindered by other things that possess his heart. And so when the final choice is laid before him, instead of coming openly and gladly to Jesus as the little children had done previously, he goes away sorrowfully, unable to relinquish the things that gripped his soul. He was thus unable to come with the simplicity of a little child. He had discovered that he could not serve God and Mammon (compare Mat 6:24).

Analysis.

a Behold, one came to Him (Mat 19:16 a).

b And said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” (Mat 19:16 b).

c And He said to him, “Why do you ask Me concerning what is good? One there is who is good” (Mat 19:17 a).

d “But if you would enter into life, keep the commandments” (Mat 19:17 b).

e He says too Him, “Which?” And Jesus said, “You shall not kill, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness. Honour your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Mat 19:18-19).

d The young man says to Him, “All these things have I observed. What do I still lack?” (Mat 19:20).

c Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you have, and give to the poor” (Mat 19:21 a).

b “And you will have treasure in heaven, and come, follow Me” (Mat 19:21 b).

a But when the young man heard the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he was one who had great possessions (Mat 19:22).

Note that in ‘a’ he comes eagerly seeking eternal life, and in the parallel he sorrowfully relinquishes eternal life because of his great possessions. In ‘b’ he is eager for eternal life, and in the parallel he is offered treasure in Heaven, which assumes eternal life. In ‘c’ he speaks of true goodness and in the parallel Jesus calls him to true goodness. In ‘d’ he is told that if he would enter into life he must keep the commandments, and in the parallel he claims to have done so but says that he knows that he is still lacking something. Centrally in ‘e’ Jesus summarises the sermon on the mount in terms of the commandments and Lev 19:18.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Trusting in the Works of the Law to Receive Eternal Life ( Mar 10:17-31 , Luk 18:18-30 ) – In Mat 19:16-30 Jesus explains to us the role and priority of riches and material possessions in the Kingdom of Heaven and cautions us on the dangers of covetousness. He takes the opportunity to teach on this subject when the rich young ruler asked Jesus about eternal life. Jesus explained that we must be ready to forsake the things of this world in order to partake of the Kingdom of Heaven. Any other choice is made because man trusts in his good works to please God. Jesus then illustrates this divine principle in the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Mat 20:1-16).

Here is a proposed outline:

1. Earthly Riches and the Law Mat 19:16-22

2. The Inquiry of the Disciples Mat 19:23-26

3. Example of Those Entering the Kingdom Mat 19:27-30

Mat 19:16-22 Earthly Riches and the Law In Mat 19:16-22 Jesus confronts a rich young ruler who asks Him how a man obtains eternal life (Mat 19:16). Jesus replied by requiring this particular person to sell all that he has and give to the poor and come follow Him in order to obtain eternal life (Mat 19:21). Jesus knew that this man trusted in his wealth to justify himself as a leader of society with much testimonies of doing good works (Mat 19:20). Jesus knew that this man must turn loose of his wealth as an act of faith in order to look towards God for his eternal rewards. Jesus wanted the man to demonstrate his faith by obedience. Although the rich young rule focused his question on life after death, Jesus reveals that eternal life begins the moment a person trusts in Him and follows Him. After this young man leaves in sorrow, Jesus explains to His disciples that they will inherit a hundred-fold in this life, and glorification with Him in eternity.

Mat 19:16  And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Mat 19:16 Comments The opening participial phrase in Mat 19:16 denotes a change in time and place in Jesus’ public ministry, a grammatical structure used often by Matthew to develop movement in the narrative plot.

The central idea of man seeking acceptance by God through his own good works is continued from Mat 19:2-12 when the rich young ruler says, “Good Master”

Mat 19:17  And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Mat 19:17 Comments – Jesus knew that this man who called Him “Good Master” did not recognize Him as God. In His reply in Mat 19:17, He is not denying that He is God; rather, He was directing this man towards God in the way that he understood Him in an effort to help him discover eternal life. Jesus wanted this man to understand that no one could achieve salvation through good works, not even a Jewish “teacher.” Thus, Jesus said that there was no one that was good except God (Isa 64:6). Jesus then exposes the man’s sinful nature by having him evaluate his heart using the Ten Commandments, which was the tool that God gave the nation of Israel to direct them to their need for redemption. Gal 3:24 says that the Mosaic Law was Israel’s schoolmaster, that was intended to direct them to their need of redemption through the coming Messiah.

Isa 64:6, “But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.”

Gal 3:24, “Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.”

Mat 19:18  He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

Mat 19:19  Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Mat 19:18-19 Comments The Commandment Regarding Covetousness – In Mat 19:18-19 Jesus leaves off the last of the Ten Commandments, which dealt with covetousness. This man that Jesus was addressing had kept all but the last commandment. This one was not being kept by rich man. So, in verse 21, Jesus deals with this man’s problem of covetousness.

Mat 19:20  The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

Mat 19:21  Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Mat 19:21 Comments In Mat 19:16 the rich young ruler had asked Jesus to tell him “one good thing” that he could do to receive eternal life. In Mat 19:21, Jesus tells the man what to do; yet, he rejected these words.

The act of forsaking all and following Jesus would demonstrate the rich young ruler’s sincere faith and trust in God for his salvation rather than his own good works. This young man would become utterly dependent upon God for every necessity of life, launching him into a deeper walk of faith in God, something the disciples have recently experiences.

Mat 19:22  But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

Mat 19:23-26 The Inquiry of the Disciples After responding to the questions from the rich young ruler (Mat 19:16-22) Jesus turns to His disciples and teaches them on the dangers of earthly riches in relation to the priority of entering into eternal life.

Mat 19:23  Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 19:24  And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Mat 19:24 Comments Grant Osborne captures the essence of Mat 19:24 by defining this statement as “Jewish hyperbole.” Jesus asked His disciples to imagine the largest animal in the Orient trying to fit through the smallest opening known to them, which was the hole at the end of the needle. [510] Just as it is impossible for this to happen, so it is impossible for a rich man who trusts in his riches to go to Heaven.

[510] Grant R. Osborne, Matthew, in Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 719-720.

Mat 19:26  But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Mat 19:26 Comments It is impossible for men to fulfill the Law of Moses in the flesh. The rich man served as an example to the disciples of mankind’s inability to please God based upon good works.

Mat 19:27-30 Example of Those Entering the Kingdom Just as the gathering of children served as a genuine example of those who are qualified to inherit the Kingdom of Heaven (Mat 19:13-15), so do the disciples serve the same example because they have forsaken all to follow Jesus.

Mat 19:27  Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?

Mat 19:28  And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Mat 19:28 Word Study on “the regeneration” – The Greek word (G3824) may be translated, “rebirth, new birth, new age, or next world.” BDAG translates it as “in the new (Messianic) age or world.” There are two uses in New Testament of this Greek word (Mat 19:28, Tit 3:5).

Tit 3:5, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration , and renewing of the Holy Ghost;”

Mat 19:29  And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Mat 19:29 Comments Strong family ties mark every culture of mankind. Breaking such strong bonds requires courage. Family members often do not understand such decisions to forsake all and follow Jesus in Christian service. They cannot see the practical benefit of such radical decisions. Because they love their family member, they often exert the most effort to prevent a loved one from forsaking all and following the Lord.

Illustration Moses forsook everything that Egypt had to offer him in order to serve the Lord (Heb 11:24-26). Yet, God sent him back to Egypt to spoil them of their riches. He led the children of Israel out of Egypt with the wealth of the nation (Exo 12:35-36).

Heb 11:24-26, “By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.”

Exo 12:35-36, “And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.”

Mat 19:30  But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.

Mat 19:30 Comments Mat 19:30 serves as a summary of the central idea of Mat 19:3-29. Those who are “first” in this life refer to those who are unqualified for Heaven; thus, they become last according to the principles of inheriting eternal life. Those who are “last” in this life refer to those who are dependent upon God’s grace; thus, they become first in that they are qualified for eternal life.

As I read this verse, the Lord quickened to me the word, “damned.” This word refers to those people who are first in this life, because in the end, they shall miss Heaven and become last, destined to eternal damnation. Others who are last, or despised in this life, shall be first in Heaven. Amen.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Dangers of Riches.

v. 16. And, behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?

v. 17. And He said unto him, Why callest thou Me good? There is none good but one, that is, God; but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

v. 18. He saith unto Him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

v. 19. Honor thy father and thy mother, and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

The evangelist introduces the story in a lively manner: Lo! Christ was on His journey through Perea, and the experience which Matthew had recorded in the first verses of this chapter may have been repeated often. People were always coming with various matters which they wanted to bring to Christ’s attention. In this case, one man came, a ruler, Luk 18:18, probably a rich young ruler of some small synagogue, as some versions imply. Here was a frank, sincere, open heart, weary of the endless disputings of the scribes and Pharisees, earnestly seeking the truth. He is even now more than half convinced that he will find it with Jesus. Good Teacher, he calls out, what good shall I do that I may have eternal life? In order to lead him to the knowledge of all truth, Jesus, first of all, takes up the question as he has put it. He wants to test him as to his understanding of his own request: Why callest thou Me good? He does not mean to decline the title as not being applicable to Him, but to God only, nor as a mere appellation of courtesy. The accent and position of the word “Me” rather implies: Do you know that in calling Me good, you are placing Me on a level with God Himself, and rightly so? Far, therefore, from rejecting the honor, Christ rather joyfully takes up the word and emphasizes its full import and significance. He now proceeds with the second test; So far as your wish to enter eternal life is concerned, you, as a ruler of a school, ought to have the information; the way you yourself have taught is that of the fulfillment of the Law. The young man was sincere enough, but he was suffering with the same amount of self-righteousness that every other person does by nature. In such cases it is necessary to refer to the Law of God and preach complete fulfillment of every commandment. If a person then has his eyes opened and freely acknowledges his insufficiency and sinfulness, then there is a chance for the knowledge of the Savior and for the faith in this Redeemer which alone brings to heaven. Two significant facts: If it were not for man’s natural depravity and his blindness in spiritual things, he could, indeed, get to heaven by fulfilling the commandments. A complete keeping of the Law earns life everlasting, Luk 10:28. Keeping the commandments is also enjoined upon the Christians as an exercise in sanctification. “The commandments must be kept, or there is no life, but only death. For even faith is nothing, where love, that is, the fulfillment of the commandments, does not follow, 1Co 13:2. For Christ, God’s Son, has not come, nor did He die for that reason that we should freely be disobedient to the commandments, but that we might fulfill the commandments through His help and assistance. Therefore as it is said: Works without faith are nothing, so it is also true: Faith without fruit is also vain. For work without faith is idolatry. Faith without work is a lie, and no faith.”

In order to open the eyes of the young man, who again frankly asks. What kind? Which do you mean? Those of Moses or those of the elders? Jesus slowly recites the chief commandments of the second table of the Decalogue, placing the summary of the entire table in the last place. He hoped that the mere hearing of the list from the lips of another might cause the man to think, to reflect, to apply the words to himself, to examine his heart properly. But even the last commandment did not so much as stir his conscience.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Mat 19:16. Behold, one came and said For the explanation of this event see the notes on Mar 10:17. &c. where it is more circumstantially related.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 19:16 ff. Comp. Mar 10:17 ff.; Luk 18:18 ff.

] One , a single individual out of the multitude. According to Luke, the person in question was an , not a (Mat 19:20 ), which is explicable (Holtzmann) on the ground of a different tradition, not from a misunderstanding on the part of Matthew founded on . (Mar 10:20 ).

] is not to be explained, with Fritzsche, as equivalent to , quid, quod bonum sit, faciam ? for the young man had already made an effort to do what is right, but, not being satisfied with what he had done, and not feeling sure of eternal life in the Messiah’s kingdom, he accordingly asks: which good thing am I to do, etc.? He wishes to know what particular thing in the category of the eternal good must be done by him in order to his obtaining life.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

C. Property in the Church. Mat 19:16-26

(Mar 10:17-27; Luk 18:18-27.)

16And, behold, one came and said unto him,13 Good14 Master, what good thing [] shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God [Why dost thou ask me about the good? One is the Good, ]Matthew 15 : but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder [shalt not kill], Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from myyouth up16: what lack I yet [do I yet lack]? 21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that [what] thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22But when the young man heard that saying he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

23Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through17 the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Mat 19:16. And, behold, one came, .From the circumstance that the former two sections are connected together, we infer that Christ was still surrounded by the Pharisees who had come tempting Him. Hence the expression of astonishment: Behold! Besides, the special designation of this one as an in the Gospel by Luke, is in favor of the supposition that, having partly been gained over by Jesus, he now came forward with the inquiry of the text.

Mat 19:16-17. (Good) Master.We presuppose that the accounts of Mark and Luke must be regarded as supplementing that of Matthew. In that case, the rejoinder of the Saviour: Why callest thou Me good? must be taken as an objection, not to this salutation itself, but to the superficial and merely outward meaning which attached to it in the mind of this scribe. None is good but God: One only is good. Everything good being in and from Him, can only be one, and can only be regarded as good in so far as it is connected with God.

Thus we also account for the reading: Why askest thou Me about the good? One is the Good. God alone being good, is the sole source of all goodness. Hence the duty of doing good is not one of many others which has to be ascertained by means of inquiry, or by theological investigation. The one good thing is to live in God and to love God. Of this the commencement is to keep the commandments, which are the legal form in which that which is good has manifested itself. In other words, seek to fulfil the law, or to be righteous before God. When attempting to do this, you will gradually be led onward to repentance and faith; or, in order to arrive at the one good, or to come unto God, you must first be in earnest about His commandments, or the manifold forms under which the good becomes outwardly manifest. Neander is mistaken in interpreting the passage: Why askest thou Me about that which is good? One is good; address thyself to Him. He has revealed it in His word. Still more erroneous is the view of de Wette, who explains it as meaning: Why propoundest thou to Me the unanswerable inquiry about the real and highest good? etc. It is certainly strange, that while this critic characterizes such an inquiry as unanswerable, Meyer should style it superfluous. The latter interpreter, however, aptly remarks: There is one who is good, and one that is good, alterum non datur. But if you really wish (the here in the same sense as the metabatic autem) to apply to your life what I say, so as to become thoroughly conscious of its spiritual import, etc. The emphasis rests on the words: . That which is good is not to be treated as the subject of pharisaical . It is not to be found in the form of any particular commandment contained among Jewish traditions. Hence Fritzsche correctly explains by quid quod bonum sit, what good thing. The young man imagined that he had kept all these things; yet he felt that he still sacked something, although he knew not what. Thus the transaction here recorded is closely connected with the interview between Jesus and the scribe recorded in Mar 12:28. In that case the fundamental idea was: One God; and hence, only one commandment. In the present instance: Only one good Being; and hence, also, only one good thing. On both occasions, the Lord alludes to the contrast with Jewish traditionalism and its manifold ordinances, which so frequently impeded and obscured what was good.

Mat 19:18. Which?, quales, which is not equivalent to , but implies that he would like to know its characteristic marks. Meyer. Hence the statement shows that, like the Pharisees generally, he made a distinction between what were supposed to be primary and secondary commandments.

Thou shalt not.This enumeration of the commandments by the Lord is of some importance, with reference to the distinction between what are commonly termed the first and second tables of the law. In Mat 19:18 four commandments of the second table are mentioned; and it has been asked how this verse stands related to Mat 19:19. But, according to Lev 19:18, the injunction, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, is evidently intended as a summary of the second table. Hence we infer that Honor thy father and thy mother is to be taken in a deeper sense, as summing up the commandments of the first table. In other words, 1. Keep sacred the root of life; or, the first table. 2. Keep sacred the tree of which you are a branch; or, the second table.

Mat 19:20. All these things have I kept, etc.: what do I yet lack? ,The latter query must not be regarded as an expression of satisfied self-righteousness, as if it implied, In that case I lack nothing. It is, indeed, true that the young man was still self-righteous. He had no conception of the spirituality, the depth, or the height of the commandments of God. Taking only the letter of the law, he considered himself blameless, and perhaps even righteous, before God. Yet his heart misgave him, and he felt that he still lacked something. Under this sense of want, he put the question to the Saviour, as if he would have said: What is it then that I yet lack? All these things have not given me peace of mind. That such is the correct view of the passage, appears both from the statement in Mark, Then Jesus, beholding him, loved him, and from the great struggle through which he afterward passed.

Mat 19:21. If thou wilt be perfect.In its connection with the preceding context, the expression can only mean: If thou wilt have the one good thing, and thus do the one good thing, so that spiritual fear and want may give place to peace and love, etc. The Lord admits the supposition of the young man, that he was now beyond the many commandments, or the way of the law. Well, then, granting this to be the case, proceed to the one thing. The young man was now to give proof that he was in earnest about the matter. For this purpose Jesus tries him, with the view of setting before him the deeper import of the law, and of awakening within him a sense of sinfulness and of spiritual bondage. The injunction of the Lord is manifestly intended to bring out the fact, that the young man had made an idol of his riches, and hence that he utterly contravened the spirit even of the first commandment. Substantially, this demand of Christ imports the same thing as the call addressed to all His disciplesto deny themselves, to take up the cross, and to follow Him. In this sense, then, the injunction applies to every Christian. All that belongs to a believer is in reality not his, but the Lords property; above all, it belongs Christo in pauperibus. The Lord, however, expresses this general call of His gospel, as it were, in a legal form, for the purpose of taking away the self-righteousness of the young man, and of leading him to feel his sinfulness and need of salvation. Obviously He could not have meant, that by literally and outwardly obeying this injunction, the young man would obtain a claim upon the kingdom of heaven. Hence those interpreters have missed the import of the passage, who imagine that everything would have been right if the young man had only followed the direction of the Saviour; but that, as he went away sorrowful, he was finally lost. It is, indeed, true that his going away indicated a state of great danger, and was calculated to awaken serious concern about his future. Still the fact of his being sorrowful afforded evidence of an inward conflict, through which by grace he might pass to a proper view of his state before God. This was still lacking in his case, and not any additional attempt at external righteousness.

Treasure in heaven.Comp. Mat 5:12; Mat 6:20.

Mat 19:23. Hardly, .The expression implies that the state of the young man was one of extreme danger. Still it does not follow that it was hopeless. A rich man may enter into the kingdom of heaven, although not as a rich man. The difficulty of the case lies in the natural unwillingness to surrender our trust in and love of earthly possessions. Comp. the tract of Clement of Alexandria: ; Quis dives salvetur?

Mat 19:24. It is easier for a camel.The hyperbolical figure here used has given rise to various false interpretations. Thus, 1. it has been rendered an anchor-rope, (a) after the somewhat arbitrary interpretation of the word ( in Theophylact); or, (b) after the reading 18 (Castellio, Huetius, etc.). 2. It has been asserted that the expression, eye of a needle, was in the East used to designate the side-gate for foot-passengers, close by the principal gate, through which camels were wont to enter cities. 3. Most interpreters, however, have taken the terms, camel and the eye of a needle, in their literal sense. Thus Grotius remarks: totum hoc proverbium mutata cameli voce in elephantem est apud Rabbi Jacobum in Caphtor. Similarly de Wette reminds us that the same saying occurs in the Talmud about an elephant; comp. Lightfoot, Schttgen, Buxtorfs Lexic. Talmud.19 Grotius quotes a similar Latin proverb, and refers to Jer 13:23 as a somewhat analogous passage. It seems to us that the Saviour here intended to convey the fact, that the difficulty of entering into the kingdom of heaven, to which Mat 19:23 referred, had now become changed into an impossibility. Of course, no expression could be too strong to characterize an impossibility. Hence the import of the passage seems to be, that while Mat 19:23 refers to those who actually possessed riches, with which they might at any moment part, Mat 19:24 applies to rich men in the symbolical sense of the term, or to those who give their heart and life to these things. Accordingly, we regard the expression not merely as a proverbial saying, but as intended to express that a thing was absolutely impossible. The camel as a beast of burden might serve as a fit emblem of a rich person while the eye of a needle, which is the smallest passage through which anything visible could enter, might be regarded as a figure of the spiritual entrance into the kingdom, of a soul which had renounced the world. In one respect, however, even this figure is inadequate, if taken literally, as it might imply that a soul could enter that kingdom while hanging to the world, though it were only by a thread. But figures must not be too closely pressed, and the eye of a needle is certainly the most fitting emblem that could be found.

Mat 19:25. Who then can be saved?De Wette (after Grotius): Since every one has more or less of the same love of the world. This explanation is certainly more satisfactory than that of Meyer, who regards the clause as a conclusio a majoribus ad minores; as if it meant, If rich persons, who have the means of doing so much good, have such difficulty, who then, etc.? In our view, the disciples reasoned as follows: If riches render a man unfit for the kingdom of heaven, there is surely some thread of possessions by which even the poorest individual may be kept from entering the kingdom, more especially as by nature every one loves riches. Or, perhaps, we might take it even in a more general sense: If riches are so great a hindrance, how much more actual sin! The disciples had evidently not yet fully perceived that every sin springs from worldliness of mind and heart; and their Jewish prejudices rose in rebellion against this teaching.

Mat 19:26. But Jesus looking on them.With kindly sympathy. He felt what a hard struggle they had yet before them, before they could attain the full liberty of the children of God.

With men.The use of the plural number deserves notice: 1. According to the judgment of men. So Fritzsche and Ewald. 2. According to the power and ability of men. De Wette and Meyer. Both these views may be combined. The common judgment of men accords, in this instance, with their felt inability; and in that sense it is impossible. But God, in His power and grace, not only renders this possible, but actually declares it such, in and through Christ. The expression men refers to the ancient and corrupt world, lost in its worldliness; while the Lord is here presented to the view of the disciples as the Creator of a new era, in which the world would be crucified to believers, and they to the world. Comp. Luk 1:37.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. We have already stated that this section sets before us the third aspect of the Christian family, or of the family in the kingdom of heaven. Having first shown what is the import of Christian marriage, and then assigned to children their proper place in the Christian household, the Lord now refers to the possessions of believers. It is of great importance to notice the threefold offence of the disciples in regard to the three fundamental elements in the Christian family, and the manner in which the Lord removes these offences. As the young man was still entirely legalistic in his views, Christ sets before him in a legalistic form the great principle according to which a Christian man was to administer his property. But this mode of teaching was intended to awaken the ruler to a knowledge of his real state before God. Hence it is a complete perversion of the import of the passage, when Roman Catholic divines regard it as a commandment applying to special individuals, or as what they designate a consilium evangelicum, in reference to voluntary poverty. The supposed consilium only becomes evangelicum, and in that case a principium evangelicum, when we look beyond the form in which this principle is expressed, and learn to regard it as teaching that a Christian is to consider all his possessions as a trust committed to him by the Lord, which he is to employ for behoof of the poor, or for the removal of the wants of humanity.

2. In this passage, the doctrine concerning the highest good is expressed in most clear and definite language. God is not merely the highest good, but also the source of all moral and physical good, and hence the only good. Even Christ Himself only claims the designation of Good because He is one with the Father, not because He was the leading Rabbi. And just as any creature can only be called good from its connection with God, so all the special commandments are only an expression of moral good in so far as they are viewed in their connection with the fundamental commandment of love to God. Finally, physical good is such only, if enjoyed or administered in the spirit of Christian devotion; otherwise it becomes a snare to the soul, and an evil instead of a blessing.
3. The Lord at once perceived that, both in respect of virtue and of the things of this life, the young man had lost sight of God as the highest and only good; and that when be addressed Him as Good Master, it had not been from the depth of a believing heart, but only as a worldly and superficial acknowledgment of His character. This view is corroborated by the peculiar manner in which the Lord dealt with him, the object of which, evidently, was to bring him to proper knowledgeto a knowledge of Christ, to an understanding of the commandments, to a proper view of the import of earthly blessings, but above all to a sight and sense of his own state and condition. Many commentators labor under a twofold misapprehension in interpreting this narrative. First, they confound the mental self-righteousness or intellectual legalism of the young man with self-righteousness of the heart, entirely overlooking the fact, that he expresses a deep feeling of spiritual want. It is in this sense that we understand the statement of Mark, that Jesus, beholding him, loved him. True, his heart was not yet broken under a sense of spiritual poverty; he still deceived himself, in his self-righteousness; but he felt that there remained some deep want unsatisfied. Again, the young man is generally condemned and supposed to have been ultimately lost, because he did not immediately obey the injunction of Christ; as if the Lord had intended to convert him into a legalist, instead of arousing him to a sense of his guilt and sinfulness. [Similarly Alford: This young man, though self-righteous, was no hypocrite, no Pharisee: he spoke earnestly, and really strove to keep, as he really believed he had kept, all Gods commandments. Accordingly Mark adds, that Jesus looking upon him loved him: in spite of his error there was a nobleness and openness about him, contrasted with the hypocritical bearing of the Pharisees and scribes.P. S.]

4. Such an animal as a camel, laden with its burdens, could not possibly enter the gate of a city of dwarfs, so small as to be compared to the eye of a needle. The case of a rich man is exactly similar. Naturally overgrown and laden with burdens, the rich man whose heart cleaves to his wealth appears before the strait gate of the kingdom of heaven. No wonder that in these circumstances he cannot even see, far less enter it. He still belongs to the sensual world; the only things which he can perceive are outward and carnal objects. The kingdom of heaven, with its spiritual realities, is far too small and inconsiderable to attract his sensuous gaze, nor can he in that state enter into it. (From the authors Leben Jesu, ii. 2, 2110.)

5. Our Lord here presents one great truth under a twofold aspect: (1) It is difficult for any rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, because it is difficult for him to become poor. (2) It is even impossible for him, inasmuch as he is rich, and will remain such, unless by a miracle of grace he becomes poor in spirit. Hence the disciples asked in deep concern, Who then can be saved? They felt that the saying of the Lord applied to the poor as well as to the rich, since all aimed after wealth; nay, that it applied to themselves, as they also still placed too much value on earthly things. Hence Jesus now beheld them with the same look of pity and sympathy as formerly the young man. True, it is impossible with men; but all things are possible with God, who can and will empty His own people, and make them poor. Thus are we, by a miracle of grace and through the cross, to be so directed and influenced, that we possess as if we possessed not, and that, as heirs of God, or of the highest good, we shall be willing to lay on the altar of love all which we possess.

6. The application of this passage made by the begging monastic ordersFrancis of Assisiis not the right one. Heubner. [This application is much older than the mendicant orders of the middle ages. St. Antony of Egypt, the patriarch of Christian monks, when he heard this Scripture lesson in the church, understood the Saviours injunction, Mat 19:21, in a literal sense, and sold his rich possessions, retaining only a sufficiency for the support of his sister. When shortly afterward he heard the Gospel: Take no thought of the following morning, he sold the remainder and gave it to the poor. The Roman Catholic commentators and moralists base their doctrine of voluntary poverty as an essential element of the higher Christian perfection mainly on this passage. Comp. Maldonatus, Cornelius Lapide, and Schegg in loc. But Christ commands all His disciples to be perfect, , Mat 5:48, and so St. Paul, 1Co 2:6; Php 3:15; Col 1:20; Eph 4:13; and St. Jam 1:4; Jam 3:2. The counsel, therefore, must be understood in a sense in which it is applicable to all true believers.P. S.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The good as viewed in the light of the gospel.Property in the Christian family.God the highest and sole good, and the source of every other good.The character of Christians: 1. They give themselves to that which is good; 2. they do that which is good; 3. they hold their possessions for that which is good. Or, the principle1. of all virtue; 2. of all duty; 3. of all true riches.The inquiry of the rich young man: What good thing must I do? as expressing a threefold error: 1. He seems to think that he can be saved by his works; 2. by deeds of special beneficence; 3. by some particular deed, which was to crown and complete all his previous righteousness.A ruler of the synagogue, and yet he has no conception of the law in its spirituality; or, the fearful ignorance resulting from mere legalism.Self-deception and self-righteousness producing each other.The question of the young man should have been: How may I have eternal life in order to do good things?The various forms of self-righteousness: 1. Self-righteousness of the head and of the heart (of doctrine and of sentiment); or, Pharisees in the strictest sense; 2. self-righteousness of the heart with orthodoxy of the head, as in the case of some in the Church who seem to be zealous for soundness of doctrine; 3. self-righteousness of the head, combined with a deep sense of spiritual need, although its grounds may not be fully understood, as in the case of this young man and of many Christian legalists.Antagonism between the self-delusion of a man and the felt need of his heart.If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments; or, we can only be free from the law by the law: 1. By understanding its spiritual import (its application to the heart); 2. by comprehending all the commandments into one commandment (forming, as it were, the point of the arrow of the law); 3. by sincere and earnest self-examination, in view of the one great commandment of love to God (the law working death).How the Lord applies the law in order to train us for the gospel.The rich young man in the school of the Lord.On the close connection between spiritual and temporal riches (or rather, the attempt to be rich): 1. Spiritual riches leading to pride and pretensions; 2. temporal riches often serving to conceal spiritual poverty.The dangers of riches (avarice, love of pleasure, pride, confidence in temporal wealth, false spirituality, self-deception as to our spiritual state).The object of riches.Twofold interpretation of this declaration of the Lord: 1. The interpretation put upon it by the disciples; 2. the interpretation of the Master.Who then can be saved? or, an admission that all men share the same guilt and love of the world.How a rich man may enter into the kingdom of heaven: 1. It is always difficult in his peculiar circumstances; 2. it is impossible, if in mind and heart he cleaves to his wealth (the Pharisees); 3. it becomes possible by a miracle of divine grace (Joseph of Arimathea).The entrance into the kingdom of heaven: 1. Very inaccessible to the natural man: (a) it is always, and in every case, a strait gate; (b) it becomes the eye of a needle to those who are rich. 2. But it is widely open to believers: (c) leading the genuine disciple of Christ into the banqueting-hall, Mat 25:10; (b) it is a gate of honor to faithful followers of Christ; (c) a heavenly gate on our return to the Fathers house, Joh 14:2.The various stages of evil, as represented by the symbols of a camel, wolves, and a generation of vipers.The camel with its heavy burden before the eye of a needle, an emblem of avarice or of worldly-mindedness standing at the gate of heaven. Comp. Mat 23:24.Regeneration and poverty in spirit a miracle of grace; resembling in that respect the birth of Christ, Luk 1:37.

Starke:Quesnel: If we want to know how we may be saved, let us apply to Christ, the greatest and truest Teacher.Zeisius: It is a common but most dangerous error, to seek eternal life by our own works.Every good gift cometh from above, Jam 1:17. To arrogate it to ourselves, is not only to defile the gift by touching it with polluted hands, but to be guilty of sacrilege, Mat 7:22.Osiander: All who are ignorant of their state before God, should be directed to the law in order to learn their guilt and need.Love to our neighbor the clearest evidence of love to God.How many imagine that they have done everything required at their hand, while in truth they cannot answer one upon a thousand! Job 9:3.Zeisius: The law is spiritual; hence, they who trust in their works grievously deceive themselves, Rom 7:8; Rom 7:14.The most dangerous state, is to imagine that we are righteous in the sight of God.Tossani Bibl.: We are not to take this history as if it implied that by the outward work of almsgiving, the young man would have become perfect. The opposite of this appears from 1Co 13:3. But Christ here sets one special commandment before the young man, whose state of mind He well perceived, in order to convince him that he was infinitely far from perfection, and unable to keep the law.He who soweth bountifully shal also reap bountifully, 2Co 9:6-7.The whole work of salvation is far beyond the knowledge or power of man.Quesnel: A sense of spiritual inability should not lead us to despair, but result in the triumph of the grace of Jesus Christ.

Lisco:Marginal note of Luther: Our Lord here puts the question, Why callest thou Me good? in the same sense as He says, Joh 7:15, My doctrine is not Mine,referring more particularly to His humanity, by which He would always lead us to the Father.To be perfect, is to keep the commandments of God.Hence it is evident, that this young man had not in reality observed the commandments, as he fondly imagined.

Gerlach.Jesus tries the young man by setting before him the spiritual bearing of the law.By such examples, the Master gradually trained His disciples to understand the utter inability of man for anything that is good.

Heubner:The ruler came forward in haste, as if he could not wait or delay; still it led to no lasting results. Afterward, however, he went away slowly and sorrowfully.There is none good. These words are not spoken lightly, but have a deep and most solemn meaning.Comp. the excellent work of J. Casp. Schade: The most important inquiries: What lack I yet? and, What shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 14th ed., Leipz., 1734.The calculation is correct, except in one little particular; but this renders the whole account false.Every one of us has something which he must give up in order to enter the kingdom of Christ.Chrysostom: On the question of the disciples, Who then can be saved?because they felt concern for the salvation of their fellow-men, because they bore deep affection to them, and because they already felt the tenderness characteristic of all true ministers. This saying of Christ made them tremble for the whole world.

Footnotes:

[13] Mat 19:16.[Or better: one came to him and said, , which is the correct reading for .P. S.]

[14] Mat 19:16.Codd. B., D., L., al., [also Cod. Sinait.], omit (good), and read only (master, teacher). With this is connected the following reading: ; (instead of the Recepta: , …). These readings are decidedly better attested by B., D., and ancient versions, and adopted by Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf. The Recepta is inserted from Mark and Luke.

[15] Mat 19:17.[The true reading, as already stated by Dr. Lange in the preceding note, is: ; , i.e., Why dost thou ask me about the good? One is the [absolutely] Good; Lange: Was fragst du mich ber das Gute? Einer ist der Gute. This reading is sustained by Cod. Sinait., Cod. Vatican., D., L., and other MSS., by Origen, Euseb., Jerome, Augustine, the Latin Vulgate (Quid me interrogas de bono? unus est bonus, Deus), and other ancient versions, and adopted by Tregelles and Alford, as well as Lachmann and Tischendorf. See the summaries in the editions of these critics in loc. The lect. rec.: ; , , , is from Mark and Luke, and is an answer to the address: Good Master, while Matthew gives the answer to the question of the young man: What good thing shall I do? Our Lord referred him first from the multiplicity of good things () to the unity of the absolute personal Good () or God (this is the sense of the question in Matthew), and then He directed him (in the question of Mark and Luke) from a merely humanitarian view of Christ to the true theanthropic view, as if to say: If God alone is good, why do you call Me good, whom you regard a mere Rabbi? He answered to the thoughts of the young man and declined his relative and humanitarian homage, but pointed him at the same time to the higher and absolute conception of good, in which He was good according to His divine nature and as one in essence with the Father. He does not say: I am not good, but none is good; no man is good in the proper sense of the term, but God alone.P. S.]

[16] Mat 19:20.[The words: , from my youth up, are omitted in the best ancient authorities, including Cod. Sinait., and in the modern critical editions. (See the apparatus in Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford.) They are inserted from the parallel passages of Mark and Luke. Dr. Lange retains them in his German Version.P. S.]

[17] Mat 19:24.Besides the reading: , we have the more difficult , to go into. [Cod. Sinait reads.; .P. S.]

[18][The word , supposed to mean a rope or cable, occurs in a few minuscule MSS., but in no Greek author, and was probably invented to escape the imaginary difficulty of this proverbial expression. Comp. the Greek Lexica and the apparatus in Tischendorfs large edition ad Mat 19:24 P. S]

[19][The Koran, Sur. 7:38, probably in imitation of this passage, uses the same figure: Non ingredientur paradisum, donec transeat camelas foramen acus. Comp. also Mat 23:24, to swallow a camel. The camel was more familiar to the hearers of the Saviour than the elephant, and on account of the hump on its back, it was especially adapted to symbolize earthly wealth as a heavy load and serious impediment to entrance through the narrow gate of the kingdom of heaven.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

“And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? (17) And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. (18) He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, (19) Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (20) The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? (21) Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. (22) But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. (23) Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. (24) And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. (25) When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? (26) But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”

I beg the Reader particularly to notice our Lord’s answer to the question of this man, in calling Christ good. Why callest thou me good? As if Jesus had said, Thou knowest that there is, there can be none good but one, that is God. Hast thou then from the miracles I have wrought, received conviction that I am (and which is indeed the case) God. This seems to have been the sense of our Lord’s question. And then, as if to deal with him as God, Jesus sends him to discover his ruined state, in the conviction of his own heart, from the breach of the commandments; and enumerates a few, as a decision for all. And so wholly untaught of the Spirit was this youth, that he knew nothing of the plague of his own heart, and therefore with the confidence of a poor, dark, blind, and ignorant mind, he declared, that he had kept the whole of God’s law; when it was notorious from scripture, that he had broken the whole. Jas 2:10 . The Lord therefore only touched him a little more closely concerning one point, and which served to detect him in all. Oh! what a deceitful heart, the human heart is, and how incapable of doing any one thing towards its own salvation? Jer 17:9-10 ; Rev 3:17 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

XIV

THE RICH YOUNG RULER; DEATH AND RESURRECTION FORETOLD; THE SELFISH AMBITION OF JAMES AND JOHN REBUKED

Harmony, pages 132-136 and Mat 19:16-20:28 ; Mar 10:17-45 ; Luk 18:18-34 .

This section commences on page 132 of the Harmony; the first three pages of the section constitute a distinct subsection, because all that is said in it arises from the coming of the young ruler to Christ. This coming of this rich young man to Christ, related by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is the occasion of four distinct lessons, which I group around four passages of Scripture: The first, “One thing thou lackest”; the second, “It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God”; the third, Peter said, “Lo, we have left all, and followed thee’ what then shall we have?”; and the fourth, “But many shall be last that are first; and first that are last.” Everything in this section may be arranged around these four scriptures.

The teaching of the Bible, especially the teaching of our Lord, on the subject of riches, calls for careful interpretation. The teaching is very abundant and manifold in both Testaments. Probably no other subject is more extensively discussed. We may accept as safe the following conclusions on these teachings: To be rich or to be poor is not in itself a sin; either may be a token of divine favor. Exceptional temptations and dangers, however, attend either great riches or extreme poverty. Agur’s prayer was wise (Pro 30:8-9 ) : Give me neither poverty nor riches; Feed me with the food that is needful for me: Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is Jehovah? Or lest I be poor, and steal, And use profanely the name of my God.

But we may pray for others as John prayed for Gaius: “I pray that in all things thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth.” This expresses the great law and standard. Be as rich as you please, even as your soul prospers; keep your soul on top, but do not love wealth more than God, nor trust in uncertain riches. Wealth is a trust which brings blessings rightly used or curses wrongly used. We are perfectly safe in accepting those conclusions concerning the manifold teachings in both Testaments on the subject of wealth.

Jesus said to this young ruler, “One thing thou lackest.” This young ruler’s sin is discovered to him by the throbbing heart of our Lord and is found to be his refusal to accept God’s paramount authority and sovereignty in one point alone: “One thing thou lackest: go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.” There seems to be more than one point here, but they are different sides to the same thought “selling all” is the negative side; “following Jesus” is the positive side. Heavenly treasure must be preferred to earthly treasure. This young man preferred the earthly treasure. Following Christ must be preferred to following mammon. This young man preferred to follow mammon. Let the reader observe that this case is introduced with the answer, “Keep the commandments.” This young man, relying upon salvation through obedience to the law, supposed that he had kept the Commandments all his life. It was necessary to prove to him that he had not kept them perfectly: “If thou wouldst be perfect.” We are not to understand our Lord to teach that the universal condition of eternal life is that men must actually give all their possessions to the poor, nor that fallen man can keep the law of God perfectly, but the soul must accept God’s sovereignty in all things. It must love treasure in heaven more than the treasure on earth. It must follow Jesus. There must not be even one thing reserved from God’s supremacy; there must be a complete surrender of our mind to God’s mind. These are great matters: The question of sovereignty, the question of true objects upon which affections should be placed, and the question of obedience. We may not satisfy ourselves with compromise or reservation. We may not Compound with sins we are inclined to, By damning those we have no mind to.

The next part of this discussion hinges on “the camel and a needle’s eye.” The camel was the largest animal familiarly known to the Jews of Palestine in Christ’s day and a needle’s eye one of the smallest openings. To say, then, that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for & rich man to enter the kingdom of God, naturally expresses not something difficult, but something that is impossible, and is so meant here; the disciples so understood it, and our Lord, later in his explanation, confirmed their construction. It was the custom of our Lord that when he desired to attract attention and to so impress the memory that his hearers would never forget, to employ very striking sayings, but men when they come to interpret these sayings, are tempted to take all the snap out of them by trying to soften the meaning, for example (See Harmony, middle column, page 133, Mark’s account, latter part of Mar 10:24 ): “How hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God.” That seems to be an explanation of what k he says, and yet that is a gloss, a human gloss. I mean to say, that verse does not appear in the two oldest Greek manuscripts, the Sinaitic and the Vatican, and that its appearance in later manuscripts is easier to account for as a marginal gloss by the copyist (he is doing it according to his opinion of what it means), than it is to suppose that such a statement as that would have been left out of the oldest manuscripts. The interpolating copyist is trying to soften Christ’s hard saying. It is true that they that trust in riches cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. The interpolated doctrine is taught in other scriptures, but it is not a part of this scripture and should not be so received. It is one of the passages that is certainly spurious. Consider another gloss:

When I was a child in Sunday school, all the Sunday school lessons had this explanation: The Jaffa-gate at Jerusalem had a little side-gate much smaller than the other, and over that little gate was its name written, “The Needle’s Eye,” and no camel could go through that little gate without getting on its knees and having its load taken off. That seemed to be, and is, a most beautiful illustration. The rich man must kneel and have his load taken off him before he can get in, but it is probable that the gate of the Sunday school lesson got its name as a development of this text, rather than being its cause.

Another explanatory gloss in this, that the Greek word of the text should not be kamelos , “a camel,” but kamilos , “a cable.” Those who have been about wharves or vessels and have noted the eye or loop of a cable in comparison with a needle’s eye may see how much this play upon words relieves the difficulty. It would then mean for a camel to go through the eye of a cable. But as every text has kamelos , and not kamilos , we need not believe any of it.

The disciples were exceedingly amazed and they rightly said, “Who then can be saved?” They had been taught that riches are a blessing sent from God, and that he promises prosperity to those who love and obey him. If it be impossible for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, “Who then can be saved?” Our Lord’s answer practically says, “It is impossible for anybody to enter the kingdom of heaven,” that is, in themselves. Impossible with men, but possible with God. His teaching seems to be this: That in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven there must be something apart from any power in us. Now this rich young man had been well taught, but he had never been regenerated. He was trying to keep the law of God perfectly, and a camel might just as well try to go through the eye of a needle. It is an impossibility for any man in himself, apart from an extraneous power, to enter into the kingdom of God. We may try to set our affections on heavenly treasures, but we have to be regenerated before we can do it. Christ’s questions were designed to show him just where his difficulty lay. He must be willing at least to give up everything and follow Jesus. To show that they thus understood it, it is manifest from Peter’s words: “Then answered Peter and said unto him, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee; what then shall we have?” He claims that what was required of this rich man is just what they had done. Christ found them engaged in the fishing business, making a living by it, and said to them, “Leave this business and come, follow me. I will make you fishers of men.” “If then the rich man when obedient shall have treasure in heaven, what shall we have?” Or, “What shall we have hereafter, and what shall we have in this world?” Listen to the answer: “And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, that ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, (or wife), or children, or lands, for my sake, shall receive a hundred fold, and shall inherit eternal life” (Mat 19:28-29 ).

This does not mean, “you that have followed me in the regeneration,” but “you that follow me now shall have in the regeneration.” The phrase, “in the regeneration,” marks the time of the reward and not of the following. He is telling first what they shall have hereafter. What then, is the meaning of the word “regeneration” here? Precisely the same word, paliggenesia , is found in Tit 3:5 and there refers to the new birth of a man, but here to the new birth of the world, which in Act 3:21 Peter calls the times of the restoration of all things and which in his second letter he describes as the destruction and renewal of the material universe (2Pe 3:7-13 ). To the same great climax of the world’s history Paul refers in Rom 8:19-23 where the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together with us waiting for the redemption of our bodies. It is the clear teaching of the Bible that this earth, which was cursed on account of man’s sin, shall itself have a regeneration; not only shall man be redeemed, but his habitat shall be redeemed. There shall be a new heaven and a new earth. There shall come a great fire in which the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll and the earth wrapped in flame shall be burned, not annihilated, for out of the purgation of that fire in the dissolution of the material universe there shall come the new heaven and the new earth, like that which was pronounced good when God originally made it. “Now, you ask me what you shall have,” says Jesus. “I tell you what ye shall have: in the regeneration [that is, hereafter], when the Son of man comes in his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” And Paul says, “Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world? . . . Know ye not that we shall judge angels?” Now, when Christ comes again he takes his own people to himself at his right hand. They sit down with him, sit on his throne and share in the judgment that he pronounces upon wicked men and fallen angels. See a similar promise in Rev 2:26-27 . In other words, Christ, the Son of man, shall lift up by his redemption, all of his people who have suffered, to sit with him on his throne, sharing with him as co-heirs of God, and that is why man, who for a little season is made lower than angels, will be lifted up above them and shall have all dominion and everything shall be in subjection to him. “Now, you apostles left your possessions, quit your business, dropped your nets and left your homes! left everything, you twelve apostles; when I said follow me, you followed me. So you will have a reward for that hereafter.”

Then he goes on to show what they shall have now, and that not only is to the apostles, but to every Christian: “There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or mother, or father, or children, or lands, for my sake, and for the gospel’s sake, but he shall receive a hundred fold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions: and in the world to come eternal life” (Mar 10:29-30 ). A hundredfold now. The question arises here, what did Jesus mean by that? If you leave one acre of land, that you will in this life receive a farm of 100 acres? That is not his meaning, but you do in this world receive some of these things in a sense. Let us suppose, for instance, that your father and mother and brother and sister and wife, every one of them, opposed your being a Christian, and that to be a Christian, you must lose the affection of every one of them. Now in this world you will receive the affection of 100 fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and wives. You will find that a new family and a new kingdom exists among the people of God. You will recall when Jesus was so intensely interested in teaching on one occasion that he would not even stop to eat, that his mother and his brothers came to arrest him under a writ of lunacy. Somebody said to him, “Your mother and your brothers are standing out there.” He answered, “Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?” and raising his hands to his disciples, he said, “Behold, my brothers and my mother and my sisters.” You get into a new spiritual family. The old earthly kinsfolk may go against you, the spiritual kinsfolk will be for you. That is what it means as to this world. In other words, “Godliness with contentment is great gain. It has the promise of the life that now is and of the world to come,” both of them. Receive that deep into your heart, but receive it in the sense that the Lord meant it.

We now come to another one of the scriptures around which lessons are grouped: “But many shall be last that are first, and first that are last.” This proverb he explains by a parable. The time that you have been in the service of God does not count, so much as the spirit and the quality of your services. One may say, “Here is a young Christian; he was converted only three years ago and behold how exalted, while I am still at the bottom, though I have been a member of the church forty-five years [and asleep all the time].” Who shall be the first of these twelve disciples? Is it the one that Christ called first in order of time? Is that the one? Here in the parable are some men that commenced work the first hour of the day and some that commenced the eleventh hour of the day, and these eleventh-hour men were paid first and received just as much as the ones who, as they said, had borne the burden and the heat of the day.

I heard Dr. Tom Eaton, who, by the way, was a marvelous expounder of God’s Word, before my prayer meeting in Waco deliver a lecture on this parable of the laborers. He said:

I want to inquire on what principle Christ paid the eleventh-hour men as much as he paid those that had worked longer. I think this may be recognized as the principle: These later men explain why they are not at work. They say “No man hath hired us. We have had no opportunity. We reported ready for work; we went to the place where workmen are employed. We have wanted to work we have needed the work we held ourselves in readiness to work but there were no openings.” David’s men detailed to stay in camp and watch over the baggage, received an equal portion with those who went and fought the battle. They would have gone if they had been commanded to go and how many hundreds of their brethren, brokenhearted men, are begging for work I They want work. It is enough to make one weep to see a man who feels that he is called to preach, whose soul is on fire to preach, longing and hungering for the care of a church and no church calls him. Perhaps he has not the attractive qualities of some other men, perhaps the modern standard of employment is not of the right kind. Some churches have itching ears and they want preachers who will preach something pleasing to them, and daub with untempered mortar, and it does not follow that every man that is idle, is sinfully idle.

That was Tom Eaton’s explanation, and there is sense in it. But this parable gives another explanation: The sovereignty of God. If I give a man that only came at the last hour as much as I give a man who commenced at the beginning of the day on a special contract, what is it to that first man? Can’t I do as I please with my own? In other words, God is the sovereign and we must never lose sight of that.

The next section (of two pages) has two great lessons arising from one occasion. Mar 10:32 thus gives the occasion: “And they were in the way, going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus was going before them: and they were amazed; and they that followed were afraid.”

What excited that amazement and fear? He was saying nothing. It was something startling and marvelous in his appearance. The shadow of an awful coming event invested his face with a pathetic solemnity, a realization of the approaching tragedy, and a sublime purpose of resignation. More than once the historians refer to this bearing of Jesus, this majestic presence, radiating his glory in a way to separate him from all other men and to put him above all other men. His disciples once saw him praying, and something in his manner convinced them that they knew not how to pray. They saw him on the mount of transfiguration radiating his glory, and they were as drunken men at the sight. Later, in Gethsemane, his presence or bearing, caused the company of soldiers who came to arrest him to fall back as if smitten with lightning.

On the occasion we are considering he answers their unspoken amazement and fear. He explains the handwriting of tragedy on his own face. He foretells minutely his approaching arrest in Jerusalem and all its attendant indignities; his crucifixion and his resurrection. But they understood it not. How blind they were, not to understand that the crosses must precede the crown! Their minds kept leaping forward to a glorious earth kingdom with its high places of honor. So Peter, immediately after his great confession at Caesarea Philippi, had said of Christ’s humiliating death: “Be it far from thee, Lord.”

So here two of his disciples, James and John, working through their ambitious mother, are petitioning for the places of honor at his right hand and left hand, in his kingdom.

My old friend, Mr. Bartlett, of Marlin, once put into my hands a newspaper clipping which related a remarkable occurrence at the Pan-Episcopal Convention in London. The clipping set forth that Dean Stanley put up to preach in Westminster Abbey the bishop of Haiti, a coal black, thicklipped Negro, who, unawed by storied urn and animated bust, or the representatives of royalty, nobility, boundless wealth and aristocratic pride, calmly took this text: “The mother of Zebedee’s children said, Lord give my son John the place at thy right hand in thy kingdom and give my son James a place at thy left hand in thy kingdom,” and then said, “Let us pray:

“O Lord, thou who didst make of one blood all the nations of men that inhabit the earth and didst fashion their hearts alike, give thou to the sons of Shem that betrayed thee a place on thy right hand, and give to the sons of Japheth that crucified thee a place on thy left hand, but Lord, give to the sons of Ham, the sons of that Simon, the Cyrenean, that bore thy cross, a place at the outer gate where some of the light of the heavenly city may fall on them and where they can hear some of the sweet music, but where looking earthward they can see Ethiopia stretching out her hands to God and behold her dusky children coming home in penitence to God and be the first to welcome them there.”

It is a marvelous prayer, if correctly reported.

One very important lesson we may deduce from this petition of the mother of Zebedee’s children. The Romanists claim that Peter received away back yonder, that is, at Caesarea Philippi, the primacy; that he received from the hands of Christ the first place; that he was made Pope. But if indeed that question was settled then, how could John and James here suppose that the highest places were yet to be assigned, and how could the same matter of honor or precedence arise again at the last Passover supper? But look at our Lord’s reply: “Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” The sons prompted the mother to make the request and were with her. So Bathsheba, who came to David requesting that Solomon, her son, should succeed him upon the throne. Ambitious mothers! Our Lord rebukes the ambitious sons: “You ask for the high places, but high places must be preceded by high service. Are you able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of? Are you able to be baptized with that baptism that I am baptized with? Are you able to establish your title to precedence, and to do the services that obtain primacy in the kingdom of heaven?”

When the ten heard this application they were moved with indignation. The ten includes Peter; the ten includes nine others. What does it show? Virgil once asked, when he was describing how the gods intervened to destroy Troy, “Can such ire exist in celestial minds?” So here we may ask, “Can such envy exist in apostolic minds?” Did you ever notice at conventions an ambitious desire to be made prominent?

Now comes the great lesson (p. 136), Mat 20:25-28 : “Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. Not so shall it be among you; but whosoever would become great among you shall be your minister; and whosoever would be first among you shall be your servant: even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” Now, I solemnly assure you that instead of craving the prominent places and positions, it is far better to crave the spirit of service and sacrifice, that will entitle you to the prominent places.

QUESTIONS

1. What are the four scriptures around which the four lessons occasioned by the rich young ruler’s coming to our Lord are grouped?

2. What may be regarded as safe conclusions on the teachings of our Lord concerning riches?

3. What was Agur’s prayer relative to riches?

4. What was John’s prayer for Gaius and its lesson?

5. What was the one thing the “rich young ruler” lacked, or what was his one sin?

6. What was the double idea in Christ’s language to him, “Go, sell,” etc., and what the application?

7. Had he kept the Commandments? If not, in what point had he failed?

8. What are three great questions for every soul?

9. What couplet cited in point, and who wrote it?

10. What is the meaning of the “needle’s eye,” negatively and positively?

11. What question did the illustration call forth from the disciples, what Christ’s answer and what his meaning?

12. What question did this call forth from Peter, and Christ’s reply?

13. What did Christ mean both negatively and positively by “in the regeneration”?

14. Give the Bible teaching on the “regeneration” of the earth.

15. What is the meaning of “sit upon twelve thrones,” etc., and how does the thought apply to all Christians?

16. How are we to receive a hundredfold for the sacrifices we make here in this world for Christ and what was Christ’s own illustration of this thought?

17. What is the point illustrated by the parable of the laborers and Dr. Baton’s explanation of it?

18. What other point explained by this parable?

19. Explain the amazement of the disciples on the way to Jerusalem and illustrate by other scriptures.

20. How does Christ answer their amazement and fear and how did they receive the explanation?

21. How does the ambition of James and John here manifest itself? Relate the incident of the Pan-Episcopal Convention in London.

22. What lesson from this incident of the mother of Zebedee’s children relative to Peter and the papacy?

23. What was our Lord’s answer to this request and its lessons?

24. How did this request of Zebedee’s sons affect the other ten, and what does it show?

25. What is the great law of promotion in the kingdom of God?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Ver. 16. And behold one came ] One of good rank, a ruler, Luk 18:18 , of good estate, for he was rich, and had great revenue ( , saith Luke, , saith Matthew,Mat 19:22Mat 19:22 , he had a good title to that he had, and he lived not beside it). He was also a young man, in the prime and pride of his age, and had been well bred; both for point of civility, he came congeeing (bowing) to our Saviour, Mar 10:17 . a And for matter of piety, he was no Sadducee, for he inquires after eternal life, which they denied. And although but young, he hearkens after heaven: and though he were rich, he comes running to Christ through desire of information; whereas great men use not to run, but to walk leisurely, so to maintain their authority. Lastly, he knew much of God’s law, and had done much; so that he seemed to himself to want work, to be beforehand with God. Christ also looked upon him and loved him, as he was a tame creature, a moral man, and fit to live in a commonwealth.

What good thing shall I do? ] A most needful and difficult question, rarely moved, by rich men especially, whose hearts are usually upon their half-penny, as they say, whose mouths utter no other language but the horse leech’s, Give, give; Who will show us any good? &c.; A good purchase, a good penny’s worth? &c. Howbeit, by the manner of his expressing himself, this gallant seems to have been a Pharisee, and of that sort of Pharisees (for there were seven sorts of them, saith the Talmud) which was named, Quid debeo facere, et faciam illud, Tell me what I should do, and I will do it. They that know not Christ, would go to heaven by their good meanings and good doings; this is a piece of natural popery, that must be utterly abandoned ere eternal life can be obtained.

That I may have eternal life ] He had a good mind to heaven, and cheapens it, but was not willing to go to the price of it, that thorough sale of all. Good desires may be found in hell’s mouth, as in Balaam some short winded wishes at least. The spies praised the land as pleasant and plenteous, but they held the conquest impossible, and thereby discouraged the people. Many like well of Abraham’s bosom, but not so well of Dives’ door. They seek to Christ, but when he saith, “Take up the cross and follow me,” they stumble at the cross, and fall backward. Their desires after heaven are lazy and sluggish, like the door that turns upon the hinges, but yet hangs still on them: so these wishers and woulders, for all their faint and weak desires after heaven, still hang fast on the hinges of their sins; they will not be wrought off from the things of this world, they will not part with their fatness and sweetness, though it be to reign for ever,Jdg 9:11Jdg 9:11 . Theotimus in St Ambrose would rather lose his sight than his sin of intemperance ( Vale lumen amicum ), farewell bright friend, so many, their souls.

a , genibus reverenter inflexis salutavit.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

16 30. ] ANSWER TO THE ENQUIRY OF A RICH YOUNG MAN, AND DISCOURSE THEREUPON. Mar 10:17-31 .Luk 18:18-30Luk 18:18-30 .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

16. ] From Luk 18:8 we learn that he was a ruler: from Mar 10:17 , that he ran to our Lord. The spirit in which he came, which does not however appear here so plainly as in the other Gospels, from the omission of , and the form of our Lord’s answer, seems to have been that of excessive admiration for Jesus as a man of eminent virtue, and of desire to know from Him by what work of exceeding merit he might win eternal life. This spirit He reproves, by replying that there is but One Good, and that the walking by His grace in the way of holiness is the path to life. On the question and answer, as they stand in the received text, and on their doctrinal bearing, see notes to Mark. This passage furnishes one of the most instructive and palpable cases of the smoothing down of apparent discrepancies by correcting the Gospels out of one another and thus reducing them to conformity.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 19:16-22 . A man in quest of the “summum bonum” (Mar 10:17-22 ; Luk 18:18-23 ). A phenomenon as welcome to Jesus as the visit of the mothers with their children: a man not belonging to the class of self-satisfied religionists of whom He had had ample experience; with moral ingenuousness, an open mind, and a good, honest heart; a malcontent probably with the teaching and practice of the Rabbis and scribes coming to the anti-Rabbinical Teacher in hope of hearing from Him something more satisfying. The main interest of the story for us lies in the revelation it makes of Christ’s method of dealing with inquirers, and in the subsequent conversation with the disciples.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Mat 19:16 . , lo! introduces a story worth telling. : one, singled out from the crowd by his approach towards Jesus, and, as the narrative shows, by his spiritual state. : this reading, which omits the epithet , doubtless gives us the true text of Mt., but in all probability not the exact terms in which the man addressed Jesus. Such a man was likely to accost Jesus courteously as “good Master,” as Mk. and Lk. both report. The omission of the epithet eliminates from the story the basis for a very important and characteristic element in Christ’s dealing with this inquirer contained in the question: “Why callest thou me good?” which means not “the epithet is not applicable to me, but to God only,” but “do not make ascriptions of goodness a matter of mere courtesy or politeness”. The case is parallel to the unwillingness of Jesus to be called Christ indiscriminately. He wished no man to give Him any title of honour till he knew what he was doing. He wished this man in particular to think carefully on what is good, and who , all the more that there were competing types of goodness to choose from, that of the Pharisees, and that exhibited in His own teaching. . the is omitted in the parallels, but it is implied: of course it was something good that would have to be done in order to obtain eternal life. What good shall I do? Fritzsche takes this as not = quid boni faciam ? but = quid, quod bonum sit, faciam ? that is, not = what particular good action shall, etc., but = what in the name of good, etc. This is probably right. The man wants to know what the good really is that by doing it he may attain eternal life. It was a natural question for a thoughtful man in those days when the teaching and practice of the religious guides made it the hardest thing possible to know what the good really was. It is a mistake to conceive of this man as asking what specially good thing he might do in the spirit of the type of Pharisee who was always asking, What is my duty and I will do it? (Schttgen). Would Jesus have loved such a man, or would such a man have left His presence sorrowful ? : an alternative name for the summum bonum in Christ’s teaching, and also in current Jewish speech (Wnsche, Beitrge ). The Kingdom of God is the more common in the Synoptics, the other in the fourth Gospel.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 19:16-22

16And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” 17And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 Then he said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; 19Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 20The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?” 21Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22But when the young man heard this statement, he went away grieving; for he was one who owned much property.

Mat 19:16 “someone came to Him” From Mat 19:20 we know that he was young, from Mat 19:22 we learn that he was rich, and from Luk 18:18 we learn that he was a ruler (cf. Mar 10:17-22).

“Teacher” The parallels in Mar 10:17 and Luk 18:18 have “good Teacher.” The better uncial MSS (i.e., , B, D, L) omit it here (UBS4 rates its exclusion as “A,” meaning “certain”).

“what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life” This Jewish man had the common conception of salvation held by most Jews of his day, which was a works righteousness based on one’s conformity to the Mosaic Law and Oral Tradition (cf. Luk 10:25; Rom 9:30-33). He saw eternal life as the result of his religious performance.

“eternal life” This was an OT concept of the life (zo) of the age to come (cf. Dan 12:2). The term addressed both the quality of the new life and its duration.

In this one context several different expressions are used to describe a person’s relationship with God.

1. obtain eternal life, Mat 19:16

2. to enter into life, Mat 19:17

3. to be complete, Mat 19:21

4. to enter the kingdom of God, Mat 19:23-24

5. be saved, Mat 19:25

6. will inherit eternal life, Mat 19:29

Mat 19:17 “There is only One who is good” Jesus was not making a statement about His lack of goodness, but was showing this man the standard of goodness that was required to be right with God. This verse should not be used as a proof-text depreciating Jesus’ deity or sinlessness.

“if” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true from the author’s perspective or for his literary purposes. There is nothing in this context to imply that this man was trying to tempt, try or trick Jesus.

“keep the commandments” This is aorist imperative (Nestle Greek text has a Present active imperative). This obviously referred to the Ten Commandments of Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. This was the heart of the Jewish Law.

Mat 19:18-19 This is a partial list of the second half of the Ten Commandments which dealt with person’s relationship to his fellow covenant brother. This listing is different from the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Septuagint. See Special Topics at Mat 5:21; Mat 5:27; Mat 15:4, and the following Special Topic.

SPECIAL TOPIC: NOTES ON Exodus 20

Mat 19:18 “murder” The King James Version (KJV) and the Jerusalem Bible (JB) render this verb as “kill,” which is an unfortunate translation of this Hebrew word for “non-legal premeditated murder.” The NKJV has ” murder.” The “eye for an eye” law code of Israel provided a blood-avenger to exact justice from one who killed a family member (cf. Num 35:12; Deu 19:6; Deu 19:12; Jos 20:1-9). This served to prevent feuds or unlimited retaliation. See Special Topic at Mat 5:21.

Mat 19:20 “the young man” In Jesus’ day a man was considered young until he was forty years old. Luk 18:18 adds that the man was a “ruler,” which meant the leader of a local synagogue or of a local town council.

“all these things I have kept” In Php 3:6 Paul makes the same claim. This is not a contradiction of Rom 3:23, but shows the legalistic nature of the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament to which Jesus spoke in Mat 5:20-48. Righteousness was seen as performance of a legal code. This man felt he had performed all the religious duties of his day and culture.

NKJV adds “from my youth,” which is found in Mar 10:20 and the uncial MSS C and W and many versions. In Jewish society a person was not responsible to keep the Law until after a time of personal study and commitment (i.e., Bar Mitzvah at age 13 for boys and Bat Mitzvah for girls at age 12). This is parallel to the concept of “the age of accountability” in Christianity.

“what am I still lacking” This shows the restlessness of this man’s heart. Even after keeping all of the Mosaic laws and their interpretations, he still felt empty.

Mat 19:21 “If” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true by the author for his literary purposes.

NASB”complete”

NKJV, NRSV,

TEV, NJB” perfect”

This word meant “full,” ” mature,” ” fully equipped for the assigned task” (from telosi). It did not imply sinlessness.

“go and sell your possessions” This shows the radical nature of the Christian’s faith (cf. Luk 14:33). It is a total commitment. For this man the choice was in the area of possessions. This man’s possessions possessed him! This is not a requirement for all believers, but a radical, ultimate commitment to Jesus is!

There is a series of imperatives.

1. go, present active imperative

2. sell, aorist active imperative

3. give, aorist active imperative

4. come, adverb used as an aorist active imperative

5. follow, present active imperative

These commands (i.e., #4, 5) are like Jesus’ call to the Twelve. Jesus was inviting this man to become part of His nucleus!

“give to the poor” From 1Co 13:1-3, we see that attitude is the key!

“you will have treasure in heaven” See notes at Mat 6:19-20.

“and come, follow Me” Jesus perceived this man’s priority structure and He demanded first place. His wealth was not the problem, but its priority (cf. 1Ti 6:10). Notice the radical personal commitment demanded for following Jesus (cf. Mat 10:34-39).

Mat 19:22 “he went away grieving” Jesus loved this man but would not lower the standards of the Kingdom. The Bible is silent on this man’s salvation. This is shocking when we realize that (1) he came with good motives, (2) he came to the right person, (3) he came with the right questions, and (4) Jesus loved him (Mar 10:21), but he went away!

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

behold. Figure of speech Asterismos. App-6.

Good. All the texts omit. The accounts here(verses: Mat 19:16-27, Mar 10:17-28, and Luk 18:18-28) are partly identical and partly complementary.

Master = Teacher. Greek. Didaskalos. See App-98. Mat 19:1.

eternal life = life age-abiding. Greek. zue aionios. App-170. This was to be gained by “doing” in that Dispensation and since the Fall. Compare Lev 18:6. Now all is “done”, and “eternal life is the gift of God” (Rom 6:23. 1Jn 5:11, 1Jn 5:12).

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

16-30.] ANSWER TO THE ENQUIRY OF A RICH YOUNG MAN, AND DISCOURSE THEREUPON. Mar 10:17-31. Luk 18:18-30.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 19:16. , behold) sc. whilst Jesus is opening the kingdom of heaven, even to infants.-, one) From the rank to which he belonged, at length comes one.- , good Teacher) He that is good teaches well concerning that which is good; see Joh 7:12.-, shall I do?) the young man asks about doing; but belief goes before.- , eternal life) Eternal life was known under the old dispensation, as we are assured in Heb 11:16; and it is explicitly called so in Dan 12:2.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Chapter 52

What lack I yet?

And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible

(Mat 19:16-26)

Here is a man who was anxious about his soul and concerned about eternal life. Such men are rare. He was rich; but he was concerned about his soul. He was young; but he was interested in eternity. He was a ruler of men; but he came to be taught by the Lord Jesus Christ. This rich young ruler came running up to Christ, and said, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? Our Lord knew the mans heart. He knew that this young man was thoroughly familiar with the law of Moses. And he knew that the young man thought, like most people do, that eternal life could be gained by outward morality, by obedience to the law. Therefore, he answered this young man according to the law. He told him to keep the commandments. The rich young ruler responded, All these things have I kept from my youth up. Then he asked, What lack I yet?

Perhaps some who read these lines ask the same question in their own minds, What lack I yet? You are very moral, and respectable in the eyes of men. You believe in God. You believe the Bible is the Word of God. And you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. You believe that he is God. You believe in his death, burial, and resurrection as the sinners Substitute. You even know that Jesus Christ the Lord is the sinners only hope of salvation before God. Yet, for all that, you know that you are not a child of God, a saved sinner, and an heir to eternal life. Knowing all these things the question of great concern in your heart is just this What lack I yet?

Many very moral and religious people yet lack that one thing which is essential to eternal life. They lack faith in Christ. There are three questions raised in this passage of Scripture that I want to answer from the Word of God.

1.What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? (Mat 19:16).

The rich young ruler asked our Savior this question. Looking at the question by itself, it appears to be a very noble one, one that we all should ask. We find this question many times in the Scriptures. Those who asked it became saved men. They were given eternal life. On the day of Pentecost, a large number of men, after they heard the gospel message, were pricked in their hearts, and they cried, Men and brethren, What shall we do? The Philippian jailor, with a broken and submissive heart cried, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

But when this rich young ruler asked the question, his heart was not broken with conviction. His soul was not humbled with a sense of sin. He was a terribly proud, self-righteous man. He felt that he was sufficient in himself to meet whatever requirements God himself might demand of him. In essence, he was saying to the Lord, You tell me what God requires, and I will do it! He had a zeal for righteousness; but going about to establish his own righteousness he had not submitted himself to the righteousness of God (Rom 10:3). How many there are like this rich young ruler: Very moral, very proud, and very lost!

There is much about this young man that is commendable. He was not a base, profligate rebel. He was moral, religious, and devout. He had been a respectful and obedient son to his parents. He was a good husband, a good father, a good provider for his family. He was a hardworking, honest man, who had acquired much wealth. He was a good neighbor, a respected community leader.

In a day of abounding unbelief he came to Christ of his own accord. He came, not to have some disease healed, not to plead for a helpless child, not to see some great miracle, but out of concern for his immortal soul. He was earnest and sincere. Mark tells us that he came running to Christ. He was orthodox in his creed. He was a religious leader. He believed in God. He believed the Holy Scriptures. He believed in the reality of eternal life. He was very strict and devoted in his practice of religion. Since the days of his youth, he had outwardly kept the law of God. His life was meticulously moral and precise. He even worshipped Christ. Again, Mark tells us that when he came to Christ, he kneeled down before him. Like Nicodemus, this young man realized that Jesus Christ was a teacher come from God. He seems even to have acknowledged our Lords deity. When the Lord Jesus asserted that no man is good, but God only, the young ruler did not withdraw his statement. He seems to have acknowledged that Christ is God.

Yet, this young man demonstrated two very sorrowful characteristics. Two things about this rich young rulers character show us that he was a lost, ruined, unregenerate man. First, he was ignorant of all spiritual truth. He knew much in a natural sense, but spiritually, regarding spiritual things, he was as ignorant as a man who had never heard of God. He was ignorant of Gods holy character. He was ignorant of his own sinfulness. He was ignorant of the laws spiritual nature. He obviously thought that the law only required outward obedience. And he was altogether ignorant of the gospel of Christ (Eph 2:8-9).

Second, the rich young ruler was, as I have already stated, dreadfully self-righteous. Beware of self-righteousness! No sin is more deadly, and more likely to keep you from Christ than the sin of self-righteousness. And no sin is more common to man. All men, by nature, are self-righteous. It is the family disease of all the sons of Adam. From the heights to the depths of society, we all think more highly of ourselves than we should. We secretly flatter ourselves that we are not so bad as some, and that we have something that will recommend us to the favor of God. The wise man said, Most men will proclaim everyone his own goodness. We forget the plain testimony of Holy Scripture. In many things we offend all (Jas 3:2). There is not a man upon the earth, that doeth good and sinneth not (Ecc 7:10). What is man that he should be clean, or he that is born of woman that he should be righteous (Job 15:14). They are all under sin; as it is written, there is none righteous, no not one (Rom 3:9-10).

Ever since man became a sinner, he has been self-righteous. When man had a perfect righteousness before God, he did not glory in it or cherish it. But ever since the fall, when we lost all righteousness, man has pretended to be righteous. Immediately after his fall, Adam wrapped himself a fig leaf apron and began to defend himself by blaming his troubles on God who gave to him the woman, and the woman for giving him the fruit.

As it was with Adam, so it is with us all. We justify ourselves before God and men. Self-righteousness is born within us. While we can, to a degree, control our lusts and wicked behavior, our self-righteousness will not allow us to confess our sins and come to God for mercy as guilty sinners. Millions of sermons have been preached against self-righteousness, but it remains the number one sin that keeps men from coming to Christ.

One old preacher said, I scarcely ever preach a sermon without condemning self-righteousness, yet I find I cannot preach it down. Men still boast of who they are, what they have done, what they have not done, and mistake the road to heaven to be one paved by their own works and merit. God help us!

Our Lord Jesus answered this mans question plainly. He asked what he could do to win Gods favor; and The Savior told him. If you want salvation by human merit, you must keep the law. As far as he understood the law, in its outward requirement, he had kept it. He was like Saul of Tarsus, as touching the law, blameless. But he was not all that he thought he was. He did not, in reality, love his neighbor as himself. The law must be kept perfectly. It must be kept in all points. It must be kept at all times. It must be kept outwardly. And it must be kept inwardly.

God never intended the law to be a basis of salvation. Its design is to show man Gods holy character and his own condemnation and guilt. Nothing else. But those who attempt to obtain righteousness by the works of the law do not understand what the law requires. It requires perfect, complete obedience (Gal 3:10).

2.What lack I yet? (Mat 19:20)

Though our Savior answered the rich young rulers question so plainly that he should have been convinced of his inability to produce righteousness for himself, his pride and self-righteousness compelled him to press the matter further. He asked the Master, What lack I yet?

Who would dare be so bold? The man must be either mad or blind. Yet, this man, like most, was very confident that he was righteous. He appears to be saying, If there is any deficiency in me, I do not know what it could be. I have done all that God requires of a man.

He did appear to lack very little. If a modern soul-winner could find a young man like this, he would have him under the water, dried off, and in the pulpit in no time. But the Lord Jesus was not trying to get another decision to put on his promotional charts as a soul winning evangelist. He labored for the souls of men, not their applause. He was both compassionate and honest. Therefore, he showed the young man exactly what he lacked. He was not lacking in morality, religious duty, orthodoxy, sincerity, or zeal. But he was lacking one essential thing. He had no faith in Christ.

Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest (Mar 10:21). He boasted that he loved his neighbor as himself. Therefore, Christ put him to a test. Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me (Mat 19:21).

Our Lord commanded this young man to surrender to his authority as his Lord. Go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. He commanded the man to trust him. He said, Come. Coming to Christ is an act of faith. He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is the Rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Mark adds the words Take up thy cross. That is to say, our Lord commanded the man to confess him. And he commanded this young man to obey him. He said, Follow me. These are the things which our Lord requires of all his people: submission, faith, confession, and obedience.

The Lord had a good reason for giving this command to this particular man. He was probing at his heart. He wanted to expose his point of rebellion. He was determined to show this young man exactly what he was lacking. God always meets the sinner at his point of rebellion. This mans money was his god. Therefore, the Master commanded him to give it away. This command was designed to expose the evil of his heart, destroy his self-confidence and pride, show him the impossibility of salvation by the works of the law, and to show him the necessity of the gospel. By this one, pointed command, our Savior stripped away the fig leaves of the rich young rulers self-righteousness, exposed the foolishness of his pride, and showed him his need of the grace of God and his need of a Substitute.

The rich young rulers one fatal deficiency was a deficiency of the heart. Like Simon Magus, his heart was not right in the sight of God. He was yet unregenerate. He was in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity. His heart was not broken. His Spirit was not humbled. He would not surrender to Christ as Lord. God met him at his point of rebellion, and he would not bow. He would not come to Christ, trusting him alone for salvation. He would not confess Christ to be Lord. He would not obey the Son of God.

Are you like this young man? If so, our Saviors words to him must be addressed to you, one thing thou lackest. You have one fatal deficiency. Your heart is not right before God. If ever you are saved, your heart must be broken (Psa 51:17; Isa 66:2). And the only way your heart will ever be broken is if God is pleased to reveal himself to you in the fulness of his grace and glory in Christ (Zec 12:10; 2Co 4:3-6). Unless God himself breaks your heart, it will never be broken; and you will never be saved. You must be born again by almighty grace. A new heart must be created within you.

3.Who then can be saved? (Mat 19:25)

When the disciples saw and heard these things, they were astonished, and cried Who then can be saved? Our Lord gives us a plain answer to that question. With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible (Mat 19:26). Salvation is not a work of man. It is not, in any way, or to any degree, dependent upon or determined by man (Joh 1:12-13). Salvation is altogether the work of Gods sovereign and irresistible grace (Rom 9:16; Eph 2:8-10). None but God can save sinners in a way that is suitable to satisfy his holy law (Rom 3:24-26). None but God can give a lost sinner a new heart. None but God can break a sinners stubborn will. None but God can give life to the dead and faith to the unbelieving. None but God can reveal Christ in us.

With men salvation is impossible, but with God all things are possible. Salvation is accomplished entirely by his omnipotent, effectual, irresistible grace (Psa 65:4). If ever the almighty God puts his hand upon a sinner, that sinner will be saved.

Who then can be saved? Let me tell you who can, who will, who must be saved. All who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, all who are born-again by God the Holy Spirit, all who are called by almighty grace, all who come to Christ must and shall be saved. The Lord Jesus Christ has declared, and it shall never be reversed, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out (Joh 6:37).

Come to Christ, no matter who you are, no matter how vile your transgressions are, and he promises that he will receive you just as you are, and that he will never cast you out, that he will give you eternal life, that you shall never perish. Come, then, to Christ without any preparations to make yourself worthy of coming, without making change to qualify you for acceptance. Come to Christ without delay. Sinner, come and welcome! The Saviors word is, Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light (Mat 11:28-30). If you are lost, it is not because there is no love in Christ for sinners. It is not because Christ is not able, willing, and ready to save sinners. If you are not saved, it is because, Ye will not come to Christ, that ye might have life. If you die in your sins, it will be entirely your own fault. If you do come, if you are saved, if you do trust the blessed Savior it will be entirely because of and entirely the work of Gods free grace.

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

The King settles the Order of Precedence

Mat 19:16. And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Here was one who thought himself first, yet he had to go last; yea, and even to go away sorrowful.

He was a self-sufficient gentleman: he seemed to feel that one good thing from him would be enough, and that he could and would do it at once. He had some misgivings, or he would not have asked the question, “What good thing shall I do?” Perhaps, even in so admirable a life as his own, something might yet be lacking. But if it should turn out to be so, he could readily supply the lack.

He was very respectful, and addressed the Lord Jesus as “Good Master.” So far, so good. His question was of great personal importance.

“What shall I do, that I may have eternal life?” Oh, that more young men would ask a similar question! It was a very suitable enquiry for an earnest person, such as he undoubtedly was. Ho sought eternal life, and could not be content with the honours of the hour. He only wanted to know what to do to win that eternal life, and he would set about it at once.

This is a hopeful enquirer. Surely he will be a grand convert! Let us wait a little, and we shall see.

Mat 19:17. And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Our Lord cared not for empty compliments, and so he asks, “Why callest thou me good?” Many modern heretics praise Jesus, and their commendations are such an insult to his glorious person that he might well say, “Why callest thou me good?” Did this man really mean it? If so, the Lord Jesus would let him know by a hint that he to whom he spake was more than man. The argument is clear: either Jesus was good, or he ought not to have called him good; but as there is none good but God, Jesus who is good must be God.

As for the question of having eternal life through a good work, Jesus answers him on his own ground. Life by the law comes only by keeping its commands: “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.” No one has ever fulfilled them so as to be good: did this young man think that he could do so? Yet, on the ground of law, if he would deserve eternal life as a reward, he must be as good as God, and keep the commandments to perfection. Thus the rugged way of works was set before him; not that he might attempt to win eternal life thereby, but that he might perceive his own shortcomings, and so feel his weakness as to look for salvation by some other method.

Mat 19:18-19. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

The questioner ventures to ask, “Which? “Did he suppose that certain ceremonial precepts would be mentioned? Probably he did, for he felt himself quite sure upon all the points of the moral law. Our Lord, however, gives him nothing new, but turns to the ancient Decalogue. He quotes the second table of the law first, and begins with commands which would appear to the young man to be the mere commonplaces of morality. The last-quoted command summarized the rest, and it ought to have opened the questioner’s eyes to his shortcomings; for who has loved his neighbour as himself? The young aristocrat was not, however, convicted of sin. He pressed his enquiry as to salvation by works because he thought himself on the road to winning it.

Mat 19:20. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

Perhaps he spoke the truth, as he understood the law. He had maintained an excellent moral character from his early boyhood. He felt that in act and deed he had kept all those commands without a fault of any consequence. He was no braggart, but could honestly claim to have led a commendable life. He was, no doubt, a very exemplary person, and so amiable that Jesus looked on him very lovingly. We know some who are like him, and may be described “as touching the law, blameless.” But he was not all he thought himself to be: he did not love his neighbour as himself, as he would soon be made to see. “What lack I yet?” is an enquiry few would dare to put. He felt that if there was anything lacking in him, he was altogether ignorant as to what it could be. His self-esteem needed no increasing.

Mat 19:21. Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Our Lord brings him to the test of the first table of the law: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart.” If he did this, he would be willing, at a divine command, to part with his property, even as Abraham was ready to offer up his son. Our Lord Jesus, as God, claimed from him an unusual sacrifice. Did he love God sufficiently to make it? The command of our Lord was a challenge to self-righteousness to prove its own profession. We may also regard it as putting on its trial his profession to have loved his neighbour as himself. Did he love the poor as well as himself? If so, it would be no hardship to sell his possessions, and give to the poor. We must not infer that Jesus would have all his followers part with all that they have: it was a test for this one man: “If thou wilt be perfect.” Still, if we love our possessions more than we love God, we are idolaters; and if we hug our property so as to let the poor hunger, we cannot be said to love them as ourselves. We have heard of persons claiming to be perfect, and yet retaining possession of hundreds of thousands of pounds; and we have doubted their perfection. Was there not a cause? Compassion for poverty, zeal for the truth, and love of doing good, will hardly allow of any Christian’s owning enormous riches. At any rate, such wealthy ones will find it hard, to render an account at the last great day. We must love Jesus and his great cause better than our wealth, or else we are not his true followers. If our religion were ever put to the great test of fierce persecution, and we had to part with all our property, or part with Christ, hesitation would be fatal.

Mat 19:22. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

He could not go the whole length of his own plan. He would be saved by works; yet he would not carry out his works to the full of the law’s demand. He failed to observe the spirit both of the second and the first table. He loved not his poor brother as himself; he loved not God in Christ Jesus with all his heart and soul. He thought himself first; but he soon stood behind the last, for he went away sorrowful. Thus the Saviour tests character. That which glittered so much is not found to be gold. This man’s great possessions so possessed him that he never possessed his own soul.

Mat 19:23. Then Jesus said unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Worldly possessions, apart from divine grace, have a deadening, hardening, hampering influence upon the soul. Some rich men do enter into the kingdom of heaven, but it is hard for them; very hard indeed. The temptation is to let riches rule the mind; and when that is the case, the kingdom of this world opposes the kingdom of heaven. Houses and land, and gold and silver, act as bird-lime to the soul, and prevent its rising towards heaven. This is especially the case in persecuting times; but it is sufficiently a fact in all periods of human history. It is worthy of notice that this hard sentence was intended for Christians; for it is written, Then Jesus said unto His disciples, “Verily I say unto you.”

Mat 19:24. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Weighty words are introduced with the authoritative formula, Again I say unto you. Into this statement our Lord throws the full weight of his personality. He uses an expressive proverb, which means precisely what the words convey to the common reader. There is no sense in hunting up abstruse metaphors where the proverbial teaching is as plain as possible. He would show that wealth is far more a hindrance than a help to those who would enter into the kingdom of God: in fact, such a hindrance as to render the matter practically impossible without divine interposition. A camel is not only large, but it has humps, and how can it go through so small an opening as the eye of a needle? It could not make such a passage except by a strange miracle; nor can a rich man enter into the kingdom of God except by a marvel of grace. How few of the rich even hear the gospel! They are too great, too fine, too busy, too proud to regard the lowly preacher of the gospel of the poor. If, perchance, they do hear the heavenly message, they have not the necessities and tribulations which drive men from the present world to seek consolation in the world to come, and so they feel no need to accept Christ. “Gold and the gospel seldom do agree.” Those who are rich in this world, in the vast majority of instances, scorn to become subjects of the kingdom in which faith is riches, and holiness is honour.

Should the rich begin the divine life, how hard it is for them to persevere amid the cares, the luxuries, the temptations of a wealthy position! The difficulties are enormous when we think of the pride of life, the flattery of rank, the danger of power, the risk of carnal security. Yet, blessed be God, we have seen rich men become poor in spirit! We have seen camels go through this needle’s eye, humps and all! We hope to see many more such miracles of almighty grace.

Mat 19:25. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?

No common astonishment filled them. Much astounding truth they had already heard from their Master; but this exceeded all, and they were exceedingly amazed. They had previously thought that wealth was an advantage: and now they judged that if those who had riches could only be saved with surpassing difficulty, poor working-men like themselves could have no hope whatever. They were ready to despair; and therefore they put to their Lord the very natural question, “Who then can be saved?” Even our Lord’s disciples felt themselves bewildered by his plain utterance, so hard is it to get rid of prejudices in favour of wealth.

Mat 19:26. But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

Jesus beheld them. He looked on them with pity and with love, and told them that God could do that which, apart from him, would never come to pass. To enter the kingdom is impossible to man unaided: one sin or another blocks the way. The cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches are a sadly effective barrier to the soul when it attempts to enter the city of holiness; but God can cause those barriers to yield, and enable the soul to enter by the narrow way. He is mighty to save. With God all things are possible. What a joyful truth for the writer and the reader! Our salvation, when we view our own weakness and the power of sin, is impossible with men. Only when we turn to God and his grace, does salvation range among the possibilities.

The rich man is set by our Lord, not at the head, but at the foot of the line of aspirants for the kingdom.

Lord, my hope of being found in thy kingdom lies in thy power, and grace, and not in my possessions!

Mat 19:27. Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?

Here is another claimant for a front place. Peter answered, adding, as he seemed to think, a question needful for the full discussion of the subject. Peter speaks for his brethren: “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee;” we have done what the rich young man refused to do: “What shall we have therefore?” He spoke as the representative of a number who had become poor for the kingdom’s sake: surely these must have a large reward. Little as these first believers had to leave, it was their all, and they had forsaken it to follow Jesus: Peter would fain hear what their recompense would be. What Peter said was true, but it was not wisely spoken. It has a selfish, grasping look, and it is worded so barely that it ought not in that fashion to have come from a servant to his Lord. After all, what have any of us to lose for Jesus compared with what we gain by him? “What shall we have?” is a question which we need not raise, for we ought rather to think of what we have already received at our Lord’s hands. Himself is reward enough to the soul that hath him.

Mat 19:28. And Jeau8 said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Our Lord regards Peter as spokesman for them all, and he therefore answered them all: “Jesus said unto them.” Seeing their questioning state of mind, he begins with, “Verily I say unto you.” He condescendingly meets their somewhat selfish enquiry. They needed not to doubt but what there would be a large and full reward for those who had followed him. His first adherents would have high rank, and should sit as assessors with the great Judge in the day of his exaltation. Those who share his humiliation shall share his glory also.

When our Lord shall sit in the throne of his glory, all things will have been made new. That dispensation will be called the regeneration: then shall the highest honours among their fellows of the twelve tribes of Israel await the twelve who followed Jesus, even to the loss of all things.

Mat 19:29. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

No man shall be a loser by the Lord Jesus in the long run. Every one that hath bravely forsaken the comforts of this life for Christ shall receive an hundredfold recompense. Our Lord makes up to the persecuted all that which they part with for his sake. Exiles for the truth have found a father and a brother in every Christian; a mother and a sister in every holy woman. Our Lord, by giving us his own love, and the love of our fellow-Christians, supplies a hundredfold compensation to those who have to leave wife or children for his sake. In being entertained hospitably by loving brethren, saints in banishment have had their houses and lands in a sense restored to them. To be at home everywhere, is a great gain, even though for Christ’s name’s sake we should be exiled from our native shores. Above all, in God we have a hundredfold recompense for all that we can possibly lose for his cause; and then there is the eternal life given to us, which no mansions and estates could have procured for us. In faith of this we look forward to the reign of the saints, when even here they shall inherit the earth, and rejoice themselves in the abundance of peace. Beyond this, when time ceases, there remains endless bliss; for we shall inherit everlasting life. Oh, that we may never hesitate to be glad losers for Jesus! They who lose all for Christ will find all in Christ, and receive all with Christ.

Mat 19:30. But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.

Thus our Lord sums up his deliverance as to rich men, and gives us the aphorism now before us, which he has already illustrated, and means to repeat further on in the sixteenth verse of the next chapter. Our King is here seen arranging human positions as they appear from his throne. To his eye, many first are last, and many last are first; and he will in his kingdom place men according to the divine order.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s The Gospel of the Kingdom

Eternal Life

And behold, one came to him and said, Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?Mat 19:16.

1. This young ruler, who appears and disappears again so suddenly in the gospel narrative, is one of the most interesting and tragic figures in the Bible. The interest is enhanced by the strong resemblance he seems to bear to the Apostle Paul in circumstances and character. Both were in the prime of early manhood when they came into contact with Jesus. Both were rulers, with all that such a position implied of theological education, social position, and ecclesiastical influence. Both were religious to the full extent of their light, striving to obey the Law and believing that they had succeeded. Both were lovable in disposition. Both were rich. The one, we are told, had great possessions. The wealth of the Apostle of the Gentiles is inferred from various circumstances. It is inferred from the education that he received, from the fact that he was a ruler, from the ease and air of equality with which he addressed nobles, governors, and kings, from the position occupied by his relatives in Jerusalem, from the two years imprisonment in which Felix detained him in the hope of obtaining a bribe, from the consideration shown to him on the voyage to Rome, from the unusual permission given him to take Luke with him. It is also suggestive that his favourite description of the gospel is riches, a suitable word on the lips of one who had been forced to ask himself if he had received compensation for what he had sacrificed. The point of decision in both men was the samethe necessity to abandon a supposed righteousness; and the touchstone of sincerity in both was the sametheir readiness to abandon wealth for Christ. At that point the difference arose. The one went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. The other counted all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord.

2. Never before had such an one come to Jesus. That he should come at all was much; that he should come at such a time was very much; that he should come at such a time and in such a way was a splendid proof of independence, of courage, and of earnestness. It was utterly unlike those about him. A man whose religion was not a cloak for all kinds of self-indulgence; whose wealth was not a thing that possessed and enslaved him; who had not learned to put the anise and cummin in place of justice and mercy; who did not go priding himself on his long robes, or his long prayers, or his trumpeted almsfree alike from hypocrisy or pride, simple and sincere. Nor was it any sudden outburst of emotion kindled by the sight of that face, by His words of wisdom, or by the tokens of His tenderness. No shallow-ground hearer of the Word was this, receiving it with joy, and then when the sun was up withering away. There was the fixed habit of goodness in him. A blameless youth had led up to a generous and noble manhood. So sincere, so brave, so earnest, no wonder that Jesus beholding him loved him. The look, the tone, the manner of Jesus told how His heart went forth to him.

It may be instructive to set this young man beside that other ruler who came to Jesus. Nicodemus came at the very outset of the Saviours ministry, when as yet men had not made up their minds as to His authority, and when at any rate there was neither peril nor social sacrifice in recognizing Him. And yet Nicodemus came by night, under cover of the darkness. He came when Jesus was alone, or when only John was with Him. But now Jesus is excommunicated; He is denounced and condemned, and the authorities have already sought to stone Him. On every side there are those who watch Him with a hatred that only His death will satisfy. To honour Him in any way is to incur their suspicion and denunciation. Yet this young ruler comes openly before all the people. And more than that, there is an enthusiasm in his coming, an ardent admiration for Jesus Christ that no other rich man ever showed. He came runningthat was a startling enough thing amidst the leisurely strut of the Pharisee and the languid indifference of the rich. Such enthusiasm has always been regarded as vulgar by the well-to-do; and to be vulgar is with them worse than to be wicked. He came with a respect and reverence that acknowledged alike the greatness and the goodness of the blessed Lord. He kneeled at the feet of the Saviour, and asked Him, as the great authority, Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?1 [Note: M. G. Pearse.]

I

The Question

1. By eternal life we must understand not merely continued existence, but continued happy existence, than which there can be no higher good. Many people are happy hereat times, and for times. But the old saying, No one is always happy, shows how constant is mans experience of the mutability of happiness. And many men wonder why this is so. The truth isthough few people see it at firstthat nothing is, or is real, but what is in harmony with the mind and will of God. He alone can create. What man seems to create, as apart from God, can last only so long as mans illusion lasts; for it is illusion alone that gives such works apparent reality. As in the case of the house founded on the sand, a little time and those natural forces which can overthrow anything illusory will distinguish the apparent from the real. The illusion will vanish like a burst bubble; and what is realthat is, what is in harmony with the mind and will of Godwill alone endure. Therefore eternal life can mean only a life (desires, tastes, workings, productions) that is in harmony with the mind and will of God. All else is folly, vanity, emptiness, illusion, which, like the state of childhood, can last its time, and then must pass away.

In the complex, of vivid, operative convictions connected with Eternal Life there is, first, a keen yet double sense of Abidingnessan absolute Abidingness, pure Simultaneity, Eternity, in God; and a relative abidingness, a quasi-eternity, Duration, in man (qua personality). And the Eternity is always experienced by man only within, together with, and in contrast to, the Duration. And both Eternity and Duration stand out, in mans deepest consciousness, with even painful contrast, against all mere Succession, all sheer flux and change. Here the special value lies in the double sense that we are indeed actually touched, penetrated, and supported by the purely Eternal; and yet that we ourselves shall never, either here or hereafter, be more than quasi-eternal, durational. For only this double sense will save us from the perilous alternatives of an uncreaturely sheer fixity and an animal mere flux and change. We thus gain a perennial source of continuity and calm. There is, next, the keen sense of Otherness in Likeness. We are genuinely like, and we are genuinely unlike, God, the Realized Perfection. Hence there is ever a certain tension, a feeling of limitation or of emptiness, a looking for a centre outside of, or other than, our own selves. Here again this double sense will be profoundly helpful in our troubles. For thus we are never free to lose reverence for the deepest of what we are, since it is like God, and actually harbours God. And yet we may never lose humility and a thirst for purification, since even the deepest and best of ourselves never will be, God.1 [Note: F. von Hgel, Eternal Life, 365.]

2. Where had the ruler got hold of the thought of eternal life? It was far above the dusty speculations and casuistries of the Rabbis. Probably from Christ Himself. He was right in recognizing that the conditions of possessing it were moral, but his conception of good was superficial, and he thought more of doing good than of being good, and of the desired life as payment for meritorious actions. In a word, he stood at the point of view of the Old Dispensation. This do, and thou shalt live, was his belief; and what he wished was further instruction as to what this was. He was to be praised in that he docilely brought his question to Jesus, even though, as Christs answer shows, there was error mingling in his docility. The fact that he came to Christ for a purely religious purpose, not seeking personal advantage for himself or for others, like the crowds who followed for loaves and cures, nor laying traps for Him with puzzles which might entangle Him with the authorities, nor asking theological questions for curiosity, but honestly and earnestly desiring to be helped to lay hold of eternal life, is to be put down to his credit. He is right in counting it the highest blessing.

3. Probably when he came to our Lord with his question the ruler had an idea that Christ would recommend him to build a synagogue or ransom some of his countrymen who were slaves, or do some striking religious act; for when our Lord gives him the simple answer that any child of his own household could have given him, he answers, What commandment? fancying He might mean some rules for extraordinary saintliness which had not been divulged to the common people; and evidently, when our Lord merely repeated the time-worn Decalogue, the young man was disappointed, and somewhat impatiently exclaimed, All these have I kept from my youth up. He probably did not mean to vaunt his own blamelessness of life. Not at all. He merely meant to state that all his life he had had these commandments before him, and if this were all our Lord had to tell him, then that was no fresh light for him at all. All the good they could do him he had already got; and that was not all the good that could be got, he felt. What lack I yet? We are told that the Talmud describes one of the classes of Pharisees as the tell-me-something-more-to-do-and-I-will-do-it Pharisee. The young man plainly belonged to this class. He thought he was ready to make any sacrifice or do any great thing which would advance his spiritual condition.

A sermon by the Archbishop of York emphasizing that the test of religion is love for ones neighbours fills her with delight; a sermon on the third anniversary of her baptism by the vicar of St. Mary Abbots, in which he laid stress on the impossibility of doing without first being, is noted with ardent enthusiasm a few days afterwards. Then she makes an approving note of some words of Dr. Parker: He spoke against men who met together in a nice room to discuss how to do something for the suffering masses; if you want to reach themgo to them yourself. I feel no doubt of religion, she wrote on the threshold of 1891, and she immediately hurried to reflect that it was life essentially: There is a tremendous difference between admiring and believing in Christianity on the one hand, and on the other putting ourselves under the Divine influence hour by hour. She was discovering the old problem of how to be what one believed, and she was just the person to solve it with almost a ruthless rectitude. She had come to the briar patches already.1 [Note: J. Ramsay MacDonald, Margaret Ethel MacDonald, 66.]

4. It is evident that the young ruler made the mistake of forgetting that goodness can come only from God. He apparently imagined that goodness is inherent in man, if he only knew how to exercise it. What good thing shall I do? And the Lord answered, Why askest thou me concerning that which is good?as if there were several good things: good works, and good eternal life? There is but one true Good, and that is not a thing, but a Being. God is the One Good, and the One Life. It is as if our Lord would say, You ask Me a question which I cannot answer directly; because, if I did, you would not understand Me. Eternal life is not a commodity to be purchased at a price. God and eternal life are one. If you have God, you have eternal life; if you enter into God, you enter into eternal life. Or, more plainly, if your idea of life, what you like, desire, work for, is one with Gods idea of life, you are thereby one with God. Your will is at-oned to His will; and therefore what you will you will have eternally, because you will what is eternal. For God is good, and good is God; and therefore whatever is goodthe good thought, the good desire, the good deedthese, and these only, are eternal.

We should mark and know of a very truth that all manner of virtue and goodness, and even that Eternal Good which is God Himself, can never make a man virtuous, good, or happy, so long as it is outside the soul. Therefore although it be good and profitable that we should ask and learn and know what good and holy men have wrought and suffered, and how God hath dealt with them, and what He hath wrought in and through them, yet it were a thousand times better that we should in ourselves learn and perceive and understand who we are, how and what our own life is, what God is and is doing in us, what He will have from us, and to what ends He will or will not make use of us. Further we should learn that eternal blessedness lieth in one thing alone, and in nought else. And if ever man or the soul is to be made blessed, that one thing alone must be in the soul. Now some might ask, But what is that one thing? I answer, it is goodness, or that which has been made good, and yet neither this good nor that, which we can name, or perceive or show; but it is all and above all good things. All the great works and wonders that God has ever wrought or shall ever work in or through the creatures, or even God Himself with all His goodness, so far as these things exist or are done outside of me, can never make me blessed, but only in so far as they exist and are done and loved, known, tasted and felt within me.1 [Note: Theologia Germanica, chap. ix.]

5. The ruler also forgot that goodness is not a thing to be done, or an attribute of actions, but an element of character in the person who performs the actions. There is no more common mistake in religion and ethics than this, and scarcely any mistake more fatal. It shifts the centre of gravity in religion from the centre to the circumference, from the soul to the outward act. The form of his question, What good thing shall I do? reveals the short-coming of his apprehension as to how the case really stands. He puts the question much as one might ask, What premium must I pay to insure my life for a thousand pounds? The premium is paid, not from the love of paying it, but as the only way of procuring a good we desire to obtain. Note how our Lord, in His reply, at once tries to shift the question to a different, and higher, ground. The question is, What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life? The answer is, If thou wilt enter into life. Eternal life is not a thing you can have, as you have an estate, or a balance in the bank. It must have you: you must enter into it. A man and his estate are two, and can be separated: a man and his eternal life are one, and cannot be separated.

The young ruler is in the position of a man who comes to his medical adviser complaining of a slight uneasiness which he supposed a tonic or a change of air may remove, and is told that he has heart disease or cancer. Or he is in the position of a sanguine inventor, who has spent the best years of his life on a machine and at last puts it into the hands of a practical man merely to get the fittings adjusted and steam applied, and is told that the whole thing is wrong in conception and can never by any possibility be made to work.1 [Note: Marcus Dods.]

6. The man was thus under an entire misapprehension as to his own spiritual condition. Exemplary in conduct, very much the model of what a wealthy young man ought to be, he had naturally some self-complacency. He had become a ruler of the synagogue, and was probably a man of influence, of large charity and much good feeling, so that the people who saw him come to consult Jesus would suppose that it was something of a condescension on his part. He was not perfectly satisfied, however, about his spiritual condition, but he thought a very little addition to his present attainments would set him above suspicion. He was well enough as he was, but he wished, as any young man with anything in him does wish, to be perfect. He was of an ardent, aspiring temper, and would leave nothing undone that he could measure his human nature and strength with, so he came to Jesus, not to be taught the mere rudiments, but to receive the finishing touches of a religious education.

In Cleon Browning pictures man perfectly civilized, having left the lower and unconscious forms of life and grown to the only life, the life of culture, the pleasure house.

Watch-tower and treasure-fortress of the soul,

Which whole surrounding flats of natural life

Seemed only fit to yield subsistence to;

A tower that crowns a country.

It is a magnificent conception of the educated, refined, civilized man. And then comes the awful awakening to its utter unsatisfactoriness.

But alas,

The soul now climbs it just to perish there!

And then he pictures the visions from that tower of capacity for joy, spread round it, meant for it, mocking it, and the agony of the soul finding itself less capable of enjoyment even than before. The very fatigue consequent on the realization has brought destruction to it.

We struggle, fain to enlarge

Our bounded physical recipiency,

Increase our power, supply fresh oil to life,

Repair the waste of age and sickness: no,

It skills not! lifes inadequate to joy.

Most progress is most failure.

He fails just as he is learning the value of gifts which he longs to use and cannot. To his patron Protus he writes:

Thou diest while I survive?

Say rather that my fate is deadlier still,

In this, that every day my sense of joy

Grows more acute, my soul (intensified

By power and insight) more enlarged, more keen;

While every day my hairs fall more and more,

My hand shakes, and the heavy years increase

The horror quickening still from year to year,

The consummation coming past escape

When I shall know most, and yet least enjoy.

The progress of culture without the spiritual outlet which communion which Christ brings, without the vision of the Eternal, beyond time and sense, being one with us, is only more and more unsatisfying. When we have kept all the commandments of science and philosophy and civilization, the question will recur, What lack I yet?1 [Note: R. Eyton, The Ten Commandments, 157.]

II

The Answer

1. Jesus said to him, If thou wilt be perfectif thou wilt supply what is lackingsell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven. This is intended to bring out an application of the law which he had not observed. There is one of the commandments the purpose of which is to pierce the heart and bring not merely the outward action to view, but also the actuating impulses. It is interesting to note that in the case of the Apostle Paul, whose resemblance to the young ruler has been referred to, it was thus that his boasted righteousness dissolved. I had not known sin, except through the law: for I had not known coveting, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. So here, too, Jesus brought out the unobserved covetousness by asking the young ruler to sacrifice his wealth for the eternal life he was anxious to acquire.

There is no passion so tenacious as covetousness. Most of the passions which rule men are exposed before long to some withering influences. The passions of young life are bound up with our physical nature, and with changed physical conditions their supremacy may be undermined. The passions of manhood, like ambition and the love of power, are shaken by stormy weather. Covetousness, unlike other passions, grows stronger with advancing years. The power of pleasure dies, the value of fame is found to be unsubstantial, but wealth is hard, solid, lastingmore real than the vain things which charmed our younger years. So wealth is loved, and covetousness grows, and becomes a tyrant vice with increasing years. It was a true instinct which led Dante to picture avarice as an invincible foe. In his pilgrimage he passed safely by the leopard of pleasure; he feared, yet was not vanquished by, the lion of ambition; but the lean wolf of avarice drove him step by step back to the darkness. Such is the power of covetousness. It is a vice which renews its strength and is tenacious and remorseless.1 [Note: W. Boyd Carpenter, The Son of Man Among the Sons of Men, 148.]

2. This young man was plainly told that in order to inherit eternal life he must give up his pleasant home, all his comforts, his position in society, and become a poor, houseless wanderer. This always seems a very harsh demand to make of a well-intentioned youth. One might have expected that, instead of thus bluntly laying down an ultimatum, our Lord would have won him by gentle, gradual, seductive methods. But often the decision of the surgeon who sees what must in the long run be done, and knows that every hour lost is a risk, sounds abrupt and harsh to those who have no such knowledge; and we can scarcely question that the method which our Lord adopted with this young man was not merely the only wise method, but the kindest possible method. This young mans possessions happened to be what prevented him from following Christ; but some pursuit of ours, or some cherished ambition, or some evil habit, or some love of ease, or mere indifference, may be as completely preventing us from learning of Christ and from living as He lived and so attaining true likeness to Him.

Never fear to let go, he says in his philosophical notes; it is the only means of getting better things,self-sacrifice. Let go; let go; we are sure to get back again. How science touches the lesson of morals, which is ever, Give up, give up; deny yourself,not this everlasting getting; deny yourself, and give, and infinitely more shall be yours; but givenot bargaining; give from love, because you must. And if the question will intrude, What shall I have if I give up this? relegate that question to faith, and answer, I shall have God. In my giving, in my love, God, who is Love, gives Himself to me. 2 [Note: Life and Letters of James Hinton, 206.]

3. But the demand of Jesus was not simply to sacrifice his wealth. Jesus makes no such merely negative claim on men. He desires to put Himself in the place of that which the heart has worshipped. He adds, And come, follow me. That is, He must have the first place in the heart and life of those who seek eternal life. Christian life is not mere renunciation. It often appears to be such to those who look only at the renunciation by which they are asked to enter on life. To make that renunciation is a great venture of faith. The man who makes it does not yet see that what he will get will make ample amends for what he loses. Christ is Himself the fountain of spiritual life to those who come to Him. He is life. Coming to Him and following Him is life indeed. Many seek life by flinging a loose rein on the neck of their passions, others in the exercise of the intellectual and social gifts they possess. But the richest life is that which calls into exercise the highest elements of our nature, those elements which bring us into touch with the spiritual and the eternal. The life Christ gives is eternal. It is above the powers that bring the lower elements of life to an end. And it is the satisfying lifethe life that will compensate for any sacrifice that has to be made to attain it.

Our Saviour, with that wonderful consideration that belongs to Him, never demanded anything unreasonable. Some He has bidden to leave all and follow Him. Some He bids to go home to their friends, and there, within the circle of their own influence, declare what great things God has done for them. The way of the Cross, the way to Heaven, can never be the way of self-indulgence and self-pleasing, whether coarse or refined. It seems to me that a refined, self-pleasing, indulgent sentimentalism, with its pretty phrases, its exquisite propriety of emotion, with nothing endured, with nothing done, is one of the subtlest religious perils of the day. It is as the Son of God, come down from Heaven, that Christ said, Believe on me; but it is as the Son of Man, living a human life, that He said, Follow me. He showed how men might live in the world, and yet not be of the world; or, in St. Pauls phrase, how they might use the world without abusing it, and make life a nobler, purer, and holier thing.1 [Note: Bishop Frasers Lancashire Life, 254.]

4. Let us remember that Jesus was already girt for the great sacrifice. He was hastening to surrender Himself utterly to it. He who was rich had become poor and had humbled Himself to death, even the death of the cross. The claims of the world and of wealth could scarcely find a place in His thoughts. Already He for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame. And now the enthusiastic approach of the young ruler, most welcome to his Lord, is answered with this splendid opportunity of service. He may bring his devotion and his longing after goodness into the service of the Saviour; he may go with Him as one of His chosen disciples to Jerusalem, and to the judgment-hall, and to Calvary, and find eternal life in thus following his Lord and in such fellowship with Him. Is not this the meaning of the Masters wordsthat He would fain have had this brave and earnest spirit as one of His chosen band? The word was that which was spoken to the disciples in Csarea Philippi when Jesus had first revealed to them that He must die, and it is recorded only once besides. If the young man had but seen the meaning of the words as the Saviour did, in the light of eternity, in the light of the glory of God, how sublime an offer it would have appeared, what trust and confidence it declared, what an opportunity for highest service it afforded!

Have you ever seen those marble statues in some public square or garden, which art has so fashioned into a perennial fountain that through the lips or through the hands the clear water flows in a perpetual stream, on and on for ever; and the marble stands therepassive, cold,making no effort to arrest the gliding water? It is so that Time flows through the hands of menswift, never pausing till it has run itself out; and there is the man petrified into a marble sleep, not feeling what it is which is passing away for ever. It is just so that the destiny of nine men out of ten accomplishes itself, slipping away from them, aimless, useless, till it is too late. Now is a time, infinite in its value for eternity, which will never return again. Nowor Never. The treasures at your command are infinite. Treasures of timetreasures of youthtreasures of opportunity that grown-up men would sacrifice everything they have to possess. Oh for ten years of youth back again with the added experience of age! But it cannot be.1 [Note: F. W. Robertson, Sermons, ii. 289.]

III

The Choice

1. He went away sorrowful. The completeness and immediateness of the collapse are noticeable. The young man seems to speak no word, and to take no time for reflection. He stands for a moment, as if stunned. The eager look passes from his face and the shadow of a great disappointment darkens his brow. For the first time he found his resources insufficient to secure the object of his desire. He discovered that there were some things which money, however plentiful, could not buy; that there were possessions which could not be inherited, but must be earned. He turned away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. The great testing had come, the clouds which portended a great storm had already gathered, and soon the placid bosom of the lake would be heaving and swelling under the stress and strain of a mighty tempest. He would never be the same man again. The depths of his nature had at last been stirred, and the effect of the storm must give him a deeper peace than he had ever known before, or intensify the unrest which he had already experienced.

2. He loved his comforts and his position better than he loved Christ. That is the whole state of the case. He did not oppose Christ. He was willing to consult Him. He was prepared to follow His advice to a certain extent. He recognized that He was a Teacher whom it would never do to argue with or scoff at. He owned Him a Teacher of the truth, but he could not obey Him; he did not love enough to follow Him; he was not fascinated by Christ. It is needless to say that, wherever such a comparative estimate of things spiritual and things worldly exists, the result must always be the same. Wherever a man is more concerned about his profits and his possessions than about his character, this will one day disastrously appear. Wherever love of Christ unsuccessfully competes with something inferior, this must one day show itself by the man cleaving to the inferior thing, and preferring to go with it.

Tolstoy, the Russian socialist, has said that the rich are willing to do anything and everything for the poor, except get off their backs! Through a similar but universal perversity, the unconverted man is willing, more or less, to do anything and everything toward God that might lie in his powerheathen-likeexcept to yield Him real heart-friendship!1 [Note: G. E. Faber.]

3. Henceforward he disappears from the gospel history; yet we are not forbidden to hope that the Saviour who loved him may have again repeated to him His command, Follow me. The sorrow which he felt was, no doubt, real; and it may have been so lasting as to make him reconsider the wisdom of his choice. And the times were coming when his nation was to pass through bitter trials, and when the wealth of many who trusted in riches was suddenly taken from them. In the ordinary course of nature this young man would have lived to see this time of great calamity for the Jewish people, and it may well have been that he who would not, of his own accord, give up all for Christ, may afterwards have suffered the loss of all things, and yet have found that it was love that sent the trial, and that the Lord was making good His promise to him of treasure in heaven.

In Dantes great poem there is a lost spirit without a name of whom he says, I looked and saw the shade of him who through cowardice made the great refusal. And he places him among those whom he calls hateful alike to God and to Gods enemies. But was there not in that sorrowful and grieved departure a proof of nobleness? How many rich men of to-day, if summarily bidden to sell all their goods and give to the poor, would go away grieved and sorrowful? Would they not rather go away, like Naaman, in a rage, scornful that any could make so outrageous a proposal, and talking angrily about the importance of class distinctions? Was not that sorrow most of all at his own failure; at finding his own weakness? We can follow him in thought to a happier destiny than Dante has depicted. It may well be that he went up to the Passover, and there again saw the Christ of whom he thought so muchsaw Him accursed and crucified. And, strengthened by that great example, he may have given to his risen Lord that service which he had shrunk from before. We can think of him as foremost among those of whom we read, As many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles feet.

What lack you yet? A pathway, do you want,

Of noble struggle after perfect good?

A chance I give you: leave your cherished sphere

Of virtuous deeds; sell all and follow Me.

Think not this test a trial hard and stern,

Coldly applied by Christ to shame his pride:

No, twas a genuine offer, not bestowed

On many. Men were often sent away:

Not the relinquishment of outward wealth

The chief thing Christ required; but that the man,

Set free from earthly things, should then begin

A loftier career, beside Himself.

Think what this offer meant. Christ saw in him

High capabilities: His heart went out

To that young man. But it was not to be:

His weakness was revealed; before his eyes

Rose the heroic vision, and he saw

It was beyond his power. The record ends

With his discomfiture. He went away,

A sadder, wiser man. We know no more.

Eternal Life

Literature

Allen (G. W.), Wonderful Words and Works, 85.

Bain (J. A.), Questions Answered by Christ, 52.

Cockin (G. S.), Some Difficulties in the Life of our Lord, 114.

Cooper (E.), Fifty-Two Family Sermons, 116.

Davidson (A. B.), The Called of God, 299.

Eyton (R.), The Ten Commandments, 147.

Goodwin (H.), Parish Sermons, iii. 198.

Lucas (B.), Conversations with Christ, 182.

Maclaren (A.), Expositions: St. Matthew xviii.xxviii., 47.

Morrow (H. W.), Questions Asked and Answered by our Lord, 210.

Prothero (G.), The Armour of Light, 253.

Salmon (G.), The Reign of Law, 194.

Shedd (W. G. T.), Sermons to the Spiritual Man, 34.

Christian World Pulpit, xxxviii. 152 (M. Dods).

Church Pulpit Year Book, 1906, p. 182.

Homiletic Review, New Ser., xxxvii. 424 (G. E. Faber).

Preachers Magazine, xii. 7 (M. G. Pearse).

Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible

one: Mar 10:17, Luk 18:18

what: Luk 10:25, Joh 6:27-29, Act 16:30

eternal: Mat 25:46, Dan 12:2, Joh 3:15, Joh 4:14, Joh 5:39, Joh 6:47, Joh 6:68, Joh 10:28, Joh 12:25, Joh 17:2, Joh 17:3, Rom 2:7, Rom 5:21, Rom 6:22, Rom 6:23, 1Ti 1:16, 1Ti 6:12, 1Ti 6:19, Tit 1:2, Tit 3:7, 1Jo 1:2, 1Jo 2:25, 1Jo 5:11-13, 1Jo 5:20, Jud 1:21

Reciprocal: Mic 6:6 – Wherewith Mal 4:4 – the law Mat 13:22 – the care Mat 19:29 – inherit Joh 6:28 – What Rom 9:32 – Because

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THE CALL TO YOUTH

Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

Mat 19:16

Even the most superficial reader of the New Testament can scarcely fail to remark the attitude adopted by our Blessed Lord towards all young people.

I. The young mans characteristics.Our Blessed Lords whole heart is filled with a yearning love for this young man. He had great possessions, yet there was with him modesty, manly reserve, frankness, and simplicity of heart. All these things have I kept from my youth up. Then he was brim full of intense earnestness. He had selected a lofty ideal.

II. Gods gifts to man.To all of you there has been allotted by Almighty God a Divine work to do in the world, and for the accomplishment of that work you have all received certain gifts. This thought compels us to pause and reflect. In some way or other, sooner or later, often by means of very strange incidents, God speaks this message to us all as He did to the young man of the GospelCome, and follow Me.

III. The Saviours call.Now the Saviours call to this rich young man carried with it very special force. It cut right down to the quick of his life. On the face of it, it would appear that the call involved display of tremendous self-sacrifice. It is useless to evade, or whittle down, or explain away the fact. Some sacrifice is required by Almighty God from us all, some detachment from this world and its own immediate interests, if we would serve the Lord heart and soul.

IV. The call neglected.But this great fact, this eternal law of sacrifice, is just one of those truths which we all to-day cannot abide. On all sides in this England of ours we see people ignobly surrendering themselves to the spirit of self-indulgence. It is one of the most serious signs of our times. The organisation of pleasure has never attained to so high a pitch in England as that which it occupies at this moment.

V. Individual responsibilities.God will call, is perhaps calling, each one of you to work for Him in some particular path of life, to fling to the winds all the wretched desire for self-indulgence, the worship of money, the worship of self which is eating into the very heart of this old England of ours. To all of you there is entrusted the shaping and the moulding of the future. Guard and cherish with deepest reverence those Divine qualities of youth which drew from our Lord that look of love.

The Rev. J. H. T. Perkins.

Illustration

It was the lot of Charles Kingsley to witness during his boyhood the awful scene of the Bristol Reform Riots, and all the hideous consequences of that wild outburst of human frenzy displayed by the unhappy city. Long years afterwards one of his pupils, a mere boy, asked him the question: Whose fault is it that such things can be? Your fault and mine, came the unexpected reply. What did that great preacher and teacher mean when he uttered that amazing statement? Just this: All of us are members of a great family, all of us share in a weighty responsibility, each one of us, no matter how humble, is his brothers keeper, and if we shirk or minimise that responsibility we are simply uttering the murderers excusethe excuse of Cain.

(SECOND OUTLINE)

THE CLEAR COMMAND

The young ruler was attracted to Christ by His wonderful morality, by His wonderful doings. He admitted, what men who do not profess to believe in the Divinity of our Lord admit to-day, that Jesus was the greatest moral teacher that ever lived. But we know that Jesus is something moreHe is still the King amongst men and he lives and reigns amongst them.

I. The great question.This young man was perfectly satisfied with himself, and yet he felt a void. He felt within himself that keeping the commandments was not enough, and he asked the Lord to show him the way to eternal life. The Lord gives him one commandment far and above all the rest. He was to sell all that he had and give to the poor and follow Jesus Christ. The Master dealt with him in exactly the same way he ought to have been dealt with. He thought himself very good, but after all, while his conscience inclined one way his will inclined another. He would have liked to be with the Saviour and to keep continually with Him, yet his love of riches kept him away.

II. The clear command.To forsake all and follow Christ! Do you know what it means? It means to forsake father and mother if need be, and to give up everything. We speak of some sacrifice that we make for a religious object, but what sacrifices do we really make? Our sacrifices are very small compared with the sacrifices of the early Christians. But Christ promises thisthat the man who hath forsaken all, father and mother and children and position, for His sake and the Gospels, shall receive an hundred-fold. Self-denial for Christ! How very few of us, comparatively speaking, practise it. Each one has his own besetting sin. It may be love of pleasure, it may be something else; but it is something that keeps us from following the Master as we should.

The Rev. J. T. Thompson.

Illustrations

(1) Self-denial lies at the foundation of the Christian character. The influence of great possessions unfits men for any self-denial whatever. Few men can resist the temptation of wealth to luxurious habits, modes of life that become more and more exacting. Pleasure is a tyrannous master; indolence is begotten of easy circumstances; reflection languishes while desire is nursed. It is so easy, too, to purchase Christian labour: We will give and others will work. Then many men seek relief from the call of Christian duty. This is the reason why many a man trained up in a godly home, and familiar with Christs teaching, is yet not one of Christs followers. He knows the Christian life to be a self-denying life, and he has wholly unfitted himself for self-denial; sadly, drearily, hopelessly he turns away.

(2) A poor woman looked longingly at the flowers which grew in the kings garden, wishing to buy some for her sick daughter. The kings gardener repelled her: The kings flowers are not for sale. But the king chancing to come by, plucked a bouquet and gave it to the woman, remarking, It is true the king does not sell his flowers, but he gives them away. So, too, the Great King does not sell eternal life: He gives it.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

9:16

The man who came to Jesus was evidently a Jew in good standing and understood what the law required of its followers. But he also must have learned something about Jesus and his teaching (Master is from a word that also means teacher), and had the idea that something very different would have to be done to obtain what he was offering to the world, hence the question stated in this verse.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 19:16. Behold. The circumstance was remarkable in view of the opposition of the Pharisees.

One came. This young ruler, who ran and kneeled to Christ (Mar 10:17), was an honest, earnest seeker after truth and life, with some admiration for, and confidence in, Jesus as a human teacher. But he was in error, as honest and earnest seekers may be.

What good thing, etc. Whether a Pharisee or not, he thought to earn eternal life. Hence the passage must not be wrested in favor of legalism.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Section 6. (Mat 19:16-30; Mat 20:1-16.)

Human limitation, and how overcome.

The sixth section shows us man in his creature place, limited necessarily because of this, but still more as fallen and in his sins; but it shows us also how God, who alone can; overcomes for him the straitness of his condition, and brings him out (as the psalmist says) into a large place.

This is developed in two ways, which are in beautiful connection, while yet very different: as regards the salvation of the sinner, and as regards the reward of a saint. For rewards there are, in which divine love sovereignly displays itself, for they are “mercy” (2Ti 1:18) and not a claim of right; as the Lord has emphatically taught us to say, when we have done all, we are unprofitable servants: we have done but that which it was our duty to do.

Creature merit is thus impossible, – a doctrine which destroys at once not only the supererogatory works and merits of the saints as Rome teaches them, but very much else held quite outside of Rome; while it makes eternal life for the sinner (such as we all are) only possible to grace.

But, alas! we are as naturally self-righteous, as we are absolutely without the least true claim to righteousness. If we will look around, we may quite easily find the Pharisee in the felon’s coat; and nearer still, in our own hearts, the spirit of Pharisaism ready to spring out from under the shadow of the Cross itself; its God-ordained condemnation.

Here we have the beginning and the end of it, as we may say, the self-assertion of the sinner and of the saint; and in the last case creeping, if it might be, into heaven itself in the abuse of the truth as to rewards. In the glimpse of heaven which immediately follows we shall have at last a scene from which it will be perfectly and forever banished. The victory of divine grace over us will then be fully accomplished.

1. We begin here with a question addressed to the Lord, not, as so often, by one tempting or caviling, but, on the contrary, earnestly seeking the way of life: “Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?”

It is “what good thing:” he does not doubt at all that some good thing is what is needed. Too many are on that road to allow him to doubt its being the right one. At the same time he is conscious of a lack, -not self-satisfied, and yet, as we see directly, with no conviction of sin; no thought of inability to attain his goal, if only the means were pointed out to him. Yet there were many instructors on such points whom he must, with the anxiety that he has, have sought out, but had not gained satisfaction from them. He confesses himself ignorant of the way of life, and has confidence, as it seems, that Christ can teach him. All this is encouraging, and yet he is on the broad way still with the multitude (no sign for good, that) and expecting God to give eternal life to the doer of “some good thing.”

The Lord meets him, therefore, where he is: not as we might have expected, perhaps, with the gospel and the declaration of His grace, for he has as yet no need of grace. Law must do its work with him, for “by the law is the knowledge of sin.” Yet He does, at the same time, intimate the result, and so had the law itself done with its unrent veil, Cod in the darkness, – whether men realized it or not: witness and warning on God’s part can never be wanting, and so here: “Why askest thou Me about that which is good? there is One good,” and only One.

That blocks the way for the legalist entirely; which yet in a sense the Lord opens directly, that one who must learn by experience may do so: “but if thou desirest to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

There was nothing fresh to be pointed out as to such a path. The law had long since precisely defined every thing, and not left men to search for some good thing additional or other than this. It is true they had not found life in this way, and hence resulted the uneasiness that prompted such inquiries as that of the young man now. But the law had nevertheless precisely defined all the good required: “the man that doeth these things shall live in them.” True, “that which was” thus the way “to life, I found to be to death,” says the apostle; and so will all true experience find it, a “ministration of death” (2Co 3:7), – the very thing man needs to shut him up to the grace of God in Christ.

But the young man has not received this ministration of death: he had no “sentence of death in himself, that he should not trust in himself, but God that raiseth the dead.” He was unsatisfied; the light of God was not on his path, – that he knew. There was no burden of sin to be lifted. He lacked, but confessedly knew not what he lacked. How many are in just such a condition! rich, and comfortably able to thank God for that; ignorant of such trials as even a Job had to learn before the depths of his heart could be made known to him, but, like him, not at rest. As to “commandments,” which did the Master mean? The Lord tests him by the second table of the law, the human side, summing it all up in “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” But he is with Saul of Tarsus, “touching the righteousness which is in the law blameless.” There is no shadow upon the honest face with which he turns to Him he is questioning, with the assertion; “All these have I kept; what lack I yet?” And then the bolt falls for him out of a summer sky: “If thou wouldst be perfect, sell what thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

People ask, how could the Lord make that the condition of eternal life for him? But it was the law that had made that necessary which would have made this easy – that he should love his neighbor as himself: and this he had declared he actually did. Why not, then; sell what he had, and give to the poor? Would it be more to him than giving it back to himself, to give to the neighbor whom he loved as himself?

Evidently the Lord is but searching out a heart that sorely needed it. He does not make it a condition of eternal life; for that is a gift which He Himself had come to acquire for us; but He speaks to the young man according to the character which he professed; adding to it that tender assurance of a heart open to him, which was ready to give him a place among His followers and intimates. “Jesus, beholding him, loved him,” says Mark in connection with these very words. And this love, may we not hope, might, even spite of present failure, wake up to consciousness of its condition the heart that could now, alas! turn from it, though grieved, to enjoy in its now exposed selfishness its “great possessions.”

2. But of this we have no knowledge. The Lord makes use of this case now to impress upon His disciples the difficulty, nay, the impossibility, of a rich man entering into the Kingdom of God. The camel may more easily pass through a needle’s eye, He says; and we must leave these words in all their simplicity, – the thing completely passes nature. The camel is, no doubt, the suited figure of one burdened with his possessions, after the manner of the young man here. The things of the world thus claim and control the natural man; and how often is their influence seen upon one who is through grace a Christian! Only the almighty grace of God can change this, that is, can change the nature of man; and so, when in dismay the disciples ask, “Who then can be saved?” the Lord assures them, salvation is not of self, but of God.

3. The question of Peter cannot but suggest how readily in a saint also the spirit of self-seeking can intrude into the most sacred themes and places. The Lord’s answer perfectly recognizes and provides for this, which comes out presently in a more offensive form in the other two of His most privileged disciples. But we may be thankful for that which exposes what is our own need as well as theirs, and has been the occasion of such an answer to it as we find here.

“Peter answered and said unto Him, Behold, we have left all and followed Thee: what shall we have then? And Jesus said unto them, Verily, I say unto you, that ye who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” This is found only in Luke and in this Gospel, and in perfect suitability with the character of it. It shows us how literally the reign of the saints with Christ is to be taken; and in the term “regeneration” applied to the millennial Kingdom presents an instructive parallel between the work of God in the individual and in the world at large. That these are, in fact, in correspondence with one another, the first chapter of Genesis has already made us fully aware (see notes). The only other place in which we find this word “regeneration” (paliggenesia) is in the epistle to Titus (Tit 3:5) and it is there applied to the individual state: “according to His mercy He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” In the present state of the world sin not only dwells, but reigns; in the coming Kingdom sin exists but reigns no longer, as in the soul that has truly bowed Christ; then comes the change of the heavens and earth, as for the saint the bodily change into His likeness; and so finally for each, sin neither reigns nor exists. Thus there is a complete parallel between the ways of God in grace with the individual and with the world at large, a unity which is the stamp of the perfect workmanship of the One God in every sphere of His working, whatever may be the variety also which testifies to His infinite resources.

The Lord goes on to assure us that His love can forget nothing of whatever any disciple of His may have renounced for His name. He shall receive a hundredfold and inherit everlasting life. These distinctive rewards, whatever may be the blessing in them, we must remember always to keep apart from what is the common portion of believers, which it is good to realize, as being simply the fruit of Christ’s work for us, must be by far more blessed than anything which even in divine mercy can be accorded to our own. The place of children with God, of membership in the body of Christ, – these and such things as these are to us the fruit of divine grace alone, and have nothing whatever to do with reward of our work. This is so simple that there should be no need even of mentioning it; and yet many Christians confound, more or less, things so different as these; as even the “many mansions” of our Father’s house have been taken to imply different degrees of reward, and to put the children of God at various degrees of distance from their Father, – the very thing which assuredly is most opposite to the Lord’s intention of comfort in it. But, in fact, the legality of the human heart is such as to make the whole matter of reward require the most jealous guarding from abuse; and this the Lord proceeds now to supply in the parable which follows here.

4. The meaning of the parable is given both at the beginning and the close; so earnestly is it pressed upon us. We must not allow ourselves to be carried away from this by any supposed demand of special features, as to which we are cautioned here in the same way as in the case of the previous parable of the unmerciful servant (Mat 18:23). There it is “a man; a king”; here, “a man, a householder.” In the application we are bidden to remember that we must distinguish between the ways of men and the ways of God, even where the one may be taken to illustrate the other. God certainly does not “hire” laborers after the manner of men; where work in His vineyard is in question; but this is human misunderstanding of His way. The prodigal still afar off may talk of the “hired servants” of his father’s house; but we are not to take this as a representation of the actual truth. And the very design of the parable here is to warn us by the issue against such perversions. It would seem, therefore, plain that to seek to interpret everything in it as if it stood for absolute truth would be to fall in measure into the very misconceptions from which it is intended to deliver us.

(1) The agreement with the laborers illustrates but the legality of souls who so misconstrue the Lord’s gracious recompense of what is done for Him. Just so far as this is made the end for which we labor, it is clear that the character of what is done is deteriorated, and its value to Him lost. We are living to ourselves, the misery from which divine grace has delivered those that are Christ’s.

We are not, therefore, to conceive of this either, as if any child of God could be a mere hireling. The principle, given broadly in the parable, is by this means put before us in its proper repulsiveness, and the picture is an ideal one solely. Were we to take it as literally exact, we should have to imagine God giving in the day of recompense some stipulated measure of reward to those who have worked for it; which, whether it were saint or sinner, would be positive error. Recognizing it as ideal only, the lesson remains, and with no perplexity.

(2) In those who are called to labor at various hours in the day, we find the thought of a stipulated agreement more and more given up, and those who go into the vineyard becoming correspondingly more dependent upon the goodness of the householder to give to them as he sees fit. To those called at the third hour it is simply said, “Whatsoever is just I will give you.” At the sixth and ninth hours, “what is just” becomes a more and more slender hope. In the case of those at the eleventh hour, nothing seems to be said of this at all:* they are left entirely to the owner of the vineyard to give as he please, or not.

{*Though some ancient MSS. add a similar clause but the oldest and the drift of the parable are against it.}

(3) At the end of the day, the laborers are called and paid; and then those called at the eleventh hour receive a whole day’s wages. Of those called at the intermediate hours we are told nothing, but it is implied that they all receive the same: for when the first come, expecting to receive more, they also are paid every one a penny. From this some have deduced the doctrine of an equality of reward for all; but that is not the doctrine of Scripture; and the rewards here are plainly according to the moral of the parable given to us, that the “first shall be last and the last first:” which again is not equality.

(4) It is the first alone who murmur: it would be impossible for any of the rest, one would say, to do so; for they are all, in fact, overpaid. Ah, were we not, how little would we any of us receive! In the day of reward will there be a legalist found to murmur against the amount of his recompense? Surely, not one; all is again only ideal here. And yet even the first can only complain that they have not received more than they bargained for.

(5) The answer of the householder to one of those that murmur brings before us the conditions which have determined that result of which they now so foolishly complain. They cannot say they have not received what they contracted for. They had got what was just; grace they had not trusted nor sought: how can they complain that to those who were dependent upon it it has been shown? – and indeed in the measure in which they were dependent.

For them it was a matter of bounty, not of right; for the giver of it, had he not the right to be bountiful? What I am entitled to must be measured by what I am; what grace shall give can only be measured by what God is. Human measure and divine! put it at the best you can for man, what a difference here!

The more we think of our service, the less must we think of Him to whom the service is done; the more we imagine claim, the less must His grace appear: that the first should thus be last is absolutely simple. Think of it as the Lord once put it, a supper at which the guests take their places as they estimate themselves. No one here, however, says to another, “Give this man place.” They are permitted to assign to themselves just the rank they claim. Only, when the King comes in to take His own place among the guests, He takes it at the opposite end of the table from that which they imagined! Then; of course, “the first is last and the last is first;” and yet their places are decided by their own self-measurement.

“For many are the called,” says the Lord in closing, “but few the chosen ones:” words which here tell us that among the guests few are they that are according to His mind indeed. Alas! how slow we are indeed in the true judgment of self! how difficult is it for divine grace to obtain full possession of us!

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

Observe here, A person addressing himself to Christ, and propounding an important question to him; namely, What he should do to gain eternal life?

Where, Note, 1. He believes the certainty of a future state.

2. He professes his desire of an eternal happiness in that state.

And, 3. He declares his readiness to do some good, that he may obtain that happiness.

Learn, That the light of nature, or natural religion, directs and teaches men, that good works are necessary to salvation, or that some good things must be done by men that at death expect eternal life.

What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life? It is not talking well, and professing well, but doing well, and living well, that entitles us to eternal life.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Mat 19:16. And behold, one came, &c. Many of the poor had followed him from the beginning. One rich man came at last, and came running, with great earnestness, and kneeled to him with great humility and reverence, Mar 10:17, and said, Good Master Manifesting by the appellation both a submissive and teachable disposition; his persuasion that Christ was a divinely-commissioned teacher, and his affection and peculiar respect to him as such. What good thing shall I do? Or, as Mark and Luke express it, What shall I do to inherit eternal life? By this question he manifested, 1st, That he believed in a future state; that there was an eternal life that might be inherited; he was therefore no Sadducee: 2d, that he was concerned to ensure that life to himself, and was more desirous of it than of any of the enjoyments of this life: thus he differed from many of his age and quality; for the rich are apt to think it below them to make such an inquiry as this, and young people in general are inclined to defer making it to some future period of their lives: 3d, that something must be done; some evils omitted, some duties performed, or divine injunctions complied with, in order to it: 4th, that he was, or at least thought he was, willing to do what was to be done, or to take the steps necessary to be taken for the obtaining of this eternal life. And surely those that know what it will be to enjoy eternal life, and what to come short of it, will be glad to accept it on any terms.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

C.

THE RICH RULER. PERIL OF RICHES. REWARD OF SACRIFICE.

PARABLE OF THE LABORERS IN THE VINEYARD.

(In Pera.)

aMATT. XIX. 16-XX. 16; bMARK X. 17-31; cLUKE XVIII. 18-30.

b17 And when he was going forth into the way, abehold, bthere ran {acame} bone ca certain ruler bto him, and kneeled to him, and asked aand said, {csaying,} bGood Teacher, awhat good thing shall I do, that I may have {bmay inherit cto inherit} eternal life? [The action of this young man in running and kneeling shows that he was deeply anxious to receive an answer to his question, and also that he had great reverence for Jesus. He seemed to think, however, that heaven could be gained by performing some one meritorious act. He made the mistake of thinking that eternal life is a reward for doing rather than for being, a mistake from which the Roman Catholic Church [543] developed the doctrine of “works of supererogation.”] 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good save one, even God: aWhy askest thou me concerning that which is good? One there is who is good [To the address of the young man, viz.: “Good Master,” Jesus replies, “Why callest,” etc., and to his question, “What good thing,” etc. Jesus replies, “Why askest,” etc. The ruler using the inconsiderate, conventional language of the thoughtless, had taken an unwarrantable freedom with the word “good.” Jesus shows that if his language had been used sincerely it would have committed him to a declaration of great faith, for he had addressed Jesus by a title which belongs only to God, and he had asked Jesus the question concerning that of which God alone was fitted to speak. As the ruler had not used this language sincerely Jesus challenged his words. The challenge showed the ruler that he had unwittingly confessed the divinity of Jesus, and thus startled him into a consideration of the marvelous fact which his own mouth had stated. This is done because the young man would need to believe in the divinity of Jesus to endure the test to which he was about to be subjected– 1Jo 5:5.] but if thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments. [By referring the ruler to the commandments, Jesus not only answered the question as to obtaining life, but he emphasized the confession of his divinity contained in the question, “Why askest,” etc. God, who knows what is good, had revealed that good in the commandments which he had given. Yet the ruler had asked Jesus to be wise above God’s revelation, and to propound a law or rule of goodness in addition to that already given, and of such a nature as to more fully insure the attainment of life by obeying it. The ruler’s question reveals that common weakness in man which prompts him to look to his fellow-men for religious and moral instruction; forgetting that only God can propound the absolute standards of goodness. We should note, too, that the young man, being under the law given through Moses, was bidden to attain life by keeping the law. After the death of Christ a new law [544] was given. Had the man waited until that time, he would have been directed to this new law, and obedience to it would have been required. Compare Act 2:37, Act 2:38, 2Th 1:8, et al.] 18 He saith unto him, Which? And Jesus said, c20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do {aThou shalt} cnot commit adultery, Do {aThou shalt} cnot kill, Do {aThou shalt} cnot steal, Do {aThou shalt} cnot bear false witness, bDo not defraud, a19 Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. [The ruler still sought for some prominent commandment, but was referred to the last six of the Decalogue, these being at that time more frequently violated than the first four. For the last commandment, “Thou shalt not covet,” Jesus substitutes its equivalent, “Do not defraud,” and “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” the last being a summary of all the six– Rom 13:9.] b20 And he a20 The young man saith {bsaid} unto him, Teacher, cAll these things have I observed from my youth up. awhat lack I yet? [He had kept these commandments as far as he knew his heart and as far as he understood their import.] b21 And Jesus cwhen he heard it, blooking upon him [gazing earnestly and searchingly at him] loved him [“agapan.” See Jam 2:10], go, sell that which thou hast, csell all bwhatsoever thou hast, cand distribute {bgive} cunto {ato} the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. [The command to sell all is not a general one, but a special precept needed in this case, 1. To dispel the ruler’s self-deception. On the negative side his character was good, but on the positive it was deficient. He had done his neighbor no harm, but he had also done him very little good. 2. To show impartiality. The invitation of Jesus shows that the ruler desired to be in some manner a disciple, and hence he is subjected to the same [545] test which the other disciples had accepted, and of which Peter soon after speaks. Paul also was rich in self-righteousness like this man, but cheerfully sacrificed all, that he might follow Christ ( Phi 3:6-9). Moreover, the reference to treasure in heaven and the invitation to follow Christ tested the ruler’s obedience to the first four commandments of the Decalogue as condensed in the great summary or first commandment. ( Mat 22:37, Mat 22:38.) Though the ruler perhaps did not fully realize it, those who heard the conversation must afterwards have been impressed with the great truth that the ruler was called upon to make his choice whether he would love Christ or the world, whether he would serve God or mammon. The whole scene forms an illustration of the doctrine expressed by Paul, that by the law can no flesh be justified ( Rom 3:20), for perfection is required of those who approach God along that pathway; those, therefore, who have done all, still need Christ to lead them.] a22 But when the young man heard that saying, {cthese things} bhis countenance fell at the saying, che became exceeding sorrowful; band he went away sorrowful: cfor he was very rich. bhe was one that had great possessions. [He was not offended at the extravagance of Jesus’ demands, for he was not one of the most hardened of the rich. He belonged to that class which hold Christ and their wealth in nearly an even balance. The narrative shows us how uncompromisingly Jesus held to principle. Though the ruler was sorry to turn away, and though Jesus loved him, yet the Lord did not modify his demand by a hair’s-breadth to gain an influential disciple.] c24 And Jesus seeing him blooked round about, and saith {asaid} unto his disciples, bHow hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! aVerily I say unto you, It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. [ 1Ti 6:9, 1Ti 6:10, 1Ti 6:17-19. It should be remembered that Judas heard these words only a few days before he sold his Lord.] b24 And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in [546] riches to enter into the kingdom of God! [The possession and use of riches is permitted to the Christian, but their possession becomes a sin when the one who owns them comes to trust in them or in any way suffers them to interfere with his duties toward or relations to God.] a24 And again I say unto you, c25 For it is easier for a camel to enter in {bto go} through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. [The needle’s eye here is that of the literal needle, and the expression was a proverbial one to indicate that which was absolutely impossible. Lord George Nugent (1845-6) introduced the explanation that Jesus referred to the two gates of a city, the large one for beast of burden, and the small one for foot-passengers. This smaller one is now called “The Needle’s Eye,” but there is no evidence whatever that it was so called in our Saviour’s time. In fact, as Canon Farrar observes, we have every reason to believe that this smaller gate received its name in late years because of the efforts of those who were endeavoring to soften this saying of Jesus.] a25 And when the disciples heard it, they were astonished exceedingly, c26 And they that heard it said, {bsaying} unto him, aWho then {bThen who} can be saved? a26 And Jesus blooking upon them saith, {c27 But he said,} bWith men this is impossible, but not with God: for all things are possible with God. cThe things which are impossible with men aree possible with God. [The Jews were accustomed to look upon the possession of riches as an evidence of divine favor, and the heads of the apostles were filled with visions of the riches and honors which they would enjoy when Jesus set up his kingdom. No wonder, then, that they were amazed to find that it was impossible for a rich man to enter that kingdom, and that, moreover and worse than all, riches appeared to exclude from salvation itself: that even this virtuous rich man, this paragon of excellence, could not have eternal life because he clung to his riches. But they were comforted by the assurance of Jesus that though the salvation of some men might present more difficulties than the salvation of others [547] –might, as it were, require a miracle where others only required simple means, yet the gracious, mighty God might still be trusted to overcome the obstacles. It is impossible for any man to save himself, so that in every case of salvation God is called upon to assist man in accomplishing the impossible. God can so work upon the rich man’s heart as to make him a dispenser of blessings.] a27 Then answered Peter c28 And bbegan to say unto him, {aand said unto him,} bLo, we have left all, {cour own,} band have followed thee. awhat then shall we have? [The negative conduct of the rich man reminded the disciples of their own positive conduct when confronted with a similar crisis ( Luk 5:11), and the “all” which they had left was by no means contemptible, though perhaps none of them could have been said to have held great possessions. The mention of treasure in heaven, therefore, set Peter to wondering what manner of return would be made to them to compensate them for their sacrifice.] 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, that ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. [By the term “regeneration,” Jesus in this case means the period in which the process of regenerating men would be in progress; i. e., the period of the mediatorial reign. After his ascension Jesus sat upon his throne ( Act 2:33-35, Heb 1:13, Mat 25:31, 1Co 15:24-28). And on the day of Pentecost next following, he began this process of regeneration. Having enthroned himself, Jesus enthroned the apostles also, not as kings but as judges, having jurisdiction over all questions of faith and practice in the earthly kingdom. During their personal ministry, they judged in person; and since then they judge through their writings. True, we have written communications from only a part of them, but judgments pronounced by one of a bench of judges with the known approval of all, are the judgments of the entire bench. Moreover, the passage must be construed metaphorically, for the apostles are [548] judges in the church of Christ–the true Israel–and not over the literal twelve tribes of Jacob. And again, the twelve who then heard Jesus speak were not all enthroned, Judas having fallen from his position before the day of enthronement, and Matthias and Paul were afterwards added to the group. Jesus here causes the number of the judges to correspond to the number of the tribes, to indicate that there will be a sufficiency of judgment commensurate to the need.] 29 And every one {bThere is no man that} ahath left houses, {bhouse,} cor wife, or brethren, bor sisters, or mother, or father, cor parents, bor children, or lands, for my sake, {amy name’s sake,} band for the gospel’s sake, cfor the kingdom of God’s sake, 30 who shall not receive manifold more in this time, and in the world to come eternal life. b30 but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come ashall inherit eternal life. [The rewards of Christian self-denial are here divided into two parts–the temporal and the eternal. The earthly joys–the rewards “in this time”–shall outweigh the sacrifices made for the kingdom. The return, of course, will not be in kind, houses for house, and fathers for father, etc., but spiritual relationships and blessings which compensate abundantly for whatever has been resigned ( Mat 12:49, 1Ti 4:8). But these joys shall be mingled with the bitterness of persecution, for no pleasure is perfected in this world, but only in the inheritance which lies beyond– 1Pe 1:4.] 30 But many shall be last that are first; and first that are last. b31 But many that are first shall be last; and the last first. [The promise of large recompense which Jesus had just given was apt to tempt some to labor not for love, but for the rewards which might be reaped thereby. Jesus corrects this spirit by the statement, and the parable that follows which illustrates it, and which ends with the same sentiment. See Lev 19:13, Deu 24:15], the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward [his overseer], Call the laborers, and pay them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first. [Thus following the order indicated by Mar 7:22, 1Sa 18:9, Pro 23:6-8, Pro 28:22, Deu 15:9). The lord had done no wrong to those who had labored longest, for he had paid them what they had bargained for and earned. If he chose to be generous with those whose misfortune had prevented them from being hired earlier in the day, no one had any just cause to murmur.] 16 So the last shall be first, and the first last [The meaning of this parable has often been misunderstood by those who fail to note the maxim with which Jesus begins and ends it. This maxim acts as a safeguard in the interpretation of it; the parable also in turn guards against misunderstanding the maxim. The maxim can not be applied to Judas; for, though he then stood high in honor and afterwards fell into disgrace, yet he stands outside the pale of the maxim as interpreted by the parable, for in the parable both the first and the last were received and rewarded by their master, while Judas was rejected of Christ and received no reward. The term “last,” therefore, must be applied to those who were included among the accepted laborers, and not those who were excluded from that class. In the parable, the denarius or shilling stands for the gift of [551] eternal life. The vineyard represents the Lord’s field of work in the world. The evening is the close of the Christian dispensation, and the coming of Christ to judgment. The parable as it unfolds and develops suggests that in no case was the reward earned by the inherent merits and toil of the laborers, but was rather bestowed because of a desire on the part of the householder to that effect, just as eternal life is bestowed, not by merit, but by covenant grace ( Rom 2:6, Rom 2:7, Rom 4:3-5, Rom 5:16-21). The main object of the parable is to show that longer labor does not necessarily, as the apostles and others might think, establish a claim to higher reward. Degrees of difference there no doubt will be, but they form no account in the general covenant of grace in which the one great gift is offered to us all. As the gift can be no less than eternal life, there must of necessity be a difference in the ratio of service which is rendered for it, since it will be bestowed on the octogenarian and the child, upon Paul who made good the confession of his faith through years of toil, and the dying thief who passed to his reward while his voice of confession was, as it were, still ringing in the ears of those who heard it ( 1Co 15:8-11, 2Ti 4:6-9). The murmuring and envy of those who had labored longest is merely part of the parabolic drapery, introduced to bring out the answer of the householder, and to make plain the point to be illustrated. There will be no envy among those who inherit eternal life. By thus speaking of the envy, however, and showing how ineffectual it was, Jesus warns us to be prepared not to cherish it. The parable is not intended to teach that the characters of men will be exactly similar in the world to come. Paul will not be Peter, nor will Martin Luther be identical with Hugh Latimer and John Knox. God may award eternal life to the character which we are forming, but we should be careful what kind of character we bring to receive the gift. The lesson is that works are valued qualitatively and not quantitatively. Nor may the parable be rightly used to encourage hope in death-bed repentance. It certainly does teach that, however little the labor which a man does in the Lord’s vineyard, he will receive the final reward if only he [552] be really in the vineyard; that is, if he be really a child of God. But whether a man who repents on his death-bed actually becomes a child of God is a different question, and is not touched by the parable. Certainly the eleventh-hour laborer who had stood idle all day only because no man had hired him, and who came into the vineyard as soon as he was called, can not represent the man who has been called by the gospel every hour of his life, but has rejected every call until his sun has sunk so low that he knows he can do but little work when he comes. In order to represent this class of sinners, the eleventh-hour men should have been invited early in the morning, and should have replied, “No, it is too early; we will not go now.” Then they should have been invited at the third, the sixth, and the ninth hours, and should have made some equally frivolous excuse each time, then, finally, at the eleventh hour, they should have said, “Well, as you pay a man just the same for an hour’s work as for a day’s work, and as we are very anxious to get your money, we believe we will now go.” Had they acted thus, it is not likely that they would have found the vineyard gates open to them at all. Yet such is the sharp practice which some men attempt in dealing with God.]

[FFG 543-553]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

THE RICH YOUNG MAN

Mat 19:16-30; Mar 10:17-31; Luk 18:18-30. Mark: And He, traveling along the road, one running and kneeling clown asked Him, Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? Jesus said to him, Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One; God. This statement of our Savior is generally woefully misunderstood and erroneously construed, even preachers, standing up in the pulpit, having the audacity to look the people in the face and find here an unanswerable argument against holiness, alleging that even Jesus refused to be called good, deducing the conclusion, with an air of triumph, that nobody can be good, much less holy. May the blessed Holy Spirit now flash the light through your mind, and give you the true exposition of this passage! Jesus was almost constantly turning the edge of His opponents argument into the admission of His own Divinity. The high and primitive sense of the adjective good is only applicable to Go. The word God is a contraction of good, because God is the very essence, quintessence, and concentration of all good. Now when the young man calls Jesus good, instead of correcting him, He accepts the situation: You call Me good, and so I am. Now since God alone is good, you call Me God, which is right, thus turning the admission of the young man into the substantial affirmation of His Divinity; not only for his benefit, but that of the multitude who followed Him from day to day. While in the primitive sense, God alone is good, and all goodness emanates from Him (as John says, God is light; yet the sun shines, but he shines by the light which God gives him); and while no man is good in a primary sense, because a good man would mean one who had never sinned; yet we may be righteous, because a righteous man is simply a justified sinner; and it is equally true that we may be holy, because a holy man is nothing but a sanctified sinner. The term good is variously used in subordinate senses, and not only applied to saints, but in common parlance even to sinners, animals, and things without life; however, in those cases, all the good they have has emanated from God.

You know the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor thy father and thy mother. Matthew says, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. And he, responding, said to Him, Teacher, I have kept all these from my youth. Jesus looking on him loved him, and said to him, One thing is wanting unto thee. Here Matthew says, If thou dost wish to be perfect, go, sell as many things as you have, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven. This interview took place out in Perea, east of the Jordan.

Though our Savior is constantly surrounded by the Pharisees, you must not conclude that this young man is one of them. The truth of the matter is, he is far from them, even at the opposite pole of the battery. While the Pharisees were full of pride, haughtiness, and self-righteousness, this young man is very humble, as we see him come kneeling down before Jesus, and making earnest inquiry, What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? Luke tells us he is a ruler of the people. He certainly shows up a very beautiful, moral, and religious character, in the fact that he has kept the commandments of the Decalogue from his youth. No wonder Jesus loved him. The simple solution of the whole problem recognizes this young man as a paragon Old Testament saint, walking in all the commandments of the law and the prophets blameless. He evidently has lived up to all the light of his day and dispensation. So he has nothing to do but receive Jesus, and move forward into the gospel dispensation i.e., the kingdom of God whose normal standard is perfection, as you here see specified. Jesus responds to him, If you wish to be perfect, illustrating the fact that His dispensation requires perfection i.e., spiritual manhood, the standard of the old dispensation being spiritual infancy. There was no trouble in the case of this amiable and promising young ruler till he declined to accept the Saviors condition of discipleship, thus halting in the old dispensation after it had expired and become null and void. He was certainly a very fine subject of gospel grace, having nothing to do but meet the condition, which is Christian perfection, and pass from the law and the prophets into the kingdom of heaven.

And he, being grieved at the word, went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions. Jesus knew his heart, and went for his idol unhesitatingly. Adam the First must die before you can become a perfect Christian, with Adam the Second enthroned to reign without a rival. All the unsanctified have their besetting sin, in which the diversified appetites and passions, constituting the members of old Adam, concentrate their forces, make a general rally, and turn loose all the impetuosity of earth and hell to break the power of grace and ruin the soul, world without end. While this young man, having kept all of these commandments faithfully from his youth, living in beautiful harmony with his dispensation, exhibits the irreproachable character of a paragon Old Testament saint, yet that phase of inbred sin which he was weakest to resist, as it held a tighter grip on him than any other, was the love of money, which had been augmented and intensified by his vast possessions.

When the contractors began the Queen & Crescent Railway, they went to Kings Mountain, because they had a solid mile of tunnel to excavate, by far the heaviest job on the route of fifteen hundred miles. A wise general, invading a country, always attacks the chief citadel first. Jesus knew that money-love was the serious trouble of this young man, and if he yielded there, victory flashed all along the embattled line, and He could rely on him as a paragon disciple. O how many preachers studiously avoid those things against which they feel assured their people will kick! Jesus, our only Exemplar, gives the trumpet no uncertain sound. This young man would have yielded outright if He had not put the sword to the throat of his idol. Luke says, He went away very sad. O how wonderfully history repeats itself! This young man lost his justification because he refused to consecrate all his possessions, the necessary antecedent to Christian perfection. Multitudes of the Jewish Church, in a similar attitude, enjoying justification before God because they walked in all the light they had, keeping all of the commandments, living under the law, without reprehension, faithfully anticipating the coming Messiah, forfeited their justification because they did not walk in the new light thrown on their way by the Shiloh of prophecy. If this young man had not met Jesus, doubtless he would have lived and died an irreproachable Old Testament saint and made his way to Abrahams bosom.

God holds us responsible for all the light we receive. If we do not walk in it appreciatively, we invariably backslide. Therefore Jesus is called the Stone of stumbling, because multitudes, like this young man, stumbled over Him and fell, and they are still doing the same. God raised up Luther to pour new light upon the Church in his day and time. While his reformation was a blessing to many, it was the occasion of many stumbling and falling. The same is true of every great revival. While the present holiness movement is a God-send to myriads, it is the death-knell to multitudes, who unfortunately reject the light it brings, like this man stumbling over entire consecration.

Jesus, looking round, says to His disciples, How shall those having riches with difficulty enter the kingdom of God! But the disciples were amazed at His words. Jesus again, responding, says to them, Children, how difficult is it for those having put their confidence in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they were astonished exceedingly, saying to one another, Indeed who is able to be saved? And Jesus, looking on them, says, With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God. So far as the record warrants, there is not a presumption in favor of the salvation of this amiable young man, who is not only a member, but an officer in the Church, and, most consolatory of all, his religious character utterly irreproachable. It is a simple case of stumbling over perfection, and thus failing to pass from the dispensation of the law and the prophets into that of Christ i.e., the kingdom of heaven whose standard is perfection. I believe, the reason why the disciples were so astonished over the utterances of Jesus, in reference to the difficulty in the way of salvation to the rich, was because the patriarchs in many instances were very wealthy; e.g., Abraham and Job, millionaires. There has been an awful squirming and dodging, twisting and floundering, especially on the part of the popular clergy, to evade and explain away these plain statements of Jesus relative to the difficulties in the way of saving the rich. Some have said that camel means rope, used about a ship, which of course could go through the eye of a large needle. Kamilos means rope. Though that word looks much like kamelos, a camel, you see they are entirely different words. Hence there is no truth in the exegesis. It is a miserable dodge to evade a square issue.

Again, I have heard, over and over, that there are small gates entering through the wall of Jerusalem, called the Needles-eye. This is utterly untrue. I have made two visits to Jerusalem the one ten days, and the other seven in which I was very active, running all over it and round it repeatedly, so that I am this day better acquainted with Jerusalem than any other city in the world. As it symbolizes heaven, whither I am a pilgrim journeying, I studied it with a flaming enthusiasm, diligently investigating everything that could throw light on the Word of God. The city has but eight gates leading through the wall: The Joppa gate, on Mount Zion, looking westward, opening through the west wall, a short distance from the northwest corner. Then, as we proceed, turning eastward, we next come to the New Gate, leading through the north wall. Then, proceeding eastward, we come to the Damascus Gate, looking toward the north. Pursuing the north wall, we next arrive at Herods Gate. Now, passing the northeast corner and turning southward, we come to St. Stephens Gate, so called because it is said that the mob dragged him out through that gate when they stoned him to death. It is known in Scripture as the Sheep Gate. (John 5.) Proceeding southward, we next arrive at the Beautiful Gate. (Act 3:2.) This gate has been closed twelve hundred and sixty years, since the Mohammedans captured the city, on account of a Moslem prophecy that they can hold the city no longer than that gate is kept closed. Now the wall is on the high summit of Mount Moriah, the deep and impassable Valley of Jehoshaphat yawning beneath. Consequently there are no gates in this region, as there could be neither egress nor ingress. Pursuing the wall southward, turning the corner, we now travel westward, along the south wall, still on the summit of Moriah, till we reach a high valley between Moriah and Zion, where we arrive at the Excrement Gate, which leads out into the deep Valley of Jehoshaphat, and is used to carry, the offal out of the city; hence its name. Now the wall ascends Mount Zion westward, with a number of angles and offsets southward, by way of accommodation to the trend of the mountain. High up on the summit, in the City of David, we come to Davids Gate. These are the only entrances through the wall, with the exception which was made in 1898, when the emperor of Germany visited the city. They actually removed a section of the wall near the Joppa Gate for his convenient royal ingress and egress. Hence, you see, the report about the Needles-eye and the camel, ex necessitate divested of his burden in order to enter, is a fond fabrication to comfort the rich, but utterly untrue.

I hope you have no sympathy with any attempt to explain away the plain Word of God. What an insult to Jesus thus utterly to emasculate, eviscerate, and excoriate His Word till it is utterly divested of all its force! Remember you have to meet it at the judgment-bar precisely as it is. So I entreat you to take it now, without addition or subtraction, and never encourage any attempt to explain it away. I emphasize this point because I have heard more preaching on this subject than any other; i.e., a labored effort to explain away the plain and unmistakable Word of God. All such evasion is foolish, fanatical, and Satanic. Jesus specifies in this paragraph that, while the salvation of the rich is impossible with man, with God all things are possible. What is the solution of this? God can give the millionaire grace to consecrate all on His altar, unreservedly and eternally to be used for His glory. In that case the millionaire becomes as poor as Lazarus. Without the sanctification no one shall see the Lord. (Heb 12:14.) Hence, as God is no respecter of persons, we all stand on the same platform. If we do not consecrate all to God, we can not be perfect, as Jesus here tells the young man. Heaven is a perfect world, consequently nothing imperfect can enter there. In this statement we do not mean Divine perfection, which belongs to God only, nor angelic perfection, which belongs to angels alone; but Christian perfection, which means a complete work of grace in the elimination of all evil out of the spiritual organism. As Jesus alone can do this, we must unreservedly consecrate all to Him, in order that He may sanctify us wholly. As Jesus here says, the impossibility is with man, in case he does not make a perfect consecration, which God can not do for him, as that would ignore his free agency; but He can and will give him all the grace he needs to do it himself, of his own free will and accord. Then, when man puts all on Gods altar, there is no trouble about sanctification, as that is the work of Omnipotent Grace. This whole subject, as delivered by the Savior, is perfectly lucid and consistent. O how many, like this rich young Church officer, hesitate to put all their possessions on Gods altar, and go away sorrowing! Happy is the poor man who has s~ little to consecrate! Yet multitudes of them fail just like the rich. Jesus saves none but beggars. If you own a gold-mine, and do not turn it over to God to be used for His glory, you can not be saved.

Mat 19:27. Then Peter, responding, said to him, Behold, we have left all things, and followed Thee; what then shall be to us? Jesus said to them, Truly I say unto you, that you who have followed Me in the regeneration, when the Son of man may sit upon the throne of glory, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. The regeneration here mentioned does not mean that personal spiritual birth peculiar to all the children of God, but it is a continuation of the subject under consideration with reference to this rich young Church officer, whose life was so beautiful under the law and the prophets; and his qualification to pass out into the new dispensation, receiving his own Christ with joyful enthusiasm, and becoming a citizen of His kingdom, a bona fide member of the gospel Church, had all failed because of his delinquency in meeting the condition, i.e., consecrating all his vast wealth to God and thus getting in position for the fiery baptism to sanctify him gloriously at the Pentecost then speedily coming on. So the regeneration here means the transition out of the old into the new dispensation. As Peter well knew that he and his apostolical comrades had forsaken their fishing-boats, nets, companions, homes, employment, and everything to follow Jesus, and now having seen the sad failure of this eminently promising young man, at the very point of total abandonment where Peter knew that he and his brethren had succeeded, he proceeds to interview the Savior in reference to what is coming. There, amid the contrast of the two diametrically opposite attitudes the faithful disciples, on the one side, meeting the condition; and the young ruler signally failing and going away our Lord proceeds to answer Peters inquiry by the thrilling assurance that when He shall sit upon the throne of his glory, they shall all sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. We know that our Lord was soon glorified when He ascended from Mount Olivet; and in due time these apostles did divide up the world, and go to their diversified fields of labor the Jameses taking Judea; Matthew, Ethiopia; Mark, Egypt; Matthias, Judass successor, Abyssinia; Thomas, India; Jude, Tartary; Bartholomew, Phrygia; Philip, Syria; Simon Zelotes, the British Islands; Andrew, Armenia; John, Ephesus; Peter, Rome; and Paul, Western Asia and Eastern Europe. Of course, they all enjoyed episcopal supremacy in their diversified fields of labor.

But you must bear in mind that this wicked world did not let them live very long till they all suffered martyrdom, John being miraculously delivered, and, as we believe, finally translated. Hence this was but a preliminary fulfillment of our Saviors glorious promise, whose verification is evidently reserved for the Millennial Theocracy, when the saints will rule with Christ (Rev 20:6), the apostles in their normal attitude enjoying the supremacy, and Israel populating the whole earth, Satan having been removed, and the glory of the Lord inundating the world, and, as He says here, when He shall sit upon the throne of His glory, then shall you sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel; i.e., ruling them. Christ came the first time, in His humiliation, to suffer and to die; but He comes the second time, on the throne of His glory, to conquer and to reign. Here we certainly do see a recognition of apostolical supremacy in the rulership of the world. There are now just about twelve national divisions on the globe. So the world seems to be getting ready for these twelve apostolical thrones. Of course, our Lord must come in His glory, cast out Satan, raise the dead members of the bridehood, and reunite soul and body and translate the living. The first resurrection, at the pre-millennial coming of our Lord, will prepare the way for His glorious kingdom, when He shall sit on the throne of His glory, and the saints will judge the world (1Co 6:2); i. e., rule the world. I am so glad that I believe the whole Bible. Therefore I am looking for wonderful things.

And every one, whosoever has left houses, brothers, sisters, father, mother, wife, children, or lands, for My names sake, shall receive a hundred fold, and inherit eternal life. But many first shall be last, and last shall be first. Here you see again that the Jews are coming into the kingdom after all of the Gentiles. One of the cheering omens of the Lords near coming is the rapid gathering of the Jews into the Holy Land, and their conversion to Christianity in all the world. Luke says that the one leaving all and following Jesus shall receive a hundred-fold at this time, and in the age to come eternal life. We find some people certifying that there is no coming age after the present. Here, in Luk 18:30, we have it positively specified. You find the same in Heb 6:5, and also in Mat 12:32. I am satisfied it occurs elsewhere in the New Testament, but certainly three clear and unequivocal witnesses are sufficient. In these passages, the E. V. says world to come; but the Greek used by our Savior is not cosmos, world, but aion, age. Hence these are certainly plain allusions, not only to the coming millennium, which will be the Edenic Age of the world restored back, but the Celestial Age, that shall follow the final glorification of the earth subsequently to its purification by the great fiery baptism simultaneously with the final judgment, the glorification following, transforming it into a new earth and a new heaven, or firmament

(Revelation 21), and finally conferred, as a soldiers bounty, on the glorified saints, here to enjoy an eternity of heavenly bliss with myriads of unfallen angels, with whom, as our loving escorts, we will wing our flight from world to world, admiring the glory of Omnipotence, bespangling millions of bright celestial spheres which never knew sin nor sorrow. At the same time, with our angelic escorts, and accompanied by our sainted friends, always delighted to visit the New Jerusalem, the celestial metropolis, honored with Jehovahs throne, and the center of universal gravitation, around which all celestial worlds speed their flight, and which this world, on her final restitution and celestialization, will so approximate as to enjoy a grand and conspicuous view, and to receive the copious illuminations of the Divine glory. (Rev 21:9-27.)

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Mat 19:16-30. The Great Refusal and the Obstacle of Riches (Mar 10:17-31*, Luk 18:18-30).In Mat 19:16 f. note the changes made by Mt. to avoid the saying of Jesus, as given by Mk., that only God can be called good. In Mat 19:18 Mt. makes the inquirer ask which commandments he is to keep, and substitutes in Jesus reply Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself for Do not defraud. If this is correct, and the inquirer had observed this injunction with the others, he lacked nothing. Perhaps we should (with Syr. Sin.) omit What lack I yet? It is Mt. who says the inquirer was a young man (Mat 19:20), Lk. that he was a ruler; Mt. does not care to tell us that Jesus, looking upon him, loved him. The words if thou wouldst be perfect (Mt. only) may contain nothing more than is in Mk., a contrast between Christian perfection and the inadequacy of legal observances (Loisy), or there may be here (as in Mat 19:12) the theory of a double morality, the higher perfection of the ascetic life (Holtzmann and J. Weiss; see Montefiore, p. 695). The qualification (or the wide saying) of Mar 10:24 is omitted in Mt.; on the other hand, he gives us a new saying in Mat 19:28 (cf. Luk 22:28 ff.), probably based on Q. There is no good reason for doubting its attribution to Jesus, although He was more prone to check than to en courage the materially Messianic ambitions of His disciples. The regeneration (Moffatt, the new world) is a term used by Josephus to express the return from Babylon, and by Philo of the earth after the Deluge and after the coming destruction by fire.

Mat 19:30. Perhaps a continuation of the promise in Mat 19:29, but more likely a rebuke to Peter. It refers to rank in the Kingdom, and has no bearing on the parable that follows

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

19:16 {5} And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

(5) Those who seek to be saved by the law do not even know the law themselves.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The encounter with the rich young ruler 19:16-22 (cf. Mar 10:17-22; Luk 18:18-23)

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

A rich young man asked Jesus what he needed to do to obtain eternal life. Luk 18:18 identifies him as a ruler. Matthew presented him as a rather typical obsessive-compulsive personality who probably never knew when to stop working.

The term "eternal life" occurs here for the first time in Matthew’s Gospel (cf. Dan 12:2, LXX). However the concept of eternal life occurs in Mat 7:14. Eternal life is life that continues forever in God’s presence as opposed to eternal damnation apart from God’s presence (Mat 7:13; cf. Mat 25:46).

The young man’s idea of how one obtains eternal life was far from what Jesus had been preaching and even recently illustrating (Mat 19:13-15). He demonstrated the antithesis of childlike faith and humility. He thought one had to perform some particular act of righteousness in addition to keeping the Mosaic Law (Mat 19:20). He wanted Jesus to tell him what that act was. He was a performance-oriented person.

Jesus’ question in Mat 19:17 did not imply that He was unable to answer the young man’s question or that He was not good enough to give an answer. [Note: See B. B. Warfield, "Jesus’ Alleged Confession of Sin," Princeton Theological Review 12 (1914):127-228.] It implied that His questioner had an improper understanding of goodness. Jesus went on to explain that only God is good enough to obtain eternal life by performing some good deed. No one else is good enough to gain it that way. Jesus did not discuss His own relationship to God here. However, Jesus implied that He was God or at least spoke for God. The young man had asked Jesus questions about goodness that only God could adequately answer.

The last part of Mat 19:17 does not mean that Jesus believed a person can earn eternal life by obeying God’s commandments. Obedience to God’s commandments is a good preparation for entering into life. However obedience alone will not do.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

3. Instruction about wealth 19:16-20:16

Again someone approached Jesus with a question that provided an opportunity for Jesus to give His disciples important teaching (cf. v.3). This man’s social standing was far from that of a child, and he provides a negative example of childlikeness. Previously the disciples did not welcome children (Mat 19:13), but here they can hardly believe that Jesus would not welcome this man of wealth (Mat 19:25).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)