Rich Young Ruler

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Ravindran, Jan 15, 2014.

  1. I think everyone is very familiar about the rich young ruler.. One specific question.. Why Jesus did not mention any commandments about relationship between man and God? Every listed commandment is between human.. Any thoughts on this?
  2. Here's what comes to mind for me:

    When the rich young ruler leaves in despair, knowing that his efforts to follow the whole law are in vain if he can't give up his possessions, the disciples ask, "“Then who can be saved?” Jesus replies, “With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.”

    Jesus was demonstrating that we don't earn a relationship with God by our works, but that an innocent motivation for works follows from a relationship with God. The teaching in James 2:14-26 is in the same spirit. It's also the reason for His answer in Matthew 22:36-40.
  3. He did. The first commandment is ''I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me''. Money was his god. No point getting to the others if he is guilty of the first one.
  4. You are stating my question :)

    16 And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?”17 And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.”18 He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness,19 Honor your father and mother, and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”20 The young man said to him, “All these I have kept. What do I still lack?”

    This is what is there in the account of Mathew.. Jesus does not ask him to sell everything at the first itself.. He gets to that only later.. He gives only the other commandments.. For which the rich young man says he has kept all his life..

    The way I interpret this passage is, Jesus is trying to show what he lacks.. Exact same question he asks "What do I lack".. He denies to accept his sinful nature and the need for Saviour.. This is in contrast to Zacheus.. Where Christ does not ask him anything.. He simply calls him.. Because Zacheus accepted his sinful nature and was looking for a Saviour..
  5. There is nothing we can do to gain eternal life because H had to die for us to gain life by faith, it is not about what we do but us accepting what H did. This man could have lived by the law but did not have the faith that leads to life.
  6. That's a good point. Thanks for sharing. It makes me think of those that are going to hell who feel God is doing them an injustice. All people feel like they are good. But it is our pride that clouds us judging ourselves truthfully. Put all the people living for themselves together and then there will be no blur as to why they are in hell.
  7. I think that Jesus had to show this rich man, that although he said he had kept all the commandments, he had not. He loved his possessions more than he loved his neighbor (poor) and he loved them more than he loved God. IMO this passage teaches the seriousness of true discipleship but it does not teach that the average man that he must sell his possessions in order to be a Christian.
  8. Could it be that the list in verse 18 of Matt.19 centers on the outward duties rather than inward nature which was in fact the young mans real problem?????
  9. Having read Matthew chapter 19, I wonder if Jesus was talking about idolatry. The young rich man was wondering how to enter into Paradise by his works. Jesus knew this, and so quoted him the law. Jesus knew that this man had little intention of giving up his wealth. The young man went away 'sorrowful', because he loved his money more than God. Jesus may also have been hinting at the new covenant replacing the old law of Moses.
  10. Well, that is true.. If the problem was really inward, why Christ had to talk about outward duties? Why did He not get to crux of the problem?

    I always consider Old and New covenants in this fashion..
    Old covenant - Bring internal change through external discipline/change
    New covenant - Bring external change through internal change/discipline

    Was Christ highlighting the man the fact that he is lacking in external discipline itself? That is, he does not love his neighbors.. And he was a rich young man.. Probably at some point of time, he would have broken all the commandments.. Still he is not realizing that.. Repent and realize the need for Saviour?

Share This Page