Stuff that interests me enough to write about

Note: Contrary to popular belief in some circles the Bible does not condemn wealth or the rich simply because they are wealthy. Abraham for example, in the Old Testament was very wealthy. On the other hand the Bible frequently speaks of the perils of loving wealth (1 Tim. 3:3, 6:10; 2 Tim. 3:2). That’s what makes the stories of Zacchaeus and the rich young ruler interesting and the careful historian Luke places their stories back-to-back in Scripture for good reason. Please note this a part two and it is recommended that you read part one first if you have not already done so.

Summation of the Zacchaeus story: The story of Jesus and his encounter with Zacchaeus is a remarkable story of individual salvation and a remarkable story of the fruits of personal salvation. Zacchaeus had been a corrupt government official exploiting people by extracting from them more than they owed.  The fact Zacchaeus was rich did not make him corrupt; it was  his inherent sin nature that made him corrupt which manifested itself by Zacchaeus exploiting his fellow man. Jesus said on more than one occasion that mankind’s fundamental problems are not external, but internal or matters of the heart meaning the inner man (Luke 6:43).

Once God changed Zacchaeus’ heart toward Christ and salvation Zacchaeus became a new man (2 Cor. 5:17) and the new man repented from the corruption of the old. The new man became generous and charitable as well as making it right with those he previously exploited. The story of Zacchaeus illustrates how the gospel, rightly understood results in changed people with changed attitudes and actions.

In Luke 18 we see Jesus involved with another rich guy. This encounter took place just prior to Jesus’ encounter with Zacchaeus. I’ve dealt with them in reverse order for a reason. The reason is I wanted to show a contrast between one rich man whose heart changed and another rich man who heart did not.

In our country the political left believes that government has the power to change people since the government represents what the left believes to be the highest power. So, to them, it makes sense to invest more power in government, so that government has the power and means to socially engineer or coerce the culture to conform to what they believe to be the greatest good, i.e., income redistribution, gay marriage, abortion and so forth. The left calls these issues aspects of social justice that conform with their ideas of fairness. On occasion, the left will use the Bible or Jesus to try and make their case and often they make the rich the automatic villain simply because they are rich.

Scripture however does not treat the rich as automatic villains. As we saw with Zacchaeus his problem was not with his wealth but within his inner man and the inherent sin contained within. In Luke 18 Jesus deals with another rich guy who has a heart problem, not a wealth problem. The outcome in this story is different than with Zacchaeus.

Within the story of the rich ruler (Luke 18:18-30) is a verse that is used by social justice advocates to justify the redistribution of wealth. It is Luke 18:22:

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

Is Jesus teaching that the rich should give away all their money to obtain personal salvation or is he advocating income redistribution like some social justice advocates say? And if he is not teaching social justice or personal salvation then what is he teaching? Let’s go through the passage verse by verse and see.

18 And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

The unnamed rich young (noted as young in Matt. 19:20) ruler asks Jesus one of the most important questions a person can ask. He says, “good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

Matthew’s Gospel puts the ruler’s question like this:

And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life? Matt. 19:16, ESV

The rich young man apparently believes there is something that he can do, some good deed to perform that will cause him to inherit eternal life. He asks Jesus who he identifies as a “good teacher” what that deed might be?

The fact that the man is identified as a “ruler” probably means a ruler in the synagogue and therefore would have known the requirements for eternal life. His question may have been insincere and he was looking to trip Jesus up or perhaps, he was looking for some loophole. Whatever the case it seems odd that he asks the question since he has a high position in the synagogue and would be familiar with the Old Testament law.

Jesus gives him a surprising answer by asking him a question and following it with a statement

 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.

Jesus’ statement that “no one is good except God alone” would have been an incredible remark for those who first heard it and for those today who do not understand the gospel.

Jesus is speaking to a ruler in the synagogue, someone most of the people would have assumed to be a “good person” similar today to a priest, minister or rabbi.  Furthermore, like many today, the ruler himself thought himself to be good. We can tell by what he says a bit later when he says he has kept all the commandments. Many today might not go that far by saying they’ve kept all the commandments but they would still think themselves “good” compared to others who led a more lawless life than themselves.

Jesus’ statement is shocking for it challenges our sensibilities as to who is good. Jesus says no one but God is good.

Jesus’ point here is significant. He was not denying that he was God but was saying quite clearly, that no one is without sin and therefore no one is good in the eternal sense of the word. The apostle Paul would unequivocally state the same idea in Romans 3:9-12

9 What then? Are we Jews any better off?No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written:

“     None is righteous, no, not one;

11           no one understands;

          no one seeks for God.

12      All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;

          no one does good,

          not even one.”

This is a fundamental issue as we come to terms with issues regarding the rich and the poor. If no one is good in an eternal sense then it follows that a person’s relative wealth is not an indication either way of their “goodness” or “badness.” A poor person can in fact be just as greedy or envious as a rich person. Jesus of course knows this and goes on to more important matters.

Jesus then reminds the ruler of what the ruler already knows.

20 You know the commandments:  ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’ ”

 

In other words, Jesus is speaking law to the ruler, not gospel. If you want to inherit eternal life, keep the law, all of it. Jesus was emphasizing the high standard God requires for eternal life and in the process reminds the ruler of 5 of the 6 commandments that should govern human relationships. Jesus omits the command against coveting but adds the well known “love your neighbor” which sums up the second table of law known as the Ten Commandments.

 

Jesus’ statements by-the-way do say something about biblical social justice. In a manner of speaking Jesus is saying by not committing adultery, murdering, stealing lying and so forth you are dealing with your fellow man justly since you would not want anyone doing these things to you (Matt. 7:12). This is important because God does care about justice so the inclusion of “love your neighbor” is no small matter. Keep in mind that when Zacchaeus repented he also loved his neighbor.

The rich young ruler however gives an astounding reply.

 21 And he said, “All these I have kept from my youth.”

Yes, Jesus I have kept them all, ever since I was a child. I have not missed a single one, ever. These are words that spring from a hard, self-righteous heart.

His words illustrate the ruler thought he had eternal life already when in fact he did not. Like many today the ruler believed that because he kept the law he was entitled to eternal life. Many today believe the same thing as they compare themselves to others who seem worse than themselves. This was the issue in the story of Zacchaeus. The crowd thought themselves better than Zacchaeus and condemned him as the worst of sinners because of his occupation. In this way the ruler had more in common with the crowd in the story of Zacchaeus than he did with Zacchaeus himself.

This issue is of particular relevance to us today.

When President Obama said it is possible to criticize Wall Street and some of it’s practices without demonizing those who work there I’m not so sure he means it.

Much of what is called social justice comes from an attitude of self-righteouesness. It’s not fair that person “A” has more than person “B” and person “B” inherited much of what he has and person “A” did not inherit anything. Therefore, person “A” is more righteous than person “B” who obtained their wealth without earning it. Never mind that the redistribution of wealth also means that the recipient did not earn it either.

Absent in most politics is a sound theology of sin. Having drifted far away from what God has said our culture defines morality as it pleases. One commentator pointed out that the left harps much on one deadly sin-greed, but says nothing about another-envy.

Now Jesus finally says something about the wealth issue after the ruler declares he has been the perfect keeper of the law.

22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

As I noted earlier the passage is sometimes used to justify a definition of social justice. Take all that the rich have and redistribute to those who are poor which always means more social welfare programs. But is this what Jesus is teaching given the fact the conversation thus far has been about law and one’s ability to keep it?

Jesus is going after the ruler’s heart. The ruler thinks he is a pretty good law keeper but Jesus says there is at least one thing he lacks in regards to doing the law, notably the love your neighbor summation. He tells the ruler he should sell ALL he has and give it to the poor and then he would have eternal life. In other words, keep the law, all of it, perfectly and you will inherit eternal life. Like the story of Zacchaeus the issue is one of personal redemption or individual salvation. The Bible’s main story line is redemption in Christ and his coming kingdom, the kingdom that began when he was born and then started his ministry, the kingdom that would be fully accomplished when he comes again.

Some social justice advocates advocate a type of collectivist salvation. The President himself preaches this:

“I am confident we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth”

- BARACK OBAMA, speaking to a multi-racial evangelical church in Greenville, South Carolina

The President’s words echo the cry of the earlier social gospel advocates who believed they could create the kingdom of God right here on earth.

“… working on issues of crime and education and employment and seeing that in some ways certain portions of the African American community are doing as bad if not worse, and recognizing that my fate remain tied up with their fates, that my individual salvation is not going to come about without a collective salvation for the country.   Unfortunately, I think that recognition requires that we make sacrifices and this country has not always been willing to make the sacrifices that are necessary to bring about a new day and a new age.”  Pres. Obama

The earlier social gospel movement has morphed into a social justice movement where many liberal Christians like Obama believe their salvation is tied to a collectivist salvation. They believe in the power of big government to make it happen.

And so the love your neighbor passage and Jesus’ statement to give all of the wealth to the poor is what the President is talking about. The collective salvation is a type of salvation earned by philanthropy or government confiscation of wealth for redistribution purposes. It is a false gospel based on social gospel principles from the earlier part of the 20th century.

Remember from the Zacchaeus story Zacchaeus became generous with his wealth because he had been saved. He did not earn his salvation because he was generous. Scripture knows nothing of a collectivist salvation. Collectivist salvation is the false gospel of salvation by works and a crude justification for the confiscation of private property. It certainly is not justice as the Bible would define justice.

One further comment on verse 22. The ruler had asked Jesus what must he do to inherit eternal life. Jesus answers first one way and then another. He says at first keep the commandments and when the ruler says he has done so Jesus tells him not quite. Jesus says he is to give all his riches to the poor and then follow Jesus.

Zacchaeus did what he did because he became a follower of Jesus. He gave has his wealth to the poor and made restitution to those who cheated. Jesus was testing the ruler to see if he was willing to follow him. If he was, he would have been willing to give all away for the sake of the gospel.

The ruler does not like what he hears from Jesus.

23 But when he heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich.

The ruler loved his possessions more than his fellow man or Jesus since Jesus told him to sell all and follow him. In other words the cost of being Jesus’ disciple was too high. The man’s heart remained oblivious to his real need, that is salvation through Christ alone, who alone, did keep the entire law.

Unlike Zacchaeus whose heart had been changed the ruler’s heart was still made of stone and still oriented toward the keeping of the law.

Jesus responds to the man’s hard heart with sadness.

24 Jesus, looking at him with sadness, said, “How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!

This is another misunderstood passage.

Jesus explains that it is difficult for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of God. Why is it difficult? Why is wealth a stumbling block to eternal life?

Wealth, in general, can claim lordship over a person’s life. A man may have a million dollars or a billion dollars or even $200, 000 dollars and if it has first place in his life it is his lord and master. The amount is not relevant. The condition of the heart is.

Someone pointed out something regarding the signage used by OWS. “We are the 99%” is one of the more popular signs. It means that the 1% are greedy and wealthy and everyone else is poor by comparison. Compared to the rest of the world the 99% are really the 1% because even our poorest are wealthy by comparison with world. Again, it is the condition of the heart that matters, not relative wealth.

Relative wealth in any culture can also mean a higher degree of self-sufficiency and like the ruler an inability to not see the gravity of one’s own sin. This does not mean that poverty is a virtue like some believe. It just means the more one has the more self-sufficient one can tend to be and thus not see their spiritual poverty or spiritual bankruptcy.

Zacchaeus called Jesus Lord thus indicating that his wealth was no longer lord over his life and he followed it up by voluntarily giving away one half of it. Zacchaeus received grace and so gave grace. The ruler did not grasp what grace is and so could not give grace.

Jesus uses a metaphor with hyperbole to hammer home his point.

25 For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enterthe kingdom of God.”

There is some debate about this verse as to whether camel means camel or whether it’s a reference to a gate in Jerusalem that camels passed through with difficulty because it was so narrow. The debate misses the main point. Jesus is underscoring the utter impossibility of anyone meriting eternal life on the basis of their doing some good deed or deeds. Jesus is using a word picture to describe an impossibility.

Besides, there is no proof that a narrow gate named the camel gate ever existed in Jerusalem. (John MacArthur Study Bible)

In Jesus’ day wealth was thought to be a sign of God’s approval and if you had wealth you could give more to the poor voluntarily (no such thing as social welfare programs in First Century Judea). The giving of wealth to the poor was of course a good deed and thus the reasoning was the more good deeds the more likely it was for a person to earn eternal life. The wealthy since they were wealthy had more opportunity for good deeds and so seemed the most likely candidates for eternal life.

The passage has nothing to do with the redistribution of wealth except in the remotest sense of a changed person voluntarily becoming generous like Zacchaeus. Generosity does redistribute wealth and when it’s done from a heart that has received Christ, it honors Him and testifies to the work of the gospel within the individual.

The disciples with Jesus are shocked because they like most Judeans believed that wealth was a sign of God’s favor. They hear Jesus’ metaphor and respond.

26 Those who heard it said, “Then who can be saved?”

The question they ask is reminiscent of what the ruler asked when he said what must he do to inherit eternal life. The disciples simply say who can be saved; in other words then what does it take?

Jesus responds with a comment that has huge implications.

27 But he said,  “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”

It is impossible for any man to merit salvation. Salvation is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9) and so salvation is only possible through God’s grace, never man’s merit. The rich can be saved. The poor can be saved. Nothing is impossible with God. (See Eph. 2:8-9)

28 And Peter said, “See, we have left our homes and followed you.” 29 And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 who will not receive many times more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life.”

Notice that Jesus connects personal salvation with the kingdom of God. What is the kingdom of God becomes a key question as we try to understand the debate about income redistribution.

Remember that Zacchaeus called Jesus Lord.  This meant that Zacchaeus bowed to the the Lordship of Christ. The kingdom has to do with the redemptive rule of Christ and the story of Zacchaeus shows us that redemptive rule was applied to Zacchaeus’ heart thus giving a glimpse of what the kingdom of God will look like when Jesus returns.

Income redistribution will never usher in the kingdom nor expand it. A changed heart will result in a generous heart so if we are really interested in justice we’ll not forgot it is the gospel that changes people, not a government handout.