The Rich, Young Ruler - Matt 19:16-26; Mark 10:17-27; Luke 18:18-27

Presumably during the same time that the children were leaving after being blessed, “there came one running, and kneeled to him.” Luke states that this person is “a certain ruler” and this is known as Jesus’ interaction with the Rich, Young Ruler. The ‘rich’ part might go hand in hand with the ‘ruler’ part, so maybe something will come up later that will give us the ‘young’ part. The ruler asks Jesus “Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus responds, “why callest thou me good? None is good, save one, that is God.” I really struggled with this statement because it seems like Jesus is being antagonistic. I always looked at His answer and thought “why did he have to through that in there, why couldn’t he have just answered the question?” An article entitled “If Jesus was God, why did He say ‘No one is good but God alone?” from gotquestions.organswers the question saying, “It is often claimed by those who reject the deity of Christ that in Mark 1-:17-22 Jesus denied His divinity by rejecting the notion that He is good.”

While reading this article I realized that while, in English, this statement might have a connotation of a denial of divinity, but in fact, looking at the words, Jesus doesn’t say anything like that. If we look at Jesus’ statement in a penetrating way as opposed to an antagonistic one, it takes on a completely different meaning. Let’s consider the statement in a different way. A young man says to a man “Doctor, how can I improve my health?” and man says, “Why do you call me doctor? Only those who graduate from medical school are doctors.” He’s not denying that he’s a doctor, he’s just demonstrating to the young man that he would only be a doctor if he was formally educated to be a doctor as indicated by graduating medical school.

Likewise, Jesus asks “why are you saying that I’m good? Only God can be good.” It’s an “if A=B and B=C then A=C.” “If I really am good, and only God is good, then I am God.” The article continues, “Thus Jesus’ question to the man is designed not to deny His diety, but rather to draw the man to recognize Christ’s divine identity… The logic can thus be summarized as follows:

Jesus claims only God is good.Jesus claims to be good.Therefore, Jesus claims to be God.”

Maybe this is a similar time as when Jesus asked “which of my good works are you condemning me for?” He’s done nothing to indicate that he is on any other agenda besides God’s. It’s like he’s prompting the young man to truly consider Jesus’ works and gospel and decide if He really is God.

But Jesus does answer the man’s question, reciting the 10 commandments, “Do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, defraud not, honour thy father and mother,” Matthew adds “thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” All three gospels records the same sentiments, but the wording and phraseology is a little different in each one, thus indicating that each were written by different people. The young man responds, “Master, all these have I observed from my youth. What lack I yet?” He’s saying that he’s always kept the commandments, if that enough? He probably feels a pull to do more, to not be satisfied, to keep progressing, but because he only knows the commandments, he doesn’t know what to do next. This goes back to what we discussed a couple of weeks ago, that maintenance is doing what you know, but in order to grow spiritually, we have to reach out beyond what we know. The IM says, “Drawing a lesson from the account of the rich young man, Elder Neal A. Maxwell of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles taught that being a valiant disciples of the Savior means not just avoiding sin but actively doing good: ‘Failing to be valiant in Christ discipleship will leave us without significant happiness. Therefore, our active avoidance of wickedness must be followed by our active engagement in righteousness. Then we can come to know true goy- after all, man is that he ‘might have joy.’ It is very often the sins of omission that keep us from spiritual wholeness because we still lack certain things.’”

I feel like the commandments are given as general guidelines to happiness, then once we’ve gotten those down, we have to be tutored by the Holy Ghost as to what pertains to us specifically, for our own personal betterment. And I just realized that I am this guy. I don’t commit adultery, I don’t murder, I don’t lie or cheat or steal, I fulfill my family and church obligations. The question is “what lack I yet?” What is my next step in becoming more Christ-like? I know what the answer is, but I’ve been fighting it for so long, How interesting. It’s fine tuning. Christ isn’t perfect because he keeps the general commandments, he’s perfect because he is in tune with his Father every fiber of his being. It’s the connectedness, and spiritual entwinement that is the perfecting process.

Jesus hears his answer, but instead of telling him something basic, like “read the scriptures more,” “then Jesus beholding him loved him.” He stopped and really looked at this guy. He saw his strengths and his weaknesses, he probably appreciated this man’s sacrifices to keep the commandments. In the May 2017 Ensign article entitled, “Then Jesus Beholding Him Loved Him, “Elder S. Mark Palmer comments, “As I heard these words, a vivid image filled my mind of our Lord pausing and beholding this young man. Beholding- as in looking deeply and penetratingly into his soul, recognizing his goodness and also his potential, as well as discerning his greatest need. Then the simple words- Jesus loved him. He felt an overwhelming love and compassion for this good young man, and because of this love and with this love, Jesus asked even more of him. I pictures what it must have felt like for this young man to be enveloped by such love even while being asked to do something so supremely hard as selling all he owned and giving it to the poor.”

Jesus sees who this man is and what he needs to become perfect, and he says, “One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.” The IM quotes Elder Maxwell as commenting that this was “a customized commandment… It was something he needed to do, not something he needed to stop doing, that kept him from wholeness.” Does this mean that we need to sell everything we have and live as homeless to have eternal life? Definitely not. The Savior knew that this guy was too focused on his possessions and that it would be to his detriment to keep his current lifestyle. It’s also noteworthy that Jesus was on the earth, and so this man could have actually followed Jesus, been in his inner circle personally if he had chosen to, unlike us where “follow me,” is more of a metaphor than an actuality.

This commandment was specific for this man, and no necessarily indicative of the path we all must take. Because honestly, stuff doesn’t mean that much to me, I want to be comfortable and have financial security and all that, but I don’t care about big houses, jewelry, clothes, purses, etc. So if Jesus told me, “sell everything you have and go live in another place,” sure that’s just fine, there’s no growth there for me because I’ve lived in the dirt before, I could live in it again, it doesn’t really matter to me that much. But I have my own demons that I have to contend with and I know for a fact that my weaknesses, someone would laugh at my struggle with them because they are strength for that person. We are all different and on our own path, that’s why having the Spirit with us is such a big deal.

This guy wasn’t ready, “and he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.” Is there a correlation between the amount of wealth someone has and their emotional attachment to giving it up? Sometimes, but sometimes not. This man wasn’t attached to his possessions because he had so many, he was attached to his possessions because his heart was set on them. Honestly, he probably wasn’t expecting any kind of answer like that, it was probably a total shock to him to hear that he had to sell his stuff in order to move forward spiritually. The IM says, “However, we are not told that the young man’s decision was final- we do not know that he absolutely refused to comply with Jesus’ instruction.” It’s a big deal and even if it took him decades to get to the point where he was incredibly generous with his wealth, then that transition, the spiritual growth that he would have experienced during that time would have been worth it. I always wondered why he didn’t just say “ok” and follow Jesus, but I never understood it because his struggles aren’t mine.

Watching the man walk away from Him was probably incredibly difficult for Jesus, but we are all on our own path and the right timing is critical to us being able to make right choices. Jesus says, “Children, how hard is it for them that trust 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.” There are several theories on what the statement about the camel means. One theory is that the “needle” was a very small door in the walls of Jerusalem that a camel could go through if they took off all their gear. Another theory is that the Greek translation really means “rope” instead of “camel” which would actually make more sense. But the IM says, “However, when Jesus Christ referred to a camel passing through the eye of a needle, it was likely an example of hyperbole.” We’ve seen Jesus use this literary device before.

The disciples are shocked, saying, “Who then can be saved?” Does this mean that the amount of your possessions will dictate your salvation? If that were the case, every poor person would be saved regardless of their behavior, and every rich person would be condemned. It would also seem, that if this were the case, then God’s commandment to be self-reliant and industrious would be counter to the laws of heaven, “work hard and take care of yourself, but if you’re not poverty stricken then you will not be saved.” Talk about economic rivalries, no wonder Satan wants us to believe this is true about the rich.

But if we consider Jesus’ teaching in the context of desire instead of possession, then everything makes sense. It’s just as possible for a rich man and a poor man to get into heaven as each other because it’s all based on their actions. However, someone who is focused on worldly wealth cannot be focused on the things of God at the same time. It’s one thing to be ambitious, to try to do different things industrially, in fact that’s why the Church is putting out business and self-reliance classes. But to sacrifice the things of God for wealth is where the line is drawn. If you have to break or even bend the commandments for money, then it’s too much. If you neglect your church and family responsibilities for money, then it’s too much.

The answer to the disciples’ question only makes sense coming from the JST which says, “With men that trust in riches, it is impossible; but not impossible with men who trust in God and leave all for my sake, for with such all these things are possible.” The actual items don’t matter; it’s our attitude toward them. The IM quotes President Brigham Young as teaching, “The worst fear that I have about this people is that they will get rich in this country, forget God and His people, wax fat, and kick themselves out of the Church… This people will stand mobbing, robbing, poverty, and all manner of persecution, and be true. But my greatest fear for them is that they cannot stand wealth.” Let’s reevaluate what we are doing with our resources, and what our true intentions are.