Bible Gateway Recommendations
Our Price: $21.49
Save: $13.51 (39%)
Our Price: $37.49
Save: $22.50 (38%)
View more titles
Our Price: $21.99
Save: $8.00 (27%)
Three passages make up this discipleship section. In each case, figures provide examples. The Pharisee and tax collector contrast pride and humility. The blessing of the little children shows God's openness to all. The rich man shows how difficult it is for the rich to turn to God, while the disciples are the positive example of giving everything over to service for God. In each case, what is commended is putting everything into the Father's care. Such simple, humble faith is what God desires.
This parable, like the previous one, deals with prayer, but here the issue is the content of the heart as one prays. The parable is one of contrast and is unique to Luke. It contains common Lukan heroes and villains. The hero is the tax collector; the villain is the Pharisee. Humility is the exalted virtue. The parable serves as a rebuke, since it is told to some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everybody else. The Pharisees are the specific targets in Jesus' audience (Jeremias 1972:142-43; Josephus Jewish Wars 1.5.2 110).
What is most dangerous about pride is noted right at the start. First, we come to trust in our own abilities rather than trusting God. Second, we come to regard other people with contempt and disrespect rather than seeing them as created equal in the image of God.
This is a danger inherent in professional ministry: ministers and other Christian leaders can come to look down on laypeople. Here we are reminded, however, that God honors those who realize that their ministry does not commend them before God or make them superior; rather, we are all the objects of his grace and mercy.
The parable takes place at Israel's most holy site, the temple. The two visitors are on opposite ends of the social spectrum. The Pharisee is a respected religious member in a most honored social group, while the tax collector belongs to one of the most hated professions possible for a Jew.
The two prayers also make a contrast. The Pharisee is sure that he is a blessing to God: "I thank you that I am not like other men--robbers, evildoers, adulterers--or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get." Clearly, God's program could hardly advance without this man's contribution. In fact, his prayer's form is revealing. It starts out like a thanksgiving psalm in which God is praised for something he has done. But the form is perverted, since the occasion of thanksgiving is what the man has done for God. Here is trust in oneself. His real prayer is "God, I thank you that I am so marvelous." In his own "humble" eyes he is not unrighteous. He fasts above and beyond the call of duty, twice a week, in contrast to the one fast a year on the Day of Atonement required of Jews. He gives tithes from everything (Lev 27:30-32; Num 18:21-24; Deut 14:22-27). He probably tithes down to the smallest herbs (Lk 11:42). God needs to do nothing for him. He makes no request of God, he offers no honor to God. This religious man has done it all. After reading his prayer, we wonder whether God should apply to be his assistant!
In contrast, the tax collector senses that he approaches a holy God, a great and unique being. This man comes with timidity, from a distance, not lifting his eyes to heaven. While the Pharisee had stood right at the front and addressed God, the tax collector beats his breast in an obscure corner to reflect his contrition. A similar sign of emotional dependence in the New Testament is the lifting of hands to God to show one's need of what he provides (1 Tim 2:8). Both practices indicate an awareness of one's humble position before God.
The tax collector knows he is a sinner; the Pharisee is confident of his own righteousness. The contrast could not be greater. Here is another brilliant use of literary space and contrast by Jesus.
The tax collector asks for mercy. He desires to improve his spiritual health, not rest on any personal laurels. He is aware that the only way he has access to God is through divine mercy (Dan 9:18-19). Such access is not earned; it is the product of God's grace.
When Jesus evaluates the two prayers, only one petitioner went home justified. The tax collector's prayer honored God and was heard, not that of the Pharisee. To drive the point home, Jesus concludes, "For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." Such reversals in God's judgments are common (1:51-53; 6:20-26; 14:11; 15:11-32; 16:19-31). The parable's point is summarized in this saying. The tax collector has a humble heart. He is honored by God. Since this parable is an example story, the call is to be like the tax collector.
In this short passage we see that God is no respecter of persons--not in the sense that he could not care less about them, but rather he cares for all of them. In ancient culture, children could be seen but not heard. They were left on society's fringe until they were old enough to be useful. This fringe role magnified the impact of what Jesus says here. If he has time for children, he has time for anyone.
The child's age is indicated through a combination of terms. Though brephe usually refers to "little ones" who are babies (so NIV here), the other term used, paidion, seems to indicate that at least some of children are beyond the toddler stage. Second Timothy 3:15 uses the term "little one" to refer to Timothy's age when Scripture was read to him, so we need not think these were all infants. Mark 10:16 has some of the children small enough to be picked up by Jesus.
Yet whatever their age, they were too young to be considered important by some in the crowd. The disciples saw the attempt to bring children to Jesus as inappropriate. Surely there was a better use of his time and energy. Such trivialities should be prevented.
But the disciples had it wrong. They should not hinder the children's approach. Jesus turns the event into a two-level lesson, one about children, the other about disciples.
The lesson about children is that they are welcome in God's kingdom. He is available to them. God's care for them shows that he cares for all. The kingdom is not only for adults.
The lesson for disciples is that children are good models for a disciple. Children trust their parents and rely on them. So disciples should rely on their Father. To be a part of the kingdom, we must receive it in the way a child walks through life. Entry is blocked to those who do not trust the Father. God accepts those who run into their Father's arms, knowing that he will care for them.
This passage builds yet another contrast between the disciples and the response of others in the Jewish nation. The rich ruler represents the wealthy lay leadership in the nation and allows Luke to deal again with a theme that he has consistently kept before his readers: wealth and generosity (3:11; 5:11, 28; 6:23-26, 34-35, 38; 7:5; 8:3, 14; 10:34-35; 11:41; 12:13-21, 33; 14:12-14, 33; 16:9-13, 19-31; 18:22; 19:8; see Stein 1992:459). In fact, this passage reflects a theme that is central to Luke 18--19: the disciple's trust should lead to humble service (18:17).
The rich man lacks the trust of the blind man of verses 35-43, as well as the penitent heart of Zacchaeus (19:1-10). The rich man's attitude is more like that of the Pharisee of 18:9-14. The self-confidence he reflects, along with his sense of sinlessness, is condemned by Jesus. In contrast, by trusting and following Jesus, the disciples have given what he has asked for. They will have a rich reward, both now and in the life to come (vv. 29-30).
Most of the account's difficult aspects come at the start. When the rich ruler calls Jesus good, the teacher rebukes him. Apparently Jesus wants to warn the man not to be impressed by human credentials--a problem Jesus will face later in his own life, when the Pharisees challenge his authority (20:1-8). Being excessively tied to credentialed teachers might distract the man from pursuing God. God alone is good; he is the One who deserves attention and allegiance, a key Old Testament theme (1 Chron 16:34; 2 Chron 5:13; Ps 34:8; 106:1; 118:1, 29; 136:1). Jesus is not replying to deprecates himself, but qualifying how the man views the teaching office in general. The teaching role, even for one who does it well, is not to be overly exalted. Jesus' refusal to accept the man's flattery also warns the man that Jesus will shoot straight with him.
More important is the man's question. It matches what a lawyer asked in 10:25: "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" He wants to know how he can be sure he will share in the life to come. Jesus' reply focuses on the standard of righteousness as represented in portions of the Ten Commandments. Avoiding adultery, murder, stealing and lying, as well as the positive call to honor one's parents, are specifically noted. The spirit of Jesus' reply fits with what was said in 10:25-28, where the commandment to love God and others was cited more generally. In this context the reply is significant, because the issue of money, which will surface shortly, can make us view others as means to an end, rather than as people. So Jesus concentrates here on commandments dealing with how we relate to others. In fact, in Judaism honoring parents might imply financial responsibility for them in their old age (Tobit 4:3; Sirach 3:3-16; L. T. Johnson 1991:277).
Jesus' reply has troubled some as being "too Old Testament" in tone. Where is the appeal to follow Jesus? One could argue it is implied in Jesus' words. By steering the man toward faithfulness to God, Jesus steers the man toward following him. Jesus could steer people to him through his teaching (6:46-49; 11:29-32) or remind them of the ethical standard God desires, as he does here. There is no contradiction in this for him. As Stein (1992:455) says, "For Luke true faith involved loving God with all one's heart and one's neighbor as oneself. . . . Likewise loving God with all one's heart . . . and one's neighbor as oneself involves faith in Jesus."
To trust God means to rest in him and his way. To pursue such a path is not works, but relationship with God. The entry into grace and relationship saves; the path and pursuit of righteousness follow.
Now the man's problem begins to surface. He is confident that he can stand before God on his own merit: he has kept all the commandments since boyhood. His confidence recalls the Pharisee of verses 9-14: he has kept the law.
Jesus wishes to check this confidence with a further demand that will reveal two things: (1) how generous the man is and (2) whether he will listen to Jesus. He still lacks something. Here Jesus is not asking the man to do something he asks everyone to do, since he will commend Zacchaeus's generosity in 19:1-10 without asking him to sell all. What Jesus does is test the man's heart and attachments. Is God placed ahead of worldly possessions in this man's life? Does the man really love God and others? So Jesus tells him that he lacks one thing: he must sell all his possessions.
But to stop here is to miss the point. Jesus goes on to promise the man treasure in heaven if he will follow Jesus. The need to come to Jesus, to trust him, is not absent from the passage. It is merely defined by reference to the obstacle that stands between the man and God: his security in his wealth.
The man's response says it all. He is very sad. The choice is a painful one, and he refuses to consider it. Grieved at the options, he chooses his wealth.
There is another premise in Jesus' response that may prompt the disciples' reaction. Wealth was generally seen as evidence of divine blessing and pleasure. If Jesus is implying that wealth is not such a guarantee, then how can one know God's blessing? Jesus had answered this question in 10:20 with regard to power, but here he raises it again with the issue of wealth and status, since to sell all and follow Jesus would mean that the rich man's social status would be changed forever. Jesus responds to the rich man's somber mood by driving the point home: "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!" He looks at the man as he says it. Wealth and the false sense of security that comes with it can prevent one from meeting God.
Jesus is not done. He explains that a camel can get through the eye of a needle more easily than a rich person can enter the kingdom. Now some have argued that Jesus is talking about a small gate at the entrance to Jerusalem named the "Needle's Eye Gate." But this view clearly blunts the force of his statement. How hard is it for a camel to go through a small gate? Not very hard, yet Jesus and the disciples agree that he is expressing an impossibility, at least for human beings (vv. 26-27). So Jesus is using his common style of rhetorical hyperbole (compare 6:41; 17:2). The hyperbole here makes it clear that a rich man on his own will never make a choice for the kingdom. It is impossible. The priorities it requires demand a new heart.
The disciples catch the tension and are shocked. If the rich cannot be saved and experience ultimate divine blessing, who then can be saved? If those at the top of the ladder who enjoy God's rich material provision do not get in, where is hope for anyone else?
Jesus notes that God can do the impossible. He can change hearts and priorities. God's power and grace yield the change. People do not save themselves or earn God's blessing; God provides it. This is why Paul calls the gospel the power of God in Romans 1:16-17. God deals with sin and changes the heart.
Now the rapid-fire dialogue reaches a high point. Peter remarks, probably seeking reassurance, that the disciples have done what Jesus has asked of the rich man. They have left home to follow him.
In the reply is the passage's major point. Jesus reassures Peter and the disciples that God is blessing and will bless their decision. Even given Peter's upcoming denial of Jesus, he has made the choice to follow Jesus. Not only is what Jesus has asked for possible with God, but indeed the Father has wrought it in the hearts of Jesus' followers, who live in relationship to the kingdom of God through him. So they have left many things, but they have received many times as much in this life and, in the age to come, eternal life. In Judaism, "the age to come" is another way to speak of future eternal life (4 Ezra [2 Esdras] 7:47; 8:1; Pirqe `Abot 2:8; L. T. Johnson 1991:279). What the rich man hoped for, but refused to embrace by following Jesus, these disciples are receiving. The lesson is in the contrast. The disciples, for once, provide the positive example. God has made the seemingly impossible possible for them (see 10:20-22).