The rich young ruler

[Anchor]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

 

[biscuit1953]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

The rich young ruler was proud and would not acknowledge his own sin but on the contrary claimed perfect obedience to the moral law (v.20).  Jesus merely exposed the man's heart showing him that no one is good enough to keep the law.  Instead of throwing himself on the mercy of God he thought he was good enough to inherit eternal life.  There is always the danger of taking one text and isolating it from all others and then getting a meaning not intended I believe.

 

[prophet]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

The rich young ruler was proud and would not acknowledge his own sin but on the contrary claimed perfect obedience to the moral law (v.20).  Jesus merely exposed the man's heart showing him that no one is good enough to keep the law.  Instead of throwing himself on the mercy of God he thought he was good enough to inherit eternal life.  There is always the danger of taking one text and isolating it from all others and then getting a meaning not intended I believe.

This^^^

Mat 5:17,20
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets:I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.


20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Here is the Intro for the sermon on the mount, in the same vein, still the schoolmaster, until His death.

Anishinaabe

 

[Ransom]

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")?

Jesus' point was that the rich young ruler came up short when it came to obeying the Law, and that he loved his wealth more.

Think of it as "negative evangelism," rather than "positive."

 

[christundivided]

The issue was with his evil heart.  His choice in his possessions was just one bad choice of many. Coming to Christ involves a total abandonment of one's own desires. Nothing is more important that Christ.

 

[Anchor]

Not disagreeing with anybody's points here, but they reference a question not asked.  The question was if he had followed Christ's directive to sell all and give to the poor would he have indeed received the "treasure in heaven"?

 

[Fresh Air]

I think the answer to your question is that he couldn't achieve it. The entire point, as others have mentioned, was to prove to him that he was the sinner he didn't think that he was. In order to accomplish this he set the man to undertake a task that was absolutely impossible to achieve - to keep the Law perfectly. If he sincerely set himself out to try he would soon discover his inability, thus his own sinful condition, and thus be driven back to Christ.

Think of a newbie at the gym, rail thin, whose never worked out a day in his life yet he thinks he can lift 200 pounds. You can tell he can't. He says he can. How do you convince him he can't? Set him on the machine, and watch him try. In trying and failing he will be forced to admit that he is incapable of what he previously thought he could do.

So it was with this guy. You ask if he had done what Jesus said would he have gotten eternal life. This answer is that there is no way he possibly could have done all that Jesus told him to do. And that was the point.

 

[Anchor]

... You ask if he had done what Jesus said would he have gotten eternal life. This answer is that there is no way he possibly could have done all that Jesus told him to do. And that was the point.

You know I love ya man, but you don't think the guy could have sold all his possessions and given it to the poor?  I'm not sure why this would be so impossible.  Obviously, he didn't because he loved/trusted them too much (which is clearly the point of the narrative).

 

[Bruh]

... You ask if he had done what Jesus said would he have gotten eternal life. This answer is that there is no way he possibly could have done all that Jesus told him to do. And that was the point.

You know I love ya man, but you don't think the guy could have sold all his possessions and given it to the poor? I'm not sure why this would be so impossible.  Obviously, he didn't because he loved/trusted them too much (which is clearly the point of the narrative).

No Craigs list.  DUH!!!

 

[Fresh Air]

... You ask if he had done what Jesus said would he have gotten eternal life. This answer is that there is no way he possibly could have done all that Jesus told him to do. And that was the point.

You know I love ya man, but you don't think the guy could have sold all his possessions and given it to the poor?  I'm not sure why this would be so impossible.  Obviously, he didn't because he loved/trusted them too much (which is clearly the point of the narrative).

That isn't all Jesus told him to do.

17 ¶  And 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?
18  And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19  Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20  And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21  Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, 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.
22  And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

Jesus put his finger smack dab on what the guy couldn't do. That was the point.

 

[biscuit1953]

Not disagreeing with anybody's points here, but they reference a question not asked.  The question was if he had followed Christ's directive to sell all and give to the poor would he have indeed received the "treasure in heaven"?

According to Peter Ruckman and other hyper-dispensationalists the answer is yes.  They teach that Old Testament salvation was obtained through "faith and works."  They teach that no man was born again until after the church was formed.  Ruckman points out that scholars "break their necks in Matthew, Acts and Hebrews" because only the apostle Paul taught salvation by faith alone.  Of course it is hogwash but that is what many teach.

It is interesting that Jesus told an Old Testament Jew he must be "born again" (John 3:3).  It is also interesting that Ruckman teaches a person's works in the OT was vital for salvation when the Bible clearly teaches that their works were as "filthy rags" (Isa 64:6).  One can build any doctrine one wants by taking scripture and isolating it from other scripture.  I believe it is called "systematic theology."

 

[AresMan]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

Mar 10:26  And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
Mar 10:27  And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

 

[Anchor]

Mar 10:26  And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
Mar 10:27  And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Would you care to elaborate?

 

[Biblebeliever]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

If the ruch young ruler would have obeyed and done what Christ said to do;  then yes, he would have been granted salvation and he also would have received treasure in Heaven.

Back in the Old Testament;  they were saved by keeping the Mosaic Law.

 

[Mathew Ward]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

If the ruch young ruler would have obeyed and done what Christ said to do;  then yes, he would have been granted salvation and he also would have received treasure in Heaven.

Back in the Old Testament;  they were saved by keeping the Mosaic Law.

If folks could have kept the Mosaic Law then Christ would have no need to be anyone's sacrifice.

 

[prophet]

Mark 10:21 "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven..."

When the rich young ruler comes to Christ with the question "...what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life..." Christ eventually answers him with the above.  Now, we know from the narrative that the rich ruler finds that particular demand of Christ to be too heavy for him, for he "went away grieved: for he had great possessions."

However, theorizing only, if the rich young ruler had indeed followed Christ's directive and sold all and given it to the poor would he have indeed been granted salvation ("...treasure in heaven...")? Would selling have been a de facto "tak[ing] up the cross, and follow[ing] me"?

If the ruch young ruler would have obeyed and done what Christ said to do;  then yes, he would have been granted salvation and he also would have received treasure in Heaven.

Back in the Old Testament;  they were saved by keeping the Mosaic Law.

You just sent the Prophet David, a Man after God's own heart, to Hell, along with Moses, of the aforementioned Mosaic Law fame.

Anishinaabe

 

[Biblebeliever]

If folks could have kept the Mosaic Law then Christ would have no need to be anyone's sacrifice.

The Old Testament saints could keep the Mosaic Law and they did! (Josh. 22:2;
1 Kings 11:34; 2 Kings 18:6; Psa. 119:55).

Now even though the Old Testament saints did keep and follow the Mosaic Law; the perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was still needed to purchase and provide the eternal redemption for every saint.

 

[prophet]

If folks could have kept the Mosaic Law then Christ would have no need to be anyone's sacrifice.

The Old Testament saints could keep the Mosaic Law and they did! (Josh. 22:2;
1 Kings 11:34; 2 Kings 18:6; Psa. 119:55).

Now even though the Old Testament saints did keep and follow the Mosaic Law; the perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was still needed to purchase and provide the eternal redemption for every saint.

Name one who did.

Saul of Tarsus did.  Bible says so.
Yet God said "why persecuteth thou me?"

Mat 5:20
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Schoolmaster.

Anishinaabe

 

[Biblebeliever]

Name one who did.

David did.

Saul of Tarsus did.  Bible says so.

Yet God said "why persecuteth thou me?"

Mat 5:20
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Schoolmaster.

Anishinaabe

And that Schoolmaster (The Law) is what the Old Testament saints kept and followed. Old Testament salvation involved both Faith and Works. Just as it will be in the time of Jacob's trouble.

 

[Tim]

If folks could have kept the Mosaic Law then Christ would have no need to be anyone's sacrifice.

The Old Testament saints could keep the Mosaic Law and they did! (Josh. 22:2;
1 Kings 11:34; 2 Kings 18:6; Psa. 119:55).

Now even though the Old Testament saints did keep and follow the Mosaic Law; the perfect sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ was still needed to purchase and provide the eternal redemption for every saint.

If the Law could be kept then we have no need for Jesus Christ since we can be made pure under the Law. David and all the saints of old were just as filthy as you and I are ... and they failed God with his law and needed forgiveness. None of them perfectly kept the law. They were all SAVED by faith .... not law keeping.