The Rich, Young, Evangelized, and Lost Ruler
August 23rd, 2007
(By Jesse Johnson)
* Jesse serves as the Pastor of Local Outreach at Grace Community Church.
Luke 18, Mark 10, and Matthew 19 give us the familiar story of the rich young ruler. This story is perhaps the most commonly used model for evangelism from the Gospels, and many evangelistic programs are modeled off of this encounter.
This has always struck me as strange, because the ruler did not get saved. This fact is often overlooked by those who teach that this exchange is the model for “succesful” evangelism. Obviously this is not to suggest that Jesus failed. What it does show is that the goal of Jesus’ evangelism was to expose the motives in the heart, more than it was to convince people to follow him. If anything, this exchange is remarkable because it shows Jesus saying things designed to drive this ruler away.
It seems that many of today’s gospel presentations are geared to trap someone into a logical corner where reason dictates that they make a commitment to follow Christ. Reason does make this demand, and so does Jesus. But Jesus structured this command in a way that caused the person to ask, “Is Christ more valuable than everything in life?” Most of our gospel presentations ask, “Do you want to go to hell? If not, then follow Christ.”
Jesus used the Law as an entry point into the conversation with the ruler. But, he did not use the Law to lead him to repentance. Remember that when Jesus used the Law, the ruler replied that as to the Law, he was blameless. Jesus did not argue with him. He did not say, “so are you saying you have never lied, not even once?”
Instead, he set the whole discussion of the Law aside, and asked the ruler if he would treasure Christ above the riches of the world. Jesus used the ruler’s self-professed obedience to the Law to make a dramatic point: law keeping does not save anyone, but rather treasuring Christ leads to salvation.
People need to know the bad news, that they are sinners, before they know the good news, that Christ died as a substitutionary atonement for their sin, and rose from the grave. But, when Jesus met the rich young ruler, he did not make the issue the Law. It is as if Jesus said to the ruler, “You have kept the Law your whole life? So what? You are lost because you love your life more than you love me.”
If I could change modern evangelism in one way, this is it: that we would stop reasoning people to a commitment or decision, and we would start calling people to deny their life, and follow Christ.
Even if it means that they walk away.
How true! I am becoming nauseated by what Pastor John calls the “prostitution” of the Faith. The stereotypes, the cliches, and the lack-lustre powerless presentation of the Gospel in many pulpits has now come down to personal evangelism. What we need is “revival” everybody is saying but they want the kingdom without the King. I agree we need revival but I think the only and best way is through severe persecution – to separate the wheat and chaff and to let the glorious Gospel shine. (I think the first Christians who lived in holes in the ground for their faith would agree) – Pat
Good article, I think too often we get caught in logical arguments in our gospel presentations, apealling 100% to the mind and will as if that was what can bring someone to Christ, instead of relying on the Holy Spirit to bring about the regeneration and repentance.
However, it seems the question that Jesus posed to him was to dispute his claim to have followed the law, rather then setting the whole discussion of the law aside. Since he was not willing to value Jesus over his wealth, he was clearly in violation of the first commandment ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind’. I suspect the rich young ruler would not claim again to have followed the law all his life after having seen this truth and made the choice to value his wealth over God.
Great conclusion! Certainly the gospel message is often skewed to put man’s need rather than the value of Christ at its center. Thanks for the exhortation as it is easy to slip into that type of presentation of the gospel!
I don’t mean to detract from the main point of the article, however, by offering a kind critique. It seems a little presemptuous to say that the Lord’s remarks were “designed” to drive the ruler away. After reviewing the passages again, the Lord’s motives don’t seem to be specifically revealed and it’s hard to see (in the text) why he would want to drive the man away. Wouldn’t it be best to understand that Christ’s comments were “designed” to bring him to repentance by pointing out to the ruler that his heart was really given to his possessions and not wholly to God? (Which obviously would be sin.)
Having reread the passages mentioned, I have a different take on the rich young ruler account than before. I’ve heard it often from others, and I’ve said it myself many times, that the young ruler was proud and in denial of his sin because nobody has kept the law (perfectly). It now appears to me unlikely that he was saying that he was sinless and had perfectly kept the law, but rather that generally speaking he had indeed devoted his life to following the law as described by the Lord. (Many of us might say that we have been following the Lord for many years, yet without implying that we have done so perfectly.) Is it possible that he was sincerely asking what had to be done in order to have eternal life? The fact that the ruler went away sad, not mad or offended, leads me to believe that his inquiry was sincere, rather than a defense of his own goodness.
All of that to say, we must exercise caution when reading motives and emotions into the Bible text, which I know most people reading this post wouldn’t deny.
Thanks again for the reminder!
I hope I can express my question about the above article in a way that makes sense.
Can we really appeal to an unregenerate heart to follow Christ, or to treasure Christ above all things?
Please believe me my question is very sincere. I have read much of John Piper on the same issue and I do get confused. I must bring Piper into this because he has written so much about this in books like”God Is the Gospel”. I admire and respect him so very much and have learned much from his writings. In one place he comments that if you don’t want heaven because Jesus is there, you don’t have it.
I know that Jesse does not say that exactly but I believe the thought is similar.
It seems to me that our responsibility to the unbeliever is to present the gospel. Christ died for our sins according to the scripture- 1 Corinthians 15. People are separated from God and going to hell because of their sin.
The good news is that if they place their faith in Christ and believe the gospel they will be saved,and be given eternal life
( the depth of which a newborn believer cannot even comprehend)
What a person’s motive is for salvation seems to be for the Lord to discern.
No unbeliever can treasure Christ above all things,can he? Does that not happen after repentance and regeneration as the Holy Spirit enlightens the heart to the beauty of the Savior and the horrible state we were in before he saved us?
It was my fear of the wrath of God and my separation from Him because of my rebellion that God used to bring me to faith.
It was after my conversion that I saw the beauty of Christ and understood the command to follow Him.
Forgive me that this is so long. It just seems to take many words to try express these questions.
Is following Christ the fruit of salvation or the cause of it?
I do believe that all genuine believers will follow Christ and celebrate His Lordship.
Thanks so much
Victoria
Please let me state the next to the last line in a better way, Is my DESIRE to follow Christ the fruit of salvation or the cause of it?
Victoria you ask a good question.
“Can we really appeal to an unregenerate heart to follow Christ, or to treasure Christ above all things?”
And the answer is, even though we know God sovereignly works grace into the heart of an unbelieving person, Christ has called us to proclaim the good news of the Gospel to them. In one sense, the evangelist is simply one begger telling another begger where to find food. Following Christ, choosing Christ is a result of salvation. Or to put it more technically, regeneration preceeds faith. God acts (alone) to change our hearts, and we believe on Him the moment He grants us the faith.
So ultimately our appeal is for God to use us as we faithfully spe
oops, wrong button.
…as we faithfully spread the Gospel throughout a lost and dying world.
As I read your article, I saw the same points raised by Rob and Allen.
I did not see Jesus setting aside the Law but simply bringing up another point in the Law (covetousness) that would accomplish what Paul said in Romans 3:19–that his mouth would be stopped and that he would become guilty before God.
Money had become the young ruler’s idol and, of course, he must turn from his idol in order to serve the living and true God.
I also did not see Jesus designing His words to drive the young man away. They were simply the demands of the Gospel, which must either be accepted or rejected. Unfortunately, he rejected.
Thanks for bringing these things out for discussion! Grace and peace.
Jon
Great article. It challenged my own evangelism conversations which are often focused on the benefit of salvation to the person I am speaking to rather than on the cost of the decision to follow Christ. What are your thoughts on the Way of the Master? Would you include this in under the category of modern evangelism?
I love this story because it totally flies in the face of the so-called “Free Grace” theology.
This article falls into a conversation I had with someone in my church today. It was about how arguments are formed around cultural framing and certain opposing ideals they profess.
Today, when we work with apologetics, it seems like the culture has created the idea that faith is opposed by reason. As if there is enough reason in the world to detract people away from the truth and Jesus Christ. In many circles throughout society, reasoning based upon worldly ideals has created much doubt in the minds of people. In fact it has caused many to become so distracted from the truth that reason only has become the dominant mindset in the world today.
Yet when you read the scripture, this cultural framing does not exist. Instead the opposing ideals throughout the Bible are always shown to be faith opposed by unbelief. This article of the young ruler clearly shows how Jesus put the issue of faith before him and forced the issue of belief, not the issue of reason. It was not a conversation on whether there was enough reason to convince him to sell all of his riches.
Today apologetics have fallen into the cultural framing of the world. It has fallen into a logic chess game, forcing the issue of salvation with others based upon reason. But this has happened because the world has become a reason dominated world and it is the language it speaks.
We must get back to framing the argument around how it was intended to be framed—faith versus unbelief.
Great article. Thanks for the insight by all who has participated in this forum. It has edified me tremendously.
My view of this passage is a bit different, too. His question of Jesus might have been sincere, and Jesus helped him to discover the answer. When Jesus listed the commandments from the second table, he listed only five of the six, then the summary “you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” He gave him a hint by leaving out the one that was his problem: coveting. The ruler should have known this, and admitted to keeping the five Jesus listed. Jesus did offer him life by asking him to sell his goods and give to the poor.
If I could read between the lines, this man probably coveted by never giving to the poor. I think Jesus carried the law to its conclusion for this man. He could make no argument against the law saying he shouldn’t covet.
(we would start calling people to deny their life, and follow Christ.)
This is certainly a message of sanctification that new converts should here, but shouldn’t evangelism first give the message of justification through grace?
Jazzy Cat,
I agree that the call to treasure Christ above everything else is for disciples. But, Jesus gave it to this ruler. Jesus did not start with justification, but with the issues of the heart: if you don’t treasure Christ, you are not saved. And the man walked away…
This gospel we proclaim flies so offensively in the face of depraved humanity; on an individual as well as a cultural level. But I’ve learned in my own personal evangelism experiences that if I don’t firmly set out Jesus’ call of self-denial and surrender of the will, the message I’m trying to give, suddenly loses it’s significance with the hearer. While I’m talking with someone, sharing this offensive message, it’s amazing to me how the lost soul can seemingly, so desperately crave the radical call to self-denial and salvation outside him/herself; and yet be so repelled and arrogant in their rejection of it, at the same time. It’s as though they recognize “Christianity-Lite”, generally speaking, for the “fluff” that it is. No questions here; my theological mind can sort out the seeming conundrum, but when I’m in the heat of battle-so to speak-I continue to be amazed by it all.
Jesse:
I am gojng to visit this article tomorrow, too late this evening. I am going to address some of your notes on the Lord’s use of the Law, and your final paragraph.
Jazzy Cat made a good observation above.
J. Moorhead- You may want to re-examine “Free Grace theology.” If you refer to the Zane Hodges FG theology I’ll join you in condemning it.
There has been a huge fracture in the FG community. Most of the theologically balanced men have departed the Grace Evangelical Society (Hodges/Wilkin) camp over the “Crossless” interpretation of the Gospel coming from Hodges and the GES.
Kind regards,
LM
If I could chime in here a bit…
I too see Jesus as doing the following:
“18 And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 19 And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.
(First he corrects the Rich young ruler’s understanding of who’s good. The rich young ruler will show his proud heart in the next verse or two.)
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.’ ” 21 And he said, “All these I have kept from my youth.”
(So Jesus begins his “evangelism” by using the commandments as the bible says “the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ” “..that their mouths may be stopped and the whole world would become guilty before God” and notice the rich young rulers response “I’ve keep them” of course he didn’t but he had a proud heart thinking he was good. God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble)
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.”
(So Jesus again points him to the essence of the 1st and 2nd commandments, this guys’ God was his riches)
23 But when he heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich.
(The ruler was still loving money over God and Jesus did not pursue it further. The mans heart was as proud as when the conversation started, no need to throw pearls before swine)
I think that this parable is a great example of how the law is used to prepare the heart of the unregenerate. You’re either proud and think you’re good or you recognize that you are a sinner and in need of salvation.