The rich young man

A Catholic commenter said:

What Jesus proposes to the rich young man is not a hypothetical way of salvation which no one can actually achieve. Following the conversation, St. Peter asks (v. 27), "Behold, we have left everything and followed you. [I.e., we have done precisely what You just told the rich young man he must do in order to have eternal life.] What then shall we have?" Jesus tells him they will have eternal life. If the Apostles took this road to salvation, it is possible for men.

Jesus tells the rich young man, do X, and you will have eternal life. St. Peter says, we have done X, what will there be for us? Jesus answers, eternal life. It's not impossible. St. Anthony of Egypt did it, St. Francis of Assisi did it. Young men and women are still doing it today.

1. I'll try to collate and summarize the rich young man episode from the Synoptic Gospels in Matt 19:16-30, Mark 10:17-31, and Luke 18:18-30. I think the episode can be subdivided into at least two parts: Jesus' conversation with the rich young man and Jesus' conversation with his disciples after the rich young man has left.

1. Jesus' conversation with the rich young man:
   
   
   1. Matt 19:16 transcribes the rich young man's opening question to Jesus as, "Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?"
      
      
   2. Jesus' first response is a question, "Why do you ask me about what is good?", which he immediately follows with the response, "There is only one who is good." Whereas in Mark and Luke not only does the rich young man call Jesus good ("Good Teacher"), but Jesus responds with, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone."
      
      
   3. Jesus tells the rich young man if he wants to enter into eternal life, then he must keep the commandments. The rich young man asks Jesus which ones.
      
      
   4. Jesus probes a bit further by citing five of the commandments from (the second half of) the Decalogue as well as what Jesus later in Matt 22:39 calls "the second" great commandment in "you shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matt 19:19). The rich young man responds he has kept all these commandments from his youth.
      
      
   5. Jesus tells the rich young man he lacks one thing: he needs to sell all he has, give to the poor, and follow Jesus.
      
      
   6. As we know, the rich young man could not do it and left "very sad."
2. Jesus' conversation with his disciples after the rich young man has left:
   
   
   1. After the rich young man's departure, Jesus takes the opportunity to teach his disciples. He starts by telling his disciples it's only with great difficulty that the rich enter the kingdom of heaven. In fact, Jesus tells them it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven.
      
      
   2. The disciples are "greatly astonished" at what Jesus says. They respond by asking who then can be saved.
      
      
   3. Jesus replies, "What is impossible with man is possible with God" (Luke 18:27).
      
      
   4. At this point Peter chimes in. Peter points out he and the other disciples have left "everything" to follow Jesus.
      
      
   5. Jesus states those who have left "everything" to follow him ("for my sake and for the gospel," Mark 10:29) will receive a lot more in terms of familial relationships as well as "persecutions" (Mark 10:3) in this current life, and in the age to come "eternal life." Matthew adds they will "sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" at "the renewal of all things" (Matt 19:28).
      
      
   6. Finally, Jesus concludes saying, "But many who are first will be last, and the last first" (Matt 19:30, Mark 10:31).

2. My thoughts on the passage.

1. Jesus' conversation with the rich young man:
   
   
   1. Although I don't see the text specifically saying it, I think it's reasonable to presume the rich young man was Jewish. However this is a relatively minor point in that what I'll now say doesn't depend in any great part on whether or not he was Jewish, I don't think. I only think it's relevant primarily because of the way Jesus converses with and questions the rich young man and some of the assumptions the reader or audience would have.
      
      
   2. The rich young man was also a rich young ruler, which is a detail added by Luke in Luke 18:18. As a rich young ruler, he had wealth, youth which is often tied with strength and health, and power. He had everything almost anyone else would want.
      
      
   3. The rich young man begins the conversation with Jesus on the assumption that he can inherit or obtain eternal life by doing some good deed: "Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" (Luke 18:18).
      
      
   4. Jesus responds by calling into question (at a minimum) the rich young man's idea of goodness. "Why do you ask me about what is good?" and "Why do you call me good?"
      
      
   5. Right after Jesus says only God is good and right before he lists several commandments, the rich young man queries which commandments he needs to keep in order to obtain eternal life (Matt 19:18). But rather than ask which commandments he needs to keep, it would seem more reasonable for the rich young man, confronted with the statement that only God is good, instead to confess he has broken at least a commandment. But, of course, he doesn't.
      
      
   6. Next Jesus cites commandments dealing with one's neighbor. Jesus sums up neighbor-love in Matt 19:19 with "you shall love your neighbor as yourself." Jesus could have cited other commandments in the Bible. Why doesn't he? After all, it's not as if Jesus is suggesting the rich young man could still inherit or obtain eternal life without obeying the first five commandments of the Decalogue. As we shall later see, I think it's because Jesus wants to hone in on the rich young man's specific sin.
      
      
   7. The rich young man responds he has kept all these commandments from his youth, thereby indicating he believes he has loved his neighbor since his youth.
      
      
   8. Jesus challenges the rich young man to truly love his neighbor. How so? If the rich young man has truly loved and loves his neighbor, then he should sell all his possessions, give to his most destitute neighbors i.e. the poor, and follow Jesus.
      
      
   9. Since the rich young man can't do it, it's evident he doesn't truly love his neighbor in the way God would require.
      
      
   10. This in turn feeds into Jesus' original challenge to the rich young man's idea of goodness. The rich young man began the conversation with Jesus on the assumption that he could inherit or obtain eternal life by doing some good deed. Now it's evident the rich young man couldn't perform the "one thing" or the single good deed which Jesus called him to perform. He wasn't "good" enough. Indeed, as Jesus pointed out to the rich young man, "No one is good except God alone."
2. Jesus' conversation with his disciples after the rich young man has left:
   
   
   1. After the rich young man's departure, Jesus elucidates more lessons for his disciples to learn from the rich young man.
      
      
   2. Jesus explains not only is no one "good" enough to enter the kingdom of heaven, but people who are rich have a more difficult time entering. Hence the absurdly comical picture of a camel attempting to squeeze through the eye of a needle. I suppose this is because the poor have less to lose than the rich in terms of material wealth, and if it was true then as is true now that those in lower socioeconomic circumstances tend to be less healthy then health would apply as well, and power or position or status in society too. Plus the rich often have attendant luxuries and other comforts. In short, the poor would have less to lose in this world by following Jesus than would the rich. (Or those who think they are rich in some manner, which could include the objectively impoverished.)
      
      
   3. As I understand it, unlike modern America under Obama with its class warfare (e.g. the Occupy Wall Street movement with the 99% vs. the 1%), the rich were looked up to in 1st century Israel.
      
      For one thing, the rich had more to give in the service of God, and giving to God had become regarded as a sign of piety (e.g. "corban" in Mark 7).
      
      For another, the rich were generally better educated than the poor, which in 1st century Israel would've included education in the Bible.
      
      So perhaps the disciples' surprise at Jesus' comment that it's difficult for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven reflects this background. The disciples are in effect saying to themselves, if the rich who know the Bible better than we do and who have more with which to serve God can't be saved, then who can?
      
      
   4. Jesus replies, "What is impossible with man is possible with God" (Luke 18:27). In context, it seems Jesus is saying it's impossible for the rich young man to give up his wealth, give to the poor, and follow Jesus without God making it possible for him to do so. The rich young man loved his riches too much. This inordinate love for riches was a root sin for him.
      
      More broadly, it seems Jesus is saying it's impossible for those who are rich - who know their Bibles better and who already appear to be more pious if piety is measured in terms of giving one's wealth to God - to follow Jesus without God making it possible for them to do so.
      
      And most broadly, it seems Jesus is saying it's impossible not only for the rich but even the poor, that is anyone and everyone, to follow Jesus without God making it possible for them to do so.
      
      In other words, it's impossible to follow Jesus without God making it possible for people to do so, because our hearts are too attached to sin. This could be an inordinate love for riches. Or it could be many other idolatries. Anything which unseats God from his rightful throne on our hearts.
      
      
   5. If all this is true, since Peter says he and the other disciples have left everything to follow Jesus, it would imply God made it possible for them to follow Jesus.
      
      
   6. When Jesus speaks of receiving much more in this life, I think he's referring to fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
      
      Jesus also notes Christians will receive "persecutions," but in the end he likewise promises his disciples eternal life. All this is consonant with what the rest of Matthew teaches, what the other Synoptics teach, and what the rest of the New Testament teaches (e.g. Heb 11). As well it is consonant with Jesus' life which ended with his crucifixion and then resurrection.
      
      
   7. In his statement that the "first will be last, and the last first," Jesus pronounces how all things will be turned upside down or rather right side up in the last day. The rich will be poor and the poor will be rich (i.e. metaphorically speaking, those who think they are "rich" and have no need of God à la the church of Laodicea in Rev 3:14-22, and those whom God has opened their eyes to see their spiritual poverty and their dire need for Christ to clothe them with his robes of righteousness and cover them with his blood). The lofty will be lowly and the lowly will be lofty. The high and mighty will be humbled, the low and weak exalted. The promises of the Beautitudes will be fulfilled. And so on and so forth.
      
      
   8. With the disciples sitting on twelve thrones and judging the twelve tribes of Israel, I could easily be wrong but I suspect this is another role reversal. Those whom this world judged and persecuted and sometimes executed will themselves judge those who judged them. I don't know if this is literally true or if it's meant more figuratively though.
      
      
   9. Jesus goes on to explain the first-last idea in a bit more detail in the following section (Matt 20:1-16) with the parable of the laborers in the vineyard.

3. Of course, I'm sure others including the other Triabloggers can give far better commentary than I can.

4. Not to mention those interested could consult standard commentaries from the likes of Craig Blomberg, Darrell Bock, D.A. Carson, R.T. France, Leon Morris, Robert Stein, etc. I don't currently have these commentaries in my possession so couldn't make use of them.

5. On a side note, I found what MLJ did laudable.