Maybe you’ve heard these points elsewhere before, but I find these little insights and nuggets of truth very helpful and Keller has a wonderfully engaging style of preaching that hits hard and hits home. It’s hard in the sense that he gets to the heart of the matter, no tiptoeing around the issue. And he doesn’t let you rationalise it away and you are convicted by it. Here’s the description of this episode:
“Jesus said an awful lot of hard things. And in the story of the rich young ruler, Jesus says two hard things: he says our understanding of riches and our understanding of moral goodness are wrong.The rich young ruler is not only rich, but he’s also a man of exquisite moral character. Yet, Jesus sends him away. Jesus turns our common notions about wealth and goodness on top of their heads and he gives us new ones—ones that are explosively in contradiction with what the world thinks, but ones that, if we obey them, have the power of God exploding in our midst.Let’s look at these two principles. Jesus tells us 1) something new about wealth and 2) something new about moral goodness."
Here's a summary of the key points, or at least my take on them.
Jesus rams home the point about how difficult it is for us to give up what we love in this life to follow him, and at the same time, emphasizes the hollowness of a 'moral life' without foundation. This young ruler, would be someone held in high regard in any era. He is successful and he is a 'good' man, a poster child for the ages. But Jesus uses this opportunity to say that wealth and moral goodness can be obstacles. The young man of upright character, feels that there is something missing. He has obeyed all the rules, the laws, the commandments and yet calls out to Jesus for help. Somehow he knew that that wasn't enough, that he could not be good enough. To his credit, it is a self-awareness that many do not possess. Most people (myself included at one time) probably think that being a 'good person' should be enough.
There are parallels between this episode and our modern world in which atheists talks about universal human rights, about non-religious moral goodness and increasingly we see that without a firm foundation in faith, they find that they have painted themselves into a corner. Nothing is rooted, everything is subjective. They say you can be whatever gender or sexual orientation you choose. And yet in defining it as such, nothing you choose has value or significance, but is simply a thought or preference. Feelings are everything. If that is true then there is no moral compass anyway because nothing can be wrong.
I had a conversation with someone recently about homosexuality and this person asked if I had ever asked a gay friend about their orientation. I said I had not because I think it is fraught with minefields. But I did say that while I believed that many of them truly believe they were 'made' differently, it is interesting if this was something that could be attributed to genetics (as many make the case for), or simply feelings or preference. Maybe they are truly different, and here I think it was useful to hear another argument (in a subsequent podcast by Keller's church) where the speaker (not Keller) said she also was attracted to women but chose not to follow her feelings.
And there is something to this argument. Sin is always tempting us - to lie, to cheat and sometimes even worse things, but we have free will to refuse, to reject sin and it is the same with sexual orientation. This is a useful point to make without getting into destructive debates and arguments about morality. It is simply what God has commanded, and we make this point carefully without saying that we are better people for following his commandments. We are not better, we are also sinners and are saved by grace. Jesus reminds us of this as well - the young man asks what else he has to 'do'. Jesus asks him why he called Jesus good and then drives home the point that no one is good except God.
One of the best parts of the sermon was when Keller points out something that I had overlooked before - hence the importance of always studying the Bible and reading carefully. Jesus said this young man's refusal to surrender everything was the stumbling block. The young man was told there was one thing he "lacked" - after all, he had done everything else required under the law. He was told to sell off everything he owned and give the proceeds to the poor. And to then follow Jesus.
The insight for me was that Keller points out that in this simple set of instructions, Jesus has essentially summarised his two main commandments. Love God, and love your neighbour. You see, I had always remembered only part of the story - where the young man is told to sell everything he owns and follow Jesus. But I had glossed over the part about giving to the poor, which is an important part of the instruction. How often do we hesitate to help anyone because we wonder what it would cost us? What else are we attached to that prevent us from really 'following' Jesus?
The last insight was something that only just caught my eye. Why did Jesus say it was something the young man 'lacked'? What was this thing he lacked?
Humility? The willingness to surrender everything?
I think it is actually faith. The young man had become successful through his own efforts - at least in his own mind. So his question is about what more can he do. Jesus tells him there is nothing more he can do (at least in the manner the young man is thinking of), and instead he is to give up the things that he was most attached to. And that requires faith.
