The Rich Young Ruler

The incident in which the Rich Young Ruler asked Jesus what he must do to gain eternal life is familiar to many Bible readers. (Matthew 19:16-30; Mark 10:17-31; Luke 18:18-30)  None of the gospel writers explains exactly who the young man was and none tell what became of him after he left the encounter with Jesus.

1.     He was a Jew because he declares that he knows the Commandments and has kept them all.

2.     He was a young man, probably in his twenties or thirties.  Neaniskos νεανίσκος (“young man”)

3.     The man is described as very wealthy.  The words sphodra σφόδρα  (“great,” “much”) and plousios πλούσιος (“rich,” “wealthy”) are used.

4.     He was either a Pharisee or a follower of the Pharisee party.  The Sadducees did not believe in life after death.

5.     He is said to have been an archon ἄρχων (“leader,” “official,” “administrator”).  This may imply that he was a member of the Sanhedrin.

6.     He was not a hypocrite; he observed all the commandments.  He really wanted to know how to gain eternal life.  He did not like the answer he received.

The young man had a works-based idea of salvation, “what must I do … ?”  and Jesus knew it.   Jesus gave the man a task which he could have performed.  The task pointed out the one stumbling block for the man: his refusal to give up his control of his own life, his refusal to submit to God.   He loved his position and his power more than he loved Jesus.  He worshipped a different god.  (Exodus 20:3)

Several comments with varying insights and viewpoints on the Rich Young Ruler.

http://www.jesuswalk.com/lessons/18_18-23.htm

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/matt19.htm

http://thegourd.blogspot.com/2009/07/story-of-rich-young-ruler.html

http://www.whatsbestnext.com/2011/09/why-did-jesus-tell-the-rich-young-ruler-to-sell-all-that-he-had/

Paul Defuses a Dangerous Situation

In a follow-up to yesterday's post, here is how Paul defused the highly dangerous (for him) situation which was developing within the Sanhedrin.  The members of the council were becoming increasingly agitated at him, so he changed the subject, applying the tactic of "misdirection."  He reminded them of one of their recurring arguments.  In effect, he "pushed their buttons," and set them off.

"Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.”  At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.  Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit there to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck!”  

Those who were standing near Paul said, “You dare to insult God’s high priest?”

Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’”

Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, “My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection of the dead.”  When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided.  (The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all.)

 There was a great uproar, and some of the teachers of the law who were Pharisees stood up and argued vigorously. “We find nothing wrong with this man,” they said. “What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?”   The dispute became so violent that the commander was afraid Paul would be torn to pieces by them. He ordered the troops to go down and take him away from them by force and bring him into the barracks.

  The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, “Take courage! As you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome.” (Acts 23:1-11)."

Heresies

The word "heresy" has a broader origin than its modern, more restrictive, usage.  The word is derived from the Greek word "αἵρεσις, from the verb, αἵρεω" and, in English, means "to choose."


In the Bible, the word is used in two ways.


1. For a sect or faction which in some way may or may not depart from orthodox doctrine.  In this sense it was used in reference to the Sadducees (Acts 5:17), the Pharisees (Acts 26:5), and the Nazarenes (Acts 24:5).


2. A doctrine or group considered to be definitely outside of correct doctrine.  The Jews considered Christianity to be a heresy.  In the third quotation below, Peter uses the word in the modern sense.

“But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy (αἵρεσιν), so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:” Acts 24:14

“But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect (αἱρέσεως), we know that every where it is spoken against.”  Acts 28:22

“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies (αἱρέσεις), even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.”  2 Peter 2:1 


A new feature on this blog will define heresies which have been identified over the years within the Christian community.  Not all may seem like heresies to the reader and some may not actually be heterodox.  Many are very subtle but vary enough from orthodox doctrine to be at least "troubling."

Some are very reluctant to label anyone as a heretic.  Others have no problem at all.  How aberrant must a doctrine be before it can no longer be called Christian?  Can a person holding an aberrant belief be saved?  What about beliefs once held to be aberrant but now accepted as orthodox?

Some doctrinal points, such as the deity of Christ, are non-negotiable for Christians.  Others, we may have to wait until we can ask Jesus face-to-face.