§46 Sayings on the Kingdom (Luke 18:15–34)
This section has three parts: (1) Jesus’ blessing of the children (vv. 15–17), (2) the rich leader and related sayings on possessions (vv. 18–30), and (3) Jesus’ third passion prediction (vv. 31–34). To a greater or lesser degree the theme of the kingdom underlies all three of these parts. In the blessing of the children Jesus states that the “kingdom of God belongs to such as these” (v. 16). After his encounter with the rich ruler, Jesus declares, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!” (v. 24). Finally, in Jesus’ pronouncing for the third time his impending passion, the reader would likely see a kingdom connotation here as well, since the glorious return of the Son of Man, at which time the kingdom of God is established in its fulness, can take place only after he has first suffered and been rejected (vv. 31–32; see 17:25).
With 18:15 the evangelist Luke has resumed following his text of the Gospel of Mark. All three parts of this section are taken from Mark, and in the Marcan order (Mark 10:13–16, 17–31, 32–34).
18:15–17 / With respect to the people who were also bringing babies to Jesus, Marshall (p. 682) suggests that “the background to the story appears to be the practice of bringing children to the elders for a prayer of blessing upon them on the evening of the Day of Atonement.” The disciples, however, rebuked the parents, no doubt because they viewed it as trivial and as a waste of Jesus’ time. But Jesus called the children to him. (Here Luke omits Jesus’ indignation directed at the disciples found in Mark 10:14.) Jesus’ saying in v. 16 would indicate that the sincerity and eagerness characteristic of children are what make children a fitting example of what (as implied in v. 17) one who hopes to enter the kingdom of God should be like. Adults, by way of contrast to children, tend to be self-assured, independent, and proud—all characteristics that hinder people from entering the kingdom.
18:18–30 / Following Mark, Luke narrates an account of Jesus’ encounter with a certain ruler (see note below) who inquires of Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life. (For comments on the meaning of v. 19 see note below; according to Matt. 19:20, 22 this “ruler” is a young man.) Jesus reminds him of the commandments and cites five of the Ten Commandments concerning proper behavior toward fellow human beings. (The list comes from Deut. 5:16–20 [see also Exod. 20:12–16], but not in the Deuteronomistic order.) Not included in the list of the commandments are the first four concerned with a person’s proper relationship to God (Exod. 20:3–11; Deut. 5:7–15). (Luke omits Mark’s “do not defraud” [Mark 10:19], probably because the evangelist recognized that it was really not one of the Ten Commandments, Matthew also omits it.) The ruler is able to reply that since his youth he has kept all these commandments. Jesus, however, discerns that what this person lacks is an undivided loyalty to God, for his wealth occupies a central place in his life. Jesus asks him to give away his wealth, not because having it is bad (nor does Jesus require everyone to give everything away), but because in this case the individual is more concerned with his wealth than he is with following Jesus or with obtaining eternal life. Although it does not explicitly say so, the passage suggests that the wealthy ruler had failed to keep the tenth commandment, the commandment not to covet (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). Because of his covetous attitude toward wealth, he had become guilty of violating the first and foremost commandment as well: “You shall have no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:3; Deut. 5:7, RSV). This person could not give up his wealth and follow Jesus (hence his sadness in v. 23). His reaction well illustrates Jesus’ pronouncement: “You cannot serve both God and Money” (Luke 16:13; see also Matt. 6:24).
Following this exchange Jesus utters three more pronouncements regarding the relation of wealth to the kingdom of God (vv. 24–25, 27, 29–30). The first saying in response to the inability of the rich ruler to comply with Jesus’ demand is: How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Although Jesus does not actually state that it is impossible for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God, his likening the difficulty to a camel, the largest beast of Palestine, trying to pass through the eye of a needle, the smallest opening, suggests that it is impossible (see Luke 6:24). This understanding clearly lies behind the question of v. 26: Who then can be saved? This question must be understood against the popular view that rich people are those people who have been favored and blessed of God. If rich people do not qualify for entry into the kingdom, then what hope is there for the rest of us? Jesus’ answer in v. 27 (his second pronouncement) makes it clear that whereas salvation is impossible for humans to achieve, it is possible with God. All people, whether rich or poor, are saved by God who is merciful, and not by themselves. Salvation is ultimately a matter of a gracious God who receives repentant sinners (see 18:9–14).
The third pronouncement of Jesus on wealth and salvation is in response to Peter’s reminder in v. 28 of his and the other disciples’ forsaking of their possessions to follow Jesus. Unlike the rich ruler, Jesus’ disciples were willing to leave behind all that they had. Jesus reassures Peter and the others that whatever is left behind for the sake of the kingdom of God (Mark 10:29 reads: “for me and the gospel”) will be paid back by a greater amount (Mark 10:30 reads: “a hundred times as much”) in this age and, in the age to come, eternal life. God is a debtor to no human. Luke has modified Mark probably because he wishes to avoid the idea that the disciples are motivated to follow Jesus because they hope for a material reward in this life.
18:31–34 / The first two passion predictions were uttered in Luke 9 (vv. 21–22, 43b–45), the chapter in which the journey to Jerusalem began (v. 51). Now that the journey is almost completed, the third passion prediction is uttered (though there were other utterances of pending trouble in the journey itself, see 12:50; 13:32–33; 17:25). In the Lucan version there is found a significant addition: everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. This reference, taken together with the statement of incomprehension in v. 34, clearly anticipates Luke 24:25–27, 44–46, where the uncomprehending disciples have the Scriptures explained to them by the risen Christ. For now, however, the disciples do not understand any of this. And it is not because they are dull of understanding (which is the impression with which one is left in the Marcan version); it is because its meaning was hidden from them. This understanding would be imparted to them after the resurrection of Jesus. It is in his rejection that the Scriptures will be fulfilled. But it is in his resurrection that there can be a hope for a coming kingdom of God.
18:15 / babies: For some strange reason Luke alters Mark’s “children” (Mark 10:13) to “babies,” although he retains “children” or “child” in vv. 16 and 17, respectively. Why he did so is hard to discern, though the word is a favorite (see 1:41, 44; 2:12, 16; Acts 7:19). Schweizer (p. 285) suggests that by saying “babies” Luke emphasizes their total dependency.
18:16 / do not hinder them: In Acts 8:36 (the baptism of the Ethiopian official) and 10:47 (the baptism of Cornelius and his household) the same expression is used in reference to baptism. For this reason and others it has been suggested that Jesus’ words in Luke 18:16 mean that infants should not be prevented from baptism. The context of this passage, however, has nothing to do with baptism (as is acknowledged by Fitzmyer, p. 1194). The whole point of the saying is in the way children “receive the kingdom” (an action of which an infant is scarcely capable), as an example for adults (see v. 17).
18:18 / A certain ruler: Fitzmyer (p. 1198) translates “magistrate” and notes that it is not at all clear that this person was a “religious leader.” It is most likely, however, that Luke has in mind either the leader of a synagogue or a member of the Sanhedrin (so Marshall, p. 684). Ellis’s reference (p. 217) to this person as a “churchman” is confusing. (This curious and anachronistic epithet occurs frequently in his commentary.) Even if many of the episodes are applied to situations in the church, reference to Pharisees and other Jewish non-disciples of Jesus as “churchmen” is not only anachronistic, it is misleading.
Good teacher: See note on 7:40 above. On what is meant by “good” see note on v. 19.
inherit eternal life: The ruler’s question probably encompasses both the hope of attaining to the resurrection of the righteous and inclusion in the kingdom of God.
18:19 / Why do you call me good?: This question has prompted numerous interpretations down through the centuries. Indeed, the earliest interpretation is Matthew’s in 19:17: “Why do you ask me about what is good?” A favorite interpretation among early church fathers is that Jesus wanted the man to stop and realize that in recognizing Jesus as “good” he was really ascribing deity to Jesus (since only God is truly good). Others have suggested that Jesus has rejected the compliment as cheap flattery. Another suggestion has been that Jesus actually acknowledged his sinfulness. To be preferred, however, is the approach that understands Jesus’ question as “directing the man’s attention to God and his will as the only prescription for pleasing him” (Fitzmyer, p. 1199; similarly Marshall, p. 684; Tiede, p. 311). Jesus’ answer implies nothing about himself.
No one is good—except God alone: This statement reaffirms a major OT teaching (see Pss. 34:8; 106:1; 1 Chron. 16:34). Jesus is not implying that he himself is not good, nor is he subtly hinting that he is good only because he is himself God.
18:20 / You know the commandments: When asked the same question in 10:25 Jesus gives a different answer (see 10:26–28). How to account for the differing ordering of the commandments is not easy. Matthew follows Mark, but Luke reverses murder and adultery; while all three Synoptic Gospels differ from the order found in the OT.
18:21 / since I was a boy: The rich ruler claims to have observed the commandments faithfully since he had come of legal age (Fitzmyer, p. 1200). However, the real significance of the laws of the OT was not always grasped (see Matt. 5:21–48 for several examples).
18:22 / Matt. 19:21 begins Jesus’ response by adding the qualifying clause, “If you want to be perfect” (see Gundry, p. 388), a statement that contributes to the Matthean concern to fulfill the true righteous standards of the law (see Matt. 5:20, 48).
treasure in heaven: In addition to eternal life, one who follows Jesus will lay up treasure in heaven through obedience, particularly in giving to others in need (see 12:33).
18:23–25 / Luke omits Mark’s mention (10:22–23) of the young man’s departure, thereby creating the impression that Jesus’ comments about the difficulty of the rich entering the kingdom of God were heard by this person, as well as by his disciples.
18:24 / to enter the kingdom of God: This comment, coming where it does, suggests that receiving eternal life (v. 18) equals, or at least involves, entrance into the kingdom.
18:25 / Jesus’ exaggerated comparison makes sense only if his reference to camel and needle is taken literally. The suggestion that camel should be translated “rope” (with great difficulty a rope threads a needle) is farfetched. Moreover, the popular view that Jesus made reference to a “Needle Gate” in the wall of Jerusalem through which a camel passes with difficulty (on its knees and only after unloading its burdens!) is utterly unfounded (but popular with tourists and locals in Jerusalem). Lachs (p. 331) cites a rabbinic saying about the difficulty of “an elephant passing through a needle’s eye” (b. Berakoth 55b) a saying which Fitzmyer (p. 1204) suspects is based on the Gospels.
18:29 / Luke has added or wife. Leaney (p. 237) wonders if the evangelist has in mind the Apostle Paul, who apparently had no wife (1 Cor. 7:8; 9:5).
18:31 / the Twelve: See commentary and notes on 6:12–16 above.
Son of Man: See note on 5:24 above.