Chapter # 10 Paragraph # 3 Study # 3
August 29, 2023
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(425)
Thesis: Self-righteousness is often "validated" by how one perceives how the "justice of the universe" has played out in the life of the self-righteous.
Introduction: In our studies to date in this paragraph have focused upon Mark's use of the record of the rich man who asked Jesus what he had to
do to inherit eternal life. It is interesting to me that many of those who comment upon this record end up saying that, in fact, there is something one has to "do". It should go without saying that Mark's point in the text is to establish that there is nothing one
can "do", i.e., that the whole point of the record is that human capacity is ruled out altogether by Jesus. This means this: man has absolutely
nothing he can "do" to qualify himself for participation in the Kingdom. First, he cannot bring himself to embrace the Love of God as his guiding "value system". Second, he cannot bring himself to "believe" the Truth of God to be his "faith system". And, third, he cannot even grasp the issues involved. Even those who are most adament about how it must be the Grace of God which brings us into the Kingdom, end up telling us that
we must "do something".
This evening we are going to look again into Mark's presentation of the attitude that prevents men from being able to participate in the Kingdom of God.
- I. Round Two: The Attitude That Prevents Entrance Into The Kingdom Of The God.
- A. The initial indicators of this "attitude".
- B. The first words out of his mouth were "Good Teacher".
- C. The "burning question" that appeared to be reason for the "running" and "kneeling".
- D. Jesus' "cryptic" answer.
- 1. Was not "directly" that answer. Jesus was not interested in a superficial level of "verbal accuracy" to what is, for men, the most necessary "question".
- a. Jesus was interested in getting the man to the point where he could "inherit eternal life": 10:21.
- b. Jesus knew the true motivation: it was not "to inherit eternal life" in its true sense; it was to lay a foundation for self-exaltation as Paul insisted was the true motivation of that generation of "Jews" in Romans 10:3 ("...to establish their own righteousness...").
- 1) This is an example of the extraordinary wickedness of the human heart which thinks that it is capable of achieving a "standing" before God, rooted in human "obediences", that will allow that person to boast of his/her self-qualification for God's Kingdom's blessings.
- 2) This is the root of all legal heresy: salvation is for the "obedient".
- 2. Was to establish the issue of inheriting eternal life.
- a. As long as the "question" is about how to "inherit eternal life so that others may see and agree that 'I have earned it' ", there is no legitimate answer.
- 1) Eternal Life, in this wrong-headed question, is defined in terms of "the recognition by others of my accomplishment(s): Eternal Life is basking in the approval of others".
- 2) Since that is not the correct definition, there is no legitimate way to turn it into a legitimate question.
- b. This "issue" is an issue of "definition".
- 1) In John 17:3, Jesus gave a particular kind of "definition": it was not a "root" definition; it was a "mechanism" definition.
- a) Eternal Life is not, at root, "knowing God" because "knowing God" is a "process", not an "end".
- b) Eternal Life is, at root, the outcome of "knowing God"; it is the experience of the soul that arises out of the intimacy of the relationship that consists of experiencing God. As an "outcome" it cannot be a "process". This is like unto Paul's explanation of "repentance" as he gave it in 2 Corinthians 7:10: "...the sorrow that is according to God produces a repentance without regret unto salvation..." The repentance is not the sorrow; the sorrow is the "process" and "repentance" is the result.
- 2) The bottom line of this "issue" is also an issue of "belief".
- a) At this point there is a "textual issue" which is pretty much irresolvable from the "external sources" position: the "reading" is here given a "C" rating, but it omits the reading of the Authorized Version (which is just as likely to be the correct text).
- b) This "reading" contains the words, "for those that trust in riches".
- i. Whether the actual text of Mark contains this phrase, or not, the issue is clearly here.
- ii. This "clarity" exists in the fact that the words of Jesus that are unquestioned contain a major contradiction to the typical thoughts of the general public: the disciples are "amazed" at His declaration that it is very difficult for the "rich" to enter the Kingdom of God, and when Jesus doubles down upon on the reality of this difficulty, the disciples are "even more astonished", and, finally, Jesus admits that there is a significant "impossibility" that requires special divine action to overcome.
- iii. The question, here, is "What was the basic underlying assumption of the general public?" That assumption was rooted in the legalism of the Jews who attached "divine favor" to "human qualification". This can easily become a quagmire, but the bottom line is that men are strangled by their lust for approval on the basis of their performance. "Trusting" in one's wealth is, ultimately, "believing" that God has validated His acceptance of the "performer" by enabling him/her to acquire wealth. The wealth is his/her "proof" of the validity of divine pleasure. This misguided "trust" was woven into the fabric of Legal Theology. Note how quickly the disciples jump on the "we have sacrificed our wealth" train.
