Bible Study series: Mark 10:17-31. What will Jesus say to the rich man? Did his love for wealth hold him back?
Friendly greetings and a warm welcome to this Bible study! I write to learn, so let’s learn together how to apply these truths to our lives.
I also translate to learn. The translations are mine, unless otherwise noted. If you would like to see many others, please click here:
If you would like to see the original Greek, please click here:
At that link, I also offer more commentary and a Summary and Conclusion, geared towards discipleship. Scroll down to the bottom and check it out!
Let’s begin.
Scripture: Mark 10:17-31
17 While he was going along the road, one man ran up, kneeled before him, and asked, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 18 Jesus told him, “Why do you say, ‘Good?’ No one is good except one—God. 19 You know the commandments:
Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not defraud, honor your father and mother.” [Exod. 20:12-16; Deut. 5:16-20]
20 He told him, “Teacher, I myself have kept all these things from my youth.” 21 Jesus, looking at him intently, loved him and told him, “One thing you are in need of: Whatever you have, sell it and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” 22 He was shocked at this message and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.
23 Then Jesus, looking around, said to his disciples, “With what difficulty will those having possession enter the kingdom of God!” 24 His disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus again responded and said to them, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of heaven. 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a sewing needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” 26 They were astonished even more, saying to each other, “Who then can be saved?” 27 Jesus, looking intently at them, said, “With people it is impossible, but not with God, for all things are possible with God.” 28 Peter began to say to him, “See, we have left everything and followed you.” 29 Jesus said, “I tell you the truth: There is no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields because of me and because of the good news 30 and who would not receive a hundredfold now in this age–homes and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and fields with persecutions, and in the coming age, life eternal. 31 Many who are first shall be last, and the last first.” (Mark 10:17-31)
Comments:
Have you ever met a missionary or seen his story online or in church who has given up everything to follow Jesus and spread the good news (v. 29)? This pericope is about him. If you choose to stay at home and maintain your wealth, in order to be salt and light in affluent society, to be missionaries of a different kind, then please be generous in your support of the work of the gospel abroad—in the work of someone who has given up all his human comforts for Jesus.
17-18:
Matthew and Luke have parallel passages: Matt. 19:16-30 and Luke 18:18-30. Matthew calls him young and Luke says he is a rich ruler.
It was undignified for a man to run in the Middle East, and kneeling before Jesus may indicate flattery and obsequiousness that was excessive. This may explain why Jesus did not accept his flattering address “good teacher” at first (Wessel and Strauss’s comment on v. 17).
Mark and Luke say, “Good teacher.” And Jesus tells the man that only God is good. This cannot be the logic: Only God is good. Jesus is not God. Therefore, Jesus is not good. In Matt. 19:16-22, Matthew clarifies what is meant: “Teacher, what good thing shall I do to inherit eternal life.” The man is asking what is good, and how does he use it to enter the kingdom of heaven. So in Matthew’s version the good thing that the man is asking for is human activity, and this can only be applied, in an absolute sense, to God. Jesus is rebuking the man for careless theological language; he is reminding him that the best efforts of human activity are inadequate for God’s salvation (= entering or inheriting eternal life).
I prefer Matthew’s version, but if this does not satisfy the reader, then here is the Lucan-oriented explanation.
On the ruler calling Jesus good and Jesus questioning the man’s adjective good, there are three possible explanations: (1) Jesus was merely deflecting flattery. Perhaps Jesus perceived in him too much eagerness and wanted to bring him back down to earth. The man did not know what he was talking about, so why receive a compliment from him? (2) Alternatively, Jesus may have been pointing him towards God and the ruler’s need to totally rely on God. (3) He may have been calling on the ruler to recognize that God alone is good—the one standing before him!
Whatever the case, we shouldn’t draw the conclusion that Jesus is not good, nor did he intend to say this! Note that Jesus called an obedient servant “good servant” (Luke 19:17). So he is not opposed to acknowledging goodness in people. In this special case, however, he had to make sure this ruler knew what he was talking about. He was rebuking any flattery and theological fuzziness. Good human activity is not enough for God’s salvation
Personally, I like the first explanation. Jesus was deflecting the ruler’s flattery and empty words. But you can choose the other options, if you like. A fourth option taken by apologists is that Jesus was indirectly claiming he is God.
Strauss on v. 18: “Jesus nullifies the man’s assertion about his own goodness before he has made it and sets up the conclusion that no one can merit God’s salvation (v. 27). As in the case of the Syrophoenician woman, Jesus’ apparently naïve answer (7:27) is intended to provoke deeper thought and response.”
“inherit”: our lives down here in this age is a partial payment for our future inheritance in the age to come (v. 30).
“eternal life”: “eternal” is the adjective aiōnios (pronounced eye-oh-nee-oss and used 71 times). Please see more at this link:
What Do Words ‘Eternity,’ ‘Eternal’ Fully Mean in the Bible?
And therefore, based on the first definition, an equally valid translation is “next-age life.” In other words, the ruler was concerned about entering into the next age that God would soon usher in. He may have even believed that Jesus was in the process of ushering it in. Surely he had heard about John the Baptist; everyone else did. This man may have even been eager to be baptized by John, as seen by his eagerly running up to Jesus (Mark 10:17), though that Is speculation. He was aware of new religious movements, or else he would never have approached Jesus. The point is that he wanted to be ready for the next age.
For the noun aiōn, go to v. 30 and see the comments.
Now let’s look at the noun life more closely. It is very versatile.
I believe the man really means in his context “life in the age to come” (v. 28), which in God will last forever—only in God, not by virtue of our having a soul.
19:
Jesus quotes the second table of the Ten Commandments, which deal with a person’s relations with another person. Jesus may have used “defraud” to mean “covet.” Defrauding seems to be one outworking of coveting. In fact, the man uses them in v. 20. Those commandments accurately summarize the conventional Jewish definition of good behavior. And sure enough, it is not so hard to keep them, if you think about it. How many of us have stolen articles (let’s not mention time at work!)? It’s possible not to steal objects, particularly if you’re rich. Very few have murdered. Very few have borne false witness in a law court. Some people—though not everyone—get along really well with their parents, so it is easy to honor them. Paul said that in his old religion of Judaism he was blameless under the law (Phil. 3:4-6). The rich man said the same. It is likely a truthful self-assessment.
Another take on defraud, which is not in the Ten Commandments. Jesus is alluding to a prophetic passage in Malachi 3:5, as follows:
5 “So I will come to put you on trial. I will be quick to testify against sorcerers, adulterers and perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages, who oppress the widows and the fatherless, and deprive the foreigners among you of justice, but do not fear me,” says the Lord Almighty. (Mal. 3:5, NIV)
Jesus may have know prophetically that the inquiring man may have gotten rich because he defrauded the poor. The economy was different back then, built on agriculture or landownership. Here is a commandment against fraud:
13 “‘Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.
“‘Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight. (Lev. 19:13, NIV)
OT prophets also quoted various commandments and mixed and matched them. Jesus was simply following prophetic tradition. He never intended to limit his words to the Ten Commandments, but to general commandments, a generic term in Greek.
Later on, Jesus, after he ascended, will direct his church to draw a sharp distinction between righteousness that comes by law keeping—practical principles—and righteousness that come by faith in him—a living person. How did Paul in his old life know he was keeping faith in God? By his law keeping. How does he know this after his conversion to Jesus? By his faith in the Messiah, Jesus himself. The difference is huge. One is guided by the law, while the other is guided by a living person.
However, let’s not overlook the fact that Paul wrote that a man who behaves impurely cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10). So the bottom line is that there is no contradiction between Jesus and Paul. Jesus constantly talks about entering the kingdom and then living righteously inside it. Paul constantly talks about entering the kingdom by confessing Jesus as Lord for salvation and then living righteously inside it. Paul would definitely agree that the man should follow Jesus, because to follow Jesus is to proclaim to be Lord by demonstrating allegiance to him. That’s what Paul did. Never overlook the fact that right behavior is important to God and demonstrates surrender to him and his kingdom.
What Does the New Covenant Retain from the Old?
Do Christians Have to ‘Keep’ the Ten Commandments?
Ten Commandments: God’s Great Compromise with Humanity’s Big Failure
One Decisive Difference Between Sinai Covenant and New Covenant
20:
Mark uses the middle voice of “kept,” as if the man says, “I myself have kept” (Decker). I believe he may have too much pride in his own abilities. But this is not the real message; rather, the message is his possessions having him more than his having the possessions.
21:
Jesus looked intently at him. He saw something in him which he loved. Jesus give him a list of four imperatives, but they form one imperative to give up one’s life completely to God. Deeper discipleship involves dying to oneself taking up your cross and following Jesus (8:34; 1:17-18, 20; 2:14). “The implication is that the man’s wealth was his first love and was keeping him from fulfilling the greatest commandment: to love God with heart, soul, mind and strength. He loved his riches more than he loved God and was trusting in them instead of in God” (Strauss).
“loved him”: it may include the fact that Jesus gave him a hug of some sort (Lane).
Let’s look at love more closely.
It is the verb agapaō (pronounced ah-gah-pah-oh). BDAG, a thick Greek lexicon, says that the verb means, depending on the context: (1) “to have a warm regard for and interest in another, cherish, have affection for, love”; (2) “to have high esteem for or satisfaction with something, take pleasure in; (3) “to practice / express love, prove one’s love.” In most instances this kind love in Scripture is not gooey feelings, though it can be a heart-felt virtue and emotion, as we see in the first definition. Rather, mostly love is expressed by action. If you have no gooey feelings for your enemy, do something practical for him.
Both the noun agapē (pronounced ah-gah-pay) and the verb mean a total commitment. For example, God is totally committed to his church and to the salvation of humankind. Surprisingly, however, total commitment can be seen in an unusual verse. Men loved darkness rather than light (John 3:19), which just means they are totally committed to the dark path of life. Are we willing to be totally committed to God and to live in his light? Can we match an unbeliever’s commitment to bad things with our commitment to good things?
Agapē and agapaō are demonstrative. This love is not static or still. It moves and acts. We receive it, and then we show it with kind acts and good deeds. It is not an abstraction or a concept. It is real.
It is transferrable. God can pour and lavish it on us. And now we can transfer it to our fellow believers and people caught in the world.
Riches are not about big mansions in heaven but eternal life in relationship with God (Strauss). Laying up treasure in heaven recalls Jesus words in Matt. 6:19-21; cf. Luke 12:33-34. We must have an eternal perspective. Don’t get swept up in hyper-prosperity of certain church leaders. Having a good job to pay the bills and raise a family is wonderful, but living lavishly on the donations of Joe Factoryworker and Jane Shopkeeper, as these TV preachers do, is questionable. I urge all of them to downsize and get rid of their luxury items and prepare for the eternal kingdom.
I really like Lane’s balanced interpretation of vv. 20-21:
The specific form of the sacrifice Jesus demanded of this man is not to be regarded as a general prescription to be applied to all men, nor yet as a demand for an expression of piety that goes beyond the requirements of the Law. The command to sell his property and to distribute the proceeds to the poor was appropriate to this particular situation. The subsequent reduction of poverty and helplessness would dramatize the fact that the man is helpless in his quest for eternal life, which must be bestowed as the gift of God. Scribal legislation prohibited the giving away of all one’s possessions precisely because it would reduce a man to poverty. Nevertheless, Jesus’ call for resolute sacrifice in order to do the will of God does not exceed that which the Law requires nor that which he himself had voluntarily assumed. The assurance of “treasure in heaven” reflects an idiom that was current in Judaism, which allowed Jesus to enter the thought-world of his contemporaries. Here, however, it is stripped of its customary associations of merit (as if selling one’s property and giving money received to the poor will earn a significant reward), since the promised treasure signifies the gift of eternal life or salvation at the revelation of the Kingdom of God.
Wow. That is very eloquent, and basically Lane is saying that we cannot earn our way into the kingdom of God by giving away our money; the Law or Torah did not allow such extremes, unless it is voluntary. Think again of the missionaries who have given up everything for the gospel and for Jesus. And even in giving up everything the kingdom has to be bestowed. One does not merit it by self-sacrifice.
22:
The man was not ready for it. He did not want undivided loyalty and full-hearted obedience. It was required of him to sell everything he had and give it to the poor.
“shocked”: BDAG says of the Greek word I translated as “shocked” means: (1) “to be in shock of intense things, be shocked, appalled”; (2) “to have a dark or gloomy appearance, be or become dark or gloomy.” It can even be used of a dark and gloomy sky. The rich man did not like the reply.
The man was possessed by possessions. They crowded out God in his heart. The whole context of this command to him is the life in this age contrasted with life in the age to come. To enter the life in the age to come, he had to sell his possession and distribute them to the poor. This was a radical call to discipleship. After the resurrection and ascension, Paul acknowledges that rich Christians lived in the churches (1 Tim. 6:17-19). He told Timothy to remind the Christian rich that they should not be haughty nor set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches—it is here today and gone tomorrow. But they must do good, to be rich in good works and be generous and ready to share. In doing that, they will store up a treasure for the future. In that very same chapter he also said the love of money is the root of all evil (v. 10). We should be content with food and clothing.
Further, during Jesus ministry on earth, the women mentioned in Luke 8:3 supported Jesus and his ministry by their resources. He never told them to sell everything they had and give to the poor. They had to remain wealthy or have a steady flow of money, if they were to support him. So Jesus saw that possessions did not possess the women, while possessions did possess the ruler.
So what about the ruler? Something was missing in his heart that he had filled up with money. It needed to go. If he had followed the command personalized for him and his deep need, he would have treasure in heaven. He was unwilling. He left sad.
Wealth and political power often went hand in glove, in the ancient world. To give up wealth meant to give up power and influence. He would have become a laughingstock to his fellow rulers, if they had come across him traveling with the itinerant preacher named Jesus of Nazareth. Too undignified. The ruler felt this connection and walked away sad. He was hoping for an easier way, to hear these words. “Yes, you kept those commandments, so now go in peace, and keep on allowing possessions to maintain their grip on you, to possess you. You’ll inherit life in the age to come and right now!” That makes no sense, from the kingdom’s perspective.
23:
Jesus confirms what the problem was in the man. His many possession held him down. As the gospel went out into the provinces, rich people did convert, so God did perform the impossible.
24:
His disciples respond with amazement. Apparently, they still had in mind the powerful earth-bound kingdom, where the rich ruled. But then in v. 26 they will speak among themselves about salvation. Do they mean conversion or being born again, or do they mean entering the kingdom, as Jesus does here? Apparently it was entering the kingdom. Paul said that through many hardships we enter the kingdom (Acts 14:22). One of the hardship surely be giving up the tings that hold you back, both entering the kingdom now to follow Jesus and entering the kingdom of the future. That is, if we want to be assured that we are ready for the future and complete manifestation of the kingdom, we will have to give up somethings now.
“children”: In Greek, this word appears only here in Mark in a context like this and is affectionate. I also believe that Jesus is offering the disciples wise counsel to his sons (Prov. 1:8, 10; 2:1 and so on). But it does give Jesus an air of proper authority. He is the teacher, and they are his students.
25:
Jesus repeats himself with a perfect metaphor: a camel going through the eye of a sewing needle. It’s easier for that to happen that for a rich guy entering the kingdom.
This is a general statement, which as we already saw in v. 22, allows for exceptions. We should not interpret the statement as an iron law without even one exception. The statement warns us that we have to be vigilant about wealth cause us to lose our own soul (Mark 8:36-37).
“eye of a sewing needle”: no one has ever confirmed the idea that the eye of a needle was the opening to a tent or a small opening into a city. The eye of the needle is a sewing needle, not a gate into Jerusalem, a legend that emerged in the Middle Ages. This gate did not exist at the time when Jesus spoke those words. A loaded down camel could not fit into either opening. Instead, the best explanation is the plainest one: it is a hyperbole (a deliberate, rhetorical exaggeration to impact the listener). The camel was the largest land animal in Israel at that time. It is a silly image to hit the listeners right between the eyes.
Entering the kingdom is the same as salvation in Paul’s writing. Jesus used the phrase several times (13:24 [narrow door]; 18:17, 24-25); Both Paul and Jesus preached repentance, surrender, and the Lordship of Jesus—yes, Jesus told people to follow himself as Lord. Jesus and Paul used different words, but the reality is the same. The resurrected and ascended Jesus was guiding his church to shift the focus, as the apostles, particularly Paul, went out to the Greco-Roman provinces, beyond Israel, not that Paul neglected this important doctrine of the kingdom (Acts 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23-31; Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 4:20; 6:9-10; 15:24, 50; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5; Col. 1:12-13; 4:11; 1 Thess. 2:12; 2 Thess. 1:5; 2 Tim. 4:1; 4:18). In all of those passages, he proclaimed it.
26:
The disciples are surprised even more. We could translate it “exceedingly surprised,” but the professional grammarians say “even more” is best. Okay, I’ll go with it.
In any case, they were surprised or astounded, and then they talked among themselves, asking the one most important question. “Who then can be saved?” I thought about translating it “who can even be saved,” but once again the professional grammarians steered me away from it. As usual, I believe they are right.
“saved”: The verb is sōzō: Since the theology of salvation (soteriology) is so critical for our lives, let’s look more closely at the noun salvation, which is sōtēria (pronounced soh-tay-ree-ah and used 46 times) and at the verb sōzō (pronounced soh-zoh and used 106 times).
Greek is the language of the NT. BDAG defines the noun sōtēria as follows, depending on the context: (1) “deliverance, preservation” … (2) “salvation.”
The verb sōzō means “save, rescue, heal” in a variety of contexts, but mostly it is used of saving the soul. BDAG further says that the verb means, depending on the context: (1) “to preserve or rescue from natural dangers and afflictions, save, keep from harm, preserve,” and the sub-definitions under no. 1 are as follows: save from death; bring out safely; save from disease; keep, preserve in good condition; thrive, prosper, get on well; (2) “to save or preserve from transcendent danger or destruction, save or preserve from ‘eternal’ death … “bring Messianic salvation, bring to salvation,” and in the passive it means “be saved, attain salvation”; (3) some passages in the NT say we fit under the first and second definition at the same time (Mark 8:5; Luke 9:24; Rom. 9:27; 1 Cor. 3:15).
As I will note throughout this commentary, the noun salvation and the verb save go a lot farther than just preparing the soul to go on to heaven. Together, they have additional benefits: keeping and preserving and rescuing from harm and dangers; saving or freeing from diseases and demonic oppression; and saving or rescuing from sin dominating us; ushering into heaven and rescuing us from final judgment. What is our response to the gift of salvation? You are grateful and then you are moved to act. When you help or rescue one man from homelessness or an orphan from his oppression, you have moved one giant step towards salvation of his soul. Sometimes feeding a hungry man and giving clothes to the naked or taking him to a medical clinic come before saving his soul.
All of it is a package called salvation and being saved.
What Is the Work of Salvation?
27:
Jesus again looks intently, this time at the disciples. Some special teaching is going on here. The kingdom is at stake.
“eternal life,” “salvation,” and “entering the kingdom” are used synonymously.
This is a great statement. People cannot save themselves. Only God can save them. “All things are possible with God.” He can rescue the most stubborn and resistant among your friends and family. Pray for them! And never stop praying until they get saved! And then pray for them to grow in their salvation.
28:
Peter and his brother Andrew were fishermen and had a business in Capernaum (Luke 5:1-11). James and John, two brothers, were their partners. They left behind their humble business, by which they earned their way in society. However, Peter still kept his house (Mark 1:29; 3:9; 4:1, 36; cf. John 21:3), so let’s not take this verse ultra-literally. Matthew was a tax collector. Peter had a wife to support, and so did the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers, and they brought their wives with them on the missionary endeavors (1 Cor. 9:5). So the missionaries did not abandon their wives, but they did abandon their old way of living. They had truly crossed the boundary line between the old kingdom and the new kingdom, the old life and the new life. Their wives went with them, and I assume that if they had children, they went with their parents.
Commentator R. T. France on some disciples not asked to relinquish their wealth:
A careful reading between the lines of the gospel narratives reveals that those who had ‘left everything’ to follow Jesus (v. 28; cf. 1:18, 20; 2:14) seem nonetheless to have retained the use of some possessions (Peter’s house at Capernaum, 1:29 etc.; his fishing boat and tackle, Jn. 21:3; Levi’s party, 2:15) and that the itinerant group of Jesus and his disciples depended on the hospitality and material provision of supporters such as Mary, Martha, and Lazarus at Bethany (Lk. 10:38–42; Jn. 11; 12:2) or the women of Lk. 8:2–3. On such grounds many have gratefully concluded either that Jesus did not really mean ‘all’, or that there were (and are?) two levels of discipleship, only the more rigorous of which (to which, as we shall see below, Jesus was calling this individual) demands full renunciation. Gundry’s [another commentator] comment is perhaps apposite: ‘That Jesus did not command all his followers to sell all their possessions gives comfort only to the kind of people to whom he would issue that command.’
France goes on to say this radical call must be balanced with our call to be salt and light; and in modern society, it is difficult to do when one accepts abandonment of all possessions.
My opinion: let the readers listen to the Spirit and their own Bible-trained and God-shaped conscience. Whatever path of life you believe God has called you to walk, don’t allow possessions to possess you.
29-30:
“I tell you the truth”: see v. 15 for more comments.
Jesus promised them a whole new family of people in the Christian community (cf. Matt. 19:30; Mark 10:30). One interesting omission: Jesus did not say to give up one’s spouse, as noted in 1 Cor. 9:5), but Luke 18:29 says so. Once again, we must not take the call to radical discipleship ultra-literally. One must be ready in one’s heart to give up everything.
Of course a certain teaching, called the Word of Faith, latches on to these verses. “See! This proves that God will give me lots of property if I follow him!” However, none of the apostles and the Lord’s brothers received a hundredfold more physical land than they had before they followed Jesus wholeheartedly. Church history teaches us that they became landless missionaries. Jesus is speaking about the land in the new kingdom—the territories that the missionaries would take from the devil and bring into the kingdom of God. How do we know he was spiritualizing things? He said we would receive many fathers (plural) and mothers (plural) (Mark 10:30). We normally have one biological mother and one biological father. So receiving many of them speaks of the fathers and mothers in the kingdom. If we had to leave behind our biological parents, then God promises us many new parents in the kingdom community. We have a new family, a much bigger family.
“with persecutions”: church history says all the twelve disciples suffered persecution.
Here is just one fulfillment of the persecutions against the twelve apostles.
40 Summoning the apostles, they flogged them, ordered them not to speak about the name of Jesus, and dismissed them. 41 And so they left the presence of the High Council, rejoicing that they were considered worthy to be dishonored because of the name. 42 And every day they did not stop teaching and spreading the good news in the temple and households that the Messiah is Jesus. (Acts 5:40-42, my tentative translation)
Note how they had a new community family (v. 42). They were also taking new land for the kingdom. Soon they will leave and preach in many places and take more territory.
Paul, not one of the twelve, suffered it too, particularly. He even lists his hardships, in this passage:
I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again. 24 Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was pelted with stones, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea, 26 I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my fellow Jews, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false believers. 27 I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked. 28 Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I do not feel weak? Who is led into sin, and I do not inwardly burn? (1 Cor. 11:23-29, NIV)
As he traveled around and planted churches, Paul got a new family, filled with all sorts of brothers and sisters and mothers and new territories for the gospel.
Church historian Eusebius (AD 260/265 – 339/340) says that Peter was crucified upside down, in Rome (Ecclesiastical History III.1). He also reports that Paul was beheaded in Rome under Nero (II.25). But later scholars dismiss the claim that Peter was crucified upside down. You can do your own research.
See fuller comments about Peter in John 21:18-19:
“fields”: means new territory for the kingdom. However, If God calls you into selling real estate, for example, then go for it because that is God’s call on your life. But don’t claim this verse to buy fields. Instead, claim other verses that says God will prosper you in his way. These verses are excellent for balanced and God-sent prosperity. Deut. 8:17-18. Look them up.
Beware of rich preachers who claim these verses, particularly about landed property or book sales pumped up by their TV platforms and large church purchases of those books, for themselves. Their method to get wealth is unbiblical. They pressure Joe Factoryworker and Jane Shopkeeper for donations, and then the preachers get rich from them and buy luxury items which Joe and Jane could never afford.
9 Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. (1 Tim. 6:9-10, NIV)
In contrast, a Christian getting wealthy by proper and honest business practices and by God’s call is legitimate or biblical (1 Tim. 6:17-19).
“this age”: the noun here is kairos (pronounced kye-ross and is used 85 times), which speaks more of a quality time than quantity. BDAG defines the noun as follows: (1) a point of time or period of time, time, period, frequently with the implication of being especially fit for something and without emphasis on precise chronology. (a) Generally a welcome time or difficult time … fruitful times; (b) a moment or period as especially appropriate the right, proper, favorable time … at the right time; (2) a defined period for an event, definite, fixed time (e.g. period of fasting or mourning in accord with the changes in season), in due time (Gal. 6:9); (3) a period characterized by some aspect of special crisis, time; (a) generally the present time (Rom. 13:11; 12:11); (b) One of the chief terms relating to the endtime … the time of crisis, the last times.
All of this stand in a mild contrast—not a sharp contrast—from chronos. Greek has another word for time: chronos (pronounced khro-noss), which measures one day, one week or one month after another.
Here kairos is contrasted with the next age to come. Kairos means this age.
In this verse, the second word for age is the Greek noun aiōn (pronounced aye-own, and we get our word aeon from it and is used 122 or 123 times in the NT).
See this post:
What Do Words ‘Eternity,’ ‘Eternal’ Fully Mean in the Bible?
So, the noun has a versatile meaning, but it is clear that “eternal” is attached to God; apart from that modification it mostly means “a long time” or “an age.”
Here, in v. 30, this age is contrasted with the age to come. So key phrase in v. 30 could be translated as follows: “in this age and next-age life in the age to come.” No, it’s not talking about the weird idea of the New Age, taught by cults. But the phrase “next-age life” is referring to the fully manifested kingdom of God overseen completely and with absolute, benevolent power and authority by King Jesus. But the translation “eternal life” instead of “next-age life,” is smoother.
Bible Basics about the Final Judgment
Everyone Shall Be Judged by Their Works and Words
Before the kingdom is fully realized at his Second Coming (Parousia), the kingdom is announced and ushered in by Jesus at the launch of his ministry. So there is overlap between This Age and the Kingdom Age.
3 The Kingdom Is in the Future
5 The Kingdom of God: Already Here, But Not Yet Fully
Fuller exegesis of this verse has now been moved to this summary post:
What Jesus Really Taught about End Times
But in these eschatological (end-time) discussions:
“In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberty; in all things, charity (love).”
We should not break fellowship with those with whom we differ in eschatological matters.
Now let’s move on.
31:
This is a proverbial statement that Jesus repeats elsewhere (e.g. Matt. 20:16, Mark 10:31 and Luke 13:30). The ones who want to be prominent in the kingdom must be like children. It also introduces the next parable about the workers who get hired last receive the same pay as the ones who were hired in the morning (Matt. 20:1-16, particularly v. 16).
To summarize and repeat, I like to apply the proverb to rich TV platform speakers. They are getting their treasure down here on earth (see v. 21). They live like kings on the offerings of Joe Factoryworker and Jane Shopkeeper. Joe and Jane could never afford the luxurious lifestyles of the TV preachers. In the Messianic Age at least, the flashy preachers will be pushed toward the back of the massive crowds, while others, like martyrs and believers who gave up everything (e.g. many missionaries throughout the ages) will move toward the front.
GrowApp for Mark 10:17-31
1. What has God called you to give up for his Son and his gospel?
2. Has God done the impossible to save you? Tell your story.
RELATED
10. Eyewitness Testimony in Mark’s Gospel
2. Church Fathers and Mark’s Gospel
2. Archaeology and the Synoptic Gospels
14. Similarities among John’s Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels
1. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels: Introduction to Series
SOURCES
For bibliographical data, please click on this link and scroll down to the very bottom:
Dr. Jim's Essential Bible Teaching 