What does Jesus’ call to perfection amount to?

Explanation:

What does Jesus mean by perfection? Is perfection the giving away of all of one’s possessions, or something else? We must conclude that Jesus means something else. Specifically, he means that in order to have eternal life, one must be wholeheartedly devoted to God.⁶

We can deduce that perfection has to do with wholehearted devotion because nowhere in Matthew’s Gospel is the notion of asceticism or living a harsh life, emphasized. Thus, when Jesus tells the man that if he wants to be perfect, he should sell all he has and follow Jesus, the emphasis is on following Jesus.⁷ In the case of the rich young man, the aspect that is inhibiting him from perfection (following Jesus), is his possessions. For another, what inhibits him from perfection (following Jesus) might be something else entirely.⁸

Counterargument:

This argument says that Jesus is not concerned with asceticism. That is to say, the argument says that Jesus is not concerned with giving up one’s possessions and possibly living a difficult life in order to follow him. Unfortunately, there are two problems with this argument. First, even if Matthew does not draw attention to asceticism elsewhere in his gospel, this does not mean he is not introducing it here through this narrative. That is, while asceticism may not be a running theme in Matthew, it does not need to be for Matthew 19:21 to be about living an ascetic life for Jesus.

Second, there are other passages that Matthew includes that emphasize living an ascetic life for Jesus. That is to say, there are other passages that emphasize that one must give things up to be a disciple of Jesus. For example, in Matthew 4:18–22, as Jesus walks by the Sea of Galilee, he calls Simon, Andrew, James, and John to leave their fishing equipment and lives to follow him. And immediately, these disciples obey. Further, when we reach Matthew 19:29, Jesus explains that everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters for Jesus’ sake will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life.⁹ Again, Jesus emphasizes that inheriting eternal life entails leaving things for him.

Response to counterargument:

That Jesus calls the disciples to leave their nets and follow him is not relevant to Matthew 19:21. Clearly he has a special office in mind for the disciples, so that as his closest trusted companions, who would continue his ministry after the ascension, it is imperative that they stay close to him at all times. Further, that he says anyone who has left father, mother, sisters, or children to follow him, does not mean that living a life in poverty or without possessions is required of all believers. For he does not say that those who have left brothers and sisters along with all their wealth inherit the kingdom. Rather, he means that anyone who has left anything in order to commit himself wholeheartedly to God will inherit eternal life.

Explanation:

When Jesus tells the rich young man that if he wants to be perfect, he ought to sell all his possessions, Jesus has this man’s particular situation in mind. That is, Jesus is saying that obeying the commands and inheriting eternal life have to do with wholehearted devotion to God. For this man, wholehearted devotion means selling his possessions. We can deduce that Jesus’ general point is that perfection entails wholehearted devotion, based on the correlation between the man’s question and Jesus’ answer.

First, Jesus tells the man plainly that obedience to God’s commands will garner life. Still, the man asks, What do I still lack? Even though the man professes to keep the commands, he clearly feels as though he falls short of eternal life. Jesus answers the man with, If you would be perfect… The Greek term for perfect also means complete. The answer from Jesus corresponds to the man’s question. The man wants to know what he lacks, and Jesus tells him what it will take for him to be complete.¹⁰ Thus, Jesus has moved from the general to the particular. In general, obeying God’s commands, which is wholehearted devotion to God, will garner life. For this man in particular, wholehearted devotion to God means he must be rid of his idol of wealth. Thus, this particular man must sell his possessions if he wants to obey Jesus’ general teaching and have eternal life.

Counterargument:

The argument here is that Jesus teaches generally that to have eternal life is to be wholeheartedly devoted to God. For this particular man that means giving up his possessions. The problem with this argument is that when we continue reading, we find that Jesus continues the topic of wealth. Specifically, when the rich man walks away sorrowful, Jesus explains that it will be hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 19:23). He also says that it will be easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God (Matthew 19:24). The disciples are then astonished and ask, Who then can be saved? (Matthew 19:25). In other words, the disciples infer that since Jesus suggests that one must give up his possessions to inherit eternal life, no one will be saved.

Response to counterargument:

That Jesus stays with the topic of wealth does not mean that he is teaching that one must give up their possessions in order to be wholeheartedly devoted to God. He has already explained what it takes to have life, and that is obedience to God’s commands. True obedience to God’s commands entails wholehearted devotion to him. For this particular man, wholehearted obedience means giving up his possessions, which Jesus explains can be very difficult for people. In other words, Jesus uses the opportunity to teach his disciples that wealth can be an especially dangerous idol that prevents one from wholehearted devotion to God.¹¹ This does not imply that every follower of Jesus will have to give up his possessions, for not every follower of Jesus will make wealth an idol. Still, wealth can be a dangerous idol that requires God’s assistance to overcome (Matthew 19:26).

Possible weaknesses:

We know from elsewhere in Scripture that the love of money is the root of all evil (Matthew 19:26). Thus, even if Jesus’ teaching can be applied generally, on the face of it, it does seem that he is teaching something about giving up wealth in order to follow God. Still, given the universality of Jesus’ teaching, we have to conclude that he has more in mind than simply giving up wealth.

Explanation:

It is generally acknowledged that the Ten Commandments can be categorized as commands that have to do with loving God and loving one’s neighbour. When the man asks Jesus what he must do to have eternal life, he explains that life has to do with obeying the commands. The man then asks which commands Jesus has in mind, to which question Jesus lists the commands that have to do with loving one’s neighbour. These include, You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, honour your father and your mother, you shall love your neighbour as yourself. That he lists the commands having to do with loving one’s neighbour should not go unnoticed. For once Jesus finishes presenting these commands, the man asks what he still lacks. To this Jesus explains that if the man wants to be complete, he ought to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow Jesus. In other words, Jesus expands the scope of what it means to love one’s neighbour.¹⁴ Loving one’s neighbour means caring for all of one’s neighbour’s concerns.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it does not seem possible for Jesus to expand the scope of the commands. As Jesus himself explained in Matthew 19:17, if the man would enter life, all he must do is keep the commands. Jesus then lists the commands that have to do with loving one’s neighbour. Since the commands originate with God, there is nothing missing that needs expansion. That is, the scope of the commands does not need expansion because the commands reflect God’s will, and in turn all that is needed to enter life.

Response to counterargument:

The argument here is not that Jesus adds to the commands, but that he explains the scope of the commands. In other words, implicit in the command to love one’s neighbour is the command to care for the neighbour’s well-being in a deep and meaningful way. This means being willing to sell one’s own possessions to cover the essentials of someone else. The man should have understood that embracing the needs of one’s neighbour was always implicit in the commands. This is not the only time that Jesus expands the scope of the commands. For example, in Matthew 5:21–22, Jesus explains that the command do not murder has to be with not being angry with a brother. Also, in Matthew 5:27–28 we learn that not committing adultery means not looking lustfully at a woman. These instructions were always implicit in the commands, but Jesus makes them explicit during his ministry.

Explanation:

When Jesus tells the man that if he wants to be complete, he ought to sell all he has and give to the poor, the teaching has to do with how church members ought to care for one another. We know that some, such as the disciples, will leave their houses and fathers and lands to follow Jesus and spread the gospel (Matthew 19:27–29). Some Christians are called to this task. Others, on the other hand, are called to care for those itinerant preachers who need care and support as they spread the gospel.¹⁵ Thus, we learn from Jesus in Matthew 19:23 that whoever receives one sent by Jesus, and gives him a cup of water, will not lose his reward. In other words, Jesus’ teaching here is about caring for one another in the church. Either one is called to sell his possessions and become an itinerant preacher or sell his possessions so he can support those who spread the gospel.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it does not consider the details of the context. First, after Jesus tells the man to sell all his possessions and have treasures in heaven, we learn from Matthew that the man goes away sorrowful because he had great possessions. The clue here is that the man was wealthy. Jesus then explains to his disciples in Matthew 19:23 that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again, the focus is not on serving each other in the church, which applies to all members, but on the difficulty for rich people to serve in the church. This does not mean that Jesus is not generally concerned with the notion that all church members should serve each other. Rather, it means that in this particular instance, Jesus is concerned with the fact that wealth can be an idol that prevents one from wholehearted commitment to God.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it does not take into account that Jesus calls the man both to love his neighbour by giving away his possessions and to love God by following Jesus. In other words, Jesus seems to have love for neighbour and for God in mind.