And Jesus said to his disciples, Verily I say unto you, A rich man shall with difficulty enter into the kingdom of the heavens;
The rich young man has just walked away, unwilling to part with his possessions. Jesus then turns to His disciples with a verdict that shocked them. Does wealth shut a person out of the kingdom? And if it does, who has any hope?
Older translations read "shall hardly enter." One commentator explains what that word does and does not mean:
"A rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven." That is, with difficulty. It does not say he cannot; it says he "shall hardly." He repeats it with emphasis: "Again I say to you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle" (beyond nature, of course) "than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."
Some soften this by saying the needle's eye was a small city gate. One writer answers that, then points to a phrase Mark adds:
Those who would make this less absolute than it seems, by applying it to an eastern city gate, should remember that the Lord says directly that what He speaks of is impossible for man. On the other hand, Mark records for us the explanation that a rich man here stands for one who trusts in riches. That prevents the obvious mistake of a crude literalism, and extends the principle to the poorest in actual possessions. Really, only the man who trusts in riches is "rich" in the sense intended, and a man may do that who never acquires them.
But trust and ownership are hard to keep apart. In Mark's account, verses 23 and 24 sit side by side:
Verse 23 speaks of those who "have riches," and verse 24 of those who "trust in riches." The fact is that it is very hard to have them without trusting in them. We naturally cling to riches and earth. Christ offers the cross and heaven.
Their amazement makes sense only against their background:
The disciples were amazed because under law God had promised great increase to those who obeyed it. People too often treated riches as a sign that the man who owned them must be keeping the law. This was by no means always true, for in fact all were guilty of breaking the law. But if a man's riches only strengthened his claim to be keeping the law, then those riches made it harder for him to see any need of the grace of God.
The coming of Jesus moved the evidence of God's favour somewhere else:
They were no longer to look on material prosperity as a sign of God's favour, or to count wealth on earth as a blessing from God. They were to be followers of a rejected Christ, who had become poor. And they were to see heaven as the place to store their treasures.
What made the young man's wealth so heavy was the kind of King he was being asked to follow — not one about to take a throne, but one about to be crucified:
It was a question of forsaking all and following Christ — a Christ who was not about to ascend the throne at once and wield the sceptre of His father David, but who was first to be rejected and crucified. The riches and honours of this world were such a hindrance to anyone who had them, in following a rejected Christ this way, that nothing could overcome it, or enable anyone to overcome it, but the almighty power of God.
Does salvation then work one way for the wealthy and another for the poor?
But He drew a clear line, so that no one would apply this to salvation, as if salvation were different for different classes of men when they seek it. Those who realise their need of salvation are all one class: "Christ died for sinners" covers every case. But when men are the ones seeking, eternity seems less real the more they have to satisfy themselves with here.
Riches only stop the man who is trying to get in by his own effort. God calls whom He will, and from the least likely places:
If it were a question of man doing anything to get into the kingdom, riches are only so much hindrance. And so it is with everything else counted desirable. Whatever I may have, and trust in — whether moral ways, position, or anything else — these are only obstacles as far as the kingdom is concerned, and they make it impossible for man. But with God all things are possible, no matter what the difficulty. Therefore God chooses in His grace to call all sorts and conditions of people. We read of a person called out of Herod's court; we read of saints in Caesar's household... above all, Saul of Tarsus, brought up at the feet of Gamaliel. All these difficulties only gave God the opportunity to overcome every obstacle by His own power and grace.
- Difficulty, not denial. "Hardly" means with difficulty. The Lord does not say a rich man cannot enter. He repeats the warning instead of easing it.
- Trust is the hinge. The rich man in view is the one who trusts in riches. A man who never gets them can still be "rich" in that sense.
- Favour relocated. Wealth once looked like a mark of God's approval. Now treasure belongs in heaven, and the Christ they follow is a rejected one.
- One class only. Salvation is not graded by income. "Christ died for sinners" covers every case. Wealth simply makes eternity feel less urgent.
- Impossibility invites grace. Every advantage a person clings to is an obstacle. With God all things are possible, and He has overcome them all — in Herod's court, in Caesar's household, in Saul of Tarsus.
and again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to enter a needle's eye than a rich man into the kingdom of God.
Jesus has just watched a wealthy young man walk away sad. Now He gives His disciples a picture that stuns them: the largest animal they knew, set against the smallest opening they could imagine. Is this merely hard, or impossible? And who counts as "rich"?
Many soften this saying by making the "eye of a needle" a low city gate. A camel could squeeze through it once unloaded. Commentators reject that reading on the Lord's own grounds. He calls it impossible for man.
To the amazement of His disciples, He says it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Some want to make this less absolute than it sounds, so they apply it to an eastern city gate. They should remember that the Lord states plainly that what He is speaking of is impossible for man. Mark records the explanation that a rich man here stands for one who trusts in riches. That guards us from a crude literalism, and it stretches the warning to those who own almost nothing. Really, the only man who is "rich" in the sense meant is the man who trusts in riches — and a man can do that who never gets them.
after_note: DELETE not intended
Another writer adds that no historical record supports the gate story.
Some find it attractive to say that the camel and the needle's eye point to a small gate that a camel could only pass through once it was unloaded. But no reliable historian supports this idea.
If the barrier is trust rather than a bank balance, then no one escapes the verse by being poor. The man who only wishes he were rich needs the same work of God.
The danger of having riches is that it becomes far too easy for us to trust them. We should remember that God is the Creator, and we should honour His rights as Creator over whatever possessions He entrusts to us... So it takes an entirely divine work of grace to bring a rich man into the kingdom of God. But poor men who want to be rich need the same sovereign work of God in their hearts (1 Tim. 6:9). In fact everyone needs it, for it is a universal disease to prefer something else to a path of faith.
Wealth is not the only tie of this kind. Another writer names the rest of them, and admits how seldom they break.
These things — riches, family, power — are claims which bind the soul to this world. Grace can indeed break these chains, but it does not often happen... These chains are too strong. But with God all things are possible.
Their amazement makes sense only against what they had been taught. Under the law God promised increase to those who obeyed, so wealth looked like proof of a good record with God.
The disciples were amazed because under law God had promised great increase to those who obeyed it. People too often treated riches as a sign that their owner must be keeping the law. This was by no means always true, for in fact all were guilty of breaking the law. But if a man's riches only strengthened his claim to be keeping the law, then his riches kept him from seeing any need of the grace of God.
Matthew almost always writes "kingdom of heaven"; verse 23 does. Verse 24 switches to "kingdom of God." Matthew's few uses of that term all press the inward, moral side of things.
Only Matthew's Gospel uses the term "Kingdom of Heaven." In fact that Gospel uses "Kingdom of God" in just four passages, and each one stresses the moral or inward side... This statement speaks of the close way in which the power of God works. The Jews had been taught to believe that riches were a mark of God's favour. That idea had to be pulled out of men's minds.
The impossibility clears the ground for grace. The rich man's problem is that he wants to bring himself in too.
If it is a question of man doing anything to get into the kingdom, riches are only a hindrance. He would like to take them with him, along with anything else that makes something of himself. But everything that belongs to man only blocks his way into the kingdom. More than that, it makes entry impossible, as far as he himself is concerned. With God, however, all things are possible, and man reaches the kingdom only by the working of His grace.
- Impossible. The picture is not an exaggeration and not a narrow gate — the Lord Himself calls it impossible for man.
- Trust. "Rich" means one who trusts in riches, so the warning reaches the man who never owns them.
- Chains. Riches, family and power all bind the soul to this world; grace can break them, but it does not often happen.
- Shock. The disciples assumed wealth proved obedience to the law. That is why riches hide a man's need of grace.
- Grace. What man cannot do, God does — entry comes only by His working, never by anything a person carries in with him.