Jesus was saying only god is good

JESUS WAS SAYING ONLY GOD IS GOOD
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Matthew 19:17 "Why do you ask Me about what is
good?" Jesus replied, "There is only One who is good.
If you want to enter life, keep the commandments."
Mark 10:18 18"Whydo you call me good?" Jesus
answered. "No one is good-except God alone.
Luke 18:19 19"Whydo you call me good?" Jesus
NOTE:If only God is good, and you call me good, you are calling me God.
BIBLEHHUB RESOURCES
Mark 10:18 18"Whydo you callme good?" Jesusanswered. "No one is good-
exceptGod alone.
Man not left in doubt as to the good

F. W. Farrar, D. D.
"Why dost thou ask Me about the good?" that seems to have been our Lord's
answer, not "Why askestthou Me?" as it is often read — for whom else
should the young man ask? but "Why dost thou ask Me about the good?" Has
God left you in any doubt as to what is good? Have you in your heart no voice
of conscience? Has duty never uplifted within you that naked law of right, so
imperial in its majesty, so eternalin its origin, which you know that you ought
to follow even unto death? If not, and if experience has had no lessons foryou,
and history no teaching, was there no Sinai? Do not the cherubim of your
temple veil with their golden wings the tablets — alas!the shattered tablets of
your moral law? And there Jesus might have stopped. But, being unlike us,
being infinitely patient with man's irritating spiritual stupidity, not loving, as
we do, to be cautious and reticent, and "to steerthrough the channel of no
meaning betweenthe Scylla and Charybdis of yes and no," He added," but, if
thou wouldst enter into life, keepthe commandments."
(F. W. Farrar, D. D.)
STUDYLIGHTRESOURCES
Adam Clarke Commentary
Why callestthou me good? - Or, Why dostthou question me concerning that
goodthing? τι με ερωτας περι του αγαθου . This important reading is found in
BDL, three others, the Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Ethiopic, latter Syriac,
Vulgate, Saxon, all the Itala but one, Origen, Eusebius, Cyril, Dionysius
Areop., Antiochus, Novatian, Jerome, Augustin, and Juvencus. Erasmus,
Grotius, Mill, and Bengelapprove of this reading. This authority appears so
decisive to Griesbachthat he has receivedthis reading into the text of his

secondedition, which in the first he had interlined. And instead of, None is
goodbut the one God, he goes onto read, on nearly the same respectable
authorities, εις εϚιν ο αγαθος . There is one who is good. Let it be observed
also that, in the 16th verse, instead of διδασκαλε αγαθε, goodteacher,
διδασκαλε only is read by BDL, one other, one Evangelistarium, the Ethiopic,
three of the Itala, Origen, and Hilary. The whole passagetherefore may be
read thus: O teacher!what goodthing shall I do that I may have eternallife?
And he said unto him, Why dost thou question me concerning that good
thing? There is one that is good. (Or he who is good is one). But If thou art
willing to enter into that life, keepthe commandments. This passage,as it
stoodin the common editions, has been consideredby some writers as an
incontrovertible proof againstthe Divinity or Godheadof Christ. A very
learned person, in his note on this place, thus concludes concerning it:
"Therefore our Saviorcannot be God: and the notion of, I know not what, a
trinity in unity, Three Gods in One, is here proved beyond all controversy, by
the unequivocal declarationof Jesus Christ Himself, to be Erroneous and
Impossible." Not so. One of the greatestcritics in Europe, not at all partial to
the Godheadof Christ, has admitted the above readings into his text, on
evidence which he judged to be unexceptionable. If they be the true readings,
they destroy the whole doctrine built on this text; and indeed the utmost that
the enemies of the trinitarian doctrine can now expectfrom their formidable
opponents, concerning this text, is to leave it neuter.
Keep the commandments - From this we may learn that God's greatdesign, in
giving his law to the Jews, was to lead them to the expectationand enjoyment
of eternal life. But as all the law referred to Christ, and he became the end of
the law for righteousness (justification)to all that believe, so he is to be
received, in order to have the end accomplishedwhich the law proposed.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.

Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "The Adam Clarke
Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/matthew-
19.html. 1832.
Return to Jump List return to 'Jump List'
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
And he said unto him,.... By way of reply, first taking notice of, and
questioning him about, the epithet he gave him:
why callestthou me good? not that he denied that he was so;for he was good,
both as God and man, in his divine and human natures; in all his offices, and
the executionof them; he was goodnessitself, and did good, and nothing else
but good. But the reasonofthe question is, because this young man considered
him only as a mere man, and gave him this characteras such; and which, in
comparisonof God, the fountain of all goodness,agreeswith no mere man:
wherefore our Lord's view is, by his own language;and from his own words,
to instruct him in the knowledge ofhis proper deity. Some copies read, "why
dost thou ask me concerning good". And so the Vulgate Latin, and the
Ethiopic versions, and Munster's Hebrew Gospelread; but the Syriac, Arabic,
and Persic versions, readas we do, and this the answerof Christ requires.
There is none goodbut one, that is God; who is originally, essentially,
independently, infinitely, and immutably good, and the author and source of
all goodness;which cannot be said of any mere creature. This is to be
understood of God consideredessentially, and not personally; or it is to be
understood, not of the person of the Father, to the exclusionof the Son, or
Spirit: who are one God with the Father, and equally goodin nature as he.

Nor does this contradict and deny that there are good angels, who have
continued in that goodnessin which they were created;or that there are good
men, made so by the grace ofGod; but that none are absolutelyand perfectly
good, but God. What Christ here says of God, theF2 Jews sayof the law of
Moses,whose praise they can never enough extol; ‫ןיא‬ ‫בוט‬ ‫אלא‬ ‫הרות‬ "there is
nothing goodbut the law". The law is goodindeed; but the author of it must
be allowedto be infinitely more so. Christ next directly answers to the
question,
but if thou wilt enter into life: eternal life, which is in the question, and which
being sometimes expressedby a house, a city, and kingdom, by mansions, and
everlasting habitations, enjoyment of it is fitly signified by entering into it;
which, if our Lord suggests, he had a desire of having a right to by doing any
goodthing himself, he must
keepthe commandments; that is, perfectly: he must do not only one good
thing, but all the good things the law requires; he must not be deficient in any
single action, in anyone work of the law, either as to matter, or manner of
performance; everything must be done, and that just as the Lord in his law
has commanded it. Our Lord answers according to the tenor of the covenant
of works, under which this man was;and according to the law of God, which
requires perfect obedience to it, as a righteousness, and a title to life; and in
case ofthe leastfailure, curses and condemns to everlasting death; see
Deuteronomy 6:25. This Christ said, in order to show, that it is impossible to
enter into, or obtain eternal life by the works of the law, since no man can
perfectly keepit; and to unhinge this man from off the legalfoundation on
which he was, that he might drop all his dependencies on doing goodthings,
and come to him for righteousness and life.
Copyright Statement

The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernisedand adapted
for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved,
Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard
Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "The New JohnGill Exposition
of the Entire Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/matthew-19.html. 1999.
People's New Testament
Why callestthou me good? none goodbut one, God. The Revision, following
the Siniatic, Vatican, and some other manuscripts, leaves off "good" before
Masterin Matthew 19:16, and changes this to, "Why askeththou me
concerning good?" Still, Mark and Luke give the question in the form of the
Common Version as here; hence we are justified in adhering to the text as
above. Some have seenin these words of Christ an affirmation that he was not
divine. To these, Stierreplies: "Either there is none goodbut God, Christ is
good, therefore Christ is God; or, there is none goodbut God, Christ is not
God, therefore Christ is not good." There is no answerto these syllogisms but
to deny the sinlessnessofChrist.
If thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments. The Lord had evidently
askedhis first question to prepare the wayfor this direction. He has, in saying
that no man is absolutely good, saidthat no man cankeepthe commandments
perfectly.

Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.
Original work done by Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 at The
RestorationMovementPages.
Bibliography
Johnson, BartonW. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "People's New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pnt/matthew-
19.html. 1891.
Robertson's WordPictures in the New Testament
Concerning that which is good(περι του αγατου — peri tou agathou). He had
askedJesus in Matthew 19:16 “what goodthing” he should do. He evidently
had a light idea of the meaning of αγατος — agathos “This was only a
teacher‘s wayof leading on a pupil” (Bruce). So Jesus explains that “One
there is who is good,” one alone who is really goodin the absolute sense.
Copyright Statement
The Robertson's WordPictures of the New Testament. Copyright �
Broadman Press 1932,33,Renewal1960. All rights reserved. Used by
permission of Broadman Press (Southern BaptistSunday SchoolBoard)
Bibliography
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Robertson's Word
Pictures of the New Testament".

https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/matthew-19.html.
Broadman Press 1932,33.Renewal1960.
Vincent's Word Studies
Why callestthou me good? ( τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν)
But the true reading is, τί με ἐρωτᾷς περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ; Why askestthou me
concerning the good?
There is none goodbut one, that is God ( οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός )
But the reading is, εἷς ἐστὶν ὁ ἀγαθός , One there is who is good. The saying of
Christ appears especiallyappropriate in the light of the Rabbinic apothegm,
“There is nothing else that is goodbut the law.”
Copyright Statement
The text of this work is public domain.
Bibliography
Vincent, Marvin R. DD. "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17". "Vincent's Word
Studies in the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/matthew-19.html. Charles
Schribner's Sons. New York, USA. 1887.

Wesley's ExplanatoryNotes
And he said unto him, Why callestthou me good? there is none goodbut one,
that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments.
Why callestthou me good— Whom thou supposestto be only a man.
There is none good— Supremely, originally, essentially, but God.
If thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments — From a principle of
loving faith. Believe, and thence love and obey. And this undoubtedly is the
way to eternal life. Our Lord therefore does not answerironically, which had
been utterly beneath his character, but gives a plain, direct, serious answerto
a serious question.
Copyright Statement
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.
Bibliography
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "JohnWesley's
Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/matthew-19.html. 1765.

The Fourfold Gospel
And he said unto him, Why askestthou me concerning that which is good1?
One there is who is good:but if thou wouldestenter into life, keepthe
commandments2.
Why askestthou me concerning that which is good? Jesus'reply to the
"question" of the young man "What goodthing", etc. (Matthew 19:16). See
Matthew 19:16.
But if thou wouldestenter into life, keepthe commandments. By referring the
ruler to the commandments, Jesus not only answeredthe question as to
obtaining life, but he emphasized the confessionofhis divinity containedin
the question, "Why askest", etc. God, who knows what is good, had revealed
that goodin the commandments which he had given. Yet the ruler had asked
Jesus to be wise above God's revelation, and to propound a law or rule of
goodness in addition to that already given, and of such a nature as to more
fully insure the attainment of life by obeying it. The ruler's question reveals
that common weakness in man which prompts him to look to his fellow-men
for religious and moral instruction; forgetting that only God can propound
the absolute standards of goodness. We should note, too, that the young man,
being under the law given through Moses, wasbidden to attain life by keeping
the law. After the death of Christ a new law was given. Had the man waited
until that time, he would have been directed to this new law, and obedience to
it would have been required. Compare Acts 2:37,38 2 Thessalonians 1:8.
Copyright Statement
is available on the Christian ClassicsEthereal Library Website. These files
were made available by Mr. Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 at
The RestorationMovementPages.
Bibliography

J. W. McGarveyand Philip Y. Pendleton. "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17".
"The Fourfold Gospel".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tfg/matthew-19.html.
Standard Publishing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1914.
Abbott's Illustrated New Testament
Why callestthou me good? It is difficult to understand the grounds of this
reproof, unless we suppose that there was something in the circumstances of
the case notfully describedin the narrative. The words would seemto be a
very respectfuland proper mode of addressing even a human prophet and
teacher, of such singular benevolence ofheart and life.
Matthew 19:21,22. We here encounter another difficulty in understanding this
conversationbetweenJesus andthe young man. Instead of explaining to him
the spiritual nature of the moral law, that he might see that he had not really
kept it, the Savior seems to acquiesce in his answer, and tacitly to admit his
pretensions;and then proceeds to require of him a course of action, in regard
to his property, which the Scriptures do not enjoin, and which, if adopted as a
general rule of action, would not have a favorable effect on the welfare of
society. The usual comments on this passagedo not really meet these
difficulties; and it is better to leave such difficulties unsolved, than to attempt
to satisfy our minds with explanations which are forced and unnatural. If we
were fully acquainted with all the circumstances, we shouldundoubtedly see
that the Savior's directions were exactly adapted to the case. And though we
cannot understand the exactmoral bearing of the directions, in respectto the
young man, the lessonwhichthey convey to us, is perfectly clear;namely, that
the service ofGod, and the salvation of the soul, must be the supreme end and
aim of life, and that all other objects of interest or desire must yield to their
claims.

Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Abbott, John S. C. & Abbott, Jacob. "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17".
"Abbott's Illustrated New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ain/matthew-19.html. 1878.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible
17.Whycallestthou me good? I do not understand this correctionin so
refined a sense as is given by a goodpart of interpreters, as if Christ intended
to suggesthis Divinity; for they imagine that these words mean, “If thou
perceivestin me nothing more exalted than human nature, thou falsely
appliest to me the epithet good, which belongs to God alone. ” I do
acknowledge that, strictly speaking, menand even angels do not deserve so
honorable a title; because theyhave not a drop of goodness in themselves, but
borrowedfrom God; and because in the former, goodnessis only begun, and
is not perfect. But Christ had no other intention than to maintain the truth of
his doctrine; as if he had said, “Thoufalsely callestme a goodMaster, unless
thou acknowledgestthat I have come from God.” The essence ofhis Godhead,
therefore, is not here maintained, but the young man is directed to admit the
truth of the doctrine. He had already felt some disposition to obey; but Christ
wishes him to rise higher, that he may hear Godspeaking. For — as it is
customary with men to make angels of those who are devils — they
indiscriminately give the appellation of goodteachers to those in whom they
perceive nothing divine; but those modes of speaking are only profanations of
the gifts of God. We need not wonder, therefore, if Christ, in order to
maintain the authority of his doctrine, directs the young man to God.

Keep the commandments. This passagewas erroneouslyinterpreted by some
of the ancients, whom the Papists have followed, as if Christ taught that, by
beeping the law, we may merit eternal life On the contrary, Christ did not
take into considerationwhatmen can do, but replied to the question, What is
the righteousnessofworks? or, What does the Law require? And certainly we
ought to believe that God comprehended in his law the way of living holily
and righteously, in which righteousness is included; for not without reasondid
Moses make this statement,
He that does these things shall live in them, (Leviticus 18:5;)
and again,
I call heavenand earth to witness that l have
this day showedyou life, (Deuteronomy 30:19.)
We have no right, therefore, to deny that the keeping of the law is
righteousness, by which any man who kept the law perfectly — if there were
such a man — would obtain life for himself. But as we are all destitute of the
glory of God, (Romans 3:23,) nothing but cursing will be found in the law;
and nothing remains for us but to betake ourselves to the undeserved gift of
righteousness. And therefore Paul lays down a twofoldrighteousness, the
righteousness ofthe law, (Romans 10:5,) and the righteousness of faith,
(Romans 10:6.) He makes the first to consistin works, andthe second, in the
free grace ofChrist.

Hence we infer, that this reply of Christ is legal, because it was proper that the
young man who inquired about the righteousness ofworks should first be
taught that no man is accountedrighteous before God unless he has fulfilled
the law, (620)(which is impossible,)that, convincedof his weakness, he might
betake himself to the assistanceoffaith. I acknowledge, therefore, that, as
God has promised the rewardof eternal life to those who keephis law, we
ought to hold by this way, if the weakness ofour flesh did not prevent; but
Scripture teaches us, that it is through our own fault that it becomes necessary
for us to receive as a gift what we cannot obtain by works. If it be objected,
that it is in vain to hold out to us the righteousness whichis in the law,
(Romans 10:5,) which no man will everbe able to reach, I reply, since it is the
first part of instruction, by which we are led to the righteousness whichis
obtained by prayer, it is far from being superfluous; and, therefore, when
Paul says, that the doers of the law are justified, (Romans 2:13,) he excludes
all from the righteousness ofthe law.
This passagesets aside allthe inventions which the Papists have contrived in
order to obtain salvation. For not only are they mistakenin wishing to lay
God under obligation to them by their goodworks, to bestow salvationas a
debt; but when they apply themselves to do what is right, they leave out of
view the doctrine of the law, and attend chiefly to their pretended devotions,
as they call them, not that they openly rejectthe law of God, but that they
greatly prefer human traditions. (621)But what does Christ say? That the
only worship of which Godapproves is that which he has prescribed; because
obedience is better to him than all sacrifices, (622)(1 Samuel 15:22.)So then,
while the Papists are employed in frivolous traditions, let every man who
endeavors to regulate his life by obedience to Christ direct his whole attention
to keepthe commandments of the law.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Calvin's Commentary on
the Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/matthew-
19.html. 1840-57.
John Trapp Complete Commentary
17 And he saidunto him, Why callestthou me good? there is none goodbut
one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments.
Ver. 17. Why callestthou me good?]And if I be not good, much less art thou,
what goodconceits soeverthou hastof thyself. Here, then, our Saviour teaches
this younker humility and self-annihilation. Phocionwas surnamed Bonus
Good, but what was his goodness more than a silver sin? Lacones neminem
bonum fieri publicis literis columna incisis sanxerunt. Plut. in Quest. Graecis.
There is none goodbut one, that is God] He both is goodoriginally (others are
goodby participation only), and doth good abundantly, freely, constantly:
"Forthou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive," saith David, Psalms 86:5;
Psalms 119:68;"And let the powerof my Lord be great," saith Moses, "in
pardoning this rebellious people." In the original there is a letter greaterthan
ordinary in the word jigdal (be great), to show, say the Hebrew doctors, that
though the people should have tempted God, or murmured againsthim, ten
times more than they did, yet their perverseness shouldnot interrupt the
course of his ever-flowing, over-flowing goodness, Numbers 14:17. ‫לדגי‬

{Hebrew Text Note} Magnum iod quod valet decem, &c. Buxtorf. {See Trapp
on "Numbers 14:17"}
If thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments] That is, saith Luther,
Morere, die out of hand; for there is no man lives that sins not. It is said of
Charles IV, King of France, that being one time affectedwith the sense ofhis
many and greatsins, he fetched a deep sigh, and said to his wife, Now, by the
help of God, I will so carry myself all my life long, that I will never offend him
more; which word he had no sooneruttered, but he presently fell down and
died. It is not our Saviour’s intent here to teachthat heaven may be had or
earned by keeping the law;for Adam in his innocence, if he had so continued,
could not have merited heaven, neither do the angels, nor could Christ
himself, had he been no more than a man. None but a proud Luciferian would
have said, as Vega, the Popish perfectionary, did, Coelum gratis non accipiam,
I will not go to heaven for nought, or on free cost. But our Saviour here shapes
this young Pharisee an answeraccording to his question. He would needs be
savedby doing, Christ sets him that to do which no man living can do, and so
shows him his error. He sets him to schoolto the law, that hard schoolmaster,
that sets us such lessons as we are never able to learn (unless Christ our elder
brother teachus, and do our exercise forus), yea, bring us forth to God, as
that schoolmasterin Livy did all his scholars (the flowerof the Roman
nobility) to Hannibal; who, if he had not been more merciful than otherwise,
they had all perished.
Copyright Statement
Text Courtesyof BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliography

Trapp, John. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". John Trapp Complete
Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/matthew-
19.html. 1865-1868.
Sermon Bible Commentary
Matthew 19:17
How are we sinners to be acceptedby Almighty God? Doubtless the sacrifice
of Christ on the cross is the meritorious cause ofour justification, and His
Church is the ordained instrument of conveying it to us. But our present
question relates to another subject, to our own part in appropriating it, and
here I sayScripture makes two answers, saying sometimes, "Believe, andyou
shall be saved," and sometimes, "Keepthe commandments, and you shall be
saved." Let us considerwhether these two modes of speechare not
reconcilable with eachother.
I. What is meant by faith? It is to feelin goodearnestthat we are creatures of
God; it is a practical perceptionof the unseen world; it is to understand that
this world is not enough for our happiness, to look beyond it on towards God,
to realize His presence, to wait upon Him, to endeavour to learn and do His
will, and to seek our goodfrom Him. It is not a mere temporary strong actor
impetuous feeling of the mind, an impression or a view coming upon it, but it
is a habit, a state of mind lasting and consistent.
II. What is obedience? It is the obvious mode suggestedby nature of a
creature's conducting himself in God's sight, who fears him as his Maker, and
knows that, as a sinner, he has a specialcause for fearing Him. Under such
circumstances he will do what he canto please Him, as the woman whom our

Lord commended. And he will find nothing better as an offering, or as an
evidence, than obedience to that holy law which consciencetells him has been
given us by God Himself; that is, he will be delighted in doing his duty as far
as he knows and can do it. Thus, as is evident, the two states ofmind are
altogetherone and the same;it is quite indifferent whether we say a man
seeks Godin faith, or say he seeks Him by obedience;and whereas Almighty
God has graciouslydeclaredthat He will receive and bless all that seek Him, it
is quite indifferent whether we say He accepts those who believe, or those who
obey. To believe is to look beyond this world to God, and to obey is to look
beyond this world to God; to believe is of the heart, and to obey is of the
heart; to believe is not a solitary act, but a consistenthabit of trust; and to
obey is not a solitary act, but a consistenthabit of doing our duty in all things.
J. H. Newman, Parochialand Plain Sermons, vol. iii., p. 77.
References:Matthew 19:17.—F. W. Farrar, Anglican Pulpit of Today, p. 220;
Homiletic Magazine, vol. ix., p. 12; H. Wace, Expositor, 2nd series, vol. ii., p.
195. Matthew 19:18.—E. B. Pusey, ParochialandCathedral Sermons, p. 363.
Matthew 19:19.—H. W. Beecher, ChristianWorld Pulpit, vol. xiv., p. 61;
Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. iii., No. 145;J. Jackson, Christian World Pulpit, vol.
xxiv., p. 157.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography

Nicoll, William R. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "SermonBible
Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/sbc/matthew-
19.html.
Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible
Matthew 19:17. There is none goodbut one, that is God— This passage has
been produced and strongly argued by the Arians in favour of their system.
They found their argument upon the Greek, whichruns thus, Ουδεις εστιν
αγαθος, ει μη εις, ο Θεος . There is none good, but εις one; and that (one) is ο
Θεος, God. Whence it is argued, that the adjective εις being in the masculine
gender, cannot be interpreted to signify one being, or nature (for then it
should have been εν in the neuter), but one person; so that by confining the
attribute of goodness to the single personof the Father, it must of course
exclude the persons of the Son and Holy Ghostfrom the unity of the Godhead.
This, it must be owned, is a plausible objection:for, supposing the word εις to
signify one person (and in that lies the whole force of the argument) then, if
one persononly is good, and that personis God, it must also follow, that there
is but one person who is God; the name of God being as much confined hereby
to a single person, as the attribute of goodness.But this is utterly false;the
names of God, Lord, Lord of hosts, the Almighty, MostHigh, Eternal, God of
Israel, &c. being also ascribedto the secondand third persons of the blessed
Trinity. Take it in this way, therefore, and the objection, by
provingtoomuch,confutesitself,andprovesnothing. The truth is, this criticism,
upon the strength of which some have dared to undeify the Saviour, has no
foundation in the original. The word εις is so far from requiring the
substantive person to be understood with it, that it is put in the masculine
gender to agree with its substantive Θεος, and is best construed by an adverb.
If you follow the Greek by a literal translation, it will be thus, There is none
good, — ει μη εις ο Θεος, —but the one God; that is, in common English, but
God only. And it happens, that the same Greek, wordfor word, occurs in
Mark 2:7. Who canforgive sins, — ει μη εις ο Θεος, but God only? So it is

rendered by our translators;and we have a plain matter of fact, that the word
εις in this place cannot possibly admit the sense ofone person, because Christ,
who is another person, took upon him to forgive sins. In the parallel place of
St. Luke's Gospel(Luke 5:21.)the expressionis varied, so as to make it still
clearer, — ει μη μονος ο Θεος,— not εις, but μονος, another adjective, of the
masculine gender, which,though it agree with its substantive Θεος, is rightly
construed with an adverb,—either the alone God, or God only: and the Greek
itself uses one for the other indifferently, as επ αρτω μονω, by bread only,
Matthew 4:4. εν λογω μονον , in word only, 1 Thessalonians 1:5. The utmost
that can be gatheredtherefore from these words, is no more than this, that
there is one God, (in which we are all agreed)and that there is none good
besides him, which nobody will dispute. Whether in this God there be one
person or three, remains yet to be considered;and the Scripture is so express
in other places as to settle it beyond all dispute. If it should here be asked, for
what reasonChrist put the question before us, Why callestthou me good? I
answer, for the same reasonthat he askedthe Pharisees, WhyDavid in spirit
calledhim LORD? Matthew 22:43 and that was, to try if they were able to
accountfor it. This young man, by addressing our Saviour under the name of
goodmaster, when the Psalmisthad affirmed long before, that there is none
that doeth GOOD, no NOT ONE, (Psalms 14:3.) did in effect allow him to be
God; no mere man since the fall of Adam having any claim to that character;
and, when he was calledupon to explain his meaning, forthat God only was
good, he should have replied in the words of St. Thomas, My Lord, and my
God! which would have been a noble instance of faith, and have clearedup the
whole difficulty. See Jones's "Catholic Doctrine of a Trinity," p. 13.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography

Coke, Thomas. "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17". Thomas Coke
Commentary on the Holy Bible.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/matthew-19.html. 1801-
1803.
Expository Notes with PracticalObservations onthe New Testament
The personthus addressing himself unto Christ, was either a Pharisee or a
disciple of the Pharisees, who did not own Christ to be God, or to come from
God; but taught, that eternal life was attainable, by fulfilling of the law in that
imperfect sense which the Phariseesgave ofit.
And accordingly, 1. Christ reproves him for calling him good;Why callest
thou me good? Whenthou wilt neither own me to be God, nor to come from
God; For there is none good, that is, essentiallyand originally good, but God
only; nor any derivatively good, but he that receives his goodnessfrom God
also.
From this place the Socinians argue againstthe divinity of Christ; thus, "He
to whom the title of gooddoth not belong, cannot be God most high. But by
our Lord's words this title belongs not to him, but only to God the Father;
therefore God the Fathermust be God alone."
Answer, Christ may be supposed to speak to this young man thus, "Thou
givestme a title which was never given to the most renowned rabbis, and
which agrees to God alone;now thou oughtestto believe that there is
something in me more than human, if thou conceivestthatthis title of good
doth belong to me."

Observe, 2. That our Saviour might convince him of the error of the
Pharisees,who believed that they might, without the knowledge ofhim, the
true Messias, enterinto life by keeping the law of God according to that lax
and loose interpretation which they, the Pharisees, hadgiven of it; he bids
him, Keep the commandments.
Where, Note, Christ calls him off from outward ceremonies, whichthe
Pharisees aboundedin, to the practice of moral duties; yet withal lets him
understand, that if he expectedsalvationby the moral law, he must keep it
perfectly and exactly, without the leastdeficiency, which is an impossibility to
man in his lapsedstate.
Learn, 1. That such as seek justificationand salvationby the works of the law
only, must keepthe whole law, or covenant of works, perfectlyand exactly.
Learn, 2. That the best way to prepare men for Jesus Christ, is to let them see
their own impotency to keepand fulfil the covenantof works.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Burkitt, William. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". ExpositoryNotes with
PracticalObservations onthe New Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wbc/matthew-19.html. 1700-
1703.

Heinrich Meyer's Critical and ExegeticalCommentaryon the New Testament
Matthew 19:17. Thy question concerning the goodthing, which is necessaryto
be done in order to have eternal life in the Messianic kingdom, is quite
superfluous ( τί με ἐρωτᾶς, κ. τ. λ.); the answeris self-evident, for there is but
one (namely, God, the absolute ideal of moral life) who is the goodone,
therefore the goodthing to which thy question refers canbe neither more nor
less than obedience to His will,—one goodBeing, one goodthing, alterum non
datur! But if thou ( δέ, the continuative autem: to tell thee now more precisely
what I wished to impress upon thee by this εἷς ἐστὶν ὁ ἀγαθός)desirestto
enter into life, keepthe commandments (which are given by this One ἀγαθός).
Neanderexplains incorrectly thus: “Why askestthou me concerning that
which is good? One is the goodone, and to Him, thou must address thyself; He
has, in fact, revealedit to thee also;but since you have askedme, then let me
inform you,” etc. This view is alreadyprecluded by the enclitic με (as
otherwise we should necessarilyhave had ἐμέ).
For the explanation of the Receivedtext, see note on Mark 10:18;the claim to
originality must be decided in favour not of Matthew (in answerto Keim), but
of Mark, on whom Luke has also drawn. The tradition followedby Matthew
seems to have alreadyomitted the circumstance of our Lord’s declining the
epithet ἀγαθός. The claims of Mark and Luke are likewise favouredby
Weisse, Bleek, Weiss, Schenkel, Volkmar, Holtzmann, Hilgenfeld, the lastof
whom, however, gives the palm in the matter of originality to the narrative of
the Gospelofthe Hebrews (N. T. extra can. IV. p. 16 f.).
For οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς. κ. τ. λ., comp. Plat. Rep. p. 379 A: ἀγαθὸς ὅ γε θεὸς τῷ ὄντι
τε καὶ λεκτέονοὕτως.

On the dogmatic importance of the proposition that God alone is good, see
Köster in the Stud. u. Krit. 1856, p. 420 ff.; and on the fundamental principle
of the divine retribution: εἰ θέλεις … τήρησον τὰς ἐντολάς, which impels the
sinner to repentance, to a renunciation of his ownrighteousness, andto faith;
comp. notes on Romans 2:13; Galatians 3:10 ff. Bengelwellremarks: “Jesus
securos adlegem remittit, contritos evangelice consolatur.” Comp. Apol.
Conf. A., p. 83.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". Heinrich Meyer's
Critical and ExegeticalCommentary on the New Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hmc/matthew-19.html. 1832.
Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament
Matthew 19:17. τί, κ. τ. λ., why? etc.)He who [alone]is Good,(865)shouldbe
askedconcerning that which is good.(866)Forthe rest, see Gnomon on Mark
10:18.— εἰ δὲ θέλεις, (but if thou wishest)as thou declarest. The expressionεἰ
θέλεις (if thou wishest)occurs againat Matthew 19:21.— τήρησοντὰς ἐντολὰς
keepthe commandments) Jesus refers those who feelsecure to the law:He
consolesthe contrite with the Gospel.
BDLabc, Vulg. Memph. Orig. 3,664bc, readτί με ἐρωτᾶς περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ (D
and Origen3,664c omit τοῦ). τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόνis the reading of Rec. Text

with Iren. 92, Hil. 703, 994ac (‘vocas’for λέγεις). Origen 3,664cd, writes, ὁ μὲν
΄ατθαῖος, ὡς περὶ ἀγαθοῦ ἔργου ἐρωτηθέντος τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐν τῷ τί ἀγαθὸν
ποιήσω; ἀνέγραψεν· ὁ δὲ ΄άρκος καὶ λουκᾶς φασὶ τὸν σωτῆρα εἰρηκέναι, τί με
λέγεις ἀγαθόν;οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἶς ὁ θεός. BDabc Vulg. Orig. Iren. 92 read
εἷς ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαθός (D omits ὁ. bc Vulg. Memph. add ὁ θεος; evidently, as I
think, a gloss ofthe Harmonies from Mark 10:18 and Luke 18:19. Iren, adds
“pater in cœlis”). Rec. Text, with Hil. 994, reads οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἶς ὁ
θεός. This is still more palpably a reading copied from the parallels in Mark
and Luke.—ED.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Bengel, JohannAlbrecht. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". Johann
Albrecht Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jab/matthew-19.html. 1897.
Matthew Poole's EnglishAnnotations on the Holy Bible
Mark omits the latter clause, and only saith, Thou knowestthe
commandments; so saith Luke, Luke 18:19,20.Our Saviour’s design here was,
not to show this young man by this answerthe wayby which it was possible
that he or any other might come to heaven, but only to convince him of the
errors of the Pharisaicaldoctrine. They would not own Christ to be God, nor
to be come forth from God; they taught eternallife to be obtainable by the
works of the law, and by a fulfilling of the law, according to that imperfect
sense which they gave of it, of which we heard much, in Matthew 5:1-48. Now,

saith our Saviour, seeing you will not own me to be God, nor yet to have come
from God,
why callestthou me good? There is none originally, essentially, and absolutely
good, but God: there is none derivatively good, but he derives his goodness
from God. How callestthou me good, whom thou wilt neither own to be God,
nor to derive from God?
But if thou will enter into life, keepthe commandments. This was the doctrine
of the Pharisees,Thatmen might keepthe commandments. Saith our Saviour,
The way to eternal life, according to your doctrine, is plain before thee. You
say, men may perfectly keepthe commandments of God. He that doth so shall
be saved. Therefore
keepthe commandments. Not that our Saviour thought he could do it, or that
there did lie a passable roadto heaven that way, but that he might convince
him of his error, and the need he had of a Saviour.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Poole, Matthew, "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17". Matthew Poole's English
Annotations on the Holy Bible.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/matthew-19.html. 1685.

Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament
Why callestthou me good? this question is askedbecause the young man
addressedhim simply as a human teacher, not as divine.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Edwards, Justin. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "FamilyBible New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fam/matthew-
19.html. American TractSociety. 1851.
Cambridge Greek Testamentfor Schools andColleges
17. τί με ἐρωτᾷς περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ; The form in which our Lord’s answeris
reported in Mark and Luke is: τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν;οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός, εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ
θεός. According to St Matthew’s report, our Lord seizes upon the word
ἀγαθὸνin the ruler’s question; according to the other gospels the reply turns
on the use of the word as applied to himself, ἀγαθὲ διδάσκαλε. But though the
reports differ in form, in effectthey are identical. Christ’s answeris so framed
as to wake reflection. ‘Why do you put this question about “the good,” why do
you callme “good?”Do you understand the meaning of your own question?’
It was not a simple question, as the ruler thought: two points are raised:[1]
What is ‘the good?’[2] How to enter life eternal. Then againthe answerto the
first is partly left to inference, and the answerto the secondlies deeper than
the young ruler’s thoughts had gone. [1] There is one only who is good,

therefore (the inference is) ‘the good’ canonly be the will of God. [2] Then the
way to enter into life eternalis to keepGod’s will as expressedin the
commandments. Jesus shews thathere too the questioner had not thought
deeply enough. Keeping the commandments is not external observance of
them, but being in heart what the commandments mean, and what the will of
God is.
Note in this incident [1] the manner of Jesus adapting itself to the condition of
the ‘scholar,’one who had leisure to think, and who plumed himself on having
thought. To such he points out the way to deeper reflection. [2] The mission of
Jesus to ‘fulfil the law.’ [3] The spiritual use of the law (the ten
commandments), as awakening the sense ofsin, and so leading to repentance.
Bengelsays:‘Jesus securosadLegem remittit, contritos evangelice
consolatur.’
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
"Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Cambridge Greek Testamentfor Schools
and Colleges".https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cgt/matthew-
19.html. 1896.
Whedon's Commentary on the Bible
17. Why callestthou me good? — The young man had used the word good
twice in his question; once to designate Jesus, andonce to designate his own

performance. Our Lord first proceeds to raise his own contemplations to a
higher standard of goodness thanhe has in his mind. Perhaps he will then see
that to talk of compensating God, by his gooddoings, for the infinite bliss of
heaven, is folly.
Why callestthou me good? — Had the young rich ruler really believed Jesus
to be Lord of all, our Lord would not have said this; for never did he refuse
any homage offeredhim, howeverhigh. This passage canthen be by no means
consideredas in any degree denying the supreme divinity of the Saviour. On
the contrary, it is saying to the young man, If you call me goodyou should
admit me to be God.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Whedon's Commentary
on the Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/matthew-
19.html. 1874-1909.
PeterPett's Commentary on the Bible
“But if you would enter into life, keepthe commandments.”
Jesus then points out to him in what true goodness consists. Itis found by
wholly keeping, from the heart, all the commandments of God without

exception(contrast James 2:10). Let a man but do that and he will enter into
life (eternal), for it will indicate a full relationship with God. It will be to be
God-like. The idea may specificallyhave in mind Amos 5:4; Amos 5:6; Amos
5:14 where life is to be found both by seeking Godand by seeking His
goodness.The two are thus seenas equated. The idea is that no man canseek
true goodnesswithout seeking God, and vice versa. And it is through truly
seeking Godthat men find goodness. We cancompare with this Jesus’
indication that those whom God blesses willseek righteousness(Matthew 5:6),
and as a result will be ‘filled’ with righteousness as He Who is the
RighteousnessofGod, and His salvation, come in delivering power. Jesus is
not, of course, telling him that he can earn eternallife by doing goodworks.
He is saying that anyone who would enter into life must be truly good, a
goodness whichthey cannotachieve in themselves, a goodnesswhichthey
must find through Him. Paul says the same, ‘Do you not know that the
unrighteous will not enter the Kingly Rule of God?’ (1 Corinthians 6:9). And
then Paul lists the kind of people who cannot hope to do so, and goes onto
explain that it is only be being washed, sanctifiedand justified in the name of
the Lord Jesus Christand by the Spirit of God that it becomes possible (1
Corinthians 6:11). Jesus has in mind that if the young man would enter into
life he must be willing to come with the humility and openness ofa little child
and receive from God through Him what pertains to goodness.
But He is very much aware that the young man’s mind must be disabusedof
all its wrong ideas. This young man before Him wants, as it were, to climb into
Heaven on the stairs of some wonderful ‘goodness’. He wants to enter it
proudly as the trumpets blare about his greatachievements (Matthew 6:2). He
wants the righteousness ofthe Scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 5:20). The last
thing that he is thinking of is humbling himself as a little child. So Jesus
knows that He must first bring his high opinion of himself crashing down. He
knows His man. And He knows that unless he learns that his righteousness
must exceedthat of the Scribes and Pharisees,he cannot enter under the
Kingly Rule of God (Matthew 5:20).

Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "PeterPett's Commentaryon
the Bible ". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/matthew-
19.html. 2013.
Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Matthew 19:17. Why askestthou me of that which is good? One there is who
is good. The common version follows a reading correctedto conform with the
other two. The variety sheds light on the whole conversation. Eithertwo
questions and answers occurred, orMatthew gives this form to bring out the
true sense. There is but one goodBeing and one goodthing, namely, God
Himself.—What the young ruler needed was not to do some goodwork or’ to
learn some speculative morality, but to acknowledge Godas the Supreme
Goodand act accordingly. This strikes at his sin, the love of riches. It does not
mean: ‘ask God; read His commandments, do not ask me.’ The other
accounts presentthis alternative: Christ either claims that He is Himself God,
or denies His own perfect goodness.The answerrebukes the error of the
question, that eternallife can be won by goodworks.
But if thou wouldestenter into life, keepthe commandments. The possibility
of doing this perfectly had just been denied. Our Lord therefore seeksto show
the young man how much he falls short of such a keeping of the
commandments. What follows shows that his obedience, howeverstrict, did
not recognize Godas the supreme good.

Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Schaff's Popular
Commentary on the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/matthew-19.html. 1879-
90.
The Expositor's Greek Testament
Matthew 19:17. τί με ἐρωτᾷς, etc.: it seems as if Jesus thought the question
superfluous (so Weiss and Meyer), but this was only a teacher’s wayof
leading on a pupil = “ofcourse there is only one answerto that: God is the one
goodbeing, and His revealed will shows us the goodHe would have us do”. A
familiar old truth, yet new as Christ meant it. How opposedto current
teaching we know from Matthew 15:4-9.— εἰ δὲ θέλεις, etc., but, to answer
your question directly, if, etc.— τήρ- ει (- ησον) τ. ἐν.: a vaguer direction then
than it seems to us now. We now think only of the Ten Words. Then there
were many commands of God besides these;and many more still of the
scribes, hence most naturally the following question.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". The
Expositor's Greek Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/egt/matthew-19.html. 1897-
1910.
George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary
===============================
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
Quid me interrogas de bono? Greek:erotas peri agathou. In the common
Greek copies, ti me legeis agathon.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Haydock, George Leo. "Commentaryon Matthew 19:17". "George
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/matthew-19.html. 1859.

E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes
Why . . . ? Note the severalquestions. See the Structure above.
wilt enter = desirest(App-102.) to enter.
life. Greek. zoe. App-170.
commandments. All of them (Matthew 5:19. James 2:10, James 2:11.
Deuteronomy 27:26 (Septuagint) Galatians 1:3, Galatians 1:10).
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "E.W.
Bullinger's Companion bible Notes".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/matthew-19.html. 1909-
1922.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(17) Why callestthou me good?—Here againthe older MSS. give a different
form to our Lord’s answer:“Why askestthouMe concerning that which is
good? There is One that is the Good.” The alteration was probably made, as
before, for the sake ofagreementwith the other Gospels. In either case the
answerhas the same force. The questionerhad lightly applied the word
“good” to One whom he as yet regarded only as a human teacher, to an act
which, it seemedto him, was in his own powerto perform. What he needed,
therefore, was to be taught to deepen and widen his thoughts of goodness until
they rose to Him in whom alone it was absolute and infinite, through
fellowship with whom only could any teacherrightly be calledgood, and from
whom alone could come the powerto do any goodthing. The method by which
our Lord leads him to that conclusionmay, without irreverence, be permitted
to call up the thought of the method in which Socrates is relatedto have dealt
with like questioners, both in the grave, sad irony of the process, andin the
self-knowledgein which it was designedto issue.
Keep the commandments.—The questioneris answeredas from his ownpoint
of view. If eternal life was to be wonby doing, there was no need to come to a
new Teacherfora new precept. It was enoughto keepthe commandments, the
greatmoral laws of God, as distinct from ordinances and traditions (Matthew
15:3), with which every Israelite was familiar.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "Ellicott's
Commentary for English Readers".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/matthew-19.html. 1905.

Treasuryof Scripture Knowledge
And he said unto him, Why callestthou me good? there is none goodbut one,
that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keepthe commandments.
there
1 Samuel 2:2; Psalms 52:1;145:7-9;James 1:17; 1 John 4:8-10,16
but
Leviticus 18:5; Ezekiel20:11,12;Luke 10:26-28;Romans 10:5; Galatians
3:11-13
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "The Treasuryof Scripture
Knowledge". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/matthew-
19.html.
The Bible Study New Testament
Why do you ask me? Jesus says this because the young man is to some degree
a religious fanatic, and self-righteous. There is only One who is good. Jesus, in
the flesh, shared our weak human nature (Philippians 2:7) but without ever
sinning (1 Peter2:22). The young man wants to worship Jesus [as he is in

human form], but God is the One who must be worshipped. Keep the
commandments. Jesus had not yet died, and the Law was still in effect.
Obeying the Law would bring eternal life—yet no one could obey the Law
(James 2:10), so that really, no one could be "good" but God himself. [The
Christian's "goodness"comes throughChrist. See Romans 8:1-4]
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Ice, Rhoderick D. "Commentary on Matthew 19:17". "The Bible Study New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ice/matthew-
19.html. College Press, Joplin, MO. 1974.
E.M. Zerr's Commentary on SelectedBooksofthe New Testament
None goodbut God. Jesus did not deny being a goodperson, for in John 10:11
he even affirmed that he was the goodshepherd. Since he was a member of
the Godhead, he wished this man to know that in calling him goodit was
equivalent to calling him God, since all goodness comesfrom Him. He then
gave the young man an answerto his question which was doubtless different
from what he expected. When he told him to keepthe commandments he did
not understand to what he could have reference since the regular
commandments of the law had already been his rule of life.

PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
WILLIAM BARCLAY
THE GREAT REFUSAL (Matthew 19:16-22)
19:16-22 And, look you, a man came to him and said, "Teacher, whatgood
thing am I to do to possess eternallife?" He said to him, "Why do you ask me
about the good? There is One who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep
the commandments." He said to him, "What kind of commandments?" Jesus
said, "'You must not kill; you must not commit adultery; you must not steal;
honour your father and your mother.' And, 'You must love your neighbour as
yourself.'" The young man said, "I have observed all these things. What am I
still lacking?" Jesus saidto him, "If you wish to be complete, go, sellyour
possessions, andgive to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and
come, follow me!" When the young man heard that saying, he went awayin
sorrow, for he had many possessions.
Here is one of the best-knownand best-loved stories in the gospelhistory. One
of the most interesting things about it is the way in which most of us, quite
unconsciously, unite different details of it from the different gospels in order
to get a complete picture. We usually callit the story of the Rich Young Ruler.
All the gospels tellus that this man was rich, for therein is the point of the
story. But only Matthew says that he was young (Matthew 19:20); and only
Luke says that he was a ruler (Luke 18:18). It is interesting to see how, quite
unconsciously, we have createdfor ourselves a composite picture composedof
elements takenfrom all three gospels (Matthew 19:16-22;Mark 10:17-22;
Luke 18:18-23).

There is anotherinteresting point about this story. Matthew alters the
question put to Jesus by this man. Both Mark and Luke say that the question
was:"Why do you callme good? No one is good but God alone" (Mark 10:18;
Luke 18:19). Matthew says that the question was:"Why do you ask me about
what is good? One there is who is good" (Matthew 19:17). (The text of the
King James Versionis in error here, as reference to any of the newerand
more correcttranslations will show.)Matthew's is the latestof the first three
gospels, andhis reverence for Jesus is such that he cannot bear to show Jesus
asking the question: "Why do you call me good?" Thatalmost sounds to him
as if Jesus was refusing to be calledgood, so he alters it into: "Why do you ask
me about what is good?" in order to avoid the seeming irreverence.
Luke 18:19 19"Whydo you call me good?" Jesus
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(19) Why callestthou me good?—Theagreementwith St. Mark is againcloser
than with St. Matthew.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
18:18-30 Manyhave a greatdeal in them very commendable, yet perish for
lack of some one thing; so this ruler could not bear Christ's terms, which
would part betweenhim and his estate. Many who are loth to leave Christ, yet
do leave him. After a long struggle betweentheir convictions and their

corruptions, their corruptions carry the day. They are very sorry that they
cannot serve both; but if one must be quitted, it shall be their God, not their
wordly gain. Their boastedobedience will be found mere outside show; the
love of the world in some form or other lies at the root. Men are apt to speak
too much of what they have left and lost, of what they have done and suffered
for Christ, as Peterdid. But we should rather be ashamedthat there has been
any regretor difficulty in doing it.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
See the notes at Matthew 19:13-30.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
19. Why, &c.—Didour Lord mean then to teachthat God only ought to be
called"good?" Impossible, forthat had been to contradict all Scripture
teaching, and His own, too (Ps 112:5;Mt 25:21;Tit 1:8). Unless therefore we
are to ascribe captiousnessto our Lord, He could have had but one object—to
raise the youth's ideas of Himself, as not to be classedmerely with other "good
masters," and declining to receive this title apart from the "One" who is
essentiallyand only "good." This indeed is but distantly hinted; but unless
this is seenin the backgroundof our Lord's words, nothing worthy of Him
can be made out of them. (Hence, Socinianism, instead of having any support
here, is only baffled by it).
Matthew Poole's Commentary
See Poole on"Luke 18:18"
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And Jesus saidunto him,.... In answerto his question, beginning with the
characterhe gave him:
why callestthou me good? it being unusual to address men, even their
Rabbins, under such a title:

none is good, save one, that is, God: or "but God alone";as the Vulgate Latin
and Arabic versions render it; or, "but the one God", as read the Syriac,
Persic, and Ethiopic versions;See Gill on Matthew 19:17.
Geneva Study Bible
And Jesus saidunto him, Why callestthou me good? none is good, save one,
that is, God.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
19. Why callestthou me good?]According to St Matthew the question also
ran, ‘Why askestthou me about the good?’The emphasis is not on the me (for
the form used in the original is the enclitic με not ἐμὲ on good. Why do you
give me this strange title which from your point of view is unwarrantable?
Comp. Plato Phaed. 27, “to be a goodman is impossible...Godalone could
have this honour.”
none is good, save one, that is, God] 1 John 3:5.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 19. - And Jesus saidunto him, Why callestthou me good? none is good,
save one, that is, God. The title "good" was a singular one for the young ruler
to have used. It was never used to the most famous rabbis by their pupils. It
implied an intense reverence, but nothing more. The young man distinctly did
not then believe the Masterwas Divine, else he had never made the great
refusal recordeddirectly afterwards. "To be a goodman is impossible... God
alone could have this honour" (Plate, 'Phaed.,' 27). "You are looking at me,"
said the Master, "as a man: why give me this strange, lofty title? You are
looking on me only as an earthly Teacher."The greatHeart-readerwas
reading the young man's thoughts, thoughts which sooncrystallized, as we

shall see, into the refusedto do what he, whom he chose to style "good,"
directed him to carry out.
Links
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BRUCE HURT MD
Luke 18:19 And Jesus saidto him, "Why do you callMe good? No one is good
exceptGod alone.
Lu 1:35 11:13 Job14:4 15:14-16 25:4 1Ti 3:16 Heb 7:26 Jas 1:17
Luke 18 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries
Luke 18:18-27 How Good People GetSaved - Steven Cole
Luke 18:18-27 The Impossibility of Salvation, Part 1 - John MacArthur
Luke 18:18-27 The Impossibility of Salvation, Part 2 - John MacArthur
ONLY GOD IS
GOOD
Why do you call Me good? No one is goodexcept God alone (Mt 19:17, Mk
10:18)- There are differences of opinion as to the significance of Jesus'
question.

Here is one thought on the meaning of Jesus'question - Is He saying He is not
good? That's not what He says. He says that only God is good. He is directing
the young ruler's attention to God Who alone is good. Jesus is not saying that
He Himself is not good, although we know He is because He is God. What
Jesus seems to be doing is teaching the young ruler about what true goodness
is, what the standard of goodness is, and thus He emphasizes that the standard
of what is really goodis God alone. Imagine the shock of this young man who
had so many "goodqualities" (eagerness, humility, discernment, spiritual
mindedness, moral cleanliness, worldlysuccess). WhatJesus is saying to the
young man is that he was not good. There is none goodbut God. Paul makes a
similar statementin the sectionof Romans where he indicts all humanity as
falling short of the glory of God, declaring "there is none who does good,
there is (absolutely) not even one." (Ro 3:12, from Ps 14:3 and Ps 53:3)
Solomonis even more direct writing "there is not a righteous man on earth
who continually does goodand who never sins." (Eccl7:20)
Some writers have twisted Jesus'words to such a degree that they say this
statementby Jesus amounts to a confessionofsin. Of course this is
preposterous speculationfor such an interpretation would counter so many
other passages thatdescribe Jesus as without sin () I will not discuss this
further but will refer you to an article by the esteemed Princetontheologian
Benjamin B Warfield - Jesus'AllegedConfessionofSin - The Princeton
TheologicalReview, pp 177-228(1914). (Note you can downloadthe Pdf to
facilitate reading this excellentarticle, which also functions as a good
commentary on the story of the Rich Young Ruler.)
JoelWilliams has a well reasonedcommenton "good" in the present context -
The rich man and Jesus have different ideas about the meaning of the word
"good." The rich man apparently defines goodnessin terms of personalpiety
attained through human achievement(Lane, 365). Since he felt that he had
fulfilled God's commandments from his youth (Mk 10:30, Lk 18:21, Mt

19:20), he probably also believed himself to be good. Now he was asking
another goodman ("goodTeacher" - Mk 10:17, Lk 18:18)what else he should
do to guarantee eternallife (Mk 10:17, Mt 19:16 "What GOOD thing shall I
do that I may inherit eternallife", Lk 18:18). Jesus'questionin Mark 10:28
(Lk 18:19, Mt 19:17) is not a confessionofHis Own sinfulness but rather a
challenge to the rich man's notion of goodness.Jesus points the man to the
goodness ofGod. God is goodin an unlimited and perfect way, not by
achievementbut by His eternal character. This perfectstandard of God's
righteousness complicatesthe rich man's quest for eternal life. Instead of
taking the opportunity to rethink his views, the rich man simply drops the
offending word and addresses Jesusas "Teacher"(Mk 10:20 = only in Mark's
version) rather than as "goodTeacher" (Mk 10:17, Lk 18:18). (The Bible
Knowledge Key Word Study - The Gospels - comments on Gospelof Mark,
page 147-148)
Leon Morris has a similar thought regarding Jesus'questionwhy do you call
Me good- Jesus proceedsto show the shortcomings in the young man’s
position. No one is goodbut God alone is not to be understood as a
repudiation of the epithet goodas applied to himself. If that was his meaning,
Jesus would surely have said plainly that he was a sinner. Ratherhe was
inviting the ruler to reflecton the meaning of his own words. (TNTC)
Criswellon no one good - Jesus is not denying His goodness orHis deity here,
but is making an effort to cause the man to identify the source of His
goodness,the very goodness ofGod. In fact, the obvious purpose of Jesus'
reply is to force the ruler to the realization that Jesus is goodbecause He is
God. (Believer's Study Bible)
Ray Pritchard on good - Jesus understands that all true goodness comesfrom
God. He’s saying, “When you call me good, do you really know what you’re
saying? If I am goodin the ultimate sense, it’s because I am not merely a good
person, it’s because I am God in human flesh.” And so, when Jesus says,

“Why do you callme good?” he’s asking the question, “Do you really know
who you are talking to? And do you really know what you are saying?”
William Lane on good- Jesus respondedby directing attention awayfrom
himself to God, who alone is the source and norm of essentialgoodness. The
apparent repudiation of the epithet “good” onlyserves to radicalize the issue
posedby the question of verse 17. The inquirer’s idea of goodness was defined
by human achievement. He undoubtedly regardedhimself as “good” in the
sense that he was confident that he had fulfilled the commandments from the
time he first assumedtheir yoke as a very young man; now he hopes to
discoverfrom another “good” man what he can do to assure eternal life.
Jesus’answerforces him to recognize that his only hope is an utter reliance
upon God, who alone can bestow eternallife. The referral of the question to
God, bowing before the Father and giving him the glory, places Jesus’
response within the context of the lordship of God. In calling in question the
man’s use of “good,” Jesus’intention is not to pose the question of His own
sinlessnessoroneness with the Father, but to setin correctperspective the
honor of God. He took seriouslythe conceptof the envoy which stands behind
the formulation of Mark 9:37 (Lk 9:48-note), and desires to be knownonly in
terms of his mission and the one who sent him. (NICNT-Mark)
What the Bible teaches notes that "The Lord Jesus did not deny the goodness
that the young ruler had attributed to Him, and now gave him opportunity to
considerthe full implications of his form of address, that the One who is
"good" is God. We do not conclude from this that he graspedthe truth of the
identity of the Lord Jesus, but the implications are clear. There is, however,
another truth that is in the Lord's words. Only God is goodin the absolute
sense, therefore the young ruler is sinful. The greatestofall soul winners is
showing a sinner how far short he has come of the standard demanded by
divine holiness (Rom 3:9-23). The acknowledgmentof his guilt as a sinner is
the necessaryrequirement to receive eternal life, not as a reward for personal
goodness but as a gift.(What the Bible teaches – Luke)

Kent Hughes - Jesus usedthe occasionto do some metaphysical probing so the
man would reflect upon his ownsoul. “Why do you call me good? No one is
good—exceptGodalone” is a challenge to reflecton Jesus’ministry as it
related to God as the only truly goodpersonin existence. If the ruler could see
this level of goodness inJesus’ministry, he would realize that the kingdom of
God was present. “Think, man! If I am good, and if only God is good, then
who am I, and what am I doing? Think!” Having pushed the goodness
question, Jesus then focusedupon the insufficient goodness ofthe ruler. Jesus
did so by calling him to keepthe secondhalf of the Ten Commandments, the
commandments that have to do with our socialethics, our duty to other
people. (Preaching the Word - Luke)
John Martin - Apparently the man thought Jesus had gained a measure of
status with God by His goodworks. Jesus was implying that if He were truly
good, then it would be because He is God. This, then, is another of Jesus’
claims of deity. (Bible Knowledge Commentary)
Spurgeonexplains goodthis way - It was as if Jesus said, “You come to Me
asking about what goodthing you can do to inherit eternal life; but what do
you really know about goodness?”“The argumentis clear: either Jesus was
good, or He ought not to have calledHim good;but as there is none goodbut
God, Jesus Who is goodmust be God.”
Guzik - In this, Jesus did not deny His own goodness.Instead, He askedthe
man, “Do you understand what you are saying when you call Me good?
Becauseno one is goodbut One, that is, God.”
Constable - Jesus’question accomplishedtwo things. It setthe standard for
goodness,namely God (cf. Lk 18:11). It also confronted the man with the
logicalimplication of his question (Lk 18:18), namely that Jesus was God.
That the man did not believe that Jesus was Godseems clearfrom his
response to Him (Lk 18:23).

Cornerstone Bible Commentary explains Jesus questionabout goodthis way -
This puzzling question may imply that the man should focus not on his own
gooddeeds, but on the goodnessofthe one true God (perhaps an allusion to
Deut 6:4). Or it may mean that since God is good, his commandments provide
a detailed definition of goodness.
Good(18) (agathos)(see gooddeeds)means intrinsically good, inherently
goodin quality, with the idea of goodwhich is also profitable, useful,
benefiting others, benevolent(marked by or disposedto doing good). Agathos
is one whose goodnessandworks of goodness are transferredto others. Good
and doing goodis the idea. Agathos describes that which is beneficial in
addition to being good. Agathos is that which is goodin its character,
beneficialin its effects and/or useful in its action. Agathos is used in the New
Testamentprimarily of spiritual and moral excellence. Pauluses agathos to
describe the Gospelas the “gladtidings of goodthings” (Ro 10:15-note). The
writer of Hebrews uses it in the same way, of “the goodthings to come” of
which “Christ appeared as a high priest” (Heb 9:11-note)and of which the
law was “only a shadow” (Heb 10:1-note).
Adrian Rogers -Jesus didn't come to make you a nicer person. He came to
radically, dramatically, and eternally transform you!....Now Jesus is teaching
the rich young ruler, in this one sentence, two things. 1. He Himself Is Not
Good- Number one: Jesus is teaching this man that he himself is not good.
Jesus is teaching this young man that he himself—the young man—is not
good. This young man thought he was a quite a goodboy. And Jesus said,
“Look, there is none goodbut God.” 2. Jesus Himself Is God The secondthing
Jesus was teaching this young man is that Jesus Himself is God. Now those of
you who just want to tip the hat to Jesus and not bow the knee to Jesus—let
me tell you this about Jesus:Jesus is God. And if Jesus is not God, Jesus is not
good. How do I know? Jesus ChristHimself said so. Jesus said, “There is none
goodbut One—that’s God” (Mark 10:18). Put it down big, plain, and straight.

Don’t just flatter Jesus. Don’tjust tip the hat to Jesus and say, “Jesus is a nice
fellow.” You don’t tip the hat; you bow the knee. Because,Jesussaid, “There
is none goodbut One, and that is God” (Mark 10:18). And what Jesus was
saying in this one sentence:“I am God, and you’re a sinner. I am God, and
you are a sinner. There is none goodbut One, and that is God.” And by the
way, you might want to put in your margin, Romans 3:10-12....Youknow,
there are people who join churches today like they are doing God a wild favor.
They come down the aisle and join churches. They are religious, but they have
never seenthe holiness of God, and their own sinfulness, and the wrath of God
againstsin....And so what is Jesus teaching this young man? Jesus is teaching
this young man that proud men at their bestare really sinners at their worst.
You know, there are people writing books today with titles like this: Why Do
Bad Things Happen to GoodPeople? Come up close. Iwant to tell you
something: There are no goodpeople. You say, “Who do you think you are?”
Just a preacherpreaching what Jesus said—“There’snone goodbut One, and
that’s God” (Mark 10:18)....The worstsin, the sin of all sins, the worstform of
badness—is human goodness, whenhuman goodnessbecomesa substitute for
the new birth. The worstform of badness is human goodness. Jesus saidthat
prostitutes and crookedtax collectors were going to Heaven before the
Pharisees,becausethey had their self-righteousnessas a substitute for God’s
mercy....the worstform of badness is human goodness, whenhuman goodness
becomes the substitute for the new birth. (From his sermon Three Strikes and
You’re Out)
Verse 19
19. τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν;According to St Matthew the question also ran, ‘Why
askestthoume about the good?’The emphasis is not on the me (for the form
used is the enclitic με not ἐμὲ) but on good. Why do you give me this strange
title which from your point of view is unwarrantable? Comp. Plato Phaed. 27,
“to be a goodman is impossible … God alone could have this honour.”

εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός. 1 John 3:5.
Cambridge Greek Testamentfor Schools andColleges
STEVEN COLE
How GoodPeople GetSaved (Luke 18:18-27)
RelatedMedia
If Jesus had takenan evangelismtraining course, He would have dealt
differently with the rich young ruler. From an evangelist’s point of view, this
guy was a piece of cake. His eagernessis evident from the fact that (Mark
10:17 reports) he ran, not walked, up to Jesus. He even knelt down before
Jesus, right in front of others, and asked, “Whatmust I do to inherit eternal
life?” Jesus didn’t even have to figure out how to turn the conversationto
spiritual things! What an opportunity! Shouldn’t be too hard to geta
decision!
And the man was a choice prospect. Matthew tells us that he was young. He
still had most of his adult life aheadof him. He was a ruler (Luke 18:18). The
term is not specific, but it points to someone in a position of authority, either
in the religious or civil community. He was in a place of influence in spite of
his youthfulness. And, he was extremely rich (Luke 18:23). With just a tithe,
he could have bankrolledJesus’mission for years to come. What a key
person! But Jesus lethim walk awayunconverted.

Not only that, but the man was from a goodbackground. He didn’t have any
serious problems to overcome—no drugs or alcohol, no history of trouble with
the law. From his youth, he had tried to keepthe TenCommandments, and he
had done a pretty goodjob of it. He was a fine young man, the kind that any
church would lift up as an example. It shouldn’t take much to lead this man to
Christ. But Jesus seemedto take the wrong approach!
Anyone with a little bit of training knows that when a person asks, “What
must I do to inherit eternal life?” the right answeris, “You don’t have to do
anything. Eternal life is completely free! Just believe in Jesus and receive
God’s free gift!” Then you lead him in prayer to receive Christ, give him
assurance ofsalvation, and rejoice that another name has been added to the
Book ofLife!
The one thing you would never do with such an evangelistic prospectis to tell
him to keepthe TenCommandments as the way to gain eternallife. We all
know that obeying the commandments won’t get anyone into heaven. And yet
that is preciselywhat Jesus did! When the guy replies that he has done that,
Jesus then brings up the subjectof money and tells him to give away
everything—not a tenth, but the whole works—andthen he will have eternal
life. We won’t even bring up the subject of money in the first ten follow-up
appointments, but here Jesus brings it up with an evangelistic contactand
tells him that if he gave it all away, he would go to heaven!Jesus really could
have used some training in how to share His faith!
There’s another possibility, of course. If it seems to us that Jesus blew a choice
opportunity and that He did not share the gospelclearlywith this eageryoung
man (if it had been anyone other than Jesus who had takenthis approach, we
all would saythat he blew it), then perhaps Jesus has something to teach us
about the gospelmessage andhow to share it. In particular, He teaches us

how to share the gospelwith goodpeople—those who believe in God and have
lived decent lives. There are three main lessons:
1. Even goodpeople need salvation.
This man believed in God and was zealous for spiritual things. He was a
sincere, moral young man who was trying his best to please God. But he was
lacking eternallife. He was good, but he was lost.
I encounterpeople like this all the time—decent, moral people. Often they
have been raisedin the church. Their parents have taught them right from
wrong. They hold responsible jobs, pay their taxes, obeythe law, are faithful
to their marriages, attend church, and even give to the church. They give their
time to service clubs and to wholesome youth activities, like Scouts and
coaching sports teams. They’re goodpeople, the kind that you would want for
neighbors.
But even though they are good, they do not have eternallife. They lack
treasure in heaven (18:22). They have not entered the kingdom of God (18:24,
25). They are not saved(18:26). All of these terms in the text point to the same
thing, namely, being rightly related to God in the present so as to spend
eternity with Him in heaven after death. As this story makes evident, it is not
enough to be a very goodperson. Even goodpeople need salvation because
they are not goodenough. It raises the important question, “What must a
goodperson do to be saved?”
When I say “goodperson,” I am referring not only to those whom others
would label as good, but also to those who view themselves as good. Most
people flatter themselves by thinking that they are on the upward side of the
goodness curve. Satanhas blinded us to the enormity of our sin in God’s sight.
And, we all compare ourselves with those who are worse sinners than we are,

not with those who are better. I read about a portly fellow who put his beer,
wine, cigars, and an “adult” magazine on the counter. As the checkerrang up
the total, the man suddenly dropped a candy bar in front of her. “I almost
forgot,” he said guiltily. “My one vice.” (Reader’s Digest[7/88], p. 36).
So if you are inclined to think of yourself as a basicallygoodperson, this
messageis for you. The first thing it shows you is that you need the salvation
that the Bible talks about because you are not goodenough for heaven. No one
is. God’s Word states, “There is none righteous, not even one” (Rom. 3:10).
Even the best people need salvation. So, how are goodpeople saved?
2. Goodpeople are savedby abandoning trust in their own goodness,because
salvationby human goodness is impossible.
Jesus shockedthe disciples (Mark 10:24, 26) by saying as this young man
walkedaway(Luke 18:24), “How hard it is for those who are wealthy to enter
the kingdom of God!” The disciples and most Jews thought that wealth was a
sign of God’s blessing. But Jesus says that it is a definite spiritual hindrance
or danger. He continues, “Forit is easierfor a camel to go through the eye of a
needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Contrary to
popular belief, He was not referring to a low gate in the wallof Jerusalem
where a camel had to getdown on its knees to enter. He was referring to a
camelgoing through the eye of a needle. In other words, He is saying that
salvationfor a rich man is not just difficult; it’s impossible. The stunned
disciples ask, “Thenwho can be saved?” Jesusconfirms what they’re
thinking: “It is impossible with men.” No one canbe goodenough to be saved.
The story brings out three reasons why salvationby human goodness is
impossible:

A. SALVATION BY HUMAN GOODNESSIS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE
HUMAN GOODNESSCAN NEVER COMPARE WITH GOD’S
GOODNESS.
The young man addressedJesus as “GoodTeacher.”This was an unusual way
to address a Jewishteacherand it bordered on flattery. Jesus challengedhim,
“Why do you callMe good? No one is good exceptGod alone” (18:19). Cultists
and critics jump on this statementto say that Jesus was denying His own
deity. But they miss the point. If Jesus were not God in human flesh, to tell
this man to sell everything and follow Him would be on the par of a Jim Jones
type of cult leader! But Jesus’point was not to make a statementabout
Himself, but rather to challenge the young man’s superficialuse of the word
“good.” He was using “good” like we use the word “love.” We say, “I love
pizza” or “I love my dog” in the same breath as “I love my wife,” and then “I
love Jesus.”In so doing, we cheapenthe meaning of the word, especiallywhen
applied to Jesus. That’s why Jesus took him to task.
The man would have agreedthat God is good, in fact, better than any human
being. He also called Jesus good, andhe probably would have said that Jesus
was an exceptionally goodman. But if you had asked, he also would have
calledhimself a goodman. He kept the commandments. He wasn’t a sinner,
like the publicans and prostitutes. He was a goodman seeking to learn from
another goodman what else he could do to inherit eternallife.
Many commentators say that Jesus was telling the young man that he ought
not callJesus goodunless he was prepared to affirm that He is God. But that
is probably too subtle a refinement. Rather, Jesus was pointing out the fact
that God and His absolute goodness were much higher than he realized. As B.
B. Warfield sums it up, “Jesus’concernhere is not to glorify Himself, but
God: it is not to give any instruction concerning His own person whatever, but
to indicate the published will of God as the sole and the perfect prescription
for the pleasing of God” (The Personand Work of Christ [Presbyterian and
Reformed}, p. 185).

Thus the man neededto see that God in His awesome holiness and absolute
perfection is the minimum level of goodness necessaryto inherit eternal life.
As Jesus saidin the Sermon on the Mount, “Therefore you are to be perfect,
as your heavenly Fatheris perfect” (Matt. 5:48). Or, as Isaiah pointed out
(64:6, NIV), “allour righteous acts are like filthy rags” in God’s sight. The
young man’s flippant use of the word “good” showedthat he did not grasp the
absolute goodness ofGod that is necessaryto be in His presence in heavenfor
all eternity. Salvationby human goodness is impossible because it cannever
compare to God’s goodness.
B. SALVATION BY HUMAN GOODNESSIS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE
HUMAN GOODNESSALWAYS FALLS SHORT OF GOD’S HOLY LAW.
The difference betweenthis point and the previous one is that there the focus
was on God’s nature as holy, whereas here the focus is on God’s Law as the
expressionof His holiness towardthe human race. The young man asks what
he can do to gain eternallife and so Jesus responds, “Keepthe Ten
Commandments.” Jesus mentions the secondtable, which contains
commandments that focus on our duty to our fellow man, because these
commands are somewhatoutward and observable. If a person could keepall
of God’s commandments for all of his life, not only outwardly but on the
thought level (as Jesus explains in the Sermon on the Mount), then he would
merit eternal life (Lev. 18:5).
The man claims to have done all these things from his youth up. Jesus easily
could have challengedhim on this answer. As J. C. Ryle exclaims, “An answer
more full of darkness and self-ignorance it is impossible to conceive!He who
made it could have knownnothing rightly, either about himself, or God, or
God’s law” (Expository Thoughts on the Gospels [Baker], 3:271). ButJesus let
his answergo by and pressedon to the man’s chief problem: “One thing you

still lack;sellall that you possess, and distribute it to the poor, and you shall
have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me” (18:22).
Why did Jesus laythis requirement on this man? If it were a universal
requirement for salvation, Jesus wouldhave put the same demand on
Zaccheus, but He did not (19:1-10). There are severalviews, but I believe that
Jesus was using the Law as a tutor to convict the man of his sin (Gal. 3:24).
The man claimed to keepall of the commandments, but Jesus is saying, in
effect, “You don’t keepthe first half of the commandments, to love God with
all your heart, because your money is your god. You’re an idolater. And, you
don’t keepthe secondhalf, to love your neighbor as yourself, because you are
unwilling to give generouslyto the poor.” If he had lookedbeneath the surface
of his gooddeeds, the man would have been terrified of the requirement of
God’s holy Law, in that he was violating it all! Leon Morris observes, “When
a man takes seriouslythe requirements of the law he is on the way to coming
to Christ” (Luke [IVP/Eerdmans], p. 267).
In our attempts to share the gospel, we are often too quick to share the good
news before people feel the awful weightof the bad news. When we are talking
with a person who trusts in his owngoodness to gethim into heaven, we need
to emphasize the holy Law of Godwhich the person has violated, even though
he is blind to that fact. The Bible says that to keepthe whole law, but to
violate it in one point, is to be guilty of it all (James 2:10). You can live a
perfect life, but if you sin just once, you are disqualified from heaven, because
God will not allow any unpardoned sinner into heaven. He must punish all sin
in order to be just.
If you were driving too fast and gota ticket, you could tell the judge, “But I’ve
never murdered anyone,” and it would not get you off. You could say, “I’ve
never robbed a bank. I’ve always paid my taxes. I go to church.” It wouldn’t
matter. You broke the law and the judge will impose the penalty.

Or, suppose that you went to buy a new mirror and the clerk tried to sell you
one with a crack in it. He says, “It’s just a small crack. The restof the mirror
is just fine.” Sorry! One crack makes a broken mirror. One sin makes a
sinner and law-breaker. And we all have sinned, not just once, but repeatedly
all of our lives.
People who think that they’re goodenough to qualify for heavenneed to hold
their behavior, including their thoughts, up to the standard of God’s holy
Law. They need to feel, as Spurgeonput it, the rope around their necks, that
they stand guilty and condemned before God. One reasonthat we see so many
superficial professions offaith in our day is that we do not use the Law as
Jesus did, to convictpeople of how far short they have fallen from God’s
perfect standard.
Thus salvationby human goodnessis impossible because it cannever compare
with God’s goodness andit always falls short of God’s holy Law.
C. SALVATION BY HUMAN GOODNESSIS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE
HUMAN GOODNESSDECEIVESUS ABOUT OUR TRUE HEART
CONDITION.
This man was sincere in thinking that he had kept the commandments, but he
was sincerelywrong! He was deceiving himself because he was not looking at
things on the heart level as God does. You can sincerelybelieve that you are
well, but if you have some internal disease that is killing you, your sincerity
does not matter. You must deal with your true condition or you will die.
Sincerity is not enough; we must believe God’s diagnosis aboutthe wickedness
of the human heart.

This man thought that he had it pretty well together. He just needed to do
another thing or two to nail down eternal life. But Jesus soughtto show him
that in his heart, he was an idolater. He worshipped his money more than
God.
The Bible repeatedly warns us about the danger of money. In the parable of
the sower, the thorns that chokedout the word represent“worries and riches
and the pleasures of this life” (Luke 8:14). In the parable of the rich fool,
Jesus describeda man who had plenty of goods storedup, but he had
neglectedhis soul (12:16-21). Paulwarned that “those who want to get rich
fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires which
plunge men into ruin and destruction” (1 Tim. 6:9). Moneyis like a loaded
gun. It canbe a useful thing if you’re careful with it. But, at all times it is a
dangerous thing that you must treat with caution. Like guns, money can only
be handled by sinners. It can lull us into thinking that all is well because we
live comfortably, but we forgetthat eternity is a heartbeataway. If you
protest that money is no problem for you, I would say that you do not see your
heart as God sees it. Even those who are generous with their money may
deceive themselves into thinking that because they give awayso much, God
will overlook their sin.
But no one canget into heaven by his own goodness. Goodpeople must
abandon trusting in their own goodness if they want to getright with God.
Salvationby human goodnessis impossible.
3. Goodpeople are savedby turning from their sin and trusting in God alone
to save them.
This man lackedone thing (18:22), but in lacking that one thing, he lacked
everything. What was that one thing? He needed to sell everything, give the
money away, and come follow Jesus. What? Did Jesus meanthat he could
earn salvationby doing this one thing? If so, this would be the first and only

man in history of whom that was true. Scripture is uniformly clearthat
salvationis by grace through faith apart from works (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5).
So why did Jesus lay this heavy requirement on this man? He did it because a
man cannot cling to his idols and genuinely trust in Christ for salvationat the
same time. Saving faith is inseparable from repentance, which means, turning
from our sins. Mark 1:15 sums up Jesus’message:“Repentand believe in the
gospel.” Repentanceloosens ourgraspon our sin; faith lays hold of God for
deliverance. Repentance andsaving faith always go together.
Jesus was telling this rich young ruler what He taught elsewhere, that if your
hand or foot causes youto stumble, cut it off. If your eye causes youto
stumble, pluck it out. If you don’t, you will go to hell (see Matt. 5:29-30;Mark
9:43-50). In other words, sin condemns us. We must repent of it or it will drag
us down to hell. You can’t cling to your sin with one hand and to the cross of
Christ with the other.
Picture a man in an upper story of a burning high-rise apartment. This has
been his home and he loves it. But the building is on fire and if he wants to
save his life, he must give it up. If he clings to his things, he will die in the
smoke and flames. Repentance is his turning from those things to the open
window. Faith is his jumping out the window into the safety net which the
firemen have spread below. Both are necessaryfor him to be saved.
As Jesus makes plain here, no man can save himself; but, “the things
impossible with men are possible with God” (18:27). This means that we dare
not trust in our repentance to save us. We dare not trust in our trust to save
us. We canonly trust in Godto save us. Salvationis totally God’s doing, not at
all our doing. We must castourselves totallyon Him, not trusting at all in
ourselves. Thus,

Goodpeople are saved by abandoning trust in their owngoodness, by turning
from their sin and trusting in God alone to save them.
Conclusion
In 1882, C. H. Spurgeonwrote something that preciselyfits our times as well
(exactsource unknown):
A very greatportion of modern revivalism has been more a curse than a
blessing, because it has led thousands to a kind of peace before they have
known their misery; restoring the prodigal to the Father’s house, and never
making him say, ‘Father, I have sinned.’ How can he be healed who is not
sick, or he be satisfiedwith the bread of life who is not hungry? The old-
fashionedsense of sin is despised…. Everything in this age is shallow…. The
consequence is that men leap into religion, and then leap out again.
Unhumbled they came to the church, unhumbled they remained in it, and
unhumbled they go from it.
Perhaps I am speaking to some goodpeople today. You’ve assumed that your
gooddeeds will get you into heaven. But you must see that your own goodness
can never save you. You must further see the awful sins of your heart as God
sees them. Perhaps there is one sin that you refuse to let go. The Lord is
saying, “Let it go! Sell all that you possess,and distribute it to the poor, and
you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” Turn from your sin
and trust in Christ alone who cansave. Even though this rich young ruler
went awaysorrowful and unsaved, Jesus knew what He was doing as an
evangelist. I pray your response will not be like that of this young man.
DiscussionQuestions

Some say that requiring repentance for salvation adds works to salvation by
free grace alone. Agree/disagree?Why?
Are we too quick to press for decisions and to give assurance ofsalvation?
How can we know when a personis truly ready?
What lessons canwe learn from Jesus’evangelistic method with this young
man?
Do we as rich Americans adequately appreciate the spiritual dangers of
riches? How canwe be more on guard?
Copyright, Steven J. Cole, 1999,All Rights Reserved.
Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture Quotations are from the New American
Standard Bible, Updated Edition © The LockmanFoundation

GENERAL RESOURCES
God Alone Is Good
A
Scripture Reading — Mark 10:17-27
No one is good—exceptGodalone. — Mark 10:18
When our children were small, we taught them a simple prayer to saybefore
meals: “Godis great. God is good. Now we thank him for our food. By his
hand we all are fed. Give us this day our daily bread.” Early in life it’s
valuable to learn about God’s goodness.
As a boy, I loved the story of Heidi by Johanna Spyri. Heidi was an orphan
who lived with her embittered grandfather, a hermit, high in the Alps. The
Alm-Uncle, he was called. He avoided everyone, and everyone avoided him.
But Heidi’s gentle goodnesschangedthe Alm-Uncle, and he learned to put his
bitter past behind him.
Growing up, I found that I was a mixture of both goodand bad, as we all are.
As Paul says, “I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out”
(Romans 7:18). I tried to be good, but sometimes I was untruthful, rebellious,
disobedient, self-centered, lustful, and lazy.

When I came to know that God is totally good—unmixed with evil—and that
through Christ I could be forgiven and live a life of peace with the greatand
goodGod, my heart overflowedwith joy.
It’s important for eachof us to acknowledgethe evil in our lives. But it’s
equally important to know that God forgives our evil tendencies and restores
us to himself through faith in Jesus Christ. Have you experiencedthat
forgiveness?
Prayer
How goodit is, O God, that you are purely good, that in you there is no evil.
How happy we are to rest in your forgiveness andto find peace with you.
Thank you. Amen.
God Alone Is Good
Now let’s return to the beginning when I said I’d found something especially
inspiring in the Scriptures. I read Luke 18:19 NIV in which Jesus saidto a
rich young ruler: “No one is good—exceptGodalone.”
You know, misery isn’t the only thing that loves company, so does insecurity. I
found comfort in being reminded I’m not alone in not being goodenough.
This verse makes it plain as the big old cherry tree standing outside my
writing room window that no one on this planet is goodon their own; God
alone is good.

Jesus was saying only god is good

Jesus was saying only god is good

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was saying only god is good

Similar to Jesus was saying only god is good (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was saying only god is good