Casting off the ragged garment of my own righteousness and returning to the place of the tax collector who fell before Jesus’ feet, confessing, “There is no one good except God alone; Therefore, even today I am a sinner who cannot live apart from the grace of the Lord’s cross.”

 

Casting off the ragged garment of my own righteousness and returning to the place of the tax collector who fell before Jesus’ feet, confessing, “There is no one good except God alone; Therefore, even today I am a sinner who cannot live apart from the grace of the Lord’s cross.”

 

 

 

 

“A certain ruler asked Him, saying, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ So Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God’” (Luke 18:18–19).

 

 

(1)   Originally, I should have chosen to meditate on today’s passage from Luke 18:18–27, but I have decided to focus only on verses 18–19.  The reasons are, first, that meditating through verse 27 would make this short devotional reflection far too long, and second, that I thought it would be beneficial to meditate on verses 18–19 alone.

 

(a)    As I meditate on Luke 18:18–19, I would like to divide it into two parts: “A certain ruler asked Him, saying, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” (v. 18), “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God” (v. 19).

 

(2)   First, I would like to meditate on the words, “A certain ruler asked Him, saying, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” (v. 18).

(a)    As I meditated on this verse, I began to wonder whether this “certain ruler” might be related to the people Jesus described in verse 9 as those “who trusted in themselves that they were righteous,” or perhaps to those Jesus referred to in verse 14 as “everyone who exalts himself.”

 

(i)       The Pharisee in the first half of Luke 18 (vv. 9–14) and the rich ruler in the latter half (vv. 18–23) are spiritually very closely connected.  As you suggested, they represent typical examples of those who ‘trusted in themselves that they were righteous’ and those who ‘exalt themselves.’  Through Luke’s structure and contrasting context, we can summarize the connection between these two passages in three ways” (Internet):

 

1.      The Continuity of a Self-Righteous Attitude

 

The Pharisee in the parable (v. 9): He trusted in his own righteousness and boasted of his works (Torah observance, fasting, and tithing).

 

The rich ruler (v. 21): When Jesus listed the commandments, he replied, “All these I have kept from my youth.”

 

Spiritual connection: Like the Pharisee, the ruler was trapped in a sense of moral superiority and self-righteousness, believing that he had perfectly kept God’s law.

 

2.      The Limitation and Failure of Those Who Exalt Themselves

 

Jesus’ warning (v. 14): “Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

 

The ruler’s spiritual condition: He was a man who placed himself in a high position because of his social status (a ruler), his wealth, and his religious achievements.

 

Failure to humble himself (vv. 22–23): When Jesus demanded the humility of selling all his possessions, giving to the poor, and following Him—thereby confronting his true idol, wealth—the ruler became deeply sorrowful because he was very rich and went away.  In the end, because he could not humble himself, he turned away from the path to eternal life.

3.      Luke’s deliberate arrangement through the surrounding context

 

Luke 18 continually demonstrates what kind of attitude is necessary to enter the kingdom of God.

 

Verses 9–14: The self-exalting Pharisee (rejected) versus the self-humbling tax collector (justified).

 

Verses 15–17: Those who humble themselves and receive the kingdom like little children (heirs of the kingdom).

 

Verses 18–23: The rich ruler who trusted in his own righteousness and exalted himself (departing in sorrow).

 

Therefore, this ruler can be seen as a vivid real-life example of the kind of person Jesus warned about in verses 9 and 14—a person who is trapped in self-righteousness and self-exaltation, and whose choices ultimately reveal the consequences of that condition (Internet).

 

(b)   This ruler addressed Jesus as “Good Teacher” [Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ (Didaskale agathe)]. What was the meaning and intention behind this expression?

 

(i)      Within this title are contained the ruler’s theological background, his view of Jesus, and his personal motives. Based on the Jewish context of the time and the Greek expression, artificial intelligence analyzed its meaning and intent in three ways (Internet):

 

1.      Profound flattery and courtesy (Cultural meaning)

 

An unusual title: In Jewish society, it was extremely rare—almost unheard of—to address a rabbi (teacher) with the adjective “good” (agathos). In Jewish tradition, ultimate goodness belonged to God alone.

 

The ruler’s intention: He was praising Jesus as someone far superior to ordinary rabbis and was attempting to show the highest level of courtesy and respect.

2.      A desire to have his own “Righteousness” confirmed (Psychological intention)

 

Birds of a feather flock together: This ruler considered himself a “good person” who had perfectly kept the Law (v. 21).  Therefore, he wanted approval from Jesus, whom he perceived to be equally “good.”

 

The ruler’s intention: He approached Jesus with the unspoken expectation: “If You are truly good, then surely You will recognize the value of someone like me who has faithfully kept the Law and assure me that I am worthy of eternal life.”

 

3.      A legalistic view of eternal life as a reward for works (Theological meaning)

 

A longing for a ‘good deed’: The ruler viewed eternal life not as a gift of grace but as a proper reward earned by accomplishing some good work (Matthew 19:16 records the parallel account as, “What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”).

 

The ruler’s intention: He believed that a “good” teacher could teach him some higher, more advanced, and more special good work—a secret key—to obtaining eternal life.

 

Conclusion:

The ruler was not genuinely recognizing and confessing Jesus’ divine nature.  Rather, he was seeking confirmation of his own religious zeal and hoping to obtain a more advanced legalistic task.  Therefore, he chose what he considered the most respectful and sophisticated form of flattery according to human standards.  This is precisely why Jesus immediately challenged the title itself, saying: “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God” (v. 19) (Internet).

 

·        As I reflect on the possibility that this rich ruler desired confirmation of his own righteousness (a psychological motive), I realize that the same tendency can easily exist within us today.  We may serve diligently in the church while secretly hoping that other believers will recognize and affirm our “zeal” or “righteousness.”  If so, what spiritual reality must we guard against? We must also consider the path of restoration (Internet).

a.      When “good works” become a tool for self-satisfaction

 

The ruler’s example: His statement, “All these I have kept from my youth” (v. 21), reveals that his law-keeping had become a means of proving his own perfection rather than an expression of love for God.

 

Our reality: Many forms of service and sacrifice within the church—communion ministry, choir participation, teaching, charitable work, and more—can easily become means of self-satisfaction and spiritual superiority rather than expressions of genuine love for God.

 

b.      A faith that becomes dependent on human recognition and praise

 

The ruler’s intention: He wanted an authoritative figure—Jesus Himself—to tell him, “You are truly admirable.”

 

Our reality: We feel energized when we are praised and appreciated.  Conversely, when no one notices our efforts or when we receive criticism, we become discouraged and hurt.  This often reveals that our service is being performed not before God (Coram Deo) but before people.

 

c.      The danger of misunderstanding the gospel as a system of rewards

 

The ruler’s error: He asked, “What shall I do?” (v. 18) in order to inherit eternal life. His faith operated according to a give-and-take principle.

 

Our reality: This mindset can lead us to think, “I have sacrificed and worked hard for the church, so God should bless me, and other believers should respect me.”  Such thinking is not the life of a believer saved by grace; it is a return to legalism.

 

Ultimately, when Jesus touched the rich ruler’s ‘true idol’—his wealth—he went away sorrowful.  Although he was clothed in many layers of human approval and personal religious effort, at the center of his heart was a love for himself that surpassed his love for God.

Likewise, our own service places us before a searching question: “Am I satisfied with Jesus alone, or do I still need the wealth of human recognition?” (Internet)

 

(c)    This rich ruler asked Jesus, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” [τί ποιήσας ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω (ti poiēsas zōēn aiōnion klēronomēsō)] (v. 18).  As I reflected on this question, I became curious about what this ruler understood by “eternal life” [ζωὴν αἰώνιον (zōēn aiōnion)]. At the same time, my attention was drawn to the word “κληρονομήσω” (klēronomēsō, “inherit”).

 

(i)       When we analyze the words he used, it becomes clear how earthly and prosperity-oriented his concept of ‘eternal life’ (ζωὴν αἰώνιον) was, and what spiritual contradiction and greed were hidden within the word ‘inherit’ (κληρονομήσω)” (Internet):

 

1.      What the ruler meant by “eternal life” (ζωὴν αἰώνιον): The eternal continuation of earthly prosperity

 

From the perspective of first-century Judaism, especially among the Pharisees and the ruling class, “eternal life” did not simply mean going to heaven after death.

 

An extension of earthly blessings: According to the Deuteronomic worldview of the Old Testament (obedience brings blessing, disobedience brings curse), many Jews of that time viewed wealth and social success as evidence of God's blessing.

 

The eternal life he desired: This ruler was already enjoying wealth, privilege, and power in this life.  Therefore, the eternal life he sought was essentially, “May this blessed life and privileged status that I now enjoy continue forever without interruption in the coming Messianic age.”

 

A spiritual disconnect: For him, eternal life was not the Kingdom of God, characterized by an intimate relationship with God and submission to His reign. Rather, it was the everlasting extension of his self-centered happiness.

 

2.      The spiritual contradiction and greed contained in “klēronomēsō” (κληρονομήσω)

The root word of klēronomēsō is klēronomeō (κληρονομέω), which means “to inherit.”  Hidden within this word are two fatal blind spots in the ruler's thinking.

 

①     The serious contradiction between works (good deeds) and inheritance (grace)

 

The contradiction within his words: In the same sentence, the ruler asked, “What must I do (poiēsas—perform, accomplish)?”  Doing refers to earning or obtaining something through one's labor and effort.

 

The denial of grace: Yet the word he chose—inherit (klēronomēsō)—is a concept of grace, describing something a child receives freely from a parent.

 

The ruler's misunderstanding: In other words, although he knew intellectually that eternal life was something to be “inherited,” psychologically he was trapped in a works-based mindset.  He believed, “I must perform some extraordinary achievement or good deed to prove beyond doubt that I deserve to be God's child (to secure my share of the inheritance), and only then can I obtain eternal life.”

 

②     An extension of possessiveness and greed

 

Eternal life as an inheritance: It is quite possible that this ruler had become wealthy by inheriting significant property from his family.  He viewed eternal life much as he viewed his land, silver, gold, and livestock—as simply the most valuable new asset to add to his list of possessions.

 

Something to be controlled: Rather than seeing eternal life as a relationship involving self-denial and submission before God, he treated it as a spiritual asset that, once acquired, would belong to him and remain under his control.

 

Ultimately, the ruler was asking: “What contribution must I make, what must I do, in order to secure my share and make sure that even that eternal inheritance—eternal life—becomes permanently mine?”

 

The reason Jesus responded by telling him to sell all his possessions and later spoke about a camel passing through the eye of a needle was to expose the reality that the “inheritance” he wished to obtain was actually another name for his greed to hold on forever to his possessions rather than to God Himself (Internet).

 

·          As I reflect on the fact that, for this rich ruler, eternal life was not the Kingdom of God—an intimate relationship with God and submission to His rule—but rather the eternal continuation of self-centered happiness, and that within this self-centered happiness he viewed eternal life itself as merely another valuable inheritance to add to his list of possessions through his own good works, I believe there is an important lesson here for wealthy Christians today who pursue self-centered happiness.

 

a.      A modern prosperity-oriented faith that approaches religion as “having”

 

Spiritual consumerism (Consumer Christianity): Many wealthy churchgoers today seek to add spiritual assets to their possession list just as they accumulate nice houses, expensive cars, and social status.  Alongside material possessions, they desire to possess “eternal life” (assurance of salvation), church offices, and a godly image.

 

A faith that seeks control: The mindset that says, “I have given offerings and served faithfully, therefore God should grant me eternal life and blessings,” reduces God to a service provider who exists to support my happiness. This is a form of spiritual pride.

 

b.      A self-centered view of heaven that lacks relationship (“being”)

 

A Kingdom without God: The eternal life desired by the ruler was not a life of complete surrender to God and joyful submission to His rule.  Rather, it was simply the continuation of his present comfort and happiness forever.

 

A modern misunderstanding among Christians: Even today, many people show little interest in living under God's sovereignty and embracing discipleship, yet imagine eternal life as receiving a superior residence in heaven after death and enjoying eternal well-being, as though heaven were merely a better version of earthly prosperity.

 

c.      The cost of self-denial that those who “have much” must pay

 

The fear of surrendering one's safety zone: When Jesus said, “Sell all that you have,” He was not merely speaking about the amount of money involved.  He was saying, “Lay down the very things you trust as your security—your privileges, your control, your guarantees for the future—and trust Me alone.”

 

The choice made at the decisive moment: Many affluent Christians appear to have strong faith, but when confronted with an act of obedience that threatens their property, reputation, comfort, or sense of control, they often respond like this ruler—becoming “very sorrowful” and quietly choosing the world's path instead.

 

In the end, this ruler mistakenly believed that he loved God, but Jesus discerned that he was actually using God's name while loving himself most of all.  What prosperous believers today need is not the question, “What more can I do to make my possessions secure?” but rather the deeper question, “Am I truly prepared to lose my possessions for the sake of the Lord?” (Internet)

 

(3)   Lastly, I would like to meditate on the words, “Why do you call Me good?  No one is good except God alone” (Lk. 18:19).

 

(a)    As I meditated on this verse in the Greek New Testament, a question arose in my mind: Why did Jesus say to the rich ruler, “Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν” (Ti me legeis agathon) (literally, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good”)?  Surely this cannot mean that Jesus Himself was not good.

 

(i)        This statement does not mean that Jesus was not good or that He had sin.  Let me explain  in three ways why Jesus asked the rich ruler this question and what its intention and theological significance were (Internet):

 

1.      To shatter the ruler’s human-centered perspective (The most important reason)

 

The ruler’s perception: The ruler was not viewing Jesus as God.  Rather, he regarded Him as one of many morally outstanding and exceptional human rabbis (teachers).

 

Jesus’ intention: Jesus directed this question toward the ruler’s human-centered standard: “If you see Me merely as an exceptionally good human being, why do you use the absolute, divine description ‘good’?  There is no human being who is truly good.”

 

In other words, Jesus was not denying His own goodness.  Rather, He was dismantling the ruler’s entire concept of goodness at the merely human level.

 

2.      To redefine the ruler’s standard of “goodness”

 

The ruler’s misunderstanding: The ruler believed that human beings—including himself—could become “good” by faithfully keeping the Law.

 

Jesus’ intention: Jesus declares that “except One, God” (εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ Θεός) there is no one who is truly good. God alone is the absolute standard of goodness.

 

Through this statement, Jesus exposed the heart of the ruler, who confidently believed, “I am good because I have kept all the commandments from my youth.”  Jesus wanted him to realize: “Measured by God's standard, neither you nor any other human being is truly good.”

 

3.      To lead him into a spiritual paradox through a penetrating question

 

This question serves as a mirror, forcing the ruler to confront a profound spiritual truth. Jesus’ words contain a double-edged challenge:

 

First, if I truly am “good” in the absolute sense that you claim, then you must believe that I am not merely a human rabbi but God Himself, and you must absolutely obey everything I say—including the command that follows to sell all your possessions.

 

Second, if you regard Me merely as a human teacher, then no human being is truly good, and therefore you have no reason to seek from Me the secret of eternal life.

 

Summary:

Jesus was not denying His deity or His goodness.  Rather, He was simultaneously challenging the ruler: “If you truly call Me good, are you prepared to believe in Me as God and follow Me?”  And warning him: “Lay aside your false goodness—the goodness you believe you possess apart from God.”  This is a powerful Messianic declaration (Internet).

 

·          At this point, I find myself asking: What is the modern version of “our false goodness” that we must lay down?  Using the rich ruler as a mirror, we should examine ourselves and identify the layers of modern-day “false goodness” that we wear in our Christian lives.  Just as the rich ruler hid his greed behind obedience to the Law, we often hide our true selves behind religious and social behaviors.  We can identify three manifestations of this modern false goodness (Internet):

 

a.      The mask of the “Polished and Harmless Christian” created by social expectations

 

The appearance of false goodness: This is the morality praised by modern society—obeying the law, treating people politely, giving regularly to charity, and maintaining refined manners.

 

The spiritual reality: We may mistake this for genuine goodness, but it can simply be sophisticated packaging designed to preserve our reputation and self-esteem.  Even though our hearts may still be filled with anger when our interests are threatened, selfishness, envy, and judgment toward others, we convince ourselves that we are righteous merely because we appear harmless on the outside.

b.      Religious zeal replaced by consumption and possession

 

The appearance of false goodness: Faithfully performing organized religious activities such as attending worship every Sunday, tithing, serving in church ministries, reading Christian books, and listening to famous preachers.

 

The spiritual reality: This resembles the rich ruler's confident declaration: “All these I have kept from my youth.”  Without genuine union with God or total surrender of life in discipleship, we simply check off items on a religious to-do list and treat those activities themselves as proof of our goodness and security of salvation.  This is spiritual complacency.

 

c.      “Safe love” that never requires real sacrifice

 

The appearance of false goodness: Showing kindness and generosity only within limits that do not threaten our lifestyle, finances, comfort, or personal interests.

 

The spiritual reality: Jesus commanded the ruler to sell the very thing that sustained his life—his wealth—and give it to the poor.  True goodness therefore involves sacrifice. It requires the breaking of what is most precious to us.  Yet we carefully calculate the cost of our time, money, and comfort, doing good only within the boundaries we can control.  Then we comfort ourselves with the illusion: “I am a loving Christian.”

 

Concluding Meditation:

When Jesus said, “No one is good,” His words carried a solemn declaration that none of our moral achievements or religious efforts can ever measure up to God's standard.

 

The only way to lay aside this modern version of false goodness is to remove the ragged garment of our own righteousness and return to the place of the tax collector who fell before Jesus and confessed: “There is no one good except God alone. Therefore, even today I am a sinner who cannot live apart from the grace of the Lord’s cross.”  We must return to the place of the tax collector in verse 13, bowing before Jesus at His feet and depending entirely upon His mercy and grace (Internet).