 |
Parable of The Rich Fool |
|
|
Luke 12:13-21
13 And one of the company said unto him, Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.
14 And he said unto him, Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you?
15 And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.
16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:
17 And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits?
18 And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods.
19 And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.
20 But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?
21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.
Notes on Customs
The Jewish laws of inheritance are clearly defined in the Old Testament and the civil courts of law at the time in Judea. The inheritance was to be divided among the sons of the testator. The eldest son, the first-born son, by law inherits a double portion of the estate. The method used in the determination of the portions would be to add one to the number of sons, i.e. if there were 3 sons, 4 portions would be divided. The two younger sons would each receive one-quarter and the eldest one-half. Apparently by the sense of the opening verses of this parable there are only two sons and the division would have been 1/3 and 2/3 of the inheritance. The law did not apply to a posthumous son, nor yet in regard to the mother’s property, nor to any increase or gain that might have accrued since the father’s death. The law being so clear and just that any person with a good or just cause would have his complaint heard and granted before the magistrates.
Language Notes
Verse 13.
The address of “Master” is Teacher (didaskalos) and not Rabbi. This is a formal recognition of Christ indicating that he did not view Him with any personal attachment.
Verse 15.
“Heed” is properly to stare at. Hence to give attention to. To watch, in this passage to be attentive.
“Beware” has a sense to keep in isolation, to be on guard.
Together heed and beware is to be alert to keep ourselves isolated from covetousness.
“Covetous”: one who is greedy, or avarice. Used as the lust for having more or for things, which belong to others. It is connected with the sins of extortion, thefts, jealousy, murder and sins of the flesh. It may be said to be the root from which these sins grow, the longing of the creature, which has forsaken God to fill itself with the lower objects of nature. Specifically condemned by the 10th and final commandment.
Verse 17.
“Barns” granary or storehouse.
“Fruits” is production or produce from his ground. Here it would be grain, wheat or barely.
“My Goods” His good things. This is distinguished from his crops and would be goods of his possessions, material goods. We have this same tendency to put in storage our goods, which our houses cannot hold and which we do not make use of but we will not part from them.
Verse 20.
“thy soul shall be required of thee” is more properly “They are demanding thy soul from thee.”
YLT Luke 12:20 "And God said to him, Unthinking one! this night thy soul they shall require from thee, and what things thou didst prepare--to whom shall they be?"
Who are “they” is not clear. Some have it that “they” are angels, others that “they” are the fruits and goods which he has laid up.
Points of the Parable
Jesus had no legal authority as a judge or arbitrator. The request is to enlist His help in this man’s cause. Jesus deems the request to be that of selfish covetousness. He cannot legally interfere, nor does He wish to. It would not appear that this man was a disciple of Jesus since he addresses Him as teacher and not Rabbi. This shows no personal identification with Christ.
The actions and attitude of the rich man in the parable is all selfishness. However the world would approve of this man, and hold him up as a great successful example to follow. He is not described as a morally bad man, and probably has toiled very hard for his achievements and successes. But look at his speech, six I’s, five my’s, and four I will’s. My fruit, my soul, my barns, my corn, my goods, etc. He has no thought of God or others. All he is concerned with is providing for his future in this life, with no thought beyond this realm of existence. Nothing is seen of him having any gratitude to God for these blessings. An interesting comparison between this rich man and the one with Lazarus is that he hoards and the other lavished it on himself.
The man speaks to his own soul, and tells it to continually take its ease, eat and drink its fill, and continually be merry. This is in opposition to the response of Christ in His temptation by Satan that man does not live by bread alone, but to live (feed his soul) on every Word of God.
God reversed his plans for many years of ease by requiring his life that night. The original is more emphatic, “They shall require thy soul of thee.” Who were these? It is doubtful that angels are meant here. For if the man is lost, and the indication is that he is, then the only angel (singular) involved in his death would be the Angel of Death. It would seem more likely that “they” would be his fruits and goods demanding an accounting of his soul, in death, of how he has made use of them. Perhaps this man’s most glaring mistake was his neglect of the future!!! He preferred riches which he could see and handle above the unseen riches and eternal treasures laid up in heaven. No wonder our Lord, after uttering this parable, went on to give a contrast of more excellent way of life (verses 22-40).
The naming of the man by God as a fool is not because he is rich or wealthy, but because he takes no thought of God. A fool denies God. He is a God-less man. The greatest foolishness of all is to deny the works of God and His appeal to accept His redemption. Such a fool as this is consistently and thoroughly a fool. But God’s own children can behave foolish. While redeemed men and women are not fools, they can act foolishly, or act as a fool by denying God. To deny God is to say no to Him. How often have we all done this?
In verse 20, God responds to the decision of the rich man. By the nature of what God speaks, He is speaking directly to the man, and not through a vision or a third party messenger, angel. Everything the man has done is in contingency for all possibilities except one. That one variable was tomorrow, his life span. He just assumed that he was going to continue to live for many years. But God brings to him a shocking reality, death! God asks the pointed question, how did you plan for this? This further adds to the truth of how mammon cannot be trusted, relied upon, or be faithful. Upon his death the mammon was gone from him. These things are not the true riches of life. The man was materially rich, but spiritually destitute.
Given Interpretations
This parable yields very few interpretations, but rather much commentary on the lesson and application it carries.
The rich fool does not simply stand for people who are materially rich, but for those who take no thought for God. He takes no thought for anybody but himself. The repeated use of the personal pronoun “I” in contexts of self-interest is perhaps the most striking feature of the passage. The fact that God addresses the man as a “fool” (not the word which in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus forbids us to use with reference to our fellow human beings – Matt 5:22)) suggests that he is also a sinner.
Joachim Jeremias wrote the following, “God shatters in a night this mans security. In Luke an introductory dialogue (v. 13-15) provides the occasion for the parable. The situation, which it depicts, is necessary for the understanding of the parable. The fact that he appealed to Jesus, although the latter was a layman, shows the great prestige, which Jesus enjoyed among the people (v13). Jesus does not base his refusal to give a decision merely on the fact that he has no authority to do so (v 14); but primarily on the ground that the possession of property is irrelevant to the life of the Age to come (v 15). We are not to think that Jesus intended to impress His audience the ancient maxim, “Death comes suddenly upon man.” Rather do all the appeals and parables of warning taken together show that Jesus is not thinking of the inevitable death of the individual as the impending danger, but the approaching eschatological catastrophe, and the coming Judgment. [1]
The Interpretation
Jesus does not so much interpret the parable as He does in making the application. The application is the interpretation. What the man thought, his intended actions and attitude were wrong. Not only was he wrong in his intentions but also in his omissions. He omitted good and his fellow man and totally ignored God. These are his two mistakes. The story is that of an example of what to avoid and how not to be. His successful life is condemned, because of his failure in neglecting God. This is fatal!
The Application
Foolishness and covetousness concludes in disaster. It is a potential crisis facing all men in either of their two states, saved or lost. Men’s lives are not for the purpose of acquiring earthly riches but as to the proper usage of it. The Kingdom of God is not of riches of this life. Everything this man had was temporary, on loan to him. His great wealth, and even his soul, his life, were as opportunities only existing for a short period of time. They all came to an end. What is important is what has been established for after this life, “being rich toward God!” That is the true lasting treasure we are to be seeking and striving after. This application very much mirrors that of the parable of the Unjust Steward of Luke 16:1-13.
[1] Joachim Jeremias, The Parables of Jesus. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York. 1972
|
|
Next: Parable of The Unjust Steward |
This page last updated November 10, 2004 at 10:58am
|
|
