01/02/2024
One’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possess
Baseline Text: Luke 12:15
And He Jesus ) said to them, Take heed and beware of covetousness, for ones life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possess'
In the Gospel of Luke, we find a profound teaching from Jesus recorded in Luke 12:15: "And He said to them, 'Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one's life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.'" This cautionary statement is delivered by Jesus in response to a man who seeks His intervention in a dispute over inheritance, shedding light on the timeless struggles within families and the allure of material possessions.
To fully appreciate the depth of this teaching, we must be cognisant of the cultural and religious context of the time. In Jewish tradition, the firstborn was entitled to a double portion of the inheritance, a principle rooted in Torah law. This inheritance, often comprising property and possessions, symbolized not just material wealth but also the assumption of the role of the father, ensuring the continuity of the family legacy.
This occasion for Jesus uttering these words is when he is approached by a man from a crowd who asks him to intervene in the distribution of the inheritance between him and his brother.
Ordinarily, in a Jewish setting, the custom dictated that the older brother, upon the demise of parents, especially the father, would inherit two-thirds of the estate.
According to Torah law, the firstborn receives a double portion of inheritance. Why is that? Also, does the firstborn always inherit double, or are there some limits to this clause? We see this principle in examples from biblical writ, both in the Old Testament, where the directive to give the firstborn a double portion is found in the Book of Deuteronomy: “He [the father] must acknowledge the firstborn . . . and give him a double share in all that he possesses, for he [the firstborn son] is the first fruits of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.” This principle extends to New Testament settings as well as we see from the account of the prodigal son. John 15.
Yehuda Shurpin, in one Chabad publication, answers the question: What makes the firstborn so special that he receives a double portion? “Many commentaries have offered explanations, but ultimately the halachah is derived from the verse itself. (As you’ll see below, some of the reasons would apply equally to firstborn daughters or to the mother’s firstborn. Yet the halachic firstborn is the father’s oldest son.) Beloved by God, “All firsts are beloved by God.” Just as there is the mitzvah that the first fruits are brought as an offering to God (bikkurim), as is the first of the flock (bechor beheimah), so does God have a special love for the firstborns, and they are given a double portion.”
On another level, the two-thirds principle was to ensure that the older brother now assumes the role of the father. It is the firstborn who stands in the father’s stead, perpetuating his continued memory. It was his birth that made the father into a father, revealing his latent power of parenthood. The rest of the siblings were to share one-third in proportion. We are not sure if the one who implores Jesus is of a traditional Jewish family setting or not. Yet, I thought it opportune to introduce a sense sketch of the plausible social, cultural, religious, and economic context that may inform the backdrop for the Luke 12:15 moment of teaching.
We may surmise that Jesus, almost half irritated, points out to the one that implores him for his intervention in a family tussle, that He, Jesus, was not about to interfere and adjudicate on what was standard in culture, history, religious, and socio-economic settings captured in codicil or testament as the custom was. In a nutshell, we can rightly conclude and accept that there was discomfort, even a tussle, about the inheritance of the late parents. There is indeed nothing new under the sun. This age-old problem still sojourns with us in the 21st century.
One is not sure if there was already a court case or appeal opened, but it appears the man was desperate and saw the opportunity. If indeed a traditional Jewish family, we are not sure if the accused brother, instead of two-thirds, took it all.
What we do know is that verse 15 opens up with a definitive answer: This must then mean both the man who implores Jesus and the one – his brother he is accusing was in the same crowd. I could preach right here: The accuser and the perpetrator are usually family; the perpetrator and the victim both hang out in the same social circles, often have the same friends, and shall I say it now, both go to church. I have been mulling over the fact that the Ekklesia, those pardoned, those who share in the benevolence of forgiveness, the ones who have no identity save for being redeemed with a price they could not afford, have in the 21st-century setting come to normalize unforgiveness as standard. You hear of blood brothers/sisters who have not talked with each other for years because one has a pain trophy and deems it his/her right to hold that against the other while forgetting what he/she did, which renders them not qualified to hold such a pain trophy, but nevertheless, in self-righteousness less humility, feel it his/her inalienable right not to forgive.
The 21st century is not short of this crowd too. Why is it that one in a family always feels entitled to everything and that everything is usually made of things or possessions of the parents? I have witnessed and counseled too many families where the intention of one was obviously to get the house at any and every cost, feeling entitled to deny the others what is also their right. One of the reasons I personally do not believe in a family house is borne from my conviction that the house you buy must be for you and your spouse, not for children. It may be the start of your children; it certainly cannot be their end. On another level, I have seen mothers insist on giving the family house to the weakest among her children, often saying to the others, you all have homes; it is almost a case of the one who decided not to advance him/herself gets rewarded, and those who did are being done in for having reached independence.
Jesus, however, moves the bar to another level when he says: take heed, which if translated could mean see: horaō which I want to suggest could consider. Consider suggests an accounting term, taking stock or note in which you look at both sides of the equation.
Then he says beware, phulasso: to be on guard, to be attentive. This is now a warning that He sends out. After seeing or considering, you are warned. Beware of what: Covetousness. What then is covetousness? Strong’s Concordance explains the word: (Strong) Πλεονεξία pleonexia, which translates to avarice, greediness, by implication fraudulent practices: Covetousness thus is a desire to have that which belongs to another, definitely not to you, to the point that you wish the other never had it but it belonged to you.
Then He elucidates a fundamental life principal, not from a human mind but from the Creator’s vantage point and stance: 'for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.' Life then is explained as that which does not consist, meaning life, in Godly perspective, is defined outside the realm and circumference of the abundance of things.
This ancient text speaks to the 21st Century audience, where everything that constitutes and consists of life is orchestrated to define, as advertised, sold, and promoted in the attaining of things. We live in a society where life is understood and promoted in the acquisition and attaining of things. There is a pervasive and sustained belief that the more things I acquire, the more it attests to the fact that I live. This deception is so viral in our capitalist society where the fundamental axis of our existence is informed by possessions. Possessions, which by their very nature and design, are temporal, inanimate, and worthless in true value.
Jesus could have been speaking to this 21st-century society that has deified things. A society whose warped interpretation of success is only measurable in the crude possessing of things, often in excess. Business people strive to have a bigger market share to ultimately merely buy the things [another house, vacation, home, boat, aircraft, another house, cars, toys, and bling-bling], which they erroneously believe will separate them from those who do not have and thus define them as living the good life. This doctrine of the abundance of things possessed that define life or in which life is made out to consist is today in the pulpit. You hear pastors boasting about the chronographs, their sedans/SUVs, boats, homes, and toys they have, all in the name of them living.
What this now does is it sets fellow sojourners up for covetousness, meaning the spirit of the hour underscores Jesus’ caution to head and beware.
Jesus says it’s a sophism; it is a flagrant lie that your life is defined by and/or consists of what you acquire in possessions. Those who practice these are deceived and deceive many more. It is for this reason we, as Christ Believers, are encouraged to live lives in contentedness. He then proceeds to show the silliness of some who are slaves to the drug of covetousness, by sharing a parable. We pick the parable up in verse 18, about a business person in conversation with himself, saying: “I will pull down my barns and build greater, and there I will store all my crops and goods. Verse 19, “And I will say to my soul, ‘Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years; take your ease, eat, drink, and be merry.’ Verse 20, “But God said to him, ‘Fool, this night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided?’ Verse 21, “So is he who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.”
This latter part is self-explanatory; we all know of people who set out to make money in this world. They did it at the expense of family, their marriages, and society. They attained what the heart lusted after; they finally got the new house built in the prestigious neighborhood they dreamt of, they finally drive the vehicles they dreamt of, and have the holidays and find out they long lost the children and spouses who, in the meantime, have become emotionally and otherwise intimate with guys who don’t have 10% of what their husbands or wives have attained in success. In some cases, the spouses use the very money to entertain their new lovers. Jesus warns how foolish this need for more and more and greater barns leads us all to ultimately die, and that which we have attained is in the hands of people who have scant regard for what we worshiped in things. How many times have we not seen how children waste away after inheriting a fortune?
The warning for us here and now is to take heed and beware of the potential of covetousness that lurks at the door of those who have come to define life in the abundance of things. If God blessed you, please enjoy your wealth, just do not think of yourself as complete and immune to covetousness and its consequence, as nakedly revealed in verses 18 – 21.
‘One’s life does not consist in the abundance of things he possesses…’
Bishop Dr. Clyde N.S Ramalaine
February 1, 2024
Sermon Collection 2024
