"And behold, a man came up to him, saying, 'Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother, and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Matthew 19:16-19(ESV)
You know, whenever our Adventist friends try to show that keeping the Ten Commandments is a must for eternal life, Matthew 19:16–19 is usually their go-to verse. It's actually one of their favorites. But honestly, it's also one of the easiest arguments to answer once you just let the passage finish its sentence.
The thing is, they often stop reading at verse 17 and build a whole doctrine out of it. We’re not going to do that. We’re going to keep reading all the way to verse 22 and let Jesus' own words, plus what their own scholars say, undo the argument completely.
Q1. What exactly are Adventists claiming from this text?
ANSWER
If you check out official Adventist teachings, they use Matthew 19:17 to show that Jesus directly taught that we need to keep the commandments to get saved.
“Obedience to the law, as the rule of life, is vital to our salvation. Christ Himself said: ‘If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments’ (Matt. 19:17).” (Seventh-day Adventists Believe, 3rd ed., 350¹
Most SDA apologists usually make the same argument: since Jesus lists five of the Ten Commandments in verses 18–19, they assume “the commandments” in verse 17 must mean the entire Ten Commandments, Sabbath and all, and that following them perfectly is the only way to get into heaven. It’s an argument that really doesn’t hold up, and we’re going to break down exactly why it falls apart.
Q2. What was actually wrong with the rich young ruler's question?
ANSWER
It all comes down to verse 16, but Adventists usually don’t spend much time there. When the guy asks, “What good thing must I do?” he’s not just asking a simple, honest question about grace. He’s talking like he’s running a business, he wants to know what "payment" he can make to get God to owe him. It was a common mindset back then that if you just did enough good deeds, you could earn your way into heaven. Jesus doesn't buy it, though. He challenges that whole idea right away with His very first question: “Why do you ask me about what is good?”
Adventism's Own Commentary Concedes the Point
“What good thing? This question reflects the typical Pharisaical concept of righteousness by works as a passport to ‘eternal life.’” (Francis D. Nichol, ed., The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5 (Review and Herald, 1980), 457²)
Think about what this means for Adventist apologists who try to use verse 17 to build a whole system of salvation. Their own church commentary already admits that the man’s question was based on that Pharisaical "works-righteousness", the exact thing Jesus spent His whole ministry tearing down. You can’t take an answer that was meant to correct a wrong idea and then turn around and use it as the "how-to" guide for that very same wrong idea. That's a total contradiction.
It’s a major logical flaw when a group’s own official commentary admits a verse doesn't mean what their popular teaching materials claim it does. If an apologist keeps using that verse to support their argument without ever acknowledging that contradiction, they’re committing the "fallacy of suppressed evidence." Basically, they’re cherry-picking the info that makes their point look good while ignoring a big, internal admission that actually blows their argument out of the water.
Q3. What does the Greek text add that the English translation hides?
ANSWER
There are three key points about the original Greek words and the text itself that really matter here, yet you’ll notice that Adventist apologetics never actually addresses any of them.
Greek Exegesis Panel
- ἀγαθός (agathon) “good” (v. 16–17): That’s how the man starts off his question. He’s basically looking for one specific, "good" action that will earn him credit.
"And behold, a man came up to him, saying, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” Matthew 19:16-17(ESV) - τηρέω (tēreō) “to keep, guard, watch over” (v. 17): It’s basically an "outside" word like being a security guard. It’s all about watching over a boundary, not the kind of deep, internal heart change that the Law actually asks for."And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” Matthew 19:17(ESV)
- τέλειος (teleios) “perfect, complete, mature, having reached the intended goal” (v. 21): It’s the same word Jesus uses in Matthew 5:48. Notice how He intentionally raises the stakes here: the guy is asking for a single "good deed" to tick off his list, but Jesus shifts the focus to teleios which means total, wholehearted devotion. You can’t reach that kind of perfection just by stacking up a bunch of individual "good things." That’s exactly the point Jesus is making: He’s moving the goalposts away from just tallying up commandments and toward the only thing that actually matters undivided love (like He mentions in Matthew 6:24)."Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” Matthew 19:21(ESV
- ὑστερώ (hysterō) “I lack, fall short” (v. 20): That’s the guy’s own word right there, even by his own system of keeping score, he can feel that something is missing. The Law was already doing its job, acting like a diagnostic tool on his conscience, even before Jesus actually pointed out exactly what he was lacking.
"The young man said to him, “All these I have kept. What do I still lack?” Matthew 19:20(ESV)
One more technical point that really drives this home: if you look closely at the original text, Matthew’s version (“Why do you ask me about what is good?”) is actually a bit different from how Mark and Luke write it (“Why do you call me good?”). It seems like Matthew specifically focused the question on the concept of "good" rather than the person of Jesus. This fits perfectly with Matthew's goal throughout his Gospel: he’s trying to show how flawed the whole idea of earning your way into heaven is, rather than trying to start a complex theological debate about Jesus' identity. Either way, it doesn't matter which version you look at, neither one backs up the Adventist interpretation. In both cases, Jesus is busy correcting the man’s wrong thinking before He even gets around to answering the guy's actual question.
Q4. Did Jesus really teach that keeping the commandments earns eternal life?
ANSWER
No, and the rest of Matthew 19 itself proves it. Jesus used the Law exactly the way the Law was always designed to be used: as a mirror, not a ladder.
"For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin." Romans 3:20(ESV)
"The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me." Romans 7:10(ESV)
"The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law." 1 Corinthians 15:56(ESV)
"(for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God." Hebrews 7:19(ESV)
Since Jesus was the one who gave the Law at Sinai in the first place, He knew exactly what it could and couldn't do. He didn't send the man away with the false idea that he could be perfect just by following a list of rules. Instead, He sent him away sad because the Law had done its job: it exposed the man's idol, his wealth, which his version of "obedience" had never actually addressed.
Just because Jesus said "keep the commandments," it doesn't mean He was teaching that following a checklist is the way to get eternal life. You can't just pull a command out of context and build a whole theology on it without looking at the rest of the story.
Think about it: the same book that records this command also records Jesus saying that your righteousness has to be even better than the Pharisees', a standard that’s actually impossible for any human to reach on their own (Matthew 5:20). When you read the rest of Matthew 5, it becomes clear that Jesus defines this righteousness by heart-level purity, which is impossible for fallen humans to achieve on their own (Matthew 19:25-26). If you just take that one verse from Matthew 19:17 and ignore the rest of the chapter, you're missing the big point. Later in the same conversation, Jesus makes it clear that being saved is impossible for humans to do by themselves, but with God, anything is possible. Ignoring that ending to focus only on the command is a classic case of taking things out of context and drawing the wrong conclusion.
Q5. Which commandments did Jesus actually list, and which one is conspicuously absent?
ANSWER
This is, in my opinion, the one detail that really pulls the rug out from under Adventist apologists, and they never seem to address it. When the guy asks, “Which ones?” Jesus lists the commands about murder, adultery, stealing, lying, honoring your parents, and then adds, “love your neighbor as yourself.” That’s it, that’s the whole list.
The entire first half of the Ten Commandments about not having other gods, avoiding idols, and not misusing God’s name is missing. And, most significantly for our Adventist friends, the Fourth Commandment is nowhere to be found. He doesn't mention the Sabbath at all.
If Jesus really meant that keeping the commandments was a checklist for getting into heaven, and if the Sabbath is supposedly the ultimate "seal of God" and the big test of loyalty at the end of time (as Adventism claims in Revelation 14:12, then its total absence here makes no sense from their perspective. Jesus had the perfect chance to say, “Remember the Sabbath day,” but He didn't. Instead, He focused on commands about loving your neighbor, which leads right into his diagnosis in verse 21: when the man refuses to give up his wealth for the poor, it proves he hadn't actually kept the very "love your neighbor" command he claimed to have mastered.
Adventist apologetics tries to use Matthew 19:17–19 as proof that "the commandments" means the entire Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath. But they conveniently ignore that the text itself only lists five commandments and the Sabbath isn't one of them. Trying to force the Fourth Commandment into that list when it’s clearly missing is just "special pleading." They’re sticking to their rule that "commandments means all ten" even though the verses they’re using as proof actually show the opposite.
Q6. Doesn't insisting on this reading put Adventism in dangerous company?
ANSWER
It does, and I want to be straight with our Adventist friends about this, I’m saying it with love, but I’m not going to sugarcoat it: if you use Matthew 19:17 to argue that "keeping the Ten Commandments is how you get saved," that isn’t the Christian gospel. That’s the Pharisees' gospel. It’s the exact same approach Jesus called out as not being good enough in Matthew 5:20, and it’s the same thing Paul described in Philippians 3:9 as a "righteousness of my own from the law" which he contrasted with the real righteousness that only comes through faith in Christ.
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." Ephesians 2:8-9(ESV)
The rich young ruler saw eternal life like a paycheck he had to earn. But the Bible treats it like a gift you just receive. These aren't just two different ways of looking at the same thing, they are completely opposite ways to approach God. Jesus’ whole conversation with this guy was meant to show exactly why that "earn your way" mindset is broken, not to support it.
Q7. What was Jesus actually doing, rhetorically and pastorally, in this exchange?
ANSWER
Jesus was doing exactly what Paul later described the Law as doing: acting like a tutor or guardian. Its job was to lead someone to the point where they finally realize they aren't good enough on their own and that they desperately need the true Teacher (like in Galatians 3:24).
"So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian," Galatians 3:24-25(ESV)
"So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian," Galatians 3:24-25(ESV)
When the young man showed up, he was super confident, asking, "All these I have kept. What do I still lack?" (v. 20). Jesus’ answer in verse 21 was like a surgical strike: “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor." Jesus wasn't giving a command for everyone to sell all their stuff, He didn't make Zacchaeus or Joseph of Arimathea do that. Instead, He used it as a diagnostic tool to expose the man's specific idol. Wealth had secretly become his god, which meant he was actually breaking the very first commandment without even realizing it. The man’s reaction to Jesus' words revealed this truth way better than any lecture could have.
The man walked away sad v. 22 precisely because the Law, when applied perfectly by Jesus, did exactly what Romans 3:20 says it does: it opened his eyes to his own sin. That sadness was a sign that the Law was working exactly the way it was supposed to, it wasn't proof that following a list of rules is the way to get eternal life.
Q8. How does New Covenant Theology explain why the Decalogue cannot be the boundary marker of eternal life?
ANSWER
This is where the Adventist take on Matthew 19:17 runs headfirst into how the rest of the New Testament explains the two covenants. The Ten Commandments were the foundation of the Old, Mosaic Covenant they were given specifically to Israel at Sinai, written on stone tablets, and the Bible clearly says they were meant to be replaced.
As it says in Jeremiah 31:31–33:
“Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people." Jeremiah 31:31-33(ESV)
"In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." Hebrews 8:13(ESV)
Under the New Covenant, we aren't just left to do whatever we want. Instead, we live under “the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2) and “the law of the Spirit of life” (Romans 8:2). This is all about an internal, Spirit-driven love, not just following an external list of rules written on stone.
This is exactly the direction Jesus was nudging that young man toward: moving from a single "good deed" (agathos) to a total, wholehearted relationship (teleios), and from just "guarding" rules to the invitation, “Come, follow me.” It’s a call to be a disciple, not a way to check boxes on a list. When Adventists argue that Matthew 19:17 means we still have to follow the Sinai covenant, they're asking us to go back to a system that the Bible says is already obsolete. Hebrews 8 makes it clear that the old way was fading out even in the first century, and in Christ, it has been completely fulfilled and set aside (Hebrews 8:6–7, 13).
Q9. What about the Adventist rebuttal that true obedience is inseparable from genuine love?
ANSWER
The Adventist Objection
“Is it really possible to obey the Ten Commandments without truly loving God and the people around you? Obedience isn’t just about the things you do on the outside; it has to come from your heart, based on real love. At the end of the day, that’s the deeper point of the Ten Commandments.”
That’s a fair point to bring up, and we should take it seriously because there is some real truth in it: doing the right things on the outside doesn't mean much if your heart isn't in it, and Jesus did teach that loving God and your neighbor is the greatest commandment (Matthew 22:37–40). But here’s the trick: this argument quietly tries to make "loving obedience" a requirement to earn salvation, rather than a natural result of already having it. And that’s the whole issue we’ve been looking at.
Just look at the rich young ruler. He was absolutely convinced he was loving people the right way and he was wrong. If you could actually reach "true, love-filled obedience" just by being a sincere person, he should have passed the test. But he failed, because no human heart on its own can produce the kind of perfect love the Law demands (Romans 3:23). Adding the phrase "with true love" to "keep the commandments" doesn't fix the problem of trying to earn your way to heaven; it just raises the bar so high that nobody, who hasn't been born again can ever clear it. That’s exactly what Paul was saying in Romans 3:20.
When Jesus said that "all the Law and the Prophets" hang on love (Matthew 22:40), He didn't mean that the Ten Commandments are still our official "covenant document" today. He meant that love was always the real goal of the Law. And honestly, that kind of love is exactly what the young man couldn't produce and what we can't produce either, unless we’ve been changed from the inside out by the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5).
Q10. So what is the real takeaway from Matthew 19:16–22 for our Adventist friends?
ANSWER
Eternal life was never meant to be a paycheck the rich young ruler could earn with a perfect resume of good deeds, and it’s not offered to any of us on those terms today, either. Jesus, who gave the Law in the first place, used it exactly how it was meant to be used: to tear down the false idea that we can be "good enough" on our own. He wanted to push the sinner to the same realization the shocked disciples had in verse 25: “Who then can be saved?” And Jesus answered that perfectly in verse 26: “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
That is the gospel. It’s not about tallying up how many commandments you’ve kept; it’s about receiving grace through faith in the One who actually kept the Law perfectly for us and credits His righteousness to everyone who believes (Romans 5:19). This salvation is still wide open today for every Adventist brother and sister who is ready to put down the "ledger" of law-keeping and instead trust in the finished work of Christ.
THREE QUESTIONS FOR OUR ADVENTIST FRIENDS:
1. If Matthew 19:17 is actually the "how-to" guide for earning eternal life by keeping the commandments, why did Jesus make "being perfect" (verse 21) dependent on selling everything you own a command that isn’t even in the Ten Commandments?
2. If keeping the commandments is the real test for getting into heaven, why did Jesus leave the Fourth Commandment, the Sabbath, completely off His list in verses 18–19? That’s a huge deal, especially since Adventists teach that the Sabbath is the ultimate "seal of God" and the big test of loyalty for the end times.
3. If your own Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary admits that the ruler's question was just the classic Pharisaical error of trying to earn righteousness by works, how can you justify building a doctrine of salvation based on the very words Jesus used to show the man he was wrong?
Notes
1. Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Seventh-day Adventists Believe…, 3rd ed. (Review and Herald Publishing Association), 350.
2. Francis D. Nichol, ed., The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5 (Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1980), 457.
3. Greek lexical glosses per standard NT lexicography (BDAG, s.vv. ἀγαθός, τηρέω, τέλειος, ὑστερέω); synoptic comparison per Matt. 19:17, Mark 10:18, Luke 18:19.
FORMER ADVENTISTS PHILIPPINES
“Freed by the Gospel. Firm in the Word.”
For more inquiries, contact us:
Email: formeradventist.ph@gmail.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/formeradventistph
Partner with me in advancing this ministry. Be part of this mission! Your support helps us continue gospel-centered outreach and resources.
• GCash: 0969-514-3944
• PayPal: paypal.me/formeradventistsph
• Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/ronaldobidos
No comments:
Post a Comment