David’s broken heart brings to mind a similar sort of anguish described in Luke 18.
He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14).
“You see,” we are told, “the tax-collector had only to pray and he was justified!” It would seem, from a closer reading, that “two men went up into the temple to pray.” If the parable proves that one may pray and be saved, it also proves that one may pray and be lost. The point is not prayer itself, since prayer was on both sides of the parable. The point is the attitude behind the prayer. The Pharisee’s attitude was self-centered, self-righteous and self-exalting. He mentioned no sin in his life and sought no forgiveness. The publican recognized his sin, and it filled him with remorse. He could only throw himself on the mercy of God. Jesus identified that attitude as “humble,” and proved it to be essential for justification and entrance to the kingdom (Luke 18:14, 17; Matthew 5:3; 18:1-4).
Is humility the only essential? Only if one is in the habit of isolating verses, as if Jesus said nothing beyond those few verses. A glance at this same chapter of Luke shows Jesus immediately making another distinct demand. A rich ruler came asking the very question under consideration: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” (Luke 18:18). Did Jesus answer only in terms of a repentant prayer? To the shock of modern readers, Jesus replied in terms of obedience to God’s commands. Jesus required even more than the law specified:
One thing you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me (Luke 18:22).
This answered the question, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus then proved that He was on the same subject by saying, “How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” (Luke 18:24). The disciples recognized that this was about how to be “saved” (Luke 18:26).
This story also touched on the need for humility. Jesus confronted the ruler’s self-righteousness and exposed his money as his idol. If the ruler responded properly, he would become like a child and cast himself on God’s mercy (Luke 18:13, 17). But Jesus was even more explicit: to “enter the kingdom” the ruler needed to go through the needle’s eye, giving up all he owned (Luke 18:22-25 cf. Luke 14:33).
This reminds us not to uproot texts from their context. Prayer is not the only subject in Luke 18. Nor is contrite prayer the only response. In considering context, we must also remember which covenant applied at the time. To the ruler’s question, Jesus answered in terms of “the law” current at that time. In Matthew’s account, Jesus said, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Matthew 19:17). To be clear, Jesus quoted cardinal laws from the Old Covenant (Matthew 19:18-19). The law would do two things for the ruler. Properly understood, the law would convict him as a lawbreaker, and bring about much-needed humility. But—and this is often overlooked today—the law was in a way connected to “life.” As law it could not earn salvation, and God never intended it to be used that way. But as God’s word it had an essential role, at that time, for Israelites to hear, to believe and to submit to the true God. That trusting response was relevant for any Israelite who sought eternal life! As Moses said,
Take to heart all the words by which I am warning you today, that you may command them to your children, that they may be careful to do all the words of this law. For it is no empty word for you, but your very life… (Deuteronomy 32:46-47).
“Life” often meant living successfully in Canaan (Deuteronomy 6:2; 30:15-20; 32:47). But Moses revealed that it also meant a true relationship with God. “…loving the LORD your God, obeying His voice and holding fast to Him, for He is your life” (Deuteronomy 30:20). An Old Covenant setting is evident. The Pharisee and the publican both went to the temple to pray (Luke 18:10). They apparently believed the Torah’s testimony that God was present in a special way at the tabernacle and temple (Exodus 25:8, 22; 26:11-12; 40:34-38; Deuteronomy 12:5-11; 1 Kings 11:36; 2 Chronicles 7:12-16). They took seriously the promises that God heard prayers directed toward His temple—which included prayers for forgiveness (Psalms 5:7; 2 Chronicles 6:36-39; Daniel 6:10; Deuteronomy 4:7). Thus, the parable was initially about justification for a Jew under the law of Moses. The basic message and basic response apply to us today. Yet we must treat Scripture fairly (2 Timothy 2:15). For example, few today would apply this by praying toward the place of the temple in Jerusalem. Obviously, we cannot press details further than the New Covenant itself presses them.
God had made a covenant with the whole nation of Israel (Exodus 34:27). The Pharisee and the publican, as Jews, were already members within that Old Covenant. Is it right to make one of them the complete model for how to enter the New Covenant? The answer should be as obvious as the matter of praying toward the temple. In a way, the hypocritical Pharisee was like David before Nathan confronted him. The publican was like David after Nathan’s rebuke. The publican recognized his sinful condition and it broke his heart. Like David, the publican was already in a covenant relationship with God. He shared with all Israelites the gracious right to call on his covenant God. The New Covenant parallel is not entrance to the covenant but receiving forgiveness while within the covenant. The sinful publican was to the Old Covenant what Simon of Samaria is to the New Covenant. When Simon fell, he was not told to repeat the covenant initiation of believing and being baptized (Acts 8:12-13). Rather he was told to make the heart-change and the appeal that every fallen Christian must make: “Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps He will forgive you” (Acts 8:22). The publican repented and prayed, and God justified him. In the same way, any sin-sick child of God is justified from “all sin” through repentance and confessing prayer (James 5:15-16; 1 John 1:6-9; Revelation 2:4-5; 3:1-3).
By the way, Luke 18’s parable says nothing against obedience. Jesus is not contradicting and discarding the Old Testament background of obedience.
Return to the LORD your God, you and your children, and obey His voice in all that I command you today, with all your heart and with all your soul, then the LORD your God will restore your fortunes and have compassion on you (Deuteronomy 30:2-3).
If My people who are called by My name humble themselves, and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land (2 Chronicles 7:14).
O LORD God of heaven, the great and awesome God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love Him and keep His commandments (Nehemiah 1:5 cf. Daniel 9:4).
Jesus had no intention of burying such treasures of inspired truth. Yes, the humbled heart is essential! Yes, the publican received forgiveness after his prayer! No, those truths did not erase other truths about the necessity of turning and keeping the commandments. No, words for obedience did not drop out of Scripture scrolls, leaving them looking like Swiss cheese. The publican was at the place of priestly mediation and sacrifice. Like David, though, the publican still needed to offer the deeper, truer sacrifice of his heart. When he offered that contrite sacrifice, he went home “justified” by God (Luke 18:14). This focus on the broken spirit is no argument against the submissive spirit. Both are aspects of the same humble attitude toward God.
If the publican does not remove submission from his Old Covenant setting, he certainly says nothing against obeying the Gospel of Christ. The parable reminded the Pharisees of the true attitude that befits obedience. Their “obedience” was a sham both in action and attitude. They followed man-made rules instead of the word of God (Mark 7:1-13), and their motivation was anything but humble. We today need to hear this lesson. Are we listening to men or to God? When we learn something from God’s word, do we take it to heart? Do we grieve when we find ourselves on the wrong path? Do our hearts break when God confronts us with truth and convicts us of sin? After God has broken us, do we take our broken hearts to Him for healing? Do we have our own way for God to heal, or are we willing to submit to His way?