We do see in a parallel passage...
Mark 10:17-23
King James Version (KJV)
17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
...that Christ loved him.
I think one of the primary points is to consider that this man thought he obeyed the Law, but that Christ made it clear that rote ritualistic observance is not what the Law was meant to teach.
I think we can correlate that to the Gospel, and balance our discussions concerning Eternal Separation with those we witness to. Failure to understand did not keep Christ from loving him, but at the same time it did not keep Christ from being truthful to him. The starting point here would seem to be the man's perception of what is "good." Christ makes it clear...there is none good, no, not one...but God. The man was basically placing himself on a level with Christ, in my view.
I think we might see that same thing in Don's experience, where, when failing to get Don to accept his person, the person then elevates himself over Don, charging Don with a false argument, which in that person's mind justifies the rejection. The example set by Christ is that the instruction never nullifies the motivation for the instruction, in this case, love. Most evangelism has at its root the love for others and the desire to see them saved. Dealing with unbelievers is quite different than how we interact among ourselves, and it is just my opinion that love is best presented by the fervency of the desire to see souls saved, whereby we never fail to allow our love for the lost to be overcome with our desire to instruct. It isn't going to make any difference to an unbeliever that they are "headed to Hell" if they have not come under conviction of judgment. Their condition is not so much a comparison between we and they, but a comparison between they and God. The JW in Don's example made it personal, and removed himself from an evangelistic approach to something on a human level. The man in the passage above elevated himself to a position that placed himself outside of the reality of the situation.
The correct answer for the man would have been, "But Lord...no man can keep all those." Not, "I have done that." The Lord targets his idol and the man sorrowed, not because he was told to give up his idol only, but because, I think, he understood the point. That is where the sorrow arose, I believe, rather than just a matter of his being sad that he would have to give up his possessions. What was targeted was the very thing that denied the position he claimed.
God bless.
