Matt. 10:35

gspradling

My jw mom always uses this verse to justify her distance from me and my family. I have never been able to come up with a reasonable response to her. Does anyone have any good suggestions?

Balsam

gspradling,

Well lets look at the scripturs around it: Matt. 10:32-38

32

"Everyone, then, that confesses union with me before men, I will also confess union with him before my Father who is in the heavens; 33 but whoever disowns me before men, I will also disown him before my Father who is in the heavens. 34 Do not think I came to put peace upon the earth; I came to put, not peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be persons of his own household. 37 He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. 39 He that finds his soul will lose it, and he that loses his soul for my sake will find it.

If you still profess to be a Christian this scriptures should not apply to you and your mother. She is a Christian and you are a Christian united in Christ. You would not be an unbeliever in any sense of the way. You simply would not be a Christian follower in the path that she follows.

If you have turned away from the bible and no longer profess trust in its word or in religion all together then you can use the arguement that the bible is written by men, for men. That the bible is no more inspired than is the book of Mormon, Quran, or any other so called sacred text and that her using this against you does not hold water.

Hope this helps.

Balsam

fjtoth

According to Jesus, the ones responsible for the division are the ones who are in the wrong. He mentions a sword in verse 34. The ones using the "sword" to cut off others from their association have the spirit of division, not the spirit of peace. In verses 21-23 he said that "brother will deliver up brother to death, and a father his child, and children will rise up against parents and will have them put to death. And you will be objects of hatred by all people on account of my name; but he that has endured to the end is the one that will be saved."

Those most like the evil persecutors are Jehovah's Witnesses who drive their brothers and other relatives away by means of their disfellowshipping policy. They demonstrate that they have made the disfellowshipped and disassociated ones the object of hatred by shunning them as evildoers, not even smiling or saying hello to them.

greendawn

They are the ones causing the conflict are they not, at least in many instances where they expel people for trivial or unbiblical reasons eg birthdays, xmas celebrations, smoking, dissent. They are not the innocent part as they claim.

Leolaia

This passage interprets Jesus' ministry as fulfilling Micah 7:6 which foresees eschatological discord as a feature of "the day God visits you" (v. 4). Since Matthew had a dualist conception of Judgment Day, with the sinners and the righteous divided into two clearly defined groups (the "sheep" and "goats" of ch. 25), the gathering of the church prior to Judgment Day would necessarily involve familial discord. Micah 7:6 was interpreted similarly in Mark 13:12, and the Christian readings depend on Jewish apocalyptic interpretations as can be seen in Jubilees 23:19, 4 Ezra 5:9, m. Sotah 9:16, and b. Sanhedrin 97. Such a view of coming tribulation was necessitated by Daniel 12:1 which was commonly viewed as not already past (i.e. the persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes, in the original setting of Daniel) but still future. What is interesting is that Malachi 4:5-6 has quite a different eschatological expectation, that the coming Elijah will reconcile families and parents with their children, and this text is itself interpreted as fulfilled in John the Baptist in Matthew 11:14, 17:10-12. The key tho in this interpretation is that "they did not recognize him (i.e. as Elijah)", and so Jesus comes to deliver his messianic woe (cf. Malachi 4:6, "or else I will come and strike this land with a curse"). This woeful "coming" corresponds to the familial discord unleashed by God's coming in Micah 7:4-6.

The dualism between the true followers of Jesus and those who are cast off is latent in Matthew 10:32-39 (between "those who acknowledge me before men" and "those who disown me", and between "those who find their life" and "those who lose their life," etc.). Notice that everything here revolves around following and acknowledging Jesus in spite of peril. There is nothing about such discord being the result of leaving a religious organization. Also, your mother's reading of the passage actually has things in reverse. She is construing the parents as the true followers of Jesus and the children as the disobedient wayward ones who leave Jesus. Now that is perfectly in accord with Micah 7:6, which posits the children as rebellious and dishonoring their parents. But that is not Jesus' point. Matthew 10:35 actually puts a novel twist on the old scripture. It is the children leaving their parents to follow Jesus who are doing the right thing: "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me" (v. 36a). In other words, if one's parents forbid you from truly following Jesus, you are supposed to rebel against your parents to follow him, even if that means that your parents will persecute you. That is where the discord comes from. Conversely, if it is the parent who decides to follow Jesus instead of the children, then the parent will be persecuted by his or her children (as it is in Mark 13:12). I think you can reassure your mom that you do not wish to put her to death, and that you seek reconciliation and a continued healthy relationship with her. If she is the one who insists you must follow an organization rather than Jesus, and if you don't do this you cannot have a relationship with her, then it is clear which role she is playing in this scenario.

Neo

gspradling,

You can also check the following thread: ...but Jesus said the truth would divide families!!!!.

gspradling

Thanks for your very thoughtful replies. I will use them the next time my mom decides to use that verse to justify her shunning.

FreeFromWTBS

If you continue to read, in 26; it is opposers of Christians that would cause the seperation. So your mother really cannot use this unless you are attacking her.

PrimateDave

Works of the Flesh(TM) include 'contentions and divisions' whereas the Fruitage of the Spirit(TM) includes 'peace, longsuffering, and kindness'.
Are True Christians(TM) supposed to be the cause of such works of the flesh? Or are they only the victims of it from so-called unbelieving family members?
It seems to me that it should be a one-way-street. The True Believers do not intend to cause division with their religion, but instead are persecuted despite their loving and peaceful stance. I see nothing in that scripture that would allow a True Christian(TM) to indulge in works of the flesh.
Dave

Matt. 10:35

Share this