Day 1: Divorce Teaching, Let the Children Come, Rich Young Man

Reading: Matthew 19

Listen to: Matthew chapter 19

Historical Context

Matthew 19 marks a geographical and theological transition. Jesus leaves Galilee for the last time and enters the region of Judea “beyond the Jordan” (Perea), moving steadily toward Jerusalem and the cross. The chapter contains three encounters – the Pharisees’ test about divorce, the blessing of children, and the rich young man’s question – that together address the most fundamental dimensions of human life: marriage, family, and possessions. In each case, Jesus overturns conventional wisdom and replaces it with the radical ethic of the kingdom.

The Pharisees’ question about divorce (vv. 3-12) is not a sincere inquiry but a test (peirazontes), an attempt to embroil Jesus in the most contentious rabbinic debate of the day. The two dominant schools of thought were those of Shammai and Hillel. Shammai interpreted the “something indecent” (ervat davar) of Deuteronomy 24:1 narrowly, permitting divorce only in cases of sexual immorality. Hillel interpreted the phrase broadly, allowing divorce for virtually any reason – even burning a meal (Mishnah Gittin 9:10). The question “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” (v. 3) is specifically asking Jesus to take sides. If he sides with Shammai, he alienates the majority; if he sides with Hillel, he appears morally lax. Jesus does neither. Instead of engaging the rabbinic debate about Deuteronomy 24, he bypasses it entirely and reaches back to Genesis – to the original intention of the Creator before the fall: “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?” (vv. 4-5, citing Genesis 1:27 and 2:24).

Jesus’ hermeneutical move is extraordinary. He treats Genesis 1-2 as more authoritative than Deuteronomy 24 for understanding God’s will regarding marriage. Deuteronomy’s provision for divorce is not denied but reinterpreted: “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” (v. 8). The Mosaic permission was a concession to human sinfulness, not a revelation of God’s ideal. God’s original design is a permanent, one-flesh union that “what God has joined together, let not man separate” (v. 6). The passive voice (“has joined together,” synezeuxen) indicates that God himself is the agent who unites husband and wife in marriage – it is not merely a social contract but a divine act. The exception clause – “except for sexual immorality” (porneia) – is unique to Matthew’s Gospel (it does not appear in Mark’s or Luke’s parallel) and has generated centuries of debate. Porneia is a broad term that can encompass adultery, incest, prostitution, or other forms of sexual unfaithfulness. Its inclusion in Matthew may reflect the pastoral concerns of Matthew’s Jewish-Christian community, where the Shammaitic position was familiar and the exception would have been expected.

The disciples’ reaction is telling: “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (v. 10). They are stunned by the permanence Jesus demands. His response about eunuchs “who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven” (v. 12) introduces the possibility that some are called to forgo marriage entirely for the sake of kingdom service – a radical idea in a culture where marriage and procreation were virtually universal expectations and where celibacy was viewed with suspicion.

The blessing of children (vv. 13-15) follows with deliberate literary placement. The disciples attempt to prevent children from being brought to Jesus – not out of cruelty but out of a sense of propriety. A rabbi’s time was valuable, and children had no status that warranted his attention. Jesus is “indignant” (Mark 10:14 uses the strong word eganaktesen) and declares, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” (v. 14). The connection to the preceding passage is significant: if marriage is about self-giving permanence, the kingdom is about the vulnerability and dependence that children embody. Children cannot earn, achieve, or negotiate their way into the kingdom. They can only receive it as a gift. This is the posture the kingdom demands of all its citizens.

The encounter with the rich young man (vv. 16-30) is one of the most poignant scenes in the Gospels. The man approaches Jesus with a sincere question: “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?” (v. 16). Jesus directs him to the commandments, and the young man claims to have kept them all since his youth. Matthew notes that Jesus does not challenge this claim – the man is genuinely moral, genuinely devout. Mark 10:21 adds that Jesus “looked at him and loved him.” But Jesus identifies the one thing the man lacks: “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” (v. 21). The word “perfect” (teleios) does not mean sinless but complete, whole, lacking nothing. What the man lacks is not another commandment but a willingness to dethrone his wealth from the position of ultimate security in his life. The invitation is not a universal rule requiring all disciples to take a vow of poverty; it is a diagnostic specific to this man’s particular idol. Whatever functions as your ultimate security – whatever you cannot imagine releasing – that is the thing Jesus will ask you to surrender.

The man’s response is devastating: “he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions” (v. 22). He is not angry, not dismissive, not hostile. He is sorrowful. He knows what the right answer is, and he cannot bring himself to give it. His possessions own him more than he owns them. Jesus’ comment about the camel and the eye of the needle (v. 24) has occasioned creative but unconvincing attempts to soften it – a supposed small gate in Jerusalem called “the Needle’s Eye,” or the claim that kamelos (camel) should be kamilos (rope). Neither theory has historical support. Jesus means exactly what he says: it is impossible for a rich person to enter the kingdom by human effort. The disciples are “greatly astonished” (v. 25), and their question – “Who then can be saved?” – reveals their assumption that wealth was a sign of God’s favor. Jesus’ answer is the chapter’s theological climax: “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (v. 26). Salvation is not an achievement but a miracle. No one earns their way into the kingdom, whether rich or poor. Entry is always and only by grace.

Peter’s final question – “We have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” (v. 27) – is touchingly human. Jesus does not rebuke the question but answers with a promise: the Twelve will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, and everyone who has left houses, family, or lands for his sake will receive a hundredfold and inherit eternal life. But the final word is a warning against the very calculations Peter’s question implies: “Many who are first will be last, and the last first” (v. 30). The kingdom reverses human scorekeeping.

Key Themes

• Marriage as divine act – Jesus treats marriage not as a social arrangement that can be dissolved at will but as a one-flesh union created by God himself, rooted in the creation order before the fall.
• The kingdom belongs to the dependent – Children, who have nothing to offer and no status to claim, model the only posture that grants entry into the kingdom: open-handed reception of a gift.
• The idol of wealth – The rich young man’s sorrow reveals that possessions can function as a rival god, and Jesus will not share his throne with Mammon.

Connections

• Old Testament Roots: Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 (the creation of marriage), Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (the Mosaic provision for divorce), Deuteronomy 5:16-20 (the commandments Jesus cites to the rich young man), Psalm 62:10 (“if riches increase, set not your heart on them”).
• New Testament Echoes: Ephesians 5:31-32 (marriage as a mystery pointing to Christ and the church), 1 Timothy 6:9-10 (the desire for riches as a trap), Hebrews 13:5 (“keep your life free from love of money”), 1 Corinthians 7:7-9 (Paul on the gift of celibacy).
• Parallel Passages: Mark 10:1-31 (the closely parallel account), Luke 18:18-30 (Luke’s version of the rich ruler).

Reflection Questions

1. Jesus bypasses the Pharisees’ debate about grounds for divorce and returns to God’s original design in Genesis. How does grounding ethics in creation rather than in legal exceptions change the way you think about marriage and commitment?
2. The rich young man kept all the commandments, and Jesus loved him – yet he went away sorrowful. What is the “one thing” in your life that you would find most difficult to surrender if Jesus asked? How do you know whether something is a legitimate good or an idol?
3. Jesus says, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” How does this statement challenge both the despair of those who feel they can never be good enough and the pride of those who believe they already are?

Prayer

Creator God, you made us male and female and called it very good. You designed marriage as a mystery of self-giving love that reflects your own faithfulness. Where we have treated your sacred gifts casually, forgive us. Where we have valued possessions over people, wealth over worship, security over surrender, expose the idol and give us the courage to walk away from it rather than from you. We confess that salvation is impossible for us – that we cannot earn, achieve, or buy our way into your kingdom. We come as children, with nothing in our hands, trusting that with you all things are possible. Through Jesus, who had nowhere to lay his head and yet possessed everything. Amen.