Matthew 19

Christian Nationalism can find some support for its views in the Old Testament, but it fails to take into account the political theology of Jesus and the apostles. A complete survey of the New Testament reveals that the apostles dealt with theological disputes through the church, apart from government action. Consider the strong language the apostle Paul used of the false teachers in Corinth. The context of the passage is Paul’s stinging reply to the “super-apostles” who charged Paul with preaching an unauthorized gospel given to him by men. In response, Paul had no hesitation in using this language of his critics: “So it is no surprise if [Satan’s] servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds” (2 Cor 11:15). Despite unmasking these churchmen as Satan’s servants, he never advocates turning them over to the authorities for punishment, though clearly, the issues at stake in Corinth were matters of eternal significance. In those days, professing Christians suffered persecution from Jewish authorities and, increasingly, the Roman Empire. If Paul viewed theological disputes as being within the legitimate purview of the state, he could have easily suggested that the Corinthian Christians turn these false teachers over to the Jewish leaders or Roman authorities. He doesn’t.
Perhaps the most significant teaching relevant to this discussion is recorded in Matt 19. In the preceding verses, the Pharisees had been told by Jesus that in the marital union, husband and wife are joined together by God as one flesh: therefore man should not separate what God joined. They respond by asking why Moses allowed them to divorce their wives at will. Jesus responds, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning, it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery” (Matt 19:8-9).
Jesus makes it clear that, even in theocratic Israel, God made legal exceptions for certain immoral activities, here, illegitimate divorce (Matt 5:32). This was done because of the hardness of the Israelites’ hearts.
This concession is relevant to the discussion of Christian Nationalism. If even in theocratic Israel certain sins were tolerated by the government because of the people’s hardness of heart, it would seem even more appropriate that we who live under the new covenant begun by Christ should tolerate some sins and theological errors because of a similar hardness. I would argue that external religious practice would fall under this category. Religion is one of the things people keep closest to their hearts, and is the most difficult thing to change, even under threat of government action. Ephesians 2:1 describes unbelievers as being dead in their sins. Isn’t this the epitome of a hard heart? Arguing from the principle of the lessor-to-the-greater, if divorce was allowed because of hardness of heart, shouldn’t the exercise of false religion be as well?
There are very practical dangers to a Christian government that punishes the practice of heretical views through state action. The likely result of forcing heresy underground and creating a black market of ideas instead of addressing falsehood head-on in the open debate should concern Christians thoughtfully considering these issues. Giving the government the power to determine what is and what is not heresy can also have dangerous consequences, as seen in the Inquisition, witch trials, and numerous examples of abuse of power. Even today Christian churches disagree on theology and morality and who can say that the brand of Christianity the nationalist state supports is your brand?
Pragmatic reasoning aside, Christ and His apostles teach that false doctrine and unbelief, while serious matters, are things that should be left out of the government’s hands. If we wish to apply the Bible’s teachings faithfully in this subject, we should repudiate Christian Nationalism and seek a better way to address the issues plaguing modern society.
--Mason Dees; Religious Liberty TV; The Popularity and Pitfalls of Christian Nationalism 8.21.23
Perhaps the most significant teaching relevant to this discussion is recorded in Matt 19. In the preceding verses, the Pharisees had been told by Jesus that in the marital union, husband and wife are joined together by God as one flesh: therefore man should not separate what God joined. They respond by asking why Moses allowed them to divorce their wives at will. Jesus responds, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning, it was not so. And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery” (Matt 19:8-9).
Jesus makes it clear that, even in theocratic Israel, God made legal exceptions for certain immoral activities, here, illegitimate divorce (Matt 5:32). This was done because of the hardness of the Israelites’ hearts.
This concession is relevant to the discussion of Christian Nationalism. If even in theocratic Israel certain sins were tolerated by the government because of the people’s hardness of heart, it would seem even more appropriate that we who live under the new covenant begun by Christ should tolerate some sins and theological errors because of a similar hardness. I would argue that external religious practice would fall under this category. Religion is one of the things people keep closest to their hearts, and is the most difficult thing to change, even under threat of government action. Ephesians 2:1 describes unbelievers as being dead in their sins. Isn’t this the epitome of a hard heart? Arguing from the principle of the lessor-to-the-greater, if divorce was allowed because of hardness of heart, shouldn’t the exercise of false religion be as well?
There are very practical dangers to a Christian government that punishes the practice of heretical views through state action. The likely result of forcing heresy underground and creating a black market of ideas instead of addressing falsehood head-on in the open debate should concern Christians thoughtfully considering these issues. Giving the government the power to determine what is and what is not heresy can also have dangerous consequences, as seen in the Inquisition, witch trials, and numerous examples of abuse of power. Even today Christian churches disagree on theology and morality and who can say that the brand of Christianity the nationalist state supports is your brand?
Pragmatic reasoning aside, Christ and His apostles teach that false doctrine and unbelief, while serious matters, are things that should be left out of the government’s hands. If we wish to apply the Bible’s teachings faithfully in this subject, we should repudiate Christian Nationalism and seek a better way to address the issues plaguing modern society.
--Mason Dees; Religious Liberty TV; The Popularity and Pitfalls of Christian Nationalism 8.21.23
Matthew 19:11-12:
“Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” |
![]() The third category which Jesus mentions are those who figuratively have “made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” This verse is not a command from Jesus for all to stay single or to become eunuchs—as God himself in Genesis 1 officiated the first wedding, and Jesus himself performed his first miracle at a wedding. Rather, Jesus reasons that as some men submitted to be eunuchs so as to serve kings as their personal attendants without any distractions, similarly some believers with such a gift intentionally choose the unmarried state in order to serve God’s kingdom more effectively with an undivided loyalty. They are living on earth as the angels do in heaven (Matt. 22:30). -Renew.org
|
Matthew 19:24:
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” |
Jesus said that it’s easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Biblical commentators are confused by this statement, and rather than take it as a joke and a hyperbole, they try to rationalize it by suggesting that there was a section in the Wall of Jerusalem with a tiny little door that camels could shimmy through. No! The joke is that a camel fitting through the eye of a needle is a physical impossibility. And as hard as it is to squeeze 1500 pounds of camel through a millimeter-wide opening, it’s even harder for rich people to let go of their wealth and cling instead to Jesus as their All. -The Jesus Question
|

"There was one woman that wrote to Lewis and said, 'I can't take this money you are going to give me. I just, I just can't do that.' And he said, 'Don't be silly. You need it, I have it, take it, and thank God for it.' Her response was, 'Well, I will and thank you. No wonder God has blessed you with so much money.' Lewis' answer was, 'Be careful what you say there. Nowhere in my New Testament do I see that money is a blessing. Jesus tells us something quite different. He says it's almost impossible for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. He talks about the deceit of riches.' And he said, 'I need to give this money away, or it will destroy me.'"
Matthew 19:29:
And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. |
|