Matthew 19 Footnotes

19:9 Mt 5:32 also contains this exception clause (permitting divorce in cases of sexual infidelity), while Mk 10:11 and Lk 16:18 do not. This has led many interpreters to conclude that Matthew has liberalized Jesus’s strict teaching. But all three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) agree that Jesus viewed divorce as wrong, and no good reason has been given as to why Matthew included this exception. The discussion as presented in Matthew fits first-century Jewish debates about divorce, particularly centering on the meaning of “something indecent” in Dt 24:1. Jesus agreed with the school of Shammai that the indecency involved is sexual sin. But whereas Pharisaic halakah required divorce for adultery, Jesus only permitted it.

19:16-17 Jesus did not teach that eternal life is earned by keeping the commandments. Instead, the man had to follow Jesus (v. 21). Jesus began where the man was: a Jew seeking life and righteousness must look to the law. But Jesus sought to move him to a new understanding. It is not strict adherence to the law that leads to life, as the would-be follower himself realized, but submission to the Messiah and to the broader ethic of the law as defined by him. Matthew’s account tells us that this man was young (v. 22). Luke’s parallel narrative indicates that he was very rich (Lk 18:23) and that he was a ruler (Lk 18:18); thus, the characterization of this would-be follower of Jesus as the “rich young ruler.”