Among the sayings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels, few are as jarring as his statement about hating one's family. In Luke 14:26, Jesus declares that anyone who does not hate their closest relatives—including parents, spouse, and children—cannot be his disciple.1 This teaching appears in a passage about the cost of discipleship, following Jesus's parables about counting the cost before building a tower or going to war.2 The statement is unambiguous in the Greek text, using the standard word for hatred. Yet many Christians argue Jesus did not mean what he plainly said.
What the text says
The passage appears in Luke's Gospel as Jesus addresses large crowds following him. The text records his words:
"Now great crowds accompanied him, and he turned and said to them, 'If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.'" Luke 14:25-26 (English Standard Version)1
The Greek text uses the verb miseō (μισέω), translated "hate" in virtually every major English Bible translation.3 This is not an obscure or ambiguous term. Miseō is the standard Greek word for hatred, derived from misos (hatred) and used throughout the New Testament to describe active animosity and rejection.4 Strong's Greek Lexicon defines it as "to detest (especially to persecute)."5
The comprehensiveness of Jesus's statement is striking. He does not limit hatred to one category of relatives but lists them systematically: father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters. The inclusion of "wife and children" is particularly notable, as these are relationships one chooses or creates, not merely inherits. Jesus then adds "yes, and even his own life," extending the requirement to self-hatred.1
The consequence of failing to hate one's family is equally clear: "he cannot be my disciple." This is presented not as advice but as a requirement. The Greek phrase ou dynatai einai mou mathētēs means "is not able to be my disciple"—a statement of impossibility, not mere inadvisability.3
The Greek word miseō
Understanding what Jesus said requires examining the Greek term he used. The word miseō appears 42 times in 38 verses in the New Testament, consistently translated as "hate."4 Its usage throughout the New Testament establishes its meaning clearly.
In John 15:18, Jesus tells his disciples: "If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you," using miseō to describe active hostility and persecution.6 In Matthew 6:24, Jesus states: "No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other," using miseō in direct contrast to agapaō (love).7 In Luke 6:22, Jesus speaks of being hated (miseō) and excluded for following him.8
First John 2:9 states: "Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness," using miseō to describe sinful animosity incompatible with Christian love.9 First John 3:15 declares: "Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer," again using miseō to describe the opposite of love.10 In every instance, miseō carries its standard meaning: to regard with aversion, to detest, to oppose.
New Testament uses of miseō (hate)4
| Passage | Context | Object of hatred |
|---|---|---|
| Matthew 6:24 | Two masters | One of two conflicting loyalties |
| Luke 14:26 | Cost of discipleship | Father, mother, wife, children, siblings, own life |
| John 15:18 | World's opposition | Jesus and his followers |
| 1 John 2:9 | Walking in darkness | One's brother (sinful) |
| 1 John 3:15 | Murder | One's brother (equivalent to murder) |
Scholarly Greek lexicons confirm this definition. Thayer's Greek Lexicon notes that miseō can mean "to love less, to postpone in love or esteem" but acknowledges this reflects "the Oriental" tendency "to feel and to profess love and hate where we Occidentals, with our cooler temperament, feel and express nothing more than interest in, or disregard and indifference."11 Even when granting the possibility of "love less," the lexicon confirms the primary meaning is hatred.
BDAG (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich), the authoritative Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament, defines miseō as "to have a strong aversion to" and notes it is "oft. in contrast to love."12 The lexicon lists Luke 14:26 among passages where miseō refers to people one regards with hostility or disfavor.
The parallel in Matthew
A parallel passage in Matthew's Gospel appears to present the same teaching with different wording. Matthew 10:37 records Jesus saying: "Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."13
This passage is often cited as evidence that Luke 14:26 should be interpreted as "love less" rather than "hate." If Matthew and Luke record the same teaching, and Matthew uses "loves...more than," the argument goes, then Luke's "hate" must mean the same thing.14
However, several factors complicate this harmonization. First, the passages occur in different contexts. Matthew 10 records Jesus sending out the twelve apostles with instructions about their mission, warning them of persecution and division.15 Luke 14 records Jesus addressing large crowds about the cost of discipleship generally.2 The settings and audiences differ.
Second, Matthew and Luke demonstrably made different word choices throughout their Gospels, even when describing similar events. Luke's tendency toward sharper, more radical expressions is well-documented in scholarship.16 If Matthew chose "loves...more than" and Luke chose "hate," this reflects their distinct theological emphases and editorial decisions, not necessarily synonymous expressions of identical sayings.
Third, harmonizing these passages requires assuming Luke meant something other than what he wrote. Luke, a Greek speaker writing in Greek for a Greek-speaking audience, chose miseō rather than a comparative construction with agapaō (to love).17 If he intended "love less," the Greek language provided clear ways to express that, as Matthew demonstrated. Luke did not use those expressions.
Jesus's other uses of miseō
Examining how Luke reports Jesus using miseō elsewhere reveals consistency in meaning. In Luke 6:22, Jesus says: "Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man."8 Here miseō clearly means active hostility and persecution, not "love less."
In Luke 6:27, Jesus commands: "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you."18 Again, miseō describes enemies who actively oppose believers, requiring a response of radical love. The contrast is between agapaō (love) and miseō (hate) as opposites, not as points on a spectrum.
In Luke 16:13, Jesus states: "No servant can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other."19 This passage, parallel to Matthew 6:24, presents miseō in direct antithesis to agapaō. The structure indicates mutually exclusive alternatives: one master will be hated while the other is loved.
In each instance where Luke records Jesus using miseō, the word carries its standard meaning of aversion, hostility, or rejection—the opposite of love. Luke 14:26 stands as the only passage where interpreters routinely argue miseō means something significantly different from its usage everywhere else.
Contradiction with other teachings
Jesus's statement in Luke 14:26 creates an apparent contradiction with other biblical teaching. The Ten Commandments include "Honor your father and your mother," one of the core ethical requirements of both Judaism and Christianity.20 Jesus himself affirmed this commandment multiple times in the Gospels.21
In Matthew 15:4-6, Jesus criticizes the Pharisees for finding loopholes to avoid supporting their parents, stating: "For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' But you say, 'If anyone tells his father or his mother, "What you would have gained from me is given to God," he need not honor his father.' So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God."22 Jesus explicitly upholds the commandment to honor parents and condemns those who evade it.
Paul's instructions in Ephesians reinforce this: "Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 'Honor your father and mother' (this is the first commandment with a promise)."23 First Timothy 5:8 states: "But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."24
The New Testament consistently teaches care for family members as a Christian obligation. Yet Luke 14:26 requires hating them as a condition of discipleship. Harmonizing these teachings requires interpretive work the text itself does not provide.
The Semitic idiom defense
The most common apologetic defense of Luke 14:26 argues that Jesus spoke in Aramaic using a Semitic idiom where "hate" can mean "love less" or "prefer less."25 According to this defense, Hebrew and Aramaic express comparative preference through absolute terms, stating "love" and "hate" where Greek would use "love more" and "love less."26
Several Old Testament passages are cited to support this interpretation. Genesis 29:30-31 states that Jacob "loved Rachel more than Leah," then immediately says "Leah was hated."27 Deuteronomy 21:15-17 addresses a man with two wives, "the one loved and the other hated," then refers to the same situation as having a "loved" wife and a "unloved" wife, suggesting "hated" and "unloved" are synonymous.28
Malachi 1:2-3 records God saying: "I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated," often interpreted as expressing God's choice of Jacob over Esau rather than active hatred of Esau.29 These passages demonstrate that in some Hebrew contexts, "hate" can function as the opposite of preferential love.
However, applying this idiom to Luke 14:26 encounters significant problems. First, Luke wrote in Greek for Greek-speaking audiences, not in Aramaic or Hebrew.17 If Luke intended to convey "love less," he could have used Greek comparative constructions, as Matthew did in the parallel passage. Luke chose miseō, the standard Greek word for hatred, knowing his Greek-speaking readers would understand it according to Greek usage, not hypothetical Aramaic idioms.
Second, even if Jesus originally spoke in Aramaic, Luke's Gospel presents itself as a careful historical account written for Gentile Christians unfamiliar with Semitic idioms.30 Luke 1:3 states: "It seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus."31 If Luke intended "love less," clarity for his Greek audience would require translating the Aramaic idiom into clear Greek, not preserving potentially misleading Semitic expressions.
Third, the Semitic idiom defense assumes Luke misunderstood or mistranslated Jesus's words. If "hate" in Aramaic means "love less," but Luke's Greek miseō means actual hatred to Greek readers, then Luke's translation obscures Jesus's meaning. This undermines the reliability of Luke's Gospel as an accurate account of Jesus's teaching.
The hyperbole defense
A related apologetic argument holds that Jesus used hyperbole—deliberate exaggeration for effect—and did not intend his words to be taken literally.32 Jesus frequently used dramatic, exaggerated language to make points: calling for plucking out eyes and cutting off hands to avoid sin (Matthew 5:29-30), referring to swallowing camels while straining gnats (Matthew 23:24), and calling the religious leaders whitewashed tombs (Matthew 23:27).33 By this interpretation, "hate your family" is hyperbolic rhetoric emphasizing absolute priority for discipleship.
A scholarly article in the Harvard Theological Review examined Luke 14:26 specifically as a case study of hyperbole and the cost of discipleship.34 The author argues that the extreme language functions rhetorically to express preference in absolute rather than relative terms, characteristic of Jesus's teaching style.
However, identifying Luke 14:26 as hyperbole requires external criteria, not textual evidence. The passage contains no markers of exaggeration or non-literal speech. Jesus does not say "you must hate your family—if that seems extreme, consider..." or provide contextual clues that he is speaking figuratively. The statement appears in a passage about literally counting the cost of discipleship, calculating whether one has resources to complete a tower or win a war.2 The surrounding context is concrete and literal.
Moreover, hyperbole typically exaggerates degree, not reverses meaning. Saying "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse" exaggerates hunger but does not reverse its meaning. If Jesus meant "love me more than your family," saying "hate your family" does not exaggerate this—it states the opposite. Calling this hyperbole requires assuming Jesus said the reverse of what he meant, which moves beyond hyperbole into obscurity or deception.
Additionally, even if the language is hyperbolic, the underlying point remains troubling. What extreme reality is Jesus exaggerating? If the hyperbolic "hate your family" expresses the literal truth "prioritize me absolutely above all family bonds," the moral difficulty remains. Jesus still requires disciples to subordinate all human relationships to their relationship with him, a demand that raises questions about the value he places on family commitments and obligations.
What the text emphasizes
Reading Luke 14:26 in its immediate context reveals what the passage emphasizes. Jesus has been teaching about the kingdom of God through parables, including parables about choosing the seat of least honor at a banquet and about a great feast where invited guests make excuses.35 Large crowds are following him, and he turns to address them about the cost of discipleship.
Before the statement about hating family, Jesus tells parables about counting the cost. A builder must calculate whether he has enough resources to complete a tower before beginning, or he will be mocked when he cannot finish.36 A king must assess whether his army can defeat an opposing force before going to war, or he will need to sue for peace.37 These parables emphasize realistic assessment of costs before commitment.
Immediately after stating that disciples must hate their families, Jesus says: "Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple."38 In first-century Judea, bearing one's cross meant one thing: execution. Condemned criminals carried the crossbeam of their cross to the place of crucifixion.39 Jesus explicitly compares following him to walking to one's own execution.
The passage concludes: "So therefore, any one of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple."40 The theme is total renunciation: of family (14:26), of life itself (14:26-27), and of all possessions (14:33). Jesus presents discipleship as absolute commitment requiring abandonment of every competing loyalty.
This context suggests Jesus intended his words to shock and deter half-hearted followers. He was not offering an easy path or diluting his message for popularity. The crowds following him needed to understand what discipleship would cost: everything, including family bonds.
Luke's portrait of Jesus
Luke 14:26 fits within Luke's broader portrait of Jesus as a radical teacher who overturns conventional priorities. Throughout Luke's Gospel, Jesus challenges family loyalties and social obligations in ways that offend traditional values.16
In Luke 9:59-60, a would-be disciple asks permission to bury his father before following Jesus. Jesus responds: "Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God."41 Burying one's parents was a sacred obligation in Jewish culture, considered one of the most important acts of filial piety.42 Jesus's response prioritizes discipleship over this fundamental family duty.
In Luke 11:27-28, a woman in the crowd calls out: "Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts at which you nursed!" Jesus responds: "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it."43 He redirects honor away from biological family relationships toward spiritual obedience.
In Luke 12:51-53, Jesus declares: "Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. For from now on in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother."44 Jesus explicitly predicts and accepts that his message will fracture families.
Luke 18:29-30 records Jesus promising: "Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive many times more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life."45 Leaving one's family for the kingdom is presented as commendable, even necessary.
These passages establish a pattern: Luke consistently presents Jesus as requiring absolute priority over family bonds, even sacred obligations like burying parents. Luke 14:26 represents the most extreme expression of this theme but is not inconsistent with Luke's overall portrait.
How modern translations handle the text
Nearly all major English Bible translations render miseō in Luke 14:26 as "hate," recognizing that the Greek requires this translation. The English Standard Version, New International Version, King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and Christian Standard Bible all translate it as "hate."1, 46, 47, 48
Some modern paraphrases attempt to soften the language. The Message renders it: "Anyone who comes to me but refuses to let go of father, mother, spouse, children, brothers, sisters—yes, even one's own self!—can't be my disciple."49 This interpretation adds "refuses to let go of," which is not in the Greek text, and removes "hate" entirely.
The New Living Translation states: "If you want to be my disciple, you must, by comparison, hate everyone else—your father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even your own life. Otherwise, you cannot be my disciple."50 This translation adds "by comparison," qualifying the hatred as relative rather than absolute, but these words do not appear in the Greek text.
Selected English translations of Luke 14:261, 46, 47, 49, 50
| Translation | Rendering | Added qualifications |
|---|---|---|
| ESV | "does not hate" | None |
| NIV | "does not hate" | None |
| KJV | "hate not" | None |
| NLT | "must, by comparison, hate" | "by comparison" (not in Greek) |
| The Message | "refuses to let go of" | Replaces "hate" entirely |
The translations that add qualifiers like "by comparison" or replace "hate" with softer language are making interpretive choices not supported by the Greek text. They are incorporating apologetic interpretations into the translation itself, telling readers what they believe Jesus meant rather than what he said.
Early Christian interpretation
Early Christian interpreters grappled with Luke 14:26 and its apparent conflict with other biblical teaching. Church fathers generally adopted the "love less" interpretation, but with significant variation in how they applied it.51
Augustine of Hippo addressed the passage in his writings, interpreting "hate" as referring to evil qualities in family members, not the persons themselves. He argued that Christians should hate sin in their relatives while loving the persons, a distinction the text does not make.52
Thomas Aquinas discussed Luke 14:26 in the Summa Theologica, arguing that the commandment to honor parents is not violated by "hating" them in the sense of loving God more. He maintained that one can honor parents while prioritizing God above them, though he acknowledged the apparent tension in the language.53
The Reformation brought renewed emphasis on the plain meaning of Scripture, yet reformers also interpreted Luke 14:26 as hyperbolic or comparative. John Calvin wrote that Jesus "does not expressly tell us to hate our father and mother, but makes use of an exaggerated form of speech to show that, if the love of ourselves hinder us from following Him, we ought to lay aside that love."54 Calvin recognized the language as problematic and required explanation beyond the text itself.
Implications for Christian ethics
Whether interpreted literally or as hyperbole, Luke 14:26 presents challenging implications for Christian ethics and family values. If taken literally, it requires disciples to hate their closest relatives, including children and spouses. This conflicts with biblical commands to honor parents, love one's spouse, and care for one's children.20, 55, 56
If interpreted as hyperbole meaning "love less" or "prioritize less," the passage still teaches that following Jesus requires subordinating all family relationships to discipleship. In practice, this has been used to justify abandoning family responsibilities for religious purposes, from medieval monks who left their families to enter monasteries to modern missionaries who place children in boarding schools to pursue ministry.57
The passage raises questions about the compatibility of Christianity with family values. Can one simultaneously honor parents (as commanded) and hate them (as required for discipleship)? Can one love one's spouse and children while also regarding relationship with Jesus as so supreme that family love appears as hatred by comparison?
Defenders argue these tensions resolve through proper prioritization: God first, then family. But Luke 14:26 does not merely say "put God first"—it says "hate your family" or you cannot be Jesus's disciple. The language is absolute, not merely about ordering priorities.
Broader New Testament context
The tension between Luke 14:26 and other New Testament teaching about families reveals a genuine theological difficulty. Paul instructs husbands to love their wives "as Christ loved the church" and wives to submit to husbands; he commands children to obey parents and fathers not to provoke children to anger.23, 55 Peter instructs wives to submit to husbands and husbands to honor wives.58
These instructions assume the value and importance of family relationships. They do not say "hate your spouse but act lovingly" or "hate your children but raise them well." They present family relationships as genuine goods to be nurtured, not obstacles to be overcome or subordinated through hatred or indifference.
Yet Jesus's teaching in Luke 14:26 frames family relationships as potential impediments to discipleship, requiring hatred or subordination. Harmonizing these perspectives requires interpretive work the texts themselves do not provide. Either family relationships are good things to be honored and nurtured, or they are lesser loyalties to be hated or subordinated. The New Testament appears to affirm both positions without fully reconciling them.
Assessing the passage
Luke 14:26 presents Jesus making an extraordinary demand: anyone who does not hate their closest family members cannot be his disciple. The Greek word used is miseō, the standard term for hatred, used throughout the New Testament to describe active animosity and rejection. No contextual markers indicate Jesus is speaking figuratively or hyperbolically.
Defenders argue Jesus used Semitic idiom where "hate" means "love less," pointing to Old Testament passages where similar language appears. However, this interpretation requires assuming Luke either failed to translate Aramaic idiom into clear Greek or deliberately preserved potentially misleading Semitic expressions for his Greek-speaking audience. It also requires reading Luke 14:26 differently from every other instance of miseō in Luke's Gospel.
Others argue the passage is hyperbolic, exaggerating for rhetorical effect. But hyperbole typically exaggerates degree, not reverses meaning. If Jesus meant "prioritize me above family," saying "hate your family" does not exaggerate this sentiment—it states something different and more extreme.
The most straightforward reading of the text is that Jesus required his disciples to hate their families as a condition of following him. This conflicts with other biblical teaching about honoring parents and loving family members, creating a genuine theological tension. Whether one resolves this tension by reinterpreting Jesus's words, acknowledging development in early Christian ethics, or accepting the contradiction as unresolved, the passage remains one of the most challenging in the New Testament.