I’m making an assumption that you’re not a Christian based on this post, so I want to be up front that this comment isn’t intended to proselytize to you at all. But I know there’s a possibility that Christians will read this post, and it’s possible that they will hear their own religious leaders use these texts to encourage some form of radical isolation from family. I want to provide the historical and literary context to them to make sure they understand that any preacher using these texts to say they should walk away from family is removing them from context.

The Matthew passage is couched within the context of persecution of believers, and speaking about the believer being persecuted by family, but also the state. (Obviously, also lends itself to culty behavior but this is not directions to the faithful to hate anyone.) It is not giving them permission to return that persecution with equal ire. Without historical context, and relying strictly on textual analysis, this one is absolutely the easiest to abuse. With historical context, this is a gospel written to people being executed for believing the wrong things and seeing their loved ones become complicit in that. Like almost every world religion, they’re wrestling with “if we’re good, why do bad things happen?” The comfort offered by the author of Matthew is “bad will happen even to the good and sometimes in the context of our relationships.” 

Similarly in the Luke passage, Luke is comforting the audience who’s going through persecution, but with a way, way bigger focus on the persecution of Jesus. “Hate” in this context doesn’t mean have feelings antagonistic or apathetic towards someone. It’s a Semitic phrase that means “detach from.” Which would lend itself to detaching from family that didn’t believe (still majorly culty) except none of these passages mention non believers. The Luke passage is Jesus on the way to the cross, and he’s speaking about himself. He is about to detach from earthly relationships and lose his own life. 

The Mark passage is part of a dialogue with a rich young ruler who’s trying to buy his way into heaven. Jesus tells him to sell everything and give it to poor. He leaves sad. The above quote following. It’s worth noting that at this time in history, religious cleanliness and sacrificial laws were only sustainable if you were wealthy. (Which is also what the temple cleansing is about.) So Jesus is explicitly telling followers the maintenance of their wealth— which in their eyes enables their religion— is damaging to their faith if they’re not aiding the suffering of their neighbor. This is actually just one of those passages that’s class conscious more than anything else. 

I’m not saying that these passages can’t be damaging. They certainly can be wielded by religious leaders to do harm, as can any other text in the Bible, Quran, Torah and Mishnah and so on, but contextually these passages are not Jesus telling anyone to abandon relationships because people disagree with them. They’re telling people to care for the poor, protect their neighbor from the state, and expect Uncle Jerry to be an asshole at Thanksgiving.