Mt 8:21 ‘[One] of the disciples said to him, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” 8:22 But Jesus said to him, “Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead.”’

Lk 9:59 ‘Jesus said to another, “Follow me.” But he replied, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” 9:60 But Jesus said to him, “Let the dead bury their own dead, but as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.”’

This strking saying may be taken a number of ways:-

1. ‘Let the (spiritually) dead bury the (physically) dead.

The first mention of ‘the dead’ appears to refer to the spiritually dead.  Jesus is saying that those outside the kingdom (perhaps including members of the man’s own family) should be left to care for their dead or dying relative.

France is clear enough in his own mind:

‘The dead can only mean those outside the disciple group, who lack spiritual life, and who in the absence of a higher calling can be left to deal with mundane matters.’ (TNTC)

Carson:

‘Palestinian piety, basing itself on the fifth commandment (Ex 20:12), expected sons to attend to the burial of their parents (cf. Gen 25:9; 35:29; 50:13). Jesus’ reply used paradoxical language (as in Mt 16:25): Let the (spiritually) dead bury the (physically) dead. These verses seem to be a powerful way of expressing the thought in 10:37—even closest family ties must not be set above allegiance to Jesus and the proclamation of the kingdom (Lk 9:60).’

Even so, the command is surprising (but what command of Jesus is not surprising?!), since it was the duty of a son to look after the burial arrangements for his father.

Morris highlights the solemn responsibility of the burial of one’s parent:

‘It was accepted that, faced with a burial, a man was exempted from a whole string of important religious duties: the saying of the daily prayers, the study of the law, the temple service, the observance of cirumcision, the killing of the Passover sacrifice, and the reading of the Megilla.’

Archer (Enycloperdia of Bible Difficulties) suggests that the young man in the story wished to stay at home until his father (who may have been in poor health) died.  The business of caring for him, before and after his demise, could be left his (unbelieving) brothers.

Jesus is saying, then, in no uncertain terms, that loyalty to him and his cause takes priority over all others.  It would still leave open to question whether such a command applies to all would-be followers.  But, in any case, it is hard to think of Jesus forbidding such a sacred obligation.

Hengel remarks on the sense of urgency:

‘There was no more time to be lost and so [Jesus] had to be followed without procrastination and to the abandonment of all human considerations and ties.’

Helen Bond agrees:

‘So urgent was Jesus’ call that on one occasion he is said to have commended a would-be disciple to ‘Leave the dead to bury their own dead’ (Mt 8:18–22//Lk 9:57–62). The only explanation for this deeply offensive statement, which flagrantly ignored a fundamental religious duty, is Jesus’ utter conviction that the Kingdom was about to dawn and the demand for a present response.’

(The Historical Jesus: A Guide For The Perplexed, p109)

2. It may be that Jesus is speaking rhetorically, in order to make the man think about his priorities.  Is he prepared to put Jesus before his family?  Loyalty to Jesus must take priority over all other loyalties, even the most sacred.

Bock observes:

‘Jesus’ command is heavily rhetorical, since the dead cannot bury anyone. It means either that the spiritually dead should be left to perform this task or that such concern is inconsequential in the face of the call to discipleship.’

Mounce comments:

‘This enigmatic statement is often interpreted to mean that the task of burying the physically dead is to be left to the spiritually dead (those not responding to the urgency of the kingdom message). It is probably better to take it in a more general way as indicating that the ordinary priorities of this life are to give way to the demands of Christian discipleship. (In Luke 14:25–33 one cannot be a disciple without placing Christ above family ties, carrying one’s own cross, and giving up everything one has.)’

3. It may be that the father was still alive, which would suggest that the would-be disciple wished to care for him (or used that as an excuse) until his death.  This is the view of Barclay.

Morris thinks it very likely

‘that the man’s parent was still alive and that he was referring to the obligation that rested on a dutiful son to look after his father in his declining years until his eventual death. He was saying that he must fulfil his duty to his father, a most important duty. In that case he was postponing his discipleship, perhaps for several years. He was saying in effect, “Some day, after my father has died, I will follow you.”’

But there is nothing in the text itself to suggest this.  Nolland (WBC) remarks that we must regard the father as dead or on the point of death.

4. It may be that the man’s comment reflects the burial customs of the day.  Immediately after the death of the father, the body would have been placed in a coffin and then into a tomb for one year in order for the body to decompose.  The family would have been in mourning for the first seven days, and it is unlikely that the man would have been out and about at this time.  After a year, the bones would have been placed in an ossuary and then reburied.  The point then is that the man wants to delay by up to one year his response to Jesus’ command to follow him.  This is the view of Keener (IVP Bible Background Commentary)

The CSB Study Bible adopts a similar interpretation:

‘Jesus’s demand seems harsh to modern readers, for today funerals would only briefly delay a commitment to follow him. However, ancient Jewish burials stretched over an entire year. A year after the initial interment, the eldest son was obligated to gather the skeletal remains and place them in an ossuary for second burial. Many Jews regarded the commandment to honor father and mother as the supreme commandment, and they also viewed giving parents an honorable burial as its most important implication. Jesus insisted that following him was to be an even higher priority. Since obligation to God supersedes obligation to parents (Deut 13:5–6), Jesus assumed a divine prerogative in this teaching.’

According to this interpretation, then, the man is saying: “I will follow you, Jesus, in about a year.”

Conclusion

Whichever of these interpretations we adopt, this saying is blunt, to the point of offensiveness, both in the language (referring to those outside the circle of discipleship as ‘dead’) and thrust (following Jesus is more important than the most solemn and pressing of family duties).

In considering the possible ways of interpreting this saying we must take care not to ‘domesticate’ it without good reason.

This saying powerfully expresses the teaching of Mt 10:37 (cf. Lk 9:60).  Our Lord’s use of ‘shock tactics’ should not obscure the fact that he taught (and practised) high regard for family responsibilities, Mk 7:7-13.