No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
Jesus states an absolute: 'No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.' The impossibility is categorical: 'no servant can serve two masters' (οὐδεὶς οἰκέτης δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν, oudeis oiketēs dynatai dysi kyriois douleuein). Divided loyalty is impossible—either God or money will dominate. The verbs 'hate/love' and 'hold to/despise' don't require conscious rejection but describe inevitable prioritization. The final declaration 'ye cannot serve God and mammon' (οὐ δύνασθε θεῷ δουλεύειν καὶ μαμωνᾷ, ou dynasthe theō douleuein kai mamōna) is unequivocal. Money isn't neutral—it's a rival god demanding allegiance.
Historical Context
Jesus personifies 'mammon' (μαμωνᾷ, mamōna) as a master competing with God for human devotion. This explains why the New Testament says more about money than almost any other topic—not because wealth is supremely important but because it's supremely dangerous. Money promises security, significance, and satisfaction—the very things only God can provide. Therefore, money becomes an idol. The either/or choice—God or money—cuts through all religious compromise. You can't compartmentalize life, serving God on Sundays while serving mammon weekdays. Lordship is total or non-existent. How you earn, spend, save, give, and think about money reveals your true master.
Questions for Reflection
How does money function as a rival god competing with the true God for human allegiance?
What does it look like practically to serve mammon rather than God?
How can you examine your life to discern whether you're truly serving God or subtly serving money?
Related Resources
Explore related topics, people, and study resources to deepen your understanding of this passage.
Analysis & Commentary
Jesus states an absolute: 'No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.' The impossibility is categorical: 'no servant can serve two masters' (οὐδεὶς οἰκέτης δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν, oudeis oiketēs dynatai dysi kyriois douleuein). Divided loyalty is impossible—either God or money will dominate. The verbs 'hate/love' and 'hold to/despise' don't require conscious rejection but describe inevitable prioritization. The final declaration 'ye cannot serve God and mammon' (οὐ δύνασθε θεῷ δουλεύειν καὶ μαμωνᾷ, ou dynasthe theō douleuein kai mamōna) is unequivocal. Money isn't neutral—it's a rival god demanding allegiance.