Mark Chapter 10
This chapter comes right after the section on tempting "children" to sin. Chapter 10 opens with teaching on divorce.
In Mark, the period does come after wife, as if they are asking if divorce is EVER ok:
2 And Pharisees came up and in order to test him asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" [Mar 10:2 ESV]
(In Matthew it reads like this:
3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?" [Mat 19:3 ESV] The end of the sentence could have been after wife, but they apparently knew there were causes that were a lawful basis for divorce.)
Jesus turns the question back on them, asking what Moses wrote about divorce? They say Moses allowed divorce, with a certificate. Again, they are misrepresenting. In Matthew, the passage is very much about the consequences to men after divorce. Women are not mentioned. Not excluded but not explicitly included. But here in vs 12, women are included, with exactly the same rule as for men. If she divorces for other than adultery, and marries again, then she commits adultery.
So...if you divorce, but don't get remarried...what then? It says what God has joined together, let no man put asunder. So we are not to divorce at all. But if we mess this up, and divorce, we at least should not remarry, and make things still worse. That's why the disciples said better not to marry at all than to marry, and after having that kind of a relationship, divorce and have to live alone. That living alone the second time would be very difficult to deal with indeed...unless you are a eunuch, in which case divorce would leave you in about the same situation you were in before you got married!
2024 - I had a remarkable, and possibly untrustworthy thought about this section as I read it today. What if Jesus meant it another way. What if he asked them what Moses said to make the point first, that in Moses' day, as in Jesus' day, some people put away their wives or husbands just to get rid of them - they were tired of them, or had their eyes on someone else. They could do very cruel things back then, just as now, and the innocent party - the one who had NOT been adulterous, and who was not being a fiend, was the one who suffered at the hands of these awful people. Then, as now. What if also, divorce in Moses' day was always "initiated" by someone. Then maybe what Jesus was getting at here is that if you do not have a really good reason to divorce your spouse - if you are just sick and tired of them, though they haven't done anything - if you do that and then move on to someone else, in God's sight YOU, NOT the one you divorced, becomes an adulterer. If this were not true, Jesus would never have said that if your unbelieving spouse leaves you, let them go. You'd somehow still be guilty even though this other person put you in difficulty. Vss 11 and 12, furthermore, seem to say that those who divorce a spouse for frivolous reasons - and then marry again, are adulterers.
So this year, what I am wondering is what happens if your spouse is beating on you, constantly drunk, abusive toward the children, causing the whole family to dread their company, and you file for divorce for that reason. To remove yourself and your children from a highly abusive situation, and NOT because you have your eye on the neighbors wife or the pool boy, but because you are the spouse of a despicable, even dangerous person? This year, I don't think Jesus is talking about THAT situation at all. Divorcing a mean, hateful, awful person is not something that hard-hearted people do and so cause hurt and pain to the one divorce. Divorcing a wife beater does not do HIM any harm at all, not in the sense that Jesus means here. There is good reason to get divorced from people like that, and everyone - in Moses' day as in Jesus' - knew that.
It remains true also that God never intended for people to divorce. He hates divorce. BUT, it is not tenable to claim that God DOES intend for people to be abused for a lifetime just because the abuser is married to them. No. God would never intend such a thing.
There are divorces that are based on good sound reasons, and though God does not encourage such, perhaps he also does not "curse" such divorces. It all comes down to the heart, to the real, true, deep down reason for the divorce, and I think even then we are talking about the one who initiates the divorce. The "victim", let's call it, of divorce is NOT an adulterer for getting remarried.
This is a big change in how I understand this passage. I need to look at the parallel passages very closely to see if I am contradicting one of them, and so wrong dead wrong in looking at things this way. But this way seems to make a lot of sense in the real world and when Jesus said "because of your hard hearts" he was talking about the real world, not God's ideal.
Jesus rebukes them for not letting the children come to him. He takes the children in his arms.
The rich young man shows up. First thing Jesus answers is that none is good but God alone. This is the theme of everything about to be said. Jesus makes it clear that no man can live a perfect life. Only God is perfect. But this man believes that he is also. That's the point of this answer.
At the end of this conversation, Jesus has compassion for this young man, and invites him to follow. Jesus doesn't extend that invitation to just everyone. I think this was a sort of "inner circle" invitation. Jesus truly wanted this man to join him. But the young man blatantly openly knowingly put his money ahead of Jesus, ahead of God. He could never again claim that he was a good man. Given the choice, he chose money. This is the test that all rich men must face.
Peter's question about what they'll get because they've given up everything indicates his misunderstanding of what Jesus is saying. Peter thinks it is a universal call to poverty and want. That's not what Jesus said. Jesus made it clear that with God, it is possible even for a rich person to enter the kingdom. It's just harder - and probably a lot more rare.
Mark continues on in chapter 10 past where Matthew 19 ended. Taking a quick look at Matt 20, it does not continue as Mark, just in a different chapter. The two take different routes.
After this, Jesus starts toward Jerusalem for the last time, with many following him. He walks in the lead, identifying himself easily for any who are looking for him to kill him. He walks in front as they approach enemy lines. The 12 are amazed, and all his disciples are afraid for him as he does this. Jesus tells them, in the most detailed account to date, what is going to happen when they get to Jerusalem. He tells them he will rise the third day, and yet they are surprised when this happens. They either don't understand, or even at this point, they don't believe that Jesus can rise from the dead - though they have seen him raise others. How could thy not believe???? (2020 - In a previous chapter, we were told that they were kept from grasping what Jesus was telling them. They were not supposed to latch onto it until after it happened, and THEN they would remember in what detail he prophesied about his death. This was the purpose of Jesus saying it at this point - not so they'd understand, but so they would remember this demonstration yet again that God was with Christ, controlling all these events.)
James and John ask for the most honored positions in the kingdom, once Jesus becomes king. Pretty ambitious request. They are told that they cannot have those seats because they are already prepared for others. However they can drink the same cup and be baptized the same way as Jesus. James died at Herod's hand - killed by Gentiles for his faith? John dies a natural death on Patmos...or so tradition says. So I don't quite get this passage. MSB just says they would suffer like their master. Does not try to correlate directly.
Blind Bartimaeus is bold enough to call out for Jesus though rebuked by the crowd as he does it. He doesn't care what the crowd thinks. He is fine with their shushing him. Some surely thought he was just a beggar, wasting his time trying to get attention from Jesus. The lesson is that we are all as blind as Bartimaeus, as needy as he was, and as undeserving as he was. BUT, are we as bold to approach Jesus as Bartimaeus was? He walked through the disdaining, skeptical, judgemental crowd, right to Jesus feet. Who won that one?
There is surely a FB post here! 2020 - Some make much of the fact that Mark says the blind man was healed as Jesus left Jericho, and Luke, yesterday, says it happened as he got there. The explanations I've seen say Jericho had an old town and a new town, and this event happened as Jesus was leaving one and entering the other. I say we probably have very little direct knowledge of how Jericho was laid out in those days, or of Jesus "route" as he went through it. You can make a lot of fuss about this if you want, but can no more prove it an error than I can prove it is not one.
This verse:
46 And they came to Jericho. And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. [Mar 10:46 ESV] Look at all the detail Mark gives us about the blind man. Mark and Luke only mention one blind man. Matthew's account mentions two, and says both were healed. But only Mark tells us the name of the blind man, and who his father was. My guess is that this beggar was well known. Likely he had "hollered" at a lot of people as they passed that spot. I would also guess that after these events, Bartimaeus becomes a voice proclaiming Jesus, maybe shouting at passers by from that very spot, and that he gives his testimony about having his sight restored to anyone who will listen. So in case you didn't believe the story when Mark wrote it, he is giving you a point of corroboration, so that you can go and ask Bartimaeus himself.
2020 - This whole story is a picture of salvation. Bartimaeus recognized his need, he recognized that Jesus could supply that need, he cried out - disregarding the cares and rebukes of those around him - for Jesus to help him. Jesus stops, calls him, and asks what he wants. Bartimaeus confesses his need, publicly, and then Jesus says his faith has healed him. He sort of prayed the prayer, but Jesus says the healing has already been done. The faith that his need could be met at all is what restored his sight. Upon hearing his confession, Jesus says "Go your way...", and that blind man, lost in sin, could see.