Bible Commentaries

Into the border of Judea and beyond Jordan (eis ta horia tēs Ioudaias kai peran tou Iordanou). See note on Matthew 19:1 for discussion of this curious expression. Matthew adds “from Galilee” and Luke 17:11 says that Jesus “was passing through the midst of Samaria and Galilee” after leaving Ephraim (John 11:54). A great deal has intervened between the events at the close of Mark 9 and those in the beginning of Mark 10. For these events See Matthew 18; John 7-11; Luke 9:57-18:14 (one-third of Luke‘s Gospel comes in here). It was a little over six months to the end at the close of Mark 9. It is just a few weeks now in Mark 10. Jesus has begun his last journey to Jerusalem going north through Samaria, Galilee, across the Jordan into Perea, and back into Judea near Jericho to go up with the passover pilgrims from Galilee.

Multitudes (ochloi). Caravans and caravans journeying to Jerusalem. Many of them are followers of Jesus from Galilee or at least kindly disposed towards him. They go together (sunporeuontai) with Jesus. Note dramatic historical present.

As he was wont (hōs eiōthei). Second past perfect used like an imperfect from eiōtha second perfect active. Jesus was teaching (edidasken imperfect, no longer present tense) this moving caravan.

Tempting him (peirazontes). As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. Mark 7:5; Mark 8:11). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see Matthew 4:1), but their motive was evil. They had once involved the Baptist with Herod Antipas and Herodias on this subject. They may have some such hopes about Jesus, or their purpose may have been to see if Jesus will be stricter than Moses taught. They knew that he had already spoken in Galilee on the subject (Matthew 5:31.).

What did Moses command you? (Timothyhumin eneteilato Mōusēs̱). Jesus at once brought up the issue concerning the teaching of Moses (Deuteronomy 24:1). But Jesus goes back beyond this concession here allowed by Moses to the ideal state commanded in Genesis 1:27.

To write a bill of divorcement and to put her away (biblion apostasiou grapsai kai apolusai). The word for “bill” (biblion) is a diminutive and means “little book,” like the Latin libellus, from which comes our word libel (Vincent). Wycliff has it here “a libel of forsaking.” This same point the Pharisees raise in Matthew 19:7, showing probably that they held to the liberal view of Hillel, easy divorce for almost any cause. That was the popular view as now. See note on Matthew 19:8 for this and for discussion of “for your hardness of heart” (sklērokardia). Jesus expounds the purpose of marriage (Genesis 2:24) and takes the stricter view of divorce, that of the school of Shammai. See notes on Matthew 19:3-11 for discussion. Mark 10:10 notes that the disciples asked Jesus about this problem “in the house” after they had gone away from the crowd.

Mark does not give the exception stated in Matthew 19:9 “except for fornication” which see for discussion, though the point is really involved in what Mark does record. Mere formal divorce does not annul actual marriage consummated by the physical union. Breaking that bond does annul it.

If she herself shall put away her husband and marry another (εαν αυτη απολυσασα τον ανδρα αυτης γαμησηι — ean autē apolusasa ton andra autēs gamēsēi). Condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of determination). Greek and Roman law allowed the divorce of the husband by the wife though not provided for in Jewish law. But the thing was sometimes done as in the case of Herodias and her husband before she married Herod Antipas. So also Salome, Herod‘s sister, divorced her husband. Both Bruce and Gould think that Mark added this item to the words of Jesus for the benefit of the Gentile environment of this Roman Gospel. But surely Jesus knew that the thing was done in the Roman world and hence prohibited marrying such a “grass widow.”

They brought (προσεπερον — prosepheron). Imperfect active tense, implying repetition. So also Luke 18:15, though Matthew 19:13 has the constative aorist passive (προσηνεχτησαν — prosēnechthēsan). “This incident follows with singular fitness after the Lord‘s assertion of the sanctity of married life” (Swete). These children (παιδια — paidia Mark and Matthew; βρεπη — brephē in Luke) were of various ages. They were brought to Jesus for his blessing and prayers (Matthew). The mothers had reverence for Jesus and wanted him to touch (απσηται — hapsētai) them. There was, of course, no question of baptism or salvation involved, but a most natural thing to do.

He was moved with indignation (ηγανακτησεν — ēganaktēsen). In Mark alone. The word is ingressive aorist, became indignant, and is a strong word of deep emotion (from αγαν — agan and αχτομαι — achthomai to feel pain). Already in Matthew 21:15; Matthew 26:8. Old and common word.

Suffer the little children to come unto me (απετε τα παιδια ερχεσται προς με — aphete ta paidia erchesthai pros me). Mark has the infinitive ερχεσται — erchesthai (come) not in Matthew, but in Luke. Surely it ought to be a joy to parents to bring their children to Jesus, certainly to allow them to come, but to hinder their coming is a crime. There are parents who will have to give answer to God for keeping their children away from Jesus.

As a little child (ως παιδιον — hōs paidion). How does a little child receive the kingdom of God? The little child learns to obey its parents simply and uncomplainingly. There are some new psychologists who argue against teaching obedience to children. The results have not been inspiring. Jesus here presents the little child with trusting and simple and loving obedience as the model for adults in coming into the kingdom. Jesus does not here say that children are in the kingdom of God because they are children.

He took them in his arms (εναγκαλισαμενος — enagkalisamenos). A distinct rebuke to the protest of the over-particular disciples. This word already in Mark 9:36. In Luke 2:28 we have the full idiom, to receive into the arms (εις τας αγκαλας δεχεσται — eis tās agkalas dechesthai). So with tender fondling Jesus repeatedly blessed (κατευλογει — kateulogei imperfect), laying his hands upon each of them (τιτεις — titheis present participle). It was a great moment for each mother and child.

Ran (προσδραμων — prosdramōn). Jesus had left the house (Mark 10:10) and was proceeding with the caravan on the way (εις οδον — eis hodon) when this ruler eagerly ran and kneeled (γονυπετησας — gonupetēsas) and was asking (επηρωτα — epērōtā imperfect) Jesus about his problem. Both these details alone in Mark.

Why callest thou me good? (Τι με λεγεις αγατον — Timothyme legeis agathoṉ). So Luke 18:19. Matthew 19:17 has it: “Why asketh thou concerning that which is good? “The young ruler was probably sincere and not using mere fulsome compliment, but Jesus challenges him to define his attitude towards him as was proper. Did he mean “good” (αγατος — agathos) in the absolute sense as applied to God? The language is not a disclaiming of deity on the part of Jesus.

That I may inherit (ινα κληρονομησω — hina klēronomēsō). Matthew 19:16 has (σχω — schō), that I may “get.”

All these (ταυτα παντα — tauta panta). Literally, these all (of them).

Looking upon him loved him (εμβλεπσας αυτωι ηγαπησεν — emblepsas autōi ēgapēsen). Mark alone mentions this glance of affection, ingressive aorist participle and verb. Jesus fell in love with this charming youth.

One thing thou lackest (εν σε υστερει — Hen se husterei). Luke 18:22 has it: “One thing thou lackest yet” (Ετι εν σοι λειπει — Eti hen soi leipei). Possibly two translations of the same Aramaic phrase. Matthew 19:20 represents the youth as asking “What lack I yet?” (Τι ετι υστερω — Timothyeti husterō̱). The answer of Jesus meets that inquiry after more than mere outward obedience to laws and regulations. The verb υστερω — husterō is from the adjective υστερος — husteros (behind) and means to be too late, to come short, to fail of, to lack. It is used either with the accusative, as here, or with the ablative as in 2 Corinthians 11:5, or the dative as in Textus Receptus here, σοι — soi f0).

But his countenance fell (ο δε στυγνασας — ho de stugnasas). In the lxx and Polybius once and in Matthew 16:3 (passage bracketed by Westcott and Hort). The verb is from στυγνος — stugnos sombre, gloomy, like a lowering cloud. See note on Matthew 19:22 for discussion of “sorrowful” (lupoumenos).

Looked round about (περιβλεπσαμενος — periblepsamenos). Another picture of the looks of Jesus and in Mark alone as in Mark 3:5, Mark 3:34. “To see what impression the incident had made on the Twelve” (Bruce). “When the man was gone the Lord‘s eye swept round the circle of the Twelve, as he drew for them the lesson of the incident” (Swete).

How hardly (Πως δυσκολως — Pōs duskolōs). So Luke 18:24. Matthew 19:23 has it: “With difficulty (δυσκολως — duskolōs) shall a rich man.” See note on Matthew for this word.

Were amazed (εταμβουντο — ethambounto). Imperfect passive. A look of blank astonishment was on their faces at this statement of Jesus. They in common with other Jews regarded wealth as a token of God‘s special favour.

Children (τεκνα — tekna). Here alone to the Twelve and this tender note is due to their growing perplexity.

For them that trust in riches (τους πεποιτοτας επι τοις χρημασιν — tous pepoithotas epi tois chrēmasin). These words do not occur in Aleph B Delta Memphitic and one Old Latin manuscript. Westcott and Hort omit them from their text as an evident addition to explain the difficult words of Jesus.

Needle‘s eye (τρυμαλιας ραπιδος — trumaliās rhaphidos). See note on Matthew 19:24 for discussion. Luke uses the surgical needle, belonēs Matthew has the word rhaphis like Mark from βελονης — rhaptō to sew, and it appears in the papyri. Both Matthew and Luke employ ραπις — trēmatos for eye, a perforation or hole from ραπτω — titraō to bore. Mark‘s word τρηματος — trumalias is from τιτραω — truō to wear away, to perforate. In the lxx and Plutarch.

Then who (και τις — kai tis). Matthew 19:25 has Τις ουν — Tis oun Evidently και — kai has here an inferential sense like ουν — oun f0).

Looking on them (εμβλεπσας αυτοις — emblepsas autois). So in Matthew 19:26. Their amazement increased (Mark 10:26).

But not with God (αλλ ου παρα τεωι — all' ou para theōi). Locative case with παρα — para (beside). The impossible by the side of men (παρα αντρωποις — para anthrōpois) becomes possible by the side of God. That is the whole point and brushes to one side all petty theories of a gate called needle‘s eye, etc.

Peter began to say (ηρχατο λεγειν ο Πετρος — ērxato legein ho Petros). It was hard for Peter to hold in till now. Matthew 19:27 says that “Peter answered” as if the remark was addressed to him in particular. At any rate Peter reminds Jesus of what they had left to follow him, four of them that day by the sea (Mark 1:20; Matthew 4:22; Luke 5:11). It was to claim obedience to this high ideal on their part in contrast with the conduct of the rich young ruler.

With persecutions (μετα διωγμων — meta diōgmōn). This extra touch is in Mark alone. There is a reminiscence of some of “the apocalyptic of the familiar descriptions of the blessings of the Messianic kingdom. But Jesus uses such language from the religious idiom of this time only to idealize it” (Gould). The apostles were soon to see the realization of this foreshadowing of persecution. Vincent notes that Jesus omits “a hundred wives” in this list, showing that Julian the Apostate‘s sneer on that score was without foundation.

See note on Matthew 19:30 for the use of the paradox about first and last, probably a rebuke here to Peter‘s boast.

And they were amazed (και εταμβουντο — kai ethambounto). Imperfect tense describing the feelings of the disciples as Jesus was walking on in front of them (ην προαγων αυτους — ēn proagōn autous periphrastic imperfect active), an unusual circumstance in itself that seemed to bode no good as they went on through Perea towards Jerusalem. In fact, they that followed were afraid (οι δε ακολουτουντες εποβουντο — hoi de akolouthountes ephobounto) as they looked at Jesus walking ahead in solitude. The idiom (οι δε — hoi de) may not mean that all the disciples were afraid, but only some of them. “The Lord walked in advance of the Twelve with a solemnity and a determination which foreboded danger” (Swete). Cf. Luke 9:5. They began to fear coming disaster as they neared Jerusalem. They read correctly the face of Jesus.

And he took again the twelve (και παραλαβων τους δωδεκα — kai paralabōn tous dōdeka). Matthew has “apart” from the crowds and that is what Mark also means. Note παραλαβων — paralabōn taking to his side.

And began to tell them the things that were to happen to him (ηρχατο αυτοις λεγειν τα μελλοντα αυτωι συμβαινειν — ērxato autois legein ta mellonta autōi sumbainein). He had done it before three times already (Mark 8:31; Mark 9:13; Mark 9:31). So Jesus tries once more. They had failed utterly heretofore. How is it now? Luke adds (Luke 18:34): “They understood none of these things.” But Mark and Matthew show how the minds of two of the disciples were wholly occupied with plans of their own selfish ambition while Jesus was giving details of his approaching death and resurrection.

There come near unto him James and John (και προσπορευονται Ιακωβος και Ιωανης — kai prosporeuontai Iakōbos kai Iōanēs). Dramatic present tense. Matthew has τοτε — tote then, showing that the request of the two brothers with their mother (Matthew 20:20) comes immediately after the talk about Christ‘s death.

We would (τελομεν — thelomen). We wish, we want, bluntly told.

She came worshipping (προσκυνουσα — proskunousa) Matthew says. The mother spoke for the sons. But they try to commit Jesus to their desires before they tell what they are, just like spoiled children.

In thy glory (εν τηι δοχηι — en tēi doxēi). Matthew 20:21 has “in thy kingdom.” See note on Matthew 20:20 for the literal interpretation of Matthew 19:28. They are looking for a grand Jewish world empire with apocalyptic features in the eschatological culmination of the Messiah‘s kingdom. That dream brushed aside all the talk of Jesus about his death and resurrection as mere pessimism.

Or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with (η το βαπτισμα ο εγω βαπτιζομαι βαπτιστηναι — ē to baptisma ho egō baptizomai baptisthēnai). Cognate accusative with both passive verbs. Matthew 20:22 has only the cup, but Mark has both the cup and the baptism, both referring to death. Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane will refer to his death again as “the cup” (Mark 14:36; Matthew 26:39; Luke 22:42). He had already used baptism as a figure for his death (Luke 12:50). Paul will use it several times (1 Corinthians 15:29; Romans 6:3-6; Colossians 2:12).

See notes on Matthew 20:23-28 for discussion on these memorable verses (Mark 10:39-45) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in Mark 10:45 note the language of Jesus concerning his death as “a ransom for many” (lutron anti pollōn), words of the Master that were not understood by the apostles when spoken by Jesus and which have been preserved for us by Peter through Mark. Some today seek to empty these words of all real meaning as if Jesus could not have or hold such a conception concerning his death for sinners.

See note on Mark 10:39.

See note on Mark 10:39.

See note on Mark 10:39.

See note on Mark 10:39.

See note on Mark 10:39.

sa120

See note on Mark 10:39.

sa120

From Jericho (απο Ιερειχω — apo Iereichō). See Matthew 20:29 for discussion of this phrase and Luke‘s (Luke 18:35) “nigh unto Jericho” and the two Jerichos, the old and the new Roman (Luke). The new Jericho was “about five miles W. of the Jordan and fifteen E. of Jerusalem, near the mouth of the Wady Kelt, and more than a mile south of the site of the ancient town” (Swete).

Great multitude (ochlou hikanou). Considerable, more than sufficient. Often in Luke and the papyri in this sense. See note on Matthew 3:11 for the other sense of fit for οχλου ικανου — hikanos (ικανος — Bartimaios). Aramaic name like Bartholomew, αρτιμαιος — bar meaning son like Hebrew ben. So Mark explains the name meaning “the son of Timaeus” (βαρ — ho huios Timaiou). Mark alone gives his name while Matthew 20:30 mentions two which see for discussion.

Blind beggar (ο υιος Τιμαιου — tuphlos prosaitēs), “begging” (τυπλος προσαιτης — epaitōn) Luke has it (Luke 18:35). All three Gospels picture him as sitting by the roadside (επαιτων — ekathēto para tēn hodon). It was a common sight. Bartimaeus had his regular place. Vincent quotes Thomson concerning Ramleh: “I once walked the streets counting all that were either blind or had defective eyes, and it amounted to about one-half the male population. The women I could not count, for they are rigidly veiled” (The Land and the Book). The dust, the glare of the sun, the unsanitary habits of the people spread contagious eye-diseases.

Rebuked him (επετιμων αυτωι — epetimōn autōi). Imperfect tense. Kept rebuking repeatedly. So Luke 18:39. Aorist tense in Matthew 20:31.

Should hold his peace (σιωπησηι — siōpēsēi). Ingressive aorist subjunctive, become silent.

The more a great deal (πολλωι μαλλον — pollōi māllon). So Luke 18:39. Only μειζον — meizon in Matthew 20:31.

Stood still (στας — stas). Second aorist active ingressive participle. So Matthew 20:32. Luke 18:40 has στατεις — statheis aorist passive participle.

He calleth thee (πωνει σε — phōnei se). That was joyful news to Bartimaeus. Vivid dramatic presents here in Mark.

Casting away his garment (αποβαλων το ιματιον αυτου — apobalōn to himation autou). Second aorist active participle. Outer robe in his haste.

Sprang up (αναπηδησας — anapēdēsas). Leaping up, vivid details again in Mark.

That I should do (ποιησω — poiēsō). Neat Greek idiom with aorist subjunctive without ινα — hina after τελεις — theleis For this asyndeton (or parataxis) see Robertson, Grammar, p. 430.

Rabboni (αββουνει — Rabbounei). The Aramaic word translated Lord (Kurie) in Matthew 20:33 and Luke 18:41. This very form occurs again in John 20:16.

That I may receive my sight (ινα αναβλεπσω — hina anablepsō). To recover sight (ανα — anȧ), see again. Apparently he had once been able to see. Here ινα — hina is used though τελω — thelō is not (cf. Mark 10:35). The Messiah was expected to give sight to the blind (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:18; Luke 7:22).

Followed (ηκολουτει — ēkolouthei). Imperfect tense picturing joyful Bartimaeus as he followed the caravan of Jesus into the new Jericho.

Made thee whole (σεσωκεν — sesōken). Perfect active indicative. The word commonly means save and that may be the idea here.