The questions was, "Should a man be allowed to divorce his wife?" Jesus' replied by asking them what Moses and the law had to say about it. The Pharisees, experts in the law, replied that Moses allowed it by the man giving his wife a written notice of divorce and then would send her away.
The first word in verse 5 is "but." "But Jesus responded" or we can say Jesus responded, but. He was saying the answer was correct, Moses did allow or permit it. BUT... Moses, because of the hard hearts of the people, permitted it. It was not a law, it was not given by God but rather it was allowed. I see this as man allowing or being allowed to practice something that was not a law. This took me right back to chapter 7 verse 8. In that verse, Jesus said, "For you ignore God's Law and substitute your own tradition." I believe Jesus went on in chapter 10:6-12 to say just that. Looking at verse 6 we see another "but." They quoted Moses ruling correctly BUT it was only because of their hard hearts. Yes, Moses allowed divorce, "BUT" God made people male and female from the beginning of creation which is why a man would leave his parents to be joined to his wife. He would leave them to be joined to his wife so they could become one. Jesus added, "let no one split apart what God has joined together." (NLT)
Jesus' response to the Pharisees was that, yes Moses did allow divorce but they had missed the bigger picture. In fact, as I said earlier, substituting the tradition of divorce for the actual Law of God that permitted no such thing, had become common place. He went on to say that not only was divorce not permitted by God but that if a person was to divorce, then remarry, they would be committing adultery. Not only was/is divorce not permitted by God but remarrying puts a person into the sin of adultery. People marry for the wrong reason or marry not fully aware of what they are doing. They may take marriage too casually because there can be an out if it doesn't work. But none of that is what God intended. In short, we might say, Jesus' response to the Pharisees was Yes, Moses did allow divorce because of your hard hearts BUT that is not what God intends. He made you male and female and you are to become one in marriage and that is that. If two things are joined in such a way as to become one, they cannot be separated in tact or into their previous state of fullness. In actuality, both will be damaged or destroyed. I think of marriage as cardboard. The two outer layers of brown paper can be viewed as the man and woman. The corrugated center could be God. Through God's gift of marriage the two parts, with God in the center making that union solid and complete, become one new thing. Neither are as they were and no one should try to separate them.
I think Jesus was also telling them they were not as wise as they thought because they did not site the Law of God as what should be held and practiced. In fact, Jesus tripped them up. Their answer should have been that Moses allowed divorce but God does not and what God joins in marriage should not be separated. However, if they had given that answer, then they would have to admit they were not practicing God's Law and allowing, even guiding, people to sin.
As we talked about last week, we come to the day that parents were bringing their children to Jesus to be blessed. The disciples scolded the parents for doing that but Jesus "angrily" interrupted and told the disciples to not stop them but to let them come to Him. In that day and time, children may not have been as valued as they are today. Children have always been seen as being filled with great optimism. They trust and depend on those who care for them. Jesus was telling them that anyone who did not come to God with a similar childlike faith would never grasp the Kingdom of God. If one came to God with doubt, mistrust, skepticism, or needing proof they would never gain God's Kingdom for it could only be grasped by complete faith, trust, and belief. After teaching that, He held them, touched their heads and blessed them. He must have done it out of pure love for the children but at the same time He also showed them a visible teaching that children "such as these" would be blessed.
A rich man (I have read that the man was a potential disciple; a person who wanted to follow Christ) came to Jesus and addressed Him as "Good Teacher," knelt down and asked Him what he needed to do to be saved. The man called Him "Good Teacher" out of respect and reverence, and he appropriately knelt before Him. Jesus' first response was to address his use of the term "Good." If we look at the word "good" we should perhaps see that you can't be good unless you are completely good. A person who is mostly good, is therefore not good. Jesus corrects his use of the word good to say that there is no one Good (completely good) but God. That word, "good," was meant for God and not to be used as a mere greeting or nice reference to a person.
Jesus then goes on to offer His answer by saying that he must know the commandments, not murder, not commit adultery, not steal, not testify falsely, not cheat and honor his mother and father. To which the man replied that he had done all those things since he was young. In the Jewish tradition, "since I was young," most likely implied since he was 13, the age of bar mitzvah. In that belief, a person was not responsible for himself before that age and would not have kept an account of his doings.
Okay, so if he had kept all those things, I imagine he would have thought there must be more because those things were attainable. As we have seen over and over, Jesus sees into a person. We have seen Him see demons within, the sins a person was doing, and even when people were trying to trick Him. Knowing Jesus could have done that, we have to accept that Jesus in some way agreed that the man had, indeed, kept them as he said. I say that because verse 21 reads that Jesus felt a genuine love for him. That comment leads me to believe He saw into his heart and loved what He saw.
Jesus then offered more. He said there was one thing he needed to do. Jesus told him there was one thing he had not yet done and that was to sell all he had and give the money to the poor. If he would do that, he would have treasure in heaven. Then, Jesus said, once that was done, he was to come and follow Him.
Scripture then tells us the man went away sad for he had many possessions. People assume the man went away and never sold his things but I don't think we can assume that. I think we can see that the man was sad, bummed, troubled, or whatever word you want to use, however, nothing further is said about what he actually did. In fact, the first words Jesus spoke in using that situation with His disciples were, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the Kingdom of God."
How hard is it to give it all away? Well, Jesus uses the example, that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God. How hard? It is not hard, it is impossible. A camel cannot go through the eye of a needle. The trouble is not in the act of giving everything away. The trouble is in the matter of the man's heart. His heart was set on things of the earth not on God's Kingdom, therefore it was impossible for Him to let go of the worldly things to receive the Kingdom of God unless his heart changed.
This teaching amazed the disciples and they asked Jesus, "Who then can be saved?" Jesus replied, "Humanly speaking, it is impossible. But not with God. Everything is possible with God." We cannot do it, we need God. Pretty simple, yes?
Peter followed what Jesus had said with his comment that they (the disciples) had given up everything to follow Him. Jesus acknowledged that and assured him that anyone who has given up everything would be rewarded. Jesus went on to say that those who would give up homes, family, or property for the His sake and for the Good News (maybe spreading the Good News) would get ten times as much back as they have given up. Jesus followed that teaching with "along with persecution." Mark is the only one who uses the words "with persecution." It is said that Mark was considering his Roman readers and that those who were followers in the areas the Romans ruled were persecuted. That makes good sense but as I read it, I wondered why persecution would be included in a list of things that most people would consider good and desireable. As I thought on that, my mind was drawn to Romans 5:3-5, which reads; (NIV) Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces; perserverence. character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out His love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom He has given us". Seeing how great and desirable things come from our suffering or persecution, we cold easily list being persecuted as being even more desirable than homes and family and so on.
Jesus told them that those who have given up everything for Him and the Good News would have eternal life. Jesus encourages those contemplating giving all away for His sake by telling them that those who seem to be the greatest now, in this life, will be the least important then. Also, that those who seem to be the least important now, who give their lives to Christ, will be the most important then.
As was customary, Jesus as rabbi, was leading the disciples and a group of people toward Jerusalem. They were all aware of Jesus' earlier teachings about what must happen to Him. The disciples followed awestruck by Jesus' willingness and determination to go through with those things in service to God and the people. The others that followed walked in fear of what was to come.
Jesus took the disciples aside and again, told them what was to take place. He was to be betrayed to the religious leaders, be sentenced to death, and be turned over to the Romans. The Romans would mock Him, spit on Him, beat him and kill Him. Then, after three days, He would rise from the dead.
The brothers, James and John, the sons of Zebedee, asked Jesus if, when He was to sit on His glorious throne, they could sit one on His left and one on His right, in the places of honor. Jesus responded that they had no idea what they were asking for. He then asked them if they were able to endure the same suffering He was about to endure. They replied that they were able. Jesus said, they would surely experience suffering similar to His but that the decision of who would sit in those seats of honor was up to God, not Him.
When I read these verses, I could not help but think of Jesus teaching in Luke 14:7-11. It is too long to add here but I will summarize. Jesus had noticed how guests were picking the places of honor at the table and He told them a parable. When you are invited to a wedding do not take the place of honor because if someone more distinguished than you comes, the host will ask you to move and give your seat to that man. Being humiliated, you will have to move a seat that is left over. At that late time, the left over seat will most likely be the least important place. Jesus instructed that when you are invited, take the lowest place so that when the host comes he will ask you to move up to a better place. Then you will be honored in front of your friends and fellow guests. "For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled and he who humbles himself will be exalted".
When the other ten disciples heard of James and John's request to be seated in places of honor over all of them, they were angry. I imagine this put a bit of a wedge between them. Jesus called them together to calm them down by explaining that the rulers of this world lord their authority over others but that things would be different among the disciples. For them, the one who wants to be a leader among them will have to lower himself to the place of servant of all. This was the example Jesus' life exhibited. Jesus, the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve others. Not only that, but He gave His very life as a ransom to save the lives of many people. Jesus used the word "ransom," which to me paints a picture of hostages. The people He came to save were being held hostage by their sin. There was no escape, they were prisoners sentenced to death. For them to be set free, a ransom needed to be paid. Jesus' life was the only ransom that could set the prisoners free. Jesus was willing and would make that payment, setting them free.
Chapter ten ends with Jesus' encounter with a man named Bartimaeus. Bartimaeus was a blind beggar who was sitting along the side of the road begging. He heard Jesus was coming and began shouting, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!" The people began shouting at Bartimaeus to shut up but he cried out even louder. Jesus heard him and told him to come to Him. The Scriptures say that, "he threw aside his coat, jumped up and came to Jesus." Here was a poor, blind man with nothing to his name, calling out to Jesus for mercy. What struck me was that when Jesus told him to come to Him, the man did not hesitate. His faith in what Jesus could do left no doubt causing him to jump up immediately. The second thing that struck me is that, considering this man was a beggar, he most likely had no possessions. He must have been poor. Notice that he threw aside, what I imagine was his only possession - his coat, and went to Jesus. Bartimaeus gave up the one thing he had, the one thing that would protect him against the elements and went to Jesus. Jesus asked him what he wanted and Bartimaeus, addressing Jesus as rabbi, said he wanted to see. Jesus said, "Go for your faith has healed you." Two things: First that again faith and healing are together. Faith in Christ and who He is and faith of what He can do. Second, Jesus told him to go but he followed Jesus down the road. The man could have gone and done anything he wanted but rather he followed the man who made him see. A person with the kind of faith that believed in Jesus and what he could do would also be the kind of person who, because of that faith, could do no less than leave his old life behind and follow Jesus.