Lange Commentary - Mark 10:1 - 10:12

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

Lange Commentary - Mark 10:1 - 10:12


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

PART THIRD

The Lord’s Conflicts and Victories in Peræa. Transition from the Old Church to the New. The Disciples gathered together for the Passion

________

FIRST SECTION

CARNAL MARRIAGE LEGISLATION OF THE PHARISEES, AND THE SPIRITUAL MARRIAGE LEGISLATION OF THE LORD

Mar_10:1-12

(Parallel: Mat_19:1-12.)

      1And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judea, by [through] the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again. 2And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. 3And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. 5And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept: 6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. 10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

See the notes on the parallel in Matthew , 19—Christ’s abode in Peræa embraces three occurrences: the treatment of the subject of divorce, the bringing of the little children to Jesus, and the rich young man. These transactions all belong, doubtless, to the second abode of Christ in Peræa. We must, according to the connection of the evangelical narratives, assume two residences in Peræa; for we know that Jesus, after the Feast of Tabernacles in the year of persecution 782, returning into Galilee, assembled His disciples there; that with them He journeyed through the boundaries of Galilee and Samaria to Peræa (see Luk_9:51-52; Luk_17:11-19; comp. Leben Jesu, ii. 2, 1058), appeared then in Jerusalem at the Feast of the dedication, and afterwards returned back to Peræa, Joh_10:42. That the circumstances related by the Evangelists Matthew and Mark belong to the close of the second abode in Peræa, is manifest from the intimation that the rich young man came to Him as He was on the point of journeying; and the same applies to Matthew’s account of the mothers bringing their children. But with this last transaction that concerning divorce was closely connected.—Concerning Peræa, see the Critical Notes on Matthew, as also concerning the double residence in Peræa, and the significance of the Peræan narrative in relation to the founding and preparation of the new congregation, the Christian Church.—Christian ecclesiastical regulations begin with regulations for the house: with the Christian legislation, 1. for marriage; 2. for children; 3. for property.

As to the relation of Mark to the Synoptists in the Peræan sections, he and Matthew alone record the matter concerning divorce. Mark states more precisely than Matthew that Jesus penetrated through Peræa to the borders of the land, Mar_10:1. In Matthew, on the other hand, there is a more definite account given of the first journey of Jesus to Peræa, accompanied by a great train. Matthew says that great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them there. Mark says that the people resorted to Him again ( ðÜëéí , again in Peræa), and that, as He was wont, He taught them again. In the Lord’s answer to the tempting question concerning divorce, Mark places first the reference to the Mosaic law of marriage, and brings in the paradisaical law afterwards: Matthew inverts that order. But it is in harmony with the character of Mark, that he introduces all by the piercing word of decision. The rebuke of the Pharisees is, moreover, made more keen by the fact that he assigns the saying concerning the Christian marriage law (Mar_10:10-12, compare Matthew Mar_10:9, Mar_5:32) to the house in which Jesus continued His discourse with the disciples on this question. Here also, as often elsewhere, Mark shows that the Lord, after His intercourse with the people, retreated to the house, that is, the inn, where He had been received, for the sake of confidentially continuing His words to the disciples. These are the lesser images of the Lord’s greater retreats.—The words that follow were not for the Pharisees. Mark gives the addition, “If a woman shall put away her husband;” but then he omits the conversation between the disciples and the Lord concerning the difficulty of true marriage, “If the case of the man,” etc. (Mat_19:10-12). In the section about the children (which Luke also has), Mark alone makes it prominent that Jesus was displeased with the disciples. He records, in common with Luke, the saying about not receiving the kingdom of God as a little child. That Jesus here again took the children in His arms and embraced them, as He had done the child in Capernaum, Mark alone mentions. He also makes it more distinctly prominent than Mathew does, Mar_10:15, that the rich young man came to the Lord on the occasion of His leaving Peræa. Luke alone tells us that the young man was a ruler, probably a ruler of the synagogue. But Mark alone records that, after the declaration “All these have I kept from my youth up,” Jesus looked upon him and loved him; as he also later inserts the Lord’s approbation of the questioning scribe, Mar_12:28 seq. To him also we owe the striking and vivid trait, that the rich young man put on a gloomy and fallen countenance ( óôõãíÜóáò ) after the Lord’s answer. The amazement of the disciples at the word, “How hardly shall the rich,” etc., Mark exhibits as continued and increased, even after the Lord’s explanation, “How hard is it for them that trust in riches.” In the transaction that followed, between Peter and the Lord, Mark is more express than Luke in recording that Peter only began in his confusion to inquire about the reward, and that he did not give full expression to his words. He omits the clause, “What shall we have therefore?” which Matthew inserts. It is very remarkable that Mark omits here again the saying of Jesus concerning the twelve thrones of the Apostles (Matt. Mar_10:28), even as he had omitted the special prerogatives of Peter. It is obvious to suggest on this point, that the saying about “judging the twelve tribes of Israel” was not so easily intelligible to Gentile Christians (although Luke also has it, Luk_22:30). On the other hand, Mark gives the broad and comprehensive promise of the Lord to the disciples who renounce all, and in the most full detail: Mar_10:30, there is the hundred-fold compensation, houses, and brethren, etc., already in the present life, although amidst persecutions.

Mar_10:1. And He arose from thence.—In the wider sense, from Galilee; in the narrower sense, from Capernaum, where He gathered together His disciples.—By the farther side of Jordan.—That Jesus did not merely come to Persia, but travelled through Peræa to the borders of Judæa, that is, to the most eastern limits of Peræa, is plain even from the words of Matthew; but is still more plainly declared in the expression here used by Mark. For the whole of Peræa could hardly be described as the borders of Judæa in the wider sense. A whole province of a land can never be merely regarded as its border. On the immediate occasion of this journey to Peræa, see on Matthew, Critical Notes.Again.—The repeated ðÜëéí seems to have been employed in consequence of the distinct remembrance of a double abode of Jesus in Peræa. At any rate, the events that follow belong to the second residence.

Mar_10:2. Asked Him.—Meyer: “Mark omits, what Matthew gives, the properly tempting element in the question, êáôὰ ðᾶóáí áἰôßáí .” But, according to the explanation of Ewald (see Critical Notes on Matthew), the question was a critical and tempting one, even without that addition, because it was dangerous in the territory of Herod Antipas to say anything against divorce. De Wette supposes that the Pharisees may have been aware of the Saviour’s earlier declaration concerning divorce. That may be true; in any case they might very well guess that, on this question, His utterance would perfectly coincide with that of the Baptist. Either, thought they, He must in His answer touch Herod too closely, or the Baptist; that is, He must fall under the condemnation either of worldly power, or of the pious.

Mar_10:3. What did Moses command you?—The order of the main points is not the same in Mark as in Matthew. Matthew comes down from the paradisaical institute to the Mosaic; Mark, on the contrary, rises from the latter to the former, and moreover makes Jesus Himself put the question concerning the law of Moses, and the tempter give the reply. This seems to have been the natural order. Elsewhere we have it as the first counter-question of Jesus: What is written in the law? (See Mar_10:19, and Luk_10:26.)

Mar_10:4. Moses suffered to write (see Deu_24:1).—In Matthew we read, Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? and the answer of Jesus: Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives. And in Mark’s account of the Pharisees’ words, they give, as in Matthew, a distorted view of the Mosaic law. Moses had suffered to divorce, and restrictingly commanded that a letter of divorce be given in addition. In Matthew, it is true, the opposition between the design of the Pharisees and the mind of Moses is made more expressly prominent. But in Mark, the opposition is found in the emphatic statement, that Moses wrote this commandment on account of the hardness of their hearts; that is, not in order to divorce, but, with the divorce, to give a bill of divorce therewith. The two accounts, in fact, are, as to their results, one and the same. The bill of divorce found divorce existing; it was intended to limit and restrain it, and make it more moral. The man who put away his wife, required the services of a learned scribe in order to construct the bill of divorce; it was necessary that he should give the grounds of the separation, and the ordinance of the lawgiver required those grounds never to be light or trivial. Moreover, there were two cases in which the marriage was indissoluble,—viz., when a man dishonored a virgin, and when he slanderously denied the virginity of his young wife (Deu_22:19; Deu_22:29). In Mark, also, more weight is attached to the other point of opposition which our Lord brings out: His appealing to the paradisaical ordinance. We must also notice the expression, wrote this precept. It refers to a written, restricting law for hardness of heart, in contradistinction to the everlasting and original commandments of paradise: hence the written word is to be interpreted in harmony with these last.

Mar_10:7. For this cause shall a man.—The words of Adam (Gen_2:24) are in Matthew words of God; in Mark, words of Christ. It is all the same; for Adam uttered those words prophetically as a paradisaical, divine, fundamental ordinance. They are words of God, as being eternally valid; and words of Christ, as rules for life to be reëstablished and sanctified. The Futures indicate the necessary realization of the original relation and condition of the sexes in marriage. As it is in reality and principle, it must be in development. See Critical Notes on Matthew.

Mar_10:10. And in the house His disciples asked Him.—Here, as often elsewhere, our Lord, according to Mark’s account, retreated, after a public transaction with the people, into the house, where He followed up His public teaching by more confidential instruction. Meyer: “The two Evangelists here differ, as it respects the place, the persons to whom our Lord speaks, and the substance of what He says.” He then gives the account of Matthew the preference. But the thought of Mar_10:11 is already found in the words of Mar_10:9 : What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. Divorce was by that word forbidden. It is an error to speak of any difference here; all we can say is, that Mark gave a more specific account. And this is strictly in harmony with the circumstances of the case; it was fit that Christ should give His fullest utterance concerning the New Testament law of marriage within the more confidential circle of His disciples.

Mar_10:11. Committeth adultery.—The marriage contracted with the one is adultery towards the other. Meyer supposes that ἐð ̓ áὐôÞí must mean, “in reference to her,” that is, the forsaken woman. But, literally, ἐð ̓ áὐôÞí refers back to the last mentioned. The great point is, that the adultery against the first woman is consummated by marriage with the second, and thus the second marriage is made into adultery. “The ìὴ ἐðὶ ðïñíåßᾳ (Matthew) is omitted by Mark. But it makes no difference, as this reason for divorce is self-understood.” (Meyer.)

Mar_10:12. And if a woman.—Meyer denies the genuineness of this added clause. Among the Greeks and Romans it certainly was customary for the woman to be the abandoned party; but not among the Jews, since the examples they furnish—Michal (1Sa_25:44), Herodias (Mat_14:4), Salome (Joseph. Antiq. 15, 7, 10)—were preëminent enormities. But he overlooks the fact, that Jesus, according to Mark, here gives His disciples a confidential decree for His new Church, and appoints a new custom which, as did the primitive paradisaical ordinance, goes far beyond the good and ill customs of the Greeks and Romans. It is to be observed that the Herodians introduced amongst the Jewish people laxer customs as it respects woman.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. See on Matthew.

2. For the hardness of your heart.—This word is in sharp contrast with the sentimental excuses made for breaches of the marriage-vow—such as rest upon the softness of the heart, the overpowering emotions of love, etc.

3. And in the house.—Confidential household words of Jesus to His disciples, according to Mark: concerning the power of casting out demons, Mar_9:28; the great in the kingdom of heaven, Mar_9:33; and here concerning New Testament marriage. In other passages it is solitude generally, or solitude on a mountain, in which Jesus imparts to His disciples the confidential utterances that belong to the future of His new Church, Mar_4:10, etc. On the other hand, the house of Jesus is often the centre of great assemblages of the people, Mar_2:1; Mar_3:20; even the house which Jesus chose for His rest and retirement cannot continue hidden, Mar_7:24. In the most important crises of His conflict, Jesus turns from official encounters with His opponents to a free exposition of His doctrine to the whole people. So in Mar_7:14; Mar_12:36 seq. Thus the house of the Redeemer is, on the one hand, the most private, and on the other, the most public, place; always, however, in its most hidden privacy opened and known. And as the Lord, in His method of teaching, passes over from the general announcement of the word into confidential communications to His chosen disciples, so also we perceive that He passes over from dealing with the priests and the officials to a freer application of His words to all the people. In the former case He regulates His teaching according to their being able to hear His words; in the latter, according to their being willing. The doctrine of Christ is the most secret and the most public: the great and utterable mystery.

4. Not only does monogamy generally lie at the foundation of this passage, but also the idea of the true ideal monogamy, which is constituted not so much by the union of two human “exemplars” as rather by the blending of two human personalities ( ἅñóåí êáὶ èῆëõ ), which are to each other similar to what (we do not say the same that) Adam and Eve were created to be to each other.

5. 1 Corinthians 7 : The Pauline development of the Christian marriage-law with reference to mixed marriages.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

See on Matthew.—Jesus pressed on all sides to the limits of His land; or, Jesus within the limitations of His earthly vocation: 1. Sacredly observing the legal restrictions; 2. extending to them, touching them; 3. going beyond them in His spiritual life and work (endlessly towards north, east, south, west).—The Lord in Peræa provides beforehand for His Church: 1. He confirms and establishes that which is the fundamental condition of its establishment (the Christian household); 2. in this place He prepares a refuge and hiding-place for the future of His persecuted people.—Peræa the last refuge of the Redeemer; the first refuge of His Church.—The pilgrimages of Christians to Christ: 1. As they spring from impulse of heart, not human traditions; 2. the life of the Spirit, and not spiritual chains; 3. movements towards the true rest, and the true rest in movement (that is, on the one hand, not the running without an object, and, on the other hand, not frigid form).—How the Lord for ever refers the tempters to the word of God:—How He glorifies Moses: 1. As an expositor of the creation; 2. as a prophet of redemption.—How Christ confirms the unison between the old and the new covenants.—Moses wrote his law for sinners; or, the finite side of the written law of God in its changeableness, explained by the finite nature of the fallen child of God.—God, even in the external changeableness of His revelations, confirms His own unchangeable character.—The dignity of marriage measured by the dignity of filial piety (of the relation to father and mother).—In order to true marriage according to the mind of Christ, more than a man and a woman is wanting.—From the right of the husband follows necessarily the right of the wife; as from the obligation of the one follows the obligation of the other.—Concerning the contrast and the reconciliation between the laws of the State and the eternal, fundamental laws of the Church of Christ.—The reciprocal influence of the punishment of death and the divorce appointed in the Jewish law: 1. Ecclesiastically: an actual adultery is spiritual death, and death as to moral fellowship; 2. an inexorable prohibition of all divorce, on civil or ecclesiastical grounds, leads to death in many ways, even to the death of the higher moral family life (see the South American and other Catholic states); 3. the reference to spiritual death in adulterous sin must remove and heal the deadly influences of both lax and over-severe marriage ordinances.

The three sections together.—The Christian household 1. in relation to marriage, 2. the children, 3. the property, 4. the vocation of the members to walk according to God’s will, and to deny themselves.

Starke:—Nova Bibl. Tub.:—Envy is soon found in the track of a teacher who has a large body of dependants.—Quesnel:—A true preacher is not soon weary.—Every age has its Pharisees, whom the devil often uses for the temptation of pastors, and whom God permits to test His people.—Osiander:—We must take care what answers we make when questions are put to us on doubtful matters; for many ask questions, not that they may learn, but that they may have something to blaspheme or except against.—Quesnel:—The bond of marriage is a figure of the union of Christ with His bride, the Church; which He will never renounce, even as she will never be separated from Christ, Eph_5:32.

Schleiermacher:—And thus we have here an example of the manner in which the Lord administered discipline in relation to the high and mighty ones of the earth. He was not moved by the fact that Herod was an example of the sin; nor did He present the matter in the slightest degree otherwise than it was, because a person was affected in whose land and in whose power He Himself then stood.—It was of the essence of the old covenant, if we go back to the legislation and lawgiver of the Jewish Church, that the divine law and the civil law were one and the same. The civil and political ordinances must be regulated by the condition of men at the time.—The civil law in relation to the actions of men, and the divine law, which utters the laws of conscience (in Christendom), distinguished.—The levity and impure motives which too often enter into marriage contracts.—Therefore we should regard it as a public evil, that such marriages are often contracted as should never be contracted.—Marriages are matters of public concernment.

Brieger:—Man must take his right place in the sight of God before he can take his right place in respect to his fellow-men, whether as husband, father, etc.—Gossner:—Alas! when we look round upon the condition of Christendom, and observe all the laws, usages, and customs which prevail, touching how many things must we say, In the beginning it was not so!—Bauer:—We may here again see how surely the man who stands firm to God’s word shall escape the most cunning snares that his most cunning enemies may lay for him.

Footnotes:

Mar_10:1.—The reading of Cod. A. ( äéὰ ôïῦ ðÝñáí &c.) must not be given up, with Lachmann and Tischendorf (who read êáὶ ðÝñáí ), on account of B., C.*, L.

Mar_10:2.—Elzevir reads ïὶ Öáñéóáῖïé ; but the article is not supported.

Mar_10:6.—The ὁ Èåüò is wanting in B., C., L., Ä ., &c., and omitted by Tischendorf [and Meyer, and bracketed by Lachmann].

Mar_10:10.— Ðåñὶ ôïýôïõ . Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, following A., B., C.

Mar_10:12.—Lachmann and Tischendorf read ãáìÞóῃ ἄëëïí instead of ãáìçèῇ ᾶëëῳ , following B., C., D., L., Ä .