Verse by Verse

1 Now when they drew near Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives, He sent two of His disciples;

² and He said to them, “Go into the village opposite you; and as soon as you have entered it you will find a colt tied, on which no one has sat. Loose it and bring it.

³ And if anyone says to you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ say, ‘The Lord has need of it,’ and immediately he will send it here.”

⁴ So they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door outside on the street, and they loosed it.

⁵ But some of those who stood there said to them, “What are you doing, loosing the colt?”

⁶ And they spoke to them just as Jesus had commanded. So they let them go.

⁷ Then they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their clothes on it, and He sat on it.

Also found in Matthew 21:1-7 and Luke 19:29-35.

Matthew tells about two animals, a donkey and a colt, while the other writers mention only the colt. … Matthew adds this detail to tie the event more closely with Zechariah 9:9 which mentions two animals. Jesus apparently rode on the colt only. … The mother of the colt was probably led in front to make the cold more at ease in carrying its first rider. — Thomas, page 176.

__________

Bethphage and Bethany were villages just on the opposite side of the Mount of Olives from Jerusalem. Bethphage was larger and better known, but Bethany was where the colt was.

sent (v.1) = sent on a commission to do something

on which no one has sat (v.2) — relates to a custom from the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 21:3; 1 Samuel 6:7), which specifies that animals to be used for certain religious rites must not have previously been ridden, burdened, or harnessed for labor. — KJBC, page 1252.

__________

His choice of an animal not ridden by anyone before Him, is another of those claims to uniqueness which contrast forcibly with His usual condescension to the circumstances of an ordinary human life. — Wuest, page 216.

__________

The disciples found the colt exactly as the Lord had said. For other examples of this supernatural knowledge of circumstances compare Mark 14:13, Matthew 17:27, John 1:48. The cold was outside the house and fastened to the door. The better class of houses were built about an open court, from which a passageway under the house led to the street outside. It was at this outside opening to the street that the colt was tied. — Wuest, page 217.

Some commentaries believe that the Lord supernaturally knew of the colt and supernaturally inclined the owners to surrender it. Others believe that Jesus had prearranged that the colt be available. Wuest has a third view, one which makes sense to me.

Those that stood by were idlers; Luke says they were the owners; they had tied up the animals while they took part in the street gossip. The fact that they were satisfied with the answer of the disciples, is explained by the consideration that the Lord was well-known in the neighborhood (John 11). They knew that this Prophet could be trusted, and its owners did not need the colt just at that time. They probably were proud of the fact that it would be used by Him. — Wuest, page 217.

Also, according to Luke 22:8, Peter was one of the disciples. He was often the spokesman for the disciples, and would most likely also have been well known in the area as an associate to the Lord.

Unless they were challenged they should simply bring the animals away; but if anyone remonstrated, they should answer, “The Lord hath need to them,” and thereupon the owner would not only acquiesce, but send them. In fact they are to make a requisition, such as the State often institutes for horses and cattle during a campaign, when private rights must give way to a national exigency. And this masterful demand, this abrupt and decisive rejoinder to a natural objection , not arguing nor requesting, but demanding, this title which they are bidden to give to Jesus, by which standing thus alone, He is rarely described in Scripture (chiefly in the later Epistles, when the remembrance of His earthly style gave place to the influence of habitual adoration), all this preliminary arrangement makes us conscious of a change of tone, of royalty issuing its mandates, and claiming its rights. But what a claim, what a requisition, when He takes the title of Jehovah, and yet announces His need of the colt of an ass. It is indeed the lowliest of all memorable processions which He plans, and yeet, in its very humility, it appeals to ancient prophecy, and says unto Zion that her King cometh unto her. The monarchs of the East and the captains of the West might ride upon horses as for war, but the King of Sion should come unto her meed, and sitting upon and ass, upon a colt, the foal of an ass. Yet there is fitness and dignity in the use of “a cold whereon never man sat,” and it reminds us of other facts, such as that He was the firstborn of a virgin mother, and rested in a tomb which corruption had never soiled. — Chadwick, page 200.

__________

The Messianic significance of this event [riding the colt and entering Jerusalem, which followed] is clear … It represented, first, a fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9; secondly, an open and deliberate assertion of Messiahship: the hour was approaching when He would be rejected and the issue must now be made plain. Either He is King, or He … must be rejected as Messiah-King. It seems doubtful, however, whether this was understood either by the disciples or by the crowd at the time. … Furthermore John tells us (John 12:16) that at first the disciples did not understand, but realized the significance of these vents only after the resurrection. The manner of His entry expressed the character of His Messiahship, for here was in fact no military conqueror upon a war-horse, or political revolutionary of the kind the Jews expected. — Guthrie, page 874.

⁴⁶ Now they came to Jericho. As He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a great multitude, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the road begging.

⁴⁷ And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”

⁴⁸ Then many warned him to be quiet; but he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!”

⁴⁹ So Jesus stood still and commanded him to be called. Then they called the blind man, saying to him, “Be of good cheer. Rise, He is calling you.”

⁵⁰ And throwing aside his garment, he rose and came to Jesus.

⁵¹ So Jesus answered and said to him, “What do you want Me to do for you?” The blind man said to Him, “Rabboni, that I may receive my sight.”

⁵² Then Jesus said to him, “Go your way; your faith has made you well.” And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus on the road.

Also found in Matthew 20:29-34 and Luke 18:35-43.

As in an earlier case, Matthew describes two victims while Mark and Luke write about only one. The second and third gospels single out the more vocal of the pair. The miracle was apparently performed as Jesus left the city though He first [passed] the men when He approached the city (Luke 18:35). — Thomas, page 170.

One of my commentaries pointed out that Matthew was an eyewitness to this healing and so remembered the second man. Mark and Luke were not eyewitnesses, and so only related (and were perhaps only told of) the man who cried out. That makes sense to me. Others suggest that one man was healed as Jesus entered the city and another as He left. That doesn’t seem likely. A third theory suggests that the men were begging along the road as Jesus entered the city but didn’t cry out until He passed on the way out. That also strikes me as a possible explanation.

Bartimaeus calls Jesus “Son of David” because Jesus was now on Judaean soil. At Jerusalem all the Jews thought of David as their father, and of Messiah as the Son of David in a special sense. The Greek construction indicates that Bartimaeus kept on crying out to Jesus. The imperative is aorist, speaking of the fact that Bartimaeus asked the Jesus heal him at once. — Wuest, page 213.

warned (v.48) = rebuked, censured severely

called (v.49) = calling out loud in an audible voice that can be heard at a distance

rose (v.50) = leapt up, sprang up

garment (v.50) = large, upper garment common in the middle east, so large that a man would sometimes sleep in it.

Rabboni (v.51) = my Master, a term of reverent respect

receive (v.51) = recover. The blind man had probably been able to see at one time. Injuries to the eyes, caused by flying ash, were common the area, affecting as much as 50% of the men.

made you well (v.52) — The word is used either of physical healing or of spiritual salvation. The perfect tense speaks of a permanent cure.

After he was healed, Bartimaeus joined the crowd.

³⁵ Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Him, saying, “Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask.”

³⁶ And He said to them, “What do you want Me to do for you?”

³⁷ They said to Him, “Grant us that we may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on Your left, in Your glory.”

³⁸ But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?”

³⁹ They said to Him, “We are able.” So Jesus said to them, “You will indeed drink the cup that I drink, and with the baptism I am baptized with you will be baptized;

⁴⁰ but to sit on My right hand and on My left is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it is prepared.”

⁴¹ And when the ten heard it, they began to be greatly displeased with James and John.

⁴² But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.

⁴³ Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant.

⁴⁴ And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all.

⁴⁵ For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Also found in Matthew 20:20-28.

Matthew agrees with Mark in the dialogue, but represents the mother of James and John (i.e., Salome) as the actual petitioner; she was in the company, and though the sons were certainly to some extent, responsible (Matthew 20:20, 22), it is more than probably that maternal ambition, prompted their application to our Lord. According to Matthew, Salome approaches with her sons, prostrates herself, and intimates that she has a request to make. Mark, who for once lost the pictorial details, preserves the words, putting them however, into the lips of the sons. Both the homage offered and the terms of the petition, suggest that the Lord is approached in the character of a King who can gratify the desires of His subjects without limitation, as in another sense He afterwards declared Himself able to do.

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. The contrast between the self-0abnegation and self-sacrificial heroism of our Lord, and the utter absence of any ambition self-ambition, stands out vividly with the petty self-interest and ambition of the disciples. … He was going to the Cross. They had their thoughts centered on self-advancement in the Kingdom. — Wuest, pages 209-210.

__________

Our Lord asks, “Are ye able to be drinking the cup which I am drinking?” The personal pronoun occurs with the verb, showing emphasis. It particularizes the cup which our Lord is drinking, from all other cups, and makes it stand out as a special one, an unusual one. … The cup is the one to which our Lord refers in His Gethsemane prayer (Matthew 26:39), its ingredients, our Lord being made sin (2 Corinthians 5:21), and being abandoned for the time being by God the Father and the Spirit (Matthew 27:46). As to the use of the figure of baptism here to speak of our Lord’s sufferings, we might say that the metaphorical use of the word is common in Greek, and is found in the Old Testament (Psalm 18:16, 42:7, 59:1). … Our Lord is referring to the sufferings into which He will be plunged at the Cross and which will overwhelm His soul, wringing from His broken hear that desolate cry, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” — Wuest, page 210.

_________

We are able (v.39) — A lighthearted and eager reply, which reveals the absence even in a disciple like John of any clear understanding of the Master’s repeated warnings, and at the same time the loyalty of the men who were ready to share the Master’s lot, whatever that might be. The “we can” of the disciples, is a mere profession of moral courage, not a claim to spiritual power. The words of our Lord came true in the case of these two disciples. James died by the sword of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:2), and John was exiled to Patmos, where, tradition says, he died at hard labor. [Tradition, in other words, means that we don’t know.] — Wuest, page 211.

displeased (v.41) = felt pain, grieved, were indignant

The sons of Zebedee wanted to be first and the Ten were unwilling to be last! Such was the energy of the carnal nature in all Twelve. Jesus as the Servant of Jehovah came to be the Servant of all and to give His life to save “many.” — Williams, page 738.

__________

It was pomp and circumstance, privilege and power, position and authority in the Gentile world, which was esteemed great, and the greatness of the individual came from his place in the system. But in the kingdom of God, the greatness of the individual comes from the lowly place he takes as a servant of all. Even the resplendent beauty of the Son of Man came from the fact, that He as Very God of Very God, became incarnate in human flesh and a servant to mankind. — Wuest, page 212.

servant (v.44) = a servant seen in his activity of serving

slave (v.44) = the most servile term for a slave (2 Corinthians 4:5).

The word “ransom” (v.45) [means] “the price for redeeming, the ransom paid for slaves.” The word “for” [means] “instead of.” It is the preposition of substitution. Our Lord paid the ransom money for slaves of sin who could not pay it themselves, namely, His own precious blood (1 Peter 1:18-19). — Wuest, page 212.

³² Now they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was going before them; and they were amazed. And as they followed they were afraid. Then He took the twelve aside again and began to tell them the things that would happen to Him:

³³ “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and deliver Him to the Gentiles;

³⁴ and they will mock Him, and scourge Him, and spit on Him, and kill Him. And the third day He will rise again.”

Also found in Matthew 20:17-19 and Luke 18:31-34 (in which we learn that the twelve understood none of what He said).

We have a construction in the Greek text which speaks, not of a momentary going on ahead but of an habitual practice. Jesus often walked alone, ahead of His disciples. … The Lord walked in advance of the Twelve with a solemnity and determination which foreboded danger. His manner struck awe into the minds of the Twelve. The words “as they followed,” do not refer to the disciples, but to the accompanying crowds, the travelers going tin caravan to Jerusalem. The Greek text has, “and those who followed.” The crowd who usually  hung upon the Lord’s footsteps, or His fellow-travelers on their way to the Passover, were conscious of a vague fear. … These feelings must have been awakened by the manner of Jesus, as of one laboring under strong emotion. … Filled with the varied feelings excited by [His] sacred recollections and tragic anticipation, He walks alone by preference, step and gesture revealing what was working within and inspiring awe. — Wuest, pages 208-209.

He took the twelve aside (v.32) — more support for the interpretation that Jesus walked ahead, followed by the twelve, who were, in turn, followed by a crowd.

happen (v.32) = “to come together,” of things that happen with one another

For the first time it is made clear that both Jews and Gentiles are to have a hand in [Jesus’ death], the Jews to condemn and the Gentiles to execute. The latter, had the disciples understood it, is tantamount to a disclosure that His death would be by crucifixion. Matthew (20:19) so records it. — Guthrie, page 873.

²³ Then Jesus looked around and said to His disciples, “How hard it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God!”

²⁴ And the disciples were astonished at His words. But Jesus answered again and said to them, “Children, how hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God!

²⁵ It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

²⁶ And they were greatly astonished, saying among themselves, “Who then can be saved?”

²⁷ But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

²⁸ Then Peter began to say to Him, “See, we have left all and followed You.”

²⁹ So Jesus answered and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel’s,

³⁰ who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time—houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions—and in the age to come, eternal life.

³¹ But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”

Also found in Matthew 19:23-30 and Luke 24-30.

The disciples were astonished when Jesus pointed out how difficult it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom, for it was the prevalent opinion in Judaism that riches were a mark of divine favor, as with Job. — Guthrie, page 873.

Jesus (v.23) wasn’t saying that a rich person couldn’t be saved. He was saying that it was difficult for a rich person to be saved because that person would usually trust in riches for his well-being and see his wealth as evidence that God was already pleased with him.

Children, how hard it is (v.24) — [Jesus] repeats His hard saying, and this time removes His qualifying reference to the rich: “it is hard in any case, though specially hard for such.” The words “For them that trust in riches” are an addition to the text here [and not in the original manuscripts]. — Wuest, page 205.

__________

Hereupon the disciples perceived what was more alarming still, that not alone do rich men trust in riches, but all who confound possessions with satisfaction, all who dream to to have much is to be blessed, as if property were character. — Chadwick, page 283.

__________

eye of a needle (v.25) — Some teach that the needle’s eye here refers to a gate in the wall of Jerusalem through which by means of much pulling and pushing a camel could finally be taken. The Greek of Matthew 19:24 and of Mark speaks of a needle that is used with threat, and that of Luke 18:25, uses a medical term for the needle used in surgical operations. It is evident that the gate is not meant, but the tiny eye of a sewing needle. This was probably a current proverb for the impossible. … It is therefore impossible for anyone whose love or riches keeps him from trusting the Lord Jesus as Savior, to be saved. — Wuest, page 205.

greatly astonished (v.26) = struck out of self-possession

with men it is impossible, but not with God (v.27) — Take your stand beside man on the question of riches, and it is impossible to be saved. but, take your stand beside God on the matter, and the formerly impossible becomes possible. — Wuest, page 206.

__________

Peter said “We abandoned all.” The verb is aorist, speaking of a once for all act. The “we” of course are the Twelve. Peter and John left a lucrative fishing business, and Matthew, a rich source of income from his tax-collector’s office, to become the disciples of a poor itinerant preacher. Peter’s question was in effect, “What reward will we get for having become poor for your sake?” The spokesman of the disciples showed by his question that they were still thinking in terms of material rather than spiritual riches. — Wuest, page 206.

followed you (v.28) — Tense indicates a once-for-all, irrevocable decision.

now in this time (v.30) — in the Dispensation of Law

in the ages to come (v.30) — in the Millennial Kingdom

The Dispensation of Grace had not been revealed at this time (and would not be until God revealed it to Paul), so it is not treated in this passage in any way.

As for “many who are first will be last, and the last first,” my commentaries have nothing to say. I believe it means that many who hold positions of power and who seem to be big shots on earth will have no place in the Kingdom or will, at best, get in by the skin of their teeth, so to speak. While others, who live life of quiet, humble service to the Lord will receive many blessings in the Kingdom.

¹⁷ Now as He was going out on the road, one came running, knelt before Him, and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?”

¹⁸ So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.

¹⁹ You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not bear false witness,’ ‘Do not defraud,’ ‘Honor your father and your mother.’ ”

²⁰ And he answered and said to Him, “Teacher, all these things I have kept from my youth.”

²¹ Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.”

²² But he was sad at this word, and went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.

Also found in Matthew 19:16-22 and Luke 18:18-23.

Luke calls this young man a ruler, but doesn’t say what he was a ruler of. The word he uses can refer to a man of influence due to wealth. He was young, so that may indicate that he was not a member of the Sanhedrin or the leader of a synagogue, but we can’t know for sure. In any case, he didn’t come to Jesus looking for any material advantage.

Good Teacher (v.17) — probably sincere, but it indicates that he thought Jesus was just a good man.

“Why callest though Me good?” means not, “the epithet is not applicable to Me,but to God only, but, “do not make ascriptions of goodness a matter of mere courtesy or politeness.” The case is parallel to the unwillingness of Jesus to be called “Christ” indiscriminately. He wished no man to give Him any title of honor till he knew what he was doing. He wished this man in particular to think carefully on what is good, and who, all the more that there were competing types of goodness to choose from, that of the Pharisees, and that exhibited in His own teaching. — Wuest, pages 201-202.

__________

Having fixed the standard of goodness, the Lord proceeds [v.19] to rehearse the divine precepts which to the Jew were the highest expression of the good will (of God) … The Lord cites only the commandments which regulate man’s duty to his neighbor, probably because they admit of a relatively simple application of the conduct of life. — Wuest, page 202.

kept (v.20) = guarded, watched, used of sentinels keeping guard over something, took care not to break.

The man, when he heard Jesus’ answer, thought he had already met the requirements for eternal life by keeping the law.

looking at him (v.21) = fixing the eyes for a moment on an object, a searching gaze.

loved (v.21) = agape. This probably means that Jesus saw the truth about the man and loved him and his attempt to be good—loved what was good in him.

But Jesus knew a strict adherence to the Law wasn’t enough. There’s a deeper meaning that the young man didn’t grasp.

The man is conscious of his defect, an important point in his spiritual condition. … The sale and distribution of his property were the necessary preparations in his case for the complete discipleship which admits to the divine kingdom. The words are not a general counsel for perfection [in other words, they weren’t a hard and fast rule for everyone], but a test of obedience and faith which our Lord saw to be necessary in this particular instance. — Wuest, page 203.

follow (v.21) = to take the same road as another.

Jesus walked a road of self-abnegation, of self-sacrifice, of service to others, of separation. To have obeyed the instructions of Jesus, would not have given this young man eternal life. The latter can only be had in answer to personal heart faith in the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. But that obedience would have been the first and necessary step for this man to take in order to become a disciple (a learner) of Jesus. Taking the same road with Him, would have eventuated in his receiving salvation in answer to his faith in the Lord Jesus as Savior. That which was keeping him from the latter step, was his love of wealth. — Wuest, page 203.

Take up the cross (v.21) — not in the best manuscripts (It would have meant nothing to the young man at this point.)

sad (v.22) = sorrowful as a result of disappointment and grief

His hopes were dashed; the one thing he wanted was beyond his reach; the price was too great to pay even for eternal life. For the time the love of the world prevailed. Yet it is unnecessary … to characterize his sorrow as that of the world (2 Corinthians 7:10); rather it may have been the birth-pangs of a spirit struggling for release. His riches were indeed as thorns which threatened to choke the seed of the word (Mark 4:7, 19), but the end of the struggle is not revealed. — Wuest, page 204.

If the young man had kept the law perfectly, he would have had eternal life, but the Bible makes it clear that nobody achieves, or can achieve, that level (Romans 3:23).

Ultimately, although he had great regard for Jesus, respect for the Law, and a desire for eternal life, at this point anyway, his faith was in his wealth.

One of my commentaries, with no explanation or support whatsoever, suggests that the young man thought better of his decision and was saved later—and that he was, in fact, Barnabas. I doubt it.

¹³ Then they brought little children to Him, that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked those who brought them.

¹⁴ But when Jesus saw it, He was greatly displeased and said to them, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God.

¹⁵ Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.”

¹⁶ And He took them up in His arms, laid His hands on them, and blessed them.

Also found in Matthew 19:13-15 and Luke 18:15-17.

brought (v.13) – kept on bringing

It is difficult to resist the attractiveness of [an] older suggestion … which associates the children with the house in v.10. They were brought to Him to say goodnight and receive His blessing before being sent to bed. — Guthrie, page 872.

__________

that He might touch them (v.13) — The custom of laying on of hands with prayer upon children for the purpose of benediction, finds its archetype in Genesis 48:14-15. Such benedictions, it seems were commonly obtained by parents for their children from the ruler of the synagogue; and here was One greater than any local synagogue-ruler. — Wuest, pages 198-199.

__________

rebuked (v.13) = to unjustly check or blame another. The rebuke of the disciples was both unwarranted and without result. They kept on rebuking those who brought the children as fast as they came to Jesus. The disciples [probably] discouraged the attempt as idle or, more probably, as derogatory to the Master’s dignity. — Wuest, page 199.

greatly displeased (v.14) = indignant, to feel pain. This is the only place in Scripture where this word is used of Jesus. Paul used the word in 2 Corinthians 7:11 and said that it could be done in a godly manner.

do not forbid (v.14) = stop forbidding

Our Lord here (v.15) holds up a little child as a model of trusting, simple, and loving obedience, for adults to emulate as the way to appropriate the salvation God offers the believing sinner. — Wuest, page 200.

by no means enter (v.15) — In Greek, a double negative is used for emphasis.

blessed them (v.16) = blessed them fervently, again and again.

He blessed them fervently, in no perfunctory way, but with emphasis, as those who were capable of a more unreserved benediction than their elders. Instead of the mere touch for which the friends had asked, He laid His hands on them. … Jesus took each child in His arms, one by one, and blessed it. — Wuest, page 200.

1 Then He arose from there and came to the region of Judea by the other side of the Jordan. And multitudes gathered to Him again, and as He was accustomed, He taught them again.

² The Pharisees came and asked Him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” testing Him.

³ And He answered and said to them, “What did Moses command you?”

⁴ They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her.”

⁵ And Jesus answered and said to them, “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.

⁶ But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’

⁷ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,

⁸ and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.

⁹ Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

¹⁰ In the house His disciples also asked Him again about the same matter.

¹¹ So He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her.

¹² And if a woman divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Also found in Matthew 19:1-12.

from there (v.1) — Jesus left Galilee for the last time until after His resurrection. From here on, each step took Him closer to the cross.

multitudes gathered (v.1) — The simple verb means “to betake one’s self, to go to some place.” Thus, it refers to someone going on a journey. The prefixed preposition means “with,” making the compound verb to mean “to go with someone on a journey.” There were many caravans going to Jerusalem. Many of the people were followers of the Lord Jesus. Others were kindly disposed towards Him. These joined our Lord and His disciples along the road. As they journeyed along together, the Lord Jesus kept on teaching them. — Wuest, page 194.

testing (v.2) = putting to the test for the purpose of discovering what good or evil, what power or weakness is in a person or thing.

The Pharisees were not attempting to influence our Lord to do evil They were trying to put Him to the test as a teacher. They wanted Him to commit Himself on the law of Moses. Their purpose was an ulterior one. If they could show that He was unorthodox, that would put Him in an unfavorable light with the people. … The question [they asked] appears to have been already answered during the Galilean ministry (Matthew 5:31-32) on an occasion when probably no Pharisees were present. They may have heard a rumor as to His view of the matter and wished to verify it, but it is unlikely that they hoped to draw Him in a moment of forgetfulness into a denial of His earlier teaching. Rather, they expected a negative reply, and were prepared to turn it to their own purposes. It might be used to excite the anger of Antipas, who had put away his first wife and married again; more probably their intention was simply to place Him in apparent opposition to Moses. — Wuest, page 195.

divorce (v.2) = lit. “release,” repudiate

Moses (v.3) — Here Jesus has in view, not what Moses allowed in Deuteronomy 24:1, but what he in Genesis enjoined as the ideal state of things (Moses from the Jewish point of view, author of the Pentateuch and all its legislation). They naturally supposed He had in view the former. The use of the word “command” by our Lord, shows [that He was referring to the command in Genesis]. — Wuest, page 195.

__________

The Lord does not deny that Moses permitted divorce; command it he did not. The commandment consisted of “regulations tending to limit it and preclude its abuse.” No such regulations would have been necessary but for the hardness which had been innate in the Hebrew people from the first. The purpose of the legislation of Deuteronomy was to check this disposition, not to give it head; and for the Pharisees to shelter themselves under the temporary recognition of a necessary evil was to confess that they had not outgrown the moral stature of their fathers. — Wuest, page 196.

hardness of heart (v.5) — insensibility to the call of God, withering of the moral nature due to unbelief

from the beginning (v.6) — referring back to the commands on marriage in Genesis 2:24.

leave (v.7) = leave behind, depart from, forsake

be joined (v.7) = cleave, glue to, join one’s self to, stick to — joining and remaining joined.

joined together (v.9) = fastened to one yoke, yoked together, united

asked (v.10) — continuing action. They plied Him with questions.

Of simple divorce the Lord has spoken sufficiently; it is a dissolution of the divinely constituted union. He deals now with the case of marriage after divorce, and pronounces it adultery. — Wuest, page 197.

against her (v.11) = in reference to her, to the prejudice of her

It may be helpful to read what Paul wrote about divorce in the Age of Grace (1 Corinthians 7:10-16). There can be no question that God does not want married people to divorce. But for those who have … there is grace.

⁴⁹ “For everyone will be seasoned with fire, and every sacrifice will be seasoned with salt.

⁵⁰ Salt is good, but if the salt loses its flavor, how will you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace with one another.”

Verse 49, taken in its context, reaches back to the unquenchable fire of Gehenna (v.48), and forward to the self-discipline of verse 50. … Every one must be salted somehow, either with the unquenchable fire of Gehenna or with the severe fire of self-discipline. Wise is he who chooses the latter alternative. … Jesus once called His disciples the salt of the earth (Matthew 5:13). He warns them now (v.50) not to lose their saltness. … [This warning may be connected with] the dispute as to who would be greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven … If the preserving principle embodied in the Apostles, and which was to emanate from them, should itself prove corrupt, then where could help be found? If they, the chosen ones, became selfish, if they wrangled about who should be greatest, then the fire which our Lord had come to send upon earth was clearly not burning in them, and whence could it be kindled afresh? — Wuest, page 193.

The words “And every sacrifice will be seasoned with salt” were probably not in the original manuscripts but were added in an attempt to make sense of the passage.

Have salt in yourselves (v.50) — Keep the seasoning power, the preserving, sacrificial Fire, within your hearts, and as first condition of its presence there, be at peace with your brethren. Thus, the discourse reverts to the point from which it started (v.33). Disputes about precedence endangered the very existence of the new life. — Wuest, page 193

it (v.50) — Greek makes it clear this is referring to the salt itself.

The salt of the illustration was salt from the Dead Sea which, unlike modern salt, contained impurities which made it lose its saltiness. — Thomas, page 126.

⁴¹ For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.

⁴² “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea.

⁴³ If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched—

⁴⁴ where ‘Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

⁴⁵ And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched—

⁴⁶ where ‘Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

⁴⁷ And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire—

⁴⁸ where ‘Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’

Also found in Matthew 18:6-9 and Luke 9:43-48.

Verse 41 picks up Jesus’ teaching interrupted in v.38 by John’s question.

will by no means lose (v.41) — In Greek, a double negative for emphasis.

causes … to stumble (v.42) — put a stumbling-block or impediment in the way upon which another may trip or fall. The noun form means “the moveable stick or rigger of a trap, a trap, snare, any impediment laced in the way causing one to stumble or fall. — Wuest, page 191.

thrown (v.42) — tense indicates that the one thrown stays thrown

A man may place moral stumbling-blocks in his own path; the temptation may proceed not from without, but from some part of his own nature. As men submit to the loss of a bodily organ or limb in order to preserve the body as a whole, so it is to their interests to sacrifice powers and functions of their spiritual nature which have been found to be inevitable occasions of sin. … The word “maimed,” in classical Greek [was used] of one who has a crushed or crippled limb.” — Wuest, page 191.

life (v.43, 45) — not eternal life, but a life that is really worthwhile.

hell (vs.43, 45, 47) — The word hell is the Greek geenna; this is a loose transliteration of the Hebrew ge-hinnom, “the valley of Hinnom,” a gorge just outside Jerusalem which had in ancient times been the scene of human sacrifices (Jeremiah 7:31), but later, during the reforms of Josiah (2 Kings 23:10), became the refuse-heap of the city. It was a natural metaphor for the place of future punishment. — Guthrie, page 871.

__________

[Geenna] is the name of a ravine starting from the northwest of Jerusalem, which sweeps around the southwest angle of the city, then meets the Kedron below the Pool of Silvan. This valley is the traditional site of the fire-worship which began in the reign of Ahaz, and after its desecration by Josiah, became a common receptacle for the offal of the city, and in later Jewish thought, a symbol of the place of future punishment. The city garbage, where worms gnawed and fires burned continually is a vivid picture of everlasting punishment. It is the word used in the N.T. to designate the place of the final abode of the wicked dead, the Lake of Fire of Revelation being the same place. — Wuest, pages 191-192.

Verses 44 and 46 are not in the best manuscripts. They are simply a repetition of v.48. The quote is from Isaiah 66:24. “And they shall go forth and look upon the corpses of the men who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, and their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.”

Again, it’s important to understand this passage in the proper dispensational context. Jesus was speaking in, and of, the dispensation of law. The parallel thought in the dispensation of Grace would be “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service (Romans 12:1).

If a person was to attempt to achieve heaven under the Law, he or she would be better off cutting off parts of the body that caused him or her to sin. One of my commentaries (below) states that the body parts are stand-ins for the sins committed with those parts of the body.

According to Palestinian custom, Jews did not refer to the abstract sinful act but to the concrete member of the body by which it was liable to be committed. This was thus not a call to self-mutilation but to a refusal to place the body at the disposal of selfish pleasure — Thomas, page 126.