Mark 10:2
And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
Jump to: AlfordBarnesBengelBensonBICalvinCambridgeClarkeDarbyEllicottExpositor'sExp DctExp GrkGaebeleinGSBGillGrayHaydockHastingsHomileticsICCJFBKellyKJTLangeMacLarenMHCMHCWMeyerParkerPNTPoolePulpitSermonSCOTTBVWSWESTSK
EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)
(2-12) And the Pharisees came to him.—See Notes on Matthew 19:3-12. We are not surprised to find St. Mark omitting the “hard saying” about the eunuchs of Matthew 19:12. It was hardly likely, even if he knew it, to commend itself to him as adapted for the Gentile readers for whom he wrote his Gospel. Probably, however, for the reason thus given, it was not part of the current teaching of the Church, and was recorded by St. Matthew as something exceptional.

10:1-12 Wherever Jesus was, the people flocked after him in crowds, and he taught them. Preaching was Christ's constant practice. He here shows that the reason why Moses' law allowed divorce, was such that they ought not to use the permission; it was only for the hardness of their hearts. God himself joined man and wife together; he has fitted them to be comforts and helps for each other. The bond which God has tied, is not to be lightly untied. Let those who are for putting away their wives consider what would become of themselves, if God should deal with them in like manner.See this question about divorce explained in the notes at Matthew 19:1-12.CHAPTER 10

Mr 10:1-12. Final Departure from Galilee—Divorce. ( = Mt 19:1-12; Lu 9:51).

See on [1471]Mt 19:1-12.

Matthew adds, for every cause, that is, for any cause, unless for adultery, for so the Pharisees had interpreted the law permitting divorce, Deu 24:1, taking advantage of those words, that she find no favour in his eyes, and interpreting the term uncleanness following, of any deformity, or other cause of dislike. And the: Pharisees came unto him,.... As they every where did; not to be instructed by him, but to ensnare him;

and asked him, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? that is, as Matthew adds, "for every cause"; see Gill on Matthew 19:3, for, a divorce might be lawfully made for a cause, or reason, namely, adultery, but not for any, or every cause; which is the sense of this question of the Pharisees; and, which they put, not for information, but

tempting him; trying to entangle him by opposing the authority of Moses, should he deny the lawfulness of divorces, or by objecting his former doctrine, Matthew 5:32, and so expose him as an inconsistent preacher, should he allow them to be lawful for every reason. This clause is placed in the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions before the question.

And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.
EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Mark 10:2-12. The question of divorce (Matthew 19:3-12).—ἀπολῦσαι: the question is put absolutely, the qualifying clause κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν in Mt. being omitted. Thus put the question presupposes knowledge of Christ’s high doctrine as to marriage, and is an attempt to bring Him into collision with the Mosaic law, as absolutely interdicting what it allowed.2. Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife] “for every cause?” as St Matthew adds (Matthew 19:3). On this point the rival schools of Hillel and Shammai were divided, the former adopting the more lax, the latter the stricter view: the one holding that any dislike, which he felt towards her, would justify a man in putting away his wife; the other, that only notorious unchastity could be a sufficient reason. It has also been suggested that the object of the question may have been to involve Him with the adulterous tetrarch, in whose territory He was.Verse 2. - And there came unto him Pharisees - the article should be omitted - and asked him - they came forward before the people, and publicly questioned him - Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? St. Matthew (Matthew 21:3) adds to the question the words, "for every cause." There were causes for which it was lawful. They put this question to our Lord, tempting him; of course with an evil intent. This question about divorce was one which was much agitated in the time of our Lord. In the century before Christ, a learned rabbi, named Hillel, a native of Babylon, who afterwards came to Jerusalem, studied the Law with great success, and became the head of the chief school in that city. One of his disciples, named Shammai, separated from his master, and set up another school; so that in the time of our Lord the scribes and doctors of the Law were ranged in two parties, namely, the followers of Hillel, the most influential; and the followers of Shammai. These two schools differed widely on the subject of divorce. The followers of Shammai only permitted divorce in the case of moral defilement, while the followers of Hillel placed the matter entirely in the power of the husband. The object, therefore, of this artful question was to entrap our Lord, and to bring him into collision with one or other of these two opposing parties. For if he had said that it was not lawful for a man to put away his wife, he would have exposed himself to the hostility of many of the wealthy classes, who put away their wives for any cause. But if he had allowed the lawfulness of divorce at all, they would have found fault with his doctrine as imperfect and carnal, although he professed to be a spiritual Teacher of a perfect system, sent down from heaven. Tempting

See on Matthew 6:13.

Links
Mark 10:2 Interlinear
Mark 10:2 Parallel Texts


Mark 10:2 NIV
Mark 10:2 NLT
Mark 10:2 ESV
Mark 10:2 NASB
Mark 10:2 KJV

Mark 10:2 Bible Apps
Mark 10:2 Parallel
Mark 10:2 Biblia Paralela
Mark 10:2 Chinese Bible
Mark 10:2 French Bible
Mark 10:2 German Bible

Bible Hub






Mark 10:1
Top of Page
Top of Page