Comments for August 15

10:25-26 there is an odd contrast between people faithfully coming to Solomon on the one hand and other the other and Solomon seeking to develop his military might which we know in part was supplied by Egypt.- 2Chron 9:28.

10:6-7 the way that the Queen of Sheba responded seems to be used as the basis for the words of Psa 48:4

10:1-10 We should not assume that the queen of Sheba was the only ruler to visit Solomon and be awed by the kingdom and everything associated with it. She is a representative showing what men and women thought of Solomon’s – God’s – kingdom. As such it is a foretaste of the submission of the nations of the world to God when Jesus rules from Jerusalem in the kingdom of God in the future.

10:1 After so much detail about the temple and the houses that Solomon built notice the focus. It was because he Queen of Sheba had heard things concerning “the name of the Lord” that she came.

Where is our focus? Is it on material or spiritual things?

10:6-7 In the reaction of the queen of Sheba we are given an insight into the way that some kings – those who are willing to be subject to Christ – will respond when they see the glories of his kingdom based in Jerusalem.

10:2 In saying that the Queen of Sheba brought “much gold” to Solomon we see the words of Psa 72:15 being fulfilled.

v.5-8 - Baruch here was obviously a man of great faith. He had seen what had happened to Jeremiah himself as a result of saying these words to the people, but did he object? No, he went and did as he was told. There has to be a lesson here. Matt.16:24, 1Cor. 16:10.

36:21-24 - So Godless and evil was Jehoiakim that he had no regard to the inspired word of God! Think of the courage of Elnathan [36:25] who interceded with the king on behalf of the written word. How would we fare before the mighty in our land in defending the word of God from abuse?

v.3 - We make a lot of fuss sometimes about whether it is appropriate to serve God out of fear or out of love. The implication behind God's words here (maybe) is that it doesn't matter. Different logic applies to different people and different situations.

36:9 This is the same time as Daniel 2:1 - So Jeremiah is speaking in Jerusalem whilst Daniel is in Babylon.

:1 Whilst this chapter records what happened and what Baruch did we learn nothing of his feelings. Chapter 45 fills out details of a conversation between Jeremiah and Baruch which indicates how he felt

36:11 Whilst Shaphan, the grandfather of Michaiah had been a faithful scribe (2Kin 22:8-9) his grandson was not following in his steps.

V.4 Jeremiah, in obedience to God , caused "a roll of a book" to be written. Jehoiakim caused this roll to be burned, but ultimately the roll; the Word of God in the mouth of Jeremiah, would burn up both him and his people.Jer 36:29-32

V.9 Not long after this point in time, at the end of the fifth year of Jehoiakim, or the beginning of his sixth year, the Babylonians would lay siege to Jerusalem, in 598 BC.  The first wave of exiles, including Jehoiakim and Daniel, would go to Babylon. 

Jeremiah would continue to prophesy in Jerusalem while Daniel was in Babylon.  Information on the Jerusalem situation would be given to the exiles, and exhortation to Jerusalem would be given via the prophets in Babylon.  

During the Babylonian siege, the people would become gaunt and weak through starvation.  Then something remarkable would happen - the Babylonians would leave.  At that time, the people in Jerusalem would probably recall the miracle of Jerusalem's delivery in the days of Hezekiah (Isa 37:35,36) and would think that Yahweh had likewise delivered them. 

Thus, Jeremiah's prophecy about Jerusalem's destruction would look foolish and the people would rejoice.  However, their jubilation would not last. 

The Babylonians had left to take care of the bothersome Egyptians.  The Babylonians would return in 587 BC and clobber Jerusalem in keeping with Jeremiah's predictions. 

PERMANENT
 
 It is only a small detail yet it adds power to the story and the message behind it.  God had told Jeremiah to write down on a scroll all the words he had spoken through Jeremiah up until that time.  So Jeremiah and Barak did as God commanded.  Jeremiah dictated the word of God to Barak, who then wrote those words on the scroll.  The interesting little detail is found as Barak spoke to the officials.  Speaking of Jeremiah, Barak said, "He dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them in ink on the scroll." (Jer 36:18) 
 
Writing in ink is a sign of permanence.  Once ink is written on a page it can never be removed.  So it is with the word of God.  It too is permanent and cannot be removed.
 
King Jehoiakim did his best to remove what had been written as he cut up the scroll and burned it in the fire.  But just as it was written in permanent ink, so the message could not be deleted.  Jeremiah and Barak wrote out another copy adding to it many similar prophecies.  We cannot erase ink, and neither can people erase the word of God.  It is here to stay whether we like it or not.  Many have tried and have failed to destroy the word of God, but it remains permanent and strong.
 
We cannot fight against God or his word and succeed.  Let us, then, add to the indelibility of God's word by writing it permanently on our hearts.

Yesterday’s and today’s chapters happened several years earlier than the siege of Jerusalem in Zedekiah’s days. In fact today’s incidents are approximately 16 years before the siege; (Jehoiakim reigned 11 yrs, so the 4th year of his reign leaves 7 left; Jehoiachin reigned 3 mths; and the siege started in Zedekiah’s 9th yr
[see 2Kin 25:1]. 7 + 9 = 16.

36:21-24  Jehoiakim is behaving in the same cavalier way in which he had behaved in Jer 26:22-23

36:3  Notice God’s desire. He wishes to forgive – hence He is seeking Judah’s repentance. Are we so generous with those with whom we meet?

36:24 Contrast this action with that of his father Josiah when the newly found Book of the Law was read in his ears (1Kin 21:27)

Josiah had rent his garments in sorrow, but now the roll is rent in anger. Jehoiakim thus threw away his last offer of mercy. 

36:2 Jeremiah was confined. He was not a free man. However ‘the word of God is not bound’ – 2Tim 2:9 - so the faithful scribe is sent with the words.

V.22 The incident described here took place in November/December. Hearth is translated from the Hebrew word ach which means fire pot. Thus, there were no chimneys involved here. A covered brass vessel would contain hot charcoal or wood embers to warm the area.

36:16 That the scribes were ‘afraid’ indicates that there were some who ‘trembled at the word’ – doubtless these were men who had been very familiar with the book of the law, copying it out. However they clearly knew what the king was like – hence the desire that he did not see the scroll and the advice that Jeremiah and Baruch should hide.

TIME AND PLACE

We can share God's word with the people around us all we like, but there are occasions when people are more open to the word of God then they are at other times. Christmas and Easter are good examples of times when your average Joe Bloggs is much more likely to take some thought about spiritual things than he is most other days of the year. But there are also other times when people stop and think about God: when life hands us desperate circumstances, in times of change, when dramatic events such as earthquakes, riots, wars, famine, disease or economic crisis dominate the news, and at weddings, funerals and others such occasions. If we want to effectively point people toward God, it is at these times that people are more ready to hear what we have to say.

God thought the same when his people in Judah had been so unresponsive to him. Instead of having Jeremiah's words read out on any ordinary day, he chose a day of fasting for them to be heard by his people. Jeremiah told Baruch, "You go to the house of the LORD on a day of fasting and read to the people from the scroll the words of the LORD that you wrote as I dictated." (Jer 36:6) God was right. There was more response that day than other days.

Let us also cash in on the times, places and methods we use to spread God's word so that we do it with maximum effect.

V.2 a roll (KJV) would consist of several parchments stitched together so that an extensive amount of writing could be made.  From the days of Josiah until today (ESV) covered about 58 years from his birth; or about 27 years from his death.

V.4 Baruch (means blessed) was a faithful scribe and attendant of Jeremiah.

Vs.5,6 Similarly, Jeremiah would later entrust Baruch’s brother Seraiah with taking his book to Babylon and reading it to the captives there (Jer 51:59-64).

V.10 Shaphan was the scribe to Josiah (2Kin 22:8-10).

V.19 The princes (officials) knew that this was the Word of God and feared the king’s adverse reaction to the prophet and scribe.

V.22 The ninth month (of the religious year) was equivalent to November/ December.

V.23 Jehudi did not cut the scroll independently.  He would act according to the wishes of the king.

V.26 The action of the princes in v.19 was supervised by Yahweh.

Vs.28,32 It is impossible to destroy the Word of God.  Many have tried to mute God’s Word over the centuries, but their efforts have all been unsuccessful.

The paralysed scribe

All the words that had caused men to want to kill Jeremiah, God now wanted him to write down. And Jeremiah asked Baruch to write it for him. Baruch would already know something of Jeremiah's message, I'm sure. So how did he feel about this request? And when, hours or days later it became painfully apparent that Jeremiahs words were slanderous, provocative and above all dangerous, how did he feel about being seen to write them? Maybe every day, when he met up with Jeremiah, he was increasingly fearful.

And the subject was upsetting too. Condemnation of his people, and judgement on his homeland. Pronouncement of doom, destruction, pain and misery for his loved ones, friends and acquaintances. The misery would lift off the page as he wrote and settle upon him like a lead garment.

And then, when the ordeal was finally at an end, and Baruch felt he could go and get on with his life again; the shocking request: "Baruch, you know I'm unable to move about don't you? But these words can't just stay unread. People have to hear the word of the LORD so that they can repent and be saved. Please could you read it to them?" (v5-6). How did this scribe feel now as he imagined the mocking, his humiliation, his capture, torture and death at the hand of the Godless king? (v26).

But we're not left guessing. Chapter 45:3 tells us what he felt at this time: "Woe is me now! For the LORD has added grief to my sorrow. I fainted in my sighing and find no rest". He was depressed by the message and burdened down by fear at the task he had been asked to carry out. When we look at the dates involved, v1 and v9, it could have been over a year before Baruch read out what he had written. Yet he went and did it. God had comforted him through a promise recorded in 45:5 "I will give your life to you as a prize wherever you go".

36:3,7 ‘It may be’ – God was still hoping that the people, led by the king, would repent. So we see the character of God as displayed to Moses –Exo 34:6-7 - in the way that he was dealing with these evil Jews in Jeremiah’s day.

"Baruch Bulla"

Jer 36:4 - papyrus documents used to be sealed with hardened clay impressions ("bullae", singular "bulla") which verified the validity of the documents. During the 1970's a bulla of Jeremiah's scribe was appropriated and verified.

36:11-19       In the midst of an evil kingdom there are a few who have regard to the word of God. But seemingly do not have enough courage to confront the king. Rather than tell Baruch and Jeremiah  to hide.

36:28   The Word of God cannot be silenced. Burning Bibles has been undertaken since this time, but, if anything, the burning of Bibles has enhanced, not silenced the message.

36:30   In saying that Jehoiakim would not have a son to sit on the throne of David we see the depths to which the kingdom had fallen for God had promised - 2Chron 6:16  - that as long as Israel were faithful there would be a son of David on the throne of Israel.

36:24  Isaiah had spoken of the kind of person that God had regard to – Isa 66:2. Clearly those listening to the reading of the book of the words of Jeremiah did not regard Jeremiah’s words of any value. Consequently they were not valued by God. 

36:26  Jeremiah speaks of certain men being hidden by God. The contemporary prophet – Zeph 2:3 – speaks of a desire that people might be hidden in the day of judgment.

36:2     So Jehoiakim received a copy of all that Jeremiah had said so far. This is the first, it seems to me, time that we learn that what Jeremiah said was written down.

OUTLINE OF JEREMIAH

PART TWO -- THE PROPHECIES TO JUDAH (JEREMIAH 2:1 to 45:5)

IV. The Present Fall of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 34:1 to 45:5)

   A. Messages Before The Fall (Jeremiah 34:1 to 36:32):

      4. Jer 36:1-26 - the first writing -

         a. V1 - in the fourth year of Jehoiakim's reign (605/4 BC) so this chapter is chronologically before chapter 34 (Jer 34:2); V1 - Jeremiah chapter 36 is sequentially followed by Jeremiah 45 (Jer 45:1); V1 - Jeremiah had been prophesying for 23 years, from the 13th year of Josiah (Jer 1:2) to the 4th year of Jehoiakim; VS 1,9 - it took a year to write the book; V1 - "Josiah<2977>", "Jehoiakim(<3079> Jehovah will raise, or Jehovah raises up)".

         b. V2 - it seems the book of Jeremiah grew out of the scroll which Baruch wrote from Jeremiah's dictation in the 4th year of Jehoiakim; VS 2,4,8,11 - Jeremiah's words were inspired by God; V3 - a last chance for repentance to avoid God's wrath; V3 - "evil<7451>", "iniquity<5771>", "sin<2403>"; V4 - "Baruch<1263>", "Neriah<5374>"; V5 - Jeremiah was not allowed entrance to the Lord's temple to speak to the people.

         c. VS 6-8 - it was hoped Judah would turn away from evil; V7 - "anger<639>", "fury<2534>".

         d. VS 9-10 - December 604BC Baruch read the scroll to all the people gathered at the Lord's temple; (Jer 25:1;Jer 36:9;Dan 2:1,44,47) the 5th year of Jehoiakim was the 2nd year of Nebuchadnezzar with the Gentile king showing respect to God's word; V9 suggests the king of Judah had an outward show of contrition before God; V10 - in the house of the Lord and in the ears of the people Baruch read the scroll in the chamber of Gemariah the son of Shaphan the scribe.  Eze 8:11 - "Jaazaniah<2970>" was the black sheep in the family of Shaphan and he used his position for evil.

         e. VS 11-13 - Micaiah gave an abstract of Jeremiah's prophetic warning as recorded and read by Baruch; V11 - "Michaiah(<4321> who is like God)", "Gemariah<1587>"; V12 - "Elishama<476>", "Delaiah<1806>", "Shemaiah<8098>, "Elnathan(<494> God hath given)", "Zedekiah(<6667> Jehovah is righteous)", "Hananiah<2608>"; Elnathan was father-in-law to Jehoiakim, being the father of Nehushta the queen (2Kin 24:8;Jer 36:12,25) and he was sent by Jehoiakim to seek out Urijah for punishment (Jer 26:20-23) and tried to stop the king from burning the scroll of Jeremiah.

         f. VS 14-19 - Baruch confirmed the prophetic warning of the scroll to the officials; V14 - "Jehudi<3065>", "Nethaniah<5418>", "Shelemiah<8018>", "Cushi<3570>"; V15 - "read<7121>"; "pronounced<7121><853>"; VS 17-18 - Baruch explains the process of dictation; V19 - Baruch and Jeremiah told by the officials to hide.

   A. Messages Before The Fall (Jeremiah 34:1 to 36:32):

      4. Jer 36:1-26 - the first writing con't. -

         g. VS 20-26 - the whole matter is reported to the king and in anger he burned the scroll; VS 22-23 - the king burned the scroll; VS 23-24 - the king and his attendants were not alarmed by the warnings of the scroll; Jer 36:23-32 - the king of Judah rejects the word of God in contrast to the Gentile king of Babylon and interestingly at about the same time (Dan 2:1,47); V26 - the king of Judah wants to arrest Baruch and Jeremiah but the Lord had hidden them; V26 - "Jerahmeel<3396>", "Hammelech<4429>", "Seriah<8304>", "Azriel<5837>", "Abdeel<5655>".

      5. Jer 36:27-32 - the rewriting of the scroll -

         a. V29 - Jehoiakim didn't heed the warning.

         b. VS 30-31 - additional words on the new scroll.

         c. V31 - "have pronounced<1696>".

36:1-2  From the beginning of Jeremiah’s ministry to the fourth year of Jehoiakim covers a period of about 22 years. So Jeremiah pronounced for Baruch to write down all that God had spoken during that time period.  A clear indication that Jeremiah was inspired. No man could remember all that he had heard from one person over a 22 year period.

36:6    We learn of Baruch’s response to this request from Jeremiah in Jer 45:3– he clearly did not want to do it!

36:26    The princes “were afraid”  -:16 – on hearing the words of Jeremiah. However the king, by contrast, did not fear. Rather he sought to kill the messenger and the prophet! Do we seek to disregard the word of God and denigrate those who speak its instructions to us when we do not like the message being delivered?

36:4 “the fasting day” in Israel’s religious calendar was the Day of Atonement – Lev 16:29. The irony is that the day when Israel should be confessing their sins the king and his princes were refusing to listen to the word of God.

36:23 whilst we do not know how long the scroll was it is evident that the scroll was cut up and burnt before it had been read in full.  Such was the king’s disdain for the word of God. This wasn’t just “speed reading”. It was closing his ears to hear the word of God  - as if the word of God  could be silenced by not listening to it! We might think that we could never be like that. However whenever we disregard parts of His word because thy are not convenient to us we are doing exactly the same sort of thing.

36:16-18 So Baruch read what he had written. Jeremiah repeated all the words that he had spoken over some time and Baruch copied them down. On hearing them all read to them the princes were amazed. How could everything that Jeremiah had already been said be repeated to them?

Clearly they did not think that anyone would remember what Jeremiah had said. They had not bargained for the fact that the God who had put the words in Jeremiah’s mouth would remember what he had commended Jeremiah to speak.

We should not forget that God remembers everything that he says and our words and actions as well.

36:1 there are four times that events in the fourth year of Jehoiakim who reigned eleven years are recorded here, 25:1 and 46:2 He died outside the walls of Jerusalem even though the king of Babylon had planned to take him to Babylon.

36:5-6  Shutting Jeremiah up in prison might have stopped him speaking directly to anyone but God’s word is not hampered by prison walls.

36:1The Chaldeans suppressed Pharaoh in this year – Jer 46:2   but I am not sure whether that was before Jeremiah spoke to Jehoiakim.

v.5 - This claim of the 'hardness of your heart' was supported back in the words of Moses in the law - [Deut 9:6, 31:27, Neh.9:16,17]. This we are told not to do - Heb.3:8-10.

v.5 - Notice that hard heartedness is first seen in Pharaoh Exodus 4:21 7:3,13 8:15,32 9:12,34 10:1,20,27 11:10 14:4,8 So when it is used to speak of how Israel behaved the message is very pointed. You are being like the oppressing Egyptians from whom you have been delivered. Deuteronomy 15:7 2 Chronicles 36:13 Psalm 95:8 Isaiah 63:17 Mark 10:5 16:14 John 12:40 Romans 2:5
v.7 - The pattern of the creation of Eve is utilised often in Scripture. Genesis 2:24 Matthew 19:5 -6 1Corinthians 6:16 Mark 10:7 - 8 Ephesians 5:31 Likewise the idea of leave / left ... father ... mother is found a number of times in Scripture. Genesis 2:24 Ruth 2:11 Matthew 19:5 Mark 10:7 29 Ephesians 5:31
v.23 - The phrase 'looked round' is only found in Mark's Gospel record. It is not to be found in any of the other accounts of the life of Jesus Mark 3:5,34 5:32 9:8 10:23 11:11

:2-12 The question, which was designed to tempt Jesus, may well have been a more than simply a trick question. If we think about it we realise that the answer from Scripture is clear. However the leaders were trying to rid themselves of Jesus. We know that John the Baptist had been imprisoned and then beheaded by Herod because he had testified against him about the taking of his brother Philip's wife [Mark 6:18]. Could it be that the leaders thought that in getting Jesus to answer this question they would be able to report him to Herod, thinking that he might suffer the same fate as that great prophet?

:10-12 That the disciples asked Jesus again about the matter of divorce indicates that Jesus' teaching surprised the disciples. In fact a parallel account (Matthew 19:10) shows the disciples dismay at Jesus words. They are astonished again (10:24) at his teaching. As we are very close to the end of the ministry of Jesus we gain an insight into the slowness of the disciples to understand his message.

If James and John were to sit next to Jesus in his kingdom, they would have to "drink the cup" that he would drink (35-38). If the rich young ruler was to inherit eternal life, he would have to "take up the cross" and follow Jesus (v21). If the disciples were to be the greatest, they would have to pluck out the eye, cut off the leg, and chop off the hand that caused the offence (9v34; 9v43-49).

These things all amount to the same thing. If you start to cut off all the flesh which causes you to offend, then you have to cut it all off. You have to cut your life off. The cup of Jesus was to cut off his life. The cross of Jesus was to die upon it. Were they prepared to do that?

In v24-27 Jesus gives them a hope. What is impossible with men, is possible with God. Through the cutting off of Jesus, they were to be allowed to forgo the same. If only they would humble themselves, and forget their desires for grandeur, they would be saved through him. Jesus tries to explain this in v43-45. God then provides a visual aid through blind Bartimaeus, who instead of trying to puff himself up in front of Jesus, cries out "Son of David, have mercy on me!" (v48). "I tell you, this man went down to his house justified [rather] than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." (Luke 18:14)

10:5-6 On the matter of divorce we should remember that the provision for divorce was given because Israel were hard hearted. If we were to appeal to the provision of Moses then we have to accept also that we are hard hearted like they were. This is not intended to censure anyone who is divorced. Rather just to make the point that Jesus does.

V43-44 Jesus is saying that in the kingdom over which he reigns, greatness is obtained by pursuing a course of action which is the exact opposite of that which is followed in the unbelieving world. Greatness consists in self giving, in the outpouring of the self in service to others, for the glory of God.

10:35Whereas Mark has the sons asking the question Matt 20:20has their mother asking the question. It appears that the boys got their mother to ask the question, possibly thinking that she would receive a more favourable answer than they would have received if they had asked directly.

10:21 Jesus’ ‘love’ for the young man did not cause Jesus to compromise himself by reducing the requirements for the man. We should remember that true love for man will cause us to teach the full gospel rather than compromise in order to pacify those with who we speak.

10:24   Jesus’ comment ‘how hard …’ echoes the words of the preacher – Prov 11:28

V.25 some believe that the eye of a needle refers to a gate in Jerusalem commonly known as Needle's Eye.  A camel, laden with goods, could not pass through this gate.  And so, the camel would have to be unloaded before it could pass through the gate.  Similarly, a rich man would have to divest himself of his wealth (or, rather, his love for wealth 1Tim 6:10) before he could enter the Kingdom of God.

Does that mean we should give everything we have away?

That's a choice, of course, but the not the Lord's categorical demand.  He does not say that a rich man will not enter the kingdom - he says hardly (KJV); "How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!" (ESV) (v.23).

Riches can be dangerous if they are misused or become a focus of our confidence (idolatry) (Matt 6:24; 1Tim 6:17,18).  But shared, selflessly, for the greater good, they can honour the Lord (2Cor 9:7; Acts 2:44,45).

10:3-9 Jesus’ approach to the trick question is instructive. Whilst his opponents used Scripture to advance their argument Jesus looked at the broader teaching of Scripture to put the quoted verse into a context which gave a clear explanation of the idea quoted by the Pharisees and other Scriptures as well. We do well in our discussion with others to not simply explain the verse that might be quoted to us but rather to lay out the whole counsel of the Scriptures.

V.2 It is important to understand the background of this question, and the reason the Pharisees posed it to Jesus.

Two prominent rabbis had established schools just prior to the time of Christ.  One was Shammai, and the other was Hillel.  Shammai had a strict interpretation of the Law, while Hillel was much more liberal.  Both rabbis had their own following. 

Thus, we see the Pharisees coming to Jesus, testing him on the question of divorce. Would he endorse Shammai who said that divorce was only valid if sexual immorality had occurred; or would he side with Hillel who allowed many reasons for divorce, some frivolous? 

Jesus, the greatest rabbi of all-time, endorsed neither but went straight to the scriptures.  His first words of reply were: What did Moses command you? (v.3). The Lord's foundation was always the Word of God - which should be ours, also (Deut 24:1-3). 

By the way, it was Hillel who won the historical battle in that his liberal ideas largely formed the direction which Judaism has taken until today.

Mark 10:47-48 First Principles>Sure mercies of David>King
Jesus, son of David is also the Son of God. For more about the King, go to 2Sam 7:12-16

10:17-18 The one who came running to Jesus was a genuine seeking for truth. We might think that such individuals, being few and far between, should be treated with great care lest we cause them to turn away from following Jesus. We don’t want to do anything to put them off from the message we have to give them. We might, therefore, avoid some points in discussion with them lest we offend them. Whilst that is good we should be aware of Jesus’ approach here. Jesus picked up on a couple of words ‘good master’ and rebuked the young man. We must be careful to ensure that we, in our enthusiasm to make our visitor comfortable, do not gloss over or avoid fundamental issues with them.

AS CHRIST LOVES

Jesus challenges the commitment we make to loving our spouse. Those of us who are married have made a promise to our spouse that we will love them "until death do us part." But in today's society, and apparently even in the time of Christ, divorce was an easy way out, terminating the marriage before its time.

Jesus pointed those who questioned marriage to the way God had made things at the beginning: one man and one woman joined for life. "Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." (Mark 10:9) Later on Paul continues on the same theme, describing marriage as a living parable of Christ and his bride. He describes the husband's love for the wife as being the same as Christ's love for the church. (Eph 5:22-33) Just as he joined husbands and wives together for life, so God has joined Christ and his bride together for ever.

So is Jesus likely to go off and have an affair with demon worshippers? Will he ever cast us off because he is bored with us? Will he be content to live in the ice box of a hostile relationship without doing anything to help heal it? Or is he likely to reject us because he cannot find it in his heart to forgive us? No! If we, as husbands and wives are a living parable of Christ and his bride, then we need to do all we can to live up to that calling.

It is not ours to judge the marriages of other people, but to make sure that our own marriage is living up to the standard God wants from us.

In v32-34 the fear shown by Jesus's followers was based on his treatment last time he was in Jerusalem. See John 11:8.

10:28  Notice peter ‘began’ to say.  Jesus stopped him. There are times when we would do well to stop what we are about to say.

Mark 10:17-22

“Thou knowest the commandments... Master, all these things have I observed from my youth. And Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast…”

Here we have a rich man who devoted his life from his youth in obedience to the Law in keeping the 10 Commandments, yet he lacked one thing. I would expect he was quite surprised! In calling the man to give up his wealth, he had the opportunity to show his true devotion. In going away, this rich man revealed that he had, indeed, violated several of the Commandments! He placed his wealth at a higher level of importance than God and obedience to the Commandments because of his covetousness.

The lesson is profound! Like this rich man, no matter how sincere we think we are in doing what we do, we need to be on guard about mere formalism and what we really place first in our lives. It is not just about money; it may be skills, talents, sports, or intellect. Many at the judgment seat will ask, “When saw we thee an hungred, or athirst… and did not minister unto thee?” (Matt 25:44). I expect they will be quite surprised, too!

Mark 10:46-52

“… blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me… And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called… and he, casting away his garment, rose and came to Jesus. And immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way.”

Most of us consider the blind beggar, Bartimaeus, to be his proper name. He is introduced as “Bartimaeus, son of Timaeus.” However, “bar” is the Aramaic for “son,” the complete Aramaic being Bar-tame-  (timaios # <5090>) from the Aramaic # <2931>, tame, “defiled.” The complete word, “Bartimaeus” is in Strong's Concordance # <924> from the Aramaic # <1247>, and means, "the unclean.” It was a theological belief among the Jews that blindness was a punishment from God for sin (John 9:34). However, this word is a hybrid word containing the Aramaic word, bar, “son” # <1247> and the Greek word, time, # <5092>, “honour.” It has a double meaning, and in the Greek, the name could also be understood as a son of honour! It may be what Mark is really telling us is that here is a beggar who is a man of honour, but living in a state of dishonour and shame. It is a very loaded word, indeed!

This blind beggar addressed as, "son of the unclean," yet a "son of honour," called out to Jesus addressing him as the “son of David,” which is the equivalent of calling him Messiah. By this address, he was requesting far more than money, or his sight. While he could not see, he saw with his mind's eye what so many others failed to see with their eyesight!

A garment was a very valuable item serving as an outer garment by day and a blanket by night. Even under the Law it was not permitted to take a man’s garment though he may owe you the very shirt off his back (Deut 24:12-13)! “Bartimaeus” cast away his garment, and came before Messiah empty. No pride, no dignity, no standing, no status, just great faith and humility. He laid aside every hindrance that might have held him back. This act is so symbolic of putting off the old way of living, and putting on the clean fresh clothes of a new way of life (Eph 4:21-24).

This is one of the great stories of the Bible. The beggar did not ask for eternal life like the rich man did (Mark 10:17). He asked for a vision, and Messiah granted it. The beggar did not walk away from Messiah, but became his disciple following "Jesus in the way.”

May we emulate this beggar, who when he needed help cried out in faith, “Thou son of David, have mercy on me.” He exemplifies the true meaning of discipleship.

Mark 10:11-12

"And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away (apoluo) his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away (apoluo) her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery."

Apoluo # <630> and refers to a separation. There is no bill, # <975>, biblion, of divorcement. In other words, there is no writing of divorcement, a legal document. Therefore, they would be guilty of adultery if they re-married.

For more in-depth notes on this topic, please read my comments on Matt 5:32; 19:9; Luke 16:18.

Mark 10:9

“What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”

This phrase is so often used at Christian wedding ceremonies, but the words, “till death do us part” has been added.  An appropriate Scriptural vow would read more like this: “By God’s grace, and through His strength, I give myself solely to you, to have and to hold, to love, honour and obey according to His will for us,” for in ourselves we are weak. We cannot do it in our own strength.

The word, asunder, is # <5562>, choreo, and is a derivative of # <5563>, chorizo, “to go away, separate.” The context is not about divorce, but separation within the body of Christ. The married couple made a covenant with one another, which they are to honour and not pull their marriage apart when problems arise. But man (either partner) does put asunder. To separate is not a sin, but the circumstances that lead to the separation are.

The whole tenor of the New Testament is forgiving those who sin against us. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves his ecclesia and gave himself for it, and wives are to love their husbands by submitting to them as unto the Lord, and not lording over them (1Cor 11:3; Eph 5:22-27)! If this order were kept and in the right spirit by both partners, separations and divorces would never occur within the body of Christ.

10:21-22          Notice the contrast ‘follow me’ – ‘went away’ the young man could not live up to what Jesus required of him. However Jesus still loved him. The young man was ‘grieved’ there was an emotional battle going on in his mind.  He was not like the leaders who had made up their mind and had decided how they would react to Jesus.

10:19   This account of the one who was told to sell his possessions is the only one in which the commandment “Defraud not,” is included in the list that the young man says he has observed from his youth.

10:26 The disciples’ incredulous reply highlights the point. For man to enter the kingdom of God through his own merits is impossible. Entry into the kingdom is through God’s grace. 

10:20   Observing the law was to be Israel’s “righteousness” Deut 6:25. However if one was to keep all the law.- James 2:10 – this man could not keep the commandment “thou shalt not covet” Exo 20:17 so could not claim “all these things …”

10:1-2 We should enter into the feelings of Jesus as we read the record of his life and actions. O this occasion he is teaching people who, we presume, want to know what he had to say. At the same time his work is disrupted by those who are opposed to is teaching. How do we react when we are interrupted in some activity or other? There is no indication here that Jesus got angry even though his teaching was interrupted.

10:16    The way in which Jesus spent time with the children in this section - :13-16 – should teach us that teaching the young is critically important. It maybe even takes precedence over teaching adults.

Mark 10:2-12

“… The outcome of this teaching in the case of obedient disciples will be that a chaste husband will cleave to his chaste wife in an indissoluble union. The observance of Christ’s instructions leaves no room for either polygamy or divorce. Christ’s mind, when one of the partners is disobedient to his instructions, is expressed in Matt. v. 32 and xix. 10. Christ makes the sin named in these two passages a cause for severance of the marriage tie. His teaching must not be confused. Indissolubility is coupled with obedience. Rome, not Christ, decrees that indissolubility shall cover up the vilest immorality.” THE CHIRSTADELPHIAN FAMILY JOURNAL, Nov, 1927, p. 193

10:32 In being told that Jesus “looked round” we are seeing a phrase unique to Mark’s gospel account. It is found in  3:5,34, 5:32, 10:23,  11:11 and once of the disciples 9:8.

Mark 10:2-12

“If you are wise you will not consent to strike out Christ’s important teaching in Mark x, 2-12 concerning the institution of marriage. Study it and you will find that it presents a picture of the divine institution. The outcome of this teaching in the case of obedient disciples will be that a chaste husband will cleave to his chaste wife in an indissoluble union. The observance of Christ’s instructions leaves no room for either polygamy or divorce. Christ’s mind, when one of the partners is disobedient to his instructions, is expressed in Matt. v 32 and xix. 9. Christ makes the sin named in these two passages a cause for severance of the marriage tie. His teaching must not be confused. Indissolubility is coupled with obedience. Rome, not Christ, decrees the indissolubility shall cover up the vilest immorality.”

Note: Roman Catholicism while not granting divorces grant annulments for a fee, which to them means the marriage never took place, so they can remarry! This Canon Law, however, applies only to baptized Roman Catholics.

"When a chaste partner is trying to live in righteousness and holiness before God and finds it necessary, in order to do so, to lay hold of Christ's permission in Matt. v. 32; xix. 9, why do you charge the chaste, upright person with dragging the name of Christ in the dust, when it is the wicked person who is doing this in the sight of God, the saints and the alien, and is further creating the necessity for divorce?"

Editors E.W. Browne, A.T. Jannaway, CHRISTADELPHIAN FAMILY JOURNAL, Vol. 3, 4, June/November 1927 (emphasis added).

"Christ does not mean that if divorced from a proper cause a woman may not marry again" Brother Roberts-Christadelphian, 1892, p. 422.

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.”