Jesus gave this series of lessons south of Galilee in Perea and Judea, not in Galilee. Another contrast is the audience. He gave the preceding instruction to the disciples in a house, but He gave this teaching to the multitudes and the disciples in the open air.
Though Mark did not record it, Jesus gave His disciples much additional instruction as they travelled from Capernaum in Galilee toward Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 8:19-22; 18:15-35; Luke 9:51-18:14; John 7:2-11:54). Evidently Jesus departed from Capernaum and journeyed through Samaria to Jerusalem. Then He proceeded east across the Jordan River into Perea, which lay east and north of the Dead Sea. From there He returned to Jerusalem again. Leaving Jerusalem Jesus visited the tribal territory of Ephraim, travelled farther north into Samaria, headed east into Perea, and returned to Jerusalem a third time. The following ministry took place during this last loop in Perea and Judea.238
10:2 This teaching grew out of the Pharisees' attempt to trap Jesus. The incident occurred in Perea, Herod Antipas' territory. Perhaps the Pharisees wanted to get Jesus to explain His view of divorce because they suspected it was the same as John the Baptist's. John had lost his head literally because of his views on marriage. Probably Jesus' critics hoped that He would also antagonize the Roman ruler with His views. The form of their question implied they thought that Jesus was against divorce for any reason.
The Pharisees all believed that the Old Testament permitted Jewish men to divorce their wives and to remarry (Deut. 24:1-4). They disagreed among themselves on the grounds for divorce. Followers of Rabbi Shammai believed Moses meant the only ground was fornication, sexual sin. Rabbi Hillel's disciples held that anything a wife did that displeased her husband constituted legitimate grounds for divorce.
10:3 Jesus responded in rabbinic fashion with another question. He asked the Pharisees what Moses, the authority whom they all professed to recognize, taught. Jesus sent them to God's Word rather than debating traditional interpretations that the Pharisees treated as authoritative.
10:4-5 The Pharisees viewed Moses' permission as God's desire, but Jesus viewed it as a divine concession.
"A distinction has to be made between that which sets forth the absolute will of God, and those provisions which take account of men's actual sinfulness and are designed to limit and control its consequences. Whereas the Ten Commandments (in this connection Exod. xx. 14) and such passages as the verses quoted in vv. 6-8 represent God's absolute command, Deut. xxiv. 1 is a divine provision to deal with situations brought about by men's sklerokardia[hardness of heart] and to protect from its worst effects those who would suffer as a result of it. (Much that is contained in the O.T. falls within the category of such provisions.)"239
10:6-8 Jesus contrasted the Pharisee's view of marriage with God's view of it. God instituted marriage. It involves the union of a male and a female that results in a uniquely close relationship, a "one flesh"relationship. "One flesh"is a Semitic expression that means "one."240This relationship is closer than even the parent child relationship. Furthermore it continues throughout the rest of the husband and wife's lives.
"The import of all this is that marriage from its very nature and from the divine institution by which it is constituted is ideally indissoluble. It is not a contract of temporary convenience and not a union that may be dissolved at will."241
10:9 Jesus drew a conclusion from what the Scriptures that He just quoted revealed. It is therefore wrong for man to break a bond that God has fashioned. Thus Jesus did not side with either school of rabbinic interpretation. He affirmed God's ideal in marriage, namely no divorce.
10:10-12 The disciples wanted clarification of Jesus' view, so they asked Him for it in private. Mark recorded His straightforward reply. Neither husband nor wife should divorce their partner and remarry someone else. To do so constitutes adultery.
Verse 12 is unique in Mark. Under Roman law a wife could divorce her husband, but under Jewish law she could not.242There were exceptions, however, as in the case of Herodias who had divorced Philip to marry Antipas (6:17-18). Herod the Great's sister also divorced her husband.243Jesus viewed all divorce followed by remarriage as constituting adultery no matter who initiated it. Divorce is wrong, but divorce followed by remarriage is worse.
Mark's omission of the exception clause that Matthew included was also due to his audience (cf. Matt. 5:32; 19:9). He did not want to draw attention to the exceptional case because to do so would weaken the main point, namely that people should not divorce. Divorce was very common in the Greco-Roman world. Matthew included Jesus' permission to divorce for fornication because the subject of how to deal with divorce cases involving marital unfaithfulness was of particular interest to the Jews.
The simple trust in Jesus that the children in this pericope demonstrated contrasts with the hostility of the Pharisees in the previous paragraph.
10:13-14 Mark's account of this incident is very similar to Matthew's. However, Mark alone noted that Jesus became indignant when He learned that the disciples were discouraging those who were bringing the children (Gr. paidia) to Him. This is another indication of the evangelist's interest in Jesus' humanity (cf. 1:25, 41, 43; 3:5; 7:34; 8:12; 9:19).
10:15 This verse occurs in Mark and Luke (Luke 18:17), but Matthew recorded Jesus' similar statement on another occasion (Matt. 18:3). It expands Jesus' words in verse 14. Jesus' point was that people must receive things associated with the kingdom of God as children receive things, namely with trust and dependence on Himself. Personal ability and effort do not determine one's reception of God's best gifts, but a proper orientation to Jesus does.
10:16 Mark also wrote that Jesus took the children in His arms and blessed them fervently (Gr. kateulogei).244This Greek word appears only here in the New Testament. The disciples viewed the children as individuals unworthy of Jesus' attention, but Jesus saw them as important in their own right and possessing important qualities that adults need to cultivate.
"This was the overflowing of Jesus' divine love for children. It was this experience that the disciples in their insensitivity were preventing the children from having and Jesus from giving! No wonder Jesus was indignant."245
A question from a man in the crowd initiated this subject. Then Jesus proceeded to instruct His disciples following up the incident. The position of this section in Mark's Gospel is significant. It occurs after Jesus' teaching about the importance of receiving the kingdom with trust and humility (vv. 13-16), and it precedes Jesus' third prediction of His passion (vv. 32-34). The young man thought he could obtain the kingdom with works and self-assertion, not as a little child. Jesus' following call to commitment prepared for His passion announcement.
