From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Mark Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2013
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted and encouraged so long as
authorial
and compiler credit is given and the text is
not altered.
CHAPTER 10:
10:1 Translations
Weymouth: Soon on His
feet once more, He enters the district of Judaea and
crosses the Jordan: again the people flock to Him, and ere long, as was usual
with Him, He was teaching them once more.
WEB: He arose
from there and came into the borders of
Young’s: And having risen thence, he doth come to the coasts of
Judea, through the other side of the Jordan, and again do multitudes come
together unto him, and, as he had been accustomed, again he was teaching them.
Conte (RC): And rising
up, he went from there into the area of
10:1 And He arose from thence. Many
transactions took place between those mentioned in the preceding chapter, and
these that follow, which are omitted by Matthew and Mark but they are related
by both Luke and John. [21]
and cometh into the coasts [region, NKJV] of
and the people resort [gathered, NKJV] unto Him
again. The
"again" seems to imply a previous visit to Peraea. [8]
Portions of His teaching
are recorded by Luke, and include the parables of (1) the unjust judge, and (2)
the Pharisee and the publican (Luke 18:1-14).
In the region now traversed probably occurred the healing of the ten
lepers (Luke
And as He was wont [accustomed, NKJV], He taught them again. His
role in traveling about was for the purpose of teaching and educating others more
deeply into the will of God. It wasn’t an
occasional purpose; it was the customary goal, typical of His
travels. [rw]
In depth:
Jesus' itinerary in the period Mark omits [10]. Between the events just recorded [chapter 9]
and those the Evangelist now proceeds to treat, many others had occurred, which
he passes over. The most important of
these were:
1. The visit of Christ to Jerusalem at the Feast
of Tabernacles (John 7:8-10), which was marked by (1) the rebuke to the "Sons of Thunder"
at the churlish conduct of the inhabitants of a Samaritan village on their way
to the Holy City (Luke 9:51-56); (2) Solemn discourses during the feast, and an
attempt of the Sanhedrin to apprehend Him (John 7:11-52; 8:12-59); (3) the opening of the eyes of one born blind
(John 9:1-4), the revelation of Himself as the Good Shepherd (John 10:1-18).
2. Ministrations in
3. Visit to
4. Tour in Peraea
(Luke
5. The raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-46).
6. Resolve of the Sanhedrin to put Him to death,
and His retirement to Ephraim (John
10:2 Translations
WEB: Pharisees
came to him testing him, and asked him, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce
his wife?"
Young’s: And the Pharisees, having come near, questioned him, if it
is lawful for a husband to put away a wife, tempting him,
Conte (RC): And
approaching, the Pharisees questioned him, testing him: "Is it lawful for
a man to dismiss his wife?"
10:2 And the Pharisees came to Him, and asked Him. The
Pharisees proposed this question to our Lord in the same spirit shown on other
occasions, not for instruction, but in the hope of entrapping Him. These enemies, the history of whose
systematic opposition Mark keeps up, now change their mode of assault from
charges of violating the law and tradition to demanding His opinion on vexed
questions of controversy. The fact that
this was kept up to the last, shows that it was not accidental but the result
of deliberate counsel and agreement on the part of the leaders of the
opposition. [45]
Is it lawful for a man
to put away his wife? Matthew adds, “for every cause” and this is
the meaning of the question as reported by Mark, seeing that if it is “lawful
to put away a wife” this privilege unqualified makes the husband the
judge of the cause. [38]
There was a question
among the Pharisees themselves as to the meaning of the ground of divorce given
in Deuteronomy 24:1, the school of Shammael limiting
it to conjugal unfaithfulness, whilst that of Hillel
extended it to the most trifling causes, even the wife's burning the food she
was cooking for her husband. [45]
Even without
this other known data, the fact that they thought this might get Him to say
something that could be used against Him (1) proves this was not just “a
friendly disagreement” but a vigorously (bitterly?) controversial question even
in His day—not merely in the twentieth century, (2) argues that the religious
leaders themselves gave sharply conflicting answers, and (3) raises an
issue where there was major Jewish versus Roman difference in practice as
well—a woman being able to initiate divorce among Romans (raising the
possibility for a split in opinion between traditional Jews and hellenized Jews), that they could exploit among local Jewish
listeners.
It is
fascinating that their mindframe was that either a man
could put away his wife for all reasons or none at all, ignoring both the
causative reason mentioned in Deuteronomy 24:1 (“uncleanness”) and the fact
that even under the best of circumstances God was only willing to tolerate
rather than be enthusiastic about the practice (Malachi 2:16: “For the Lord God of Israel says that He
hates divorce.”) [rw]
tempting [testing, NKJV] Him. How
could this be [testing or] tempting Jesus?
It was a very plain and Scriptural question and the answer, one would
suppose, must be free from risk and a very easy one. The secret of the difficulty in answering was
this: Jesus was still in the dominion of
Herod Antipas, who had put away his wife, and was living with a woman who was
not his wife, and therefore, they thought that Jesus would be put in a great
dilemma and either way get into trouble.
If He had said it was lawful, He would have been sanctioning sin, and if
He said it was not lawful, He would be put in prison for offending Herod, as
John was. [24]
10:3 Translations
WEB: He
answered, "What did Moses command you?"
Young’s: and he
answering said to them, 'What did Moses command you?'
Conte (RC): But in
response, he said to them, "What did Moses instruct you?"
10:3 And He answered and said unto them. The
order of the questions and answers in this conversation seems at first glance
to be inconsistently reported by out two evangelists. Matthew represents the Pharisees as making
the reference to what Moses had commanded, and as making it in the form of an
objection to what Jesus had said; while Mark represents Jesus as making it in
the form of a question for the Pharisees to answer.
If, according to our
rule in such cases, we suppose both accounts to be true but elliptical, the
entire conversation arranges itself most naturally in the following order: As reported by both evangelists, the
Pharisees began the conversation by asking, “Is it lawful for a man to put away
his wife for every cause?" Jesus
answered, as reported by Mark (vs. 3), “What did Moses command you?" They replied, as also reported by Mark (vs.
4), “Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement and put her away."
He then responded, as
reported in substance by both, "Have
ye not read that He who made them at the beginning, made them a male and a
female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall
cleave to his wife: and they twain shall
be one flesh. Therefore they are no more
twain, but one flesh. What therefore God
has joined together, let not man put asunder."
At this point the
Pharisees make their appeal to Moses, as reported by Matthew (vs. 7), saying,
and “Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement and put her
away?" Jesus answered, “Moses,
because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives;
but from the beginning it was not so."
This last remark is quoted out of its original connection by Mark (vs.
5), because he condenses the entire conversation. [38]
What did Moses command you? In Deuteronomy 24:1. [22]
Instead
of giving the direct answer they expected, Jesus referred them to Moses,
through whom God gave His law. [45]
They
professed much reverence for Moses; He therefore appeals to their great
lawgiver. [39]
10:4 Translations
WEB: They
said, "Moses allowed a certificate of divorce to be written, and to
divorce her."
Young’s: and they
said, 'Moses suffered to write a bill of divorce, and to put away.'
Conte (RC): And they
said, "Moses gave permission to write a bill of divorce and to dismiss
her."
10:4 And
they said, Moses suffered [permitted, NKJV]. This answer implies the
purely permissive character of the Mosaic provision (Deuteronomy
24:1-4), since the "bill of
divorcement" was not designed to encourage divorce but to render it more
difficult; being in effect a protection of the repudiated wife. [11]
to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. A precept which might give at least time to consider more calmly of
it. [20]
10:5 Translations
WEB: But Jesus
said to them, "For your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment.
Young’s: And Jesus
answering said to them, 'For the stiffness of your heart he wrote you this
command,
Conte (RC): But Jesus
responded by saying: "It was due to the hardness of your heart that he
wrote that precept for you.
10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them. Having
drawn out a statement the law, Jesus does not question that it permitted
divorce (and that, indeed, without limitation to cases of adultery), but
declares that this permission was a concession to the hardness of men's hearts,
of which concession they ought not to avail themselves. Not all that the law permits is for that
reason right to do. [44]
For the [because of,
NKJV]. God does
by no means authorize everything which He tolerates; and He frequently permits
a less evil that a greater may be avoided.
It is absolutely necessary to distinguish in the Scripture that which
God commands, that which He counsels, that which He expressly permits, and that
which, out of His infinite patience, He only tolerates or suffers. [20]
hardness of
your heart he wrote you this precept. It
was a fault in them and not out of any love of divorce that this was
permitted. The fact that it was
permitted at all argues that God recognized that the desired total prohibition
was simply too high a standard for the human race to rise to. It could overcome many internal obstacles,
but not on this topic—and therefore He, unhappily, permits them to have their
own way. [rw]
10:6 Translations
WEB: But from
the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.
Young’s: but from
the beginning of the creation, a male and a female God did make them;
Conte (RC): But from the
beginning of creation, God made them male and female.
10:6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them
male and female. Jesus appeals to the fundamental fact of
human nature, itself evidently of Divine appointment, that human beings are of
two sexes, having distinct and reciprocal functions and responsibilities. In this fundamental fact, involving, as it
does, the relations of husband and wife, parents and children, Jesus finds a
divine sanction of marriage, and from it He draws the conclusion (vs.
9)--which, like the fact itself, He states in Old Testament language--that
marriage should never be broken. [44]
10:7 Translations
Weymouth: For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother,
and shall cling to his wife,
WEB: For this
cause a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife,
Young’s: on this
account shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his
wife,
Conte (RC): Because of
this, a man shall leave behind his father and mother, and he shall cling to his
wife.
10:7 For this cause [reason, NKJV] a man shall leave his father and mother, and
cleave to his wife.
Verse 7 and half of verse 8 are exactly quoted from Genesis 2:24,
Septuagint. [23]
10:8 Translations
WEB: and the
two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Young’s: and they
shall be -- the two -- for one flesh; so that they are no more two, but one
flesh;
Conte (RC): And these
two shall be one in flesh. And so, they are now, not two, but one flesh.
10:8 And they twain [two, NKJV]
shall be one flesh: so then they are no
more twain, but one flesh. These words indicate the closest and most
indissoluble union; and not only exclude divorce on any other ground than that allowed in our Saviour's teachings, but clearly prohibit polygamy. [45]
The “male” and “female” of verse 6. The
institution was never intended for two of the same gender. Unless one is going to reject God as
homophobic—and even if He were, the Biblical record is that rejecting God’s
will is ultimately a loser’s game—then His counsel should be heeded and
respected rather than have the terminology of marriage bent to describe that
which it was never intended to cover. [rw]
10:9 Translations
Weymouth: What,
therefore, God has joined together let not man separate."
WEB: What
therefore God has joined together, let no man
separate."
Young’s: what
therefore God did join together, let not man put asunder.'
Conte (RC): Therefore,
what God has joined together, let no man separate."
10:9 What therefore God has joined together. The union is God's; man may not therefore
break it either by personal act of legal enactment. Jesus had previously given His law on the
subject of divorce in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew
let not man
put asunder. Which was surely intended not only the
avoiding of the act of divorce but also the provocations that can
lead to it—on the part of both individuals. [rw]
WEB: In the
house, his disciples asked him again about the same matter.
Young’s: And in the house again his disciples of the same thing
questioned him,
Conte (RC): And again,
in the house, his disciples questioned him about the same thing.
His disciples asked Him again on
the same matter. Mark records several confidential household words of our Lord to
His disciples; e.g., concerning (1) the power of casting out demons (
WEB: He said
to them, "Whoever divorces his wife, and marries another,
commits adultery against her.
Young’s: and he saith to them, 'Whoever may put away his wife, and may
marry another, doth commit adultery against her;
Conte (RC): And he said
to them: "Whoever dismisses his wife, and marries another, commits
adultery against her.
Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another commiteth adultery against
her. He is still before God the husband of the
woman whom he first married; his living with another is therefore itself
grievous. [35]
"Though this
discourse be originally about divorce, yet it seems plainly to evince that polygamy
must be unlawful under the Christian economy.
For, from Christ's saying, ‘He that putteth
away his wife, and married another, committeth
adultery against her;' it clearly
follows, that he who having not put her away, marries another, must be
guilty of the same crime..." (
His critics wanted to speak in terms of a blanket, unlimited right to
divorce. Jesus responds, in effect: If you must speak in terms of absolutes at
all on this matter, shouldn’t it be in terms of divorce being absolutely wrong? [rw]
Weymouth: and if a
woman puts away her husband and marries another man, she commits
adultery."
WEB: If a
woman herself divorces her husband, and marries another, she commits
adultery."
Young’s: and if a
woman may put away her husband, and is married to another, she committeth adultery.'
Conte (RC): And if a
wife dismisses her husband, and is married to another, she commits
adultery."
shall put away
[divorces, NKJV] her husband and be married
to another. Mark's account is peculiar in
representing the woman as seeking the divorce.
This was unusual among the Jews (exceptional cases: Michael, 1 Samuel 25:44; Herodias,
Matthew 14:4), though it occurred among the Greeks and Romans. Probably in this confidential interview the
delicate subject was discussed in all its bearings (Matthew preserves
particulars omitted here), and Mark preserves a specification more applicable
to Gentile readers. [11]
she commiteth
adultery. In this verse Mark makes an addition
to the report as given by Matthew, showing by express statement what is
only implied in Matthew's report, that a woman who puts away her husband
and marries another is equally guilty of adultery as the man who puts away his
wife and marries another. [38]
WEB: They were
bringing to him little children, that he should touch them, but the disciples
rebuked those who were bringing them.
Young’s: And they were bringing to him children, that he might touch
them, and the disciples were rebuking those bringing them,
Conte (RC): And they
brought to him the little children, so that he might touch them. But the
disciples admonished those who brought them.
that He should touch them. Or, as Matthew adds, "that He should lay
His hands upon them and pray" for them (
and His disciples rebuked those who brought them. They
seem to feel that children are too insignificant to be allowed to interfere
with the Master's work or to demand the Master's care. [14]
They did not wish Jesus
to be interrupted in His important work of teaching by the obtrusion of women
and children for what to them seemed of little or no importance. Neither women nor children had then the place
of honor and affection to which the Christian religion has since raised them. [45]
WEB: But when
Jesus saw it, he was moved with indignation, and said to them, "Allow the
little children to come to me! Don't forbid them, for the
Young’s: and Jesus
having seen, was much displeased, and he said to them,
'Suffer the children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the
reign of God;
Conte (RC): But when
Jesus saw this, he took offense, and he said to them: "Allow the little
ones to come to me, and do not prohibit them. For of such as these is the
Suffer the little children to come unto Me,
and forbid them not: for of such is the
It's impossible to see
how He could have spoken so freely and joyfully over the little ones if He had
been hampered by some theories about elect and non-elect infants that have
burdened many of His followers. [23]
WEB: Most
certainly I tell you, whoever will not receive the
Young’s: verily I
say to you, whoever may not receive the reign of God, as a child -- he may not
enter into it;
Conte (RC): Amen I say
to you, whoever will not accept the
I say unto you, Whosoever shall not
receive the
He shall not enter
therein. To receive the
WEB: He took
them in his arms, and blessed them, laying his hands on them.
Young’s: and having
taken them in his arms, having put his hands upon them, he was blessing them.
Conte (RC): And
embracing them, and laying his hands upon them, he blessed them.
Twice we read of our
Lord taking persons into His arms, and both times they were children, and both
times the scenes are recorded only by Mark (
The tenderness which He manifested toward the
little children should cause parents to more highly appreciate them. [38]
put His hands upon them, and blessed
them. The imposition of hands implies a
formal benediction, the invoking of Divine grace upon them, that they might
grow up into wise and holy men and women.
[39]
Weymouth: As He went
out to resume His journey, there came a man running up to Him, who knelt at His
feet and asked, "Good Rabbi, what am I to do in order to inherit the Life
of the Ages?"
WEB: As he was
going out into the way, one ran to him, knelt before him, and asked him,
"Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?"
Young’s: And as he
is going forth into the way, one having run and having kneeled to him, was
questioning him, 'Good teacher, what may I do, that life age-during I may inherit?'
Conte (RC): And when he
had departed on the way, a certain one, running up and kneeling before him,
asked him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do, so that I may secure eternal
life?"
there came one. He was a “young man”
(Matthew
The authorities were now
in such avowed opposition to Jesus that to be Christ's disciple was disgraceful
if not dangerous to a man of mark. Yet
no fear withheld this young ruler who had so much to lose; he would not come by
night, like Nicodemus before the storm had gathered which was now so dark; he
openly vowed his belief in the goodness of the Master and his own ignorance of
some great secret which Jesus could reveal.
[46]
running. To meet or overtake Jesus. [23]
and kneeled to
Him, and asked Him, Good Master [Teacher, NKJV]. This would be the ordinary
and courteous mode of accosting a person professing to be a teacher, so as to
conciliate his attention and interest. [39]
What shall I do that I may inherit
eternal life? In Matthew, “What good thing shall I
do?" What act of sacrifice or
heroism, what generous action, what penance or suffering? He has the idea of purchasing, of deserving,
eternal life. [51]
WEB: Jesus
said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good except one--God.
Young’s: And Jesus
said to him, 'Why me dost thou call good? no one is good except One -- God;
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said to him, "Why call me good? No one is good except the one God.
callest thou Me good? The term good which the man applied to
Jesus, saying, "Good Master,” and the simultaneous act of kneeling to Him,
were both suggestive of the Divine Being. Jesus catches the word for the purpose of
directing attention to its real force when applied understandingly to Himself. [38]
The Socinian
urges that by these words Jesus denied His Deity. There is none good but one, that is God, was
a reason why He should not be called so.
The Socinian who appeals to this text grasps a
sword by the blade. For if it denied
Christ's divinity it must exactly to the same extent deny also Christ's
goodness, which he admits. [46]
There is none good. The
remark was indeed, a two-edged sword, for it cut away, on the one hand, all
subsequent objections which the man might make to the divinity of Jesus, and,
on the other, it cut away all just ground for the man's conceit concerning his own
goodness. Jesus did not dwell on the
thought; He merely dropped it in the man's ear as a seed which should grow in
after-time; for though the man paused not to consider it at the moment, it was
so singular a part of a conversation which was destined to be a memorable event
in his personal history, that in after years he could not fail to think on it
solemnly. [38]
"Either: 'There is none good, but God: Christ is good; therefore Christ is God'--or,
‘there is none good, but God: Christ is
not God; therefore Christ is not good" (Stier). [11]
but One, that is, God. By
this answer Jesus did not mean to reprove him for applying the epithet good to Himself or to prohibit its application to man; for the
inspired scriptures authorize this. Yet
there is but One that is “good” in the full
meaning of the term. And He would direct
the thoughts of the young man upward, aw though He had said, “In what sense do
you call me good? Just as God is
good?" Thus understood, a high
claim to equality with the Father lies back of the question. [45]
In depth:
the other "good" involved in the conversation [38]. While Mark reports the answer just
considered, Matthew reports Jesus as answering (according to the corrected
text), “Why do you ask me about the good?"
And "the good” referred to in the question is “the good thing”
which he supposed he was to do in order to inherit eternal life (cf. Matthew
WEB: You know
the commandments: 'Do not murder,' 'Do not commit adultery,' 'Do not steal,'
'Do not give false testimony,' 'Do not defraud,' 'Honor your father and
mother.'"
Young’s: the
commands thou hast known: Thou mayest not commit
adultery, Thou mayest do no murder, Thou mayest not steal, Thou mayest not
bear false witness, Thou mayest not defraud, Honour thy father and mother.'
Conte (RC): You know the
precepts: "Do not commit adultery. Do not kill. Do not steal. Do not speak
false testimony. Do not deceive. Honor your father and mother."
Defraud not.
Instead of “covet not,” which is not, like the
other commands, in the Decalogue.
Perhaps it may have been meant as a special application, in a rich man's
case, of the tenth commandment, “Thou shalt not
covet;” as if Jesus would lead Him to inquire whether all His wealth had been
acquired without defrauding. [23]
WEB: He said
to him, "Teacher, I have observed all these things from my youth."
Young’s: And he answering said to him, 'Teacher, all these did I keep
from my youth.'
Conte (RC): But in
response, he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed from my
youth."
from my youth. He had not yet found his answer; he was still
perplexed at being told to do what he supposed he had always been doing. [23]
WEB: Jesus
looking at him loved him, and said to him, "One thing you lack. Go, sell
whatever you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven;
and come, follow me, taking up the cross."
Young’s: And Jesus
having looked upon him, did love him, and said to him, 'One thing thou dost
lack; go away, whatever thou hast -- sell, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, be following me,
having taken up the cross.'
Conte (RC): Then Jesus,
gazing at him, loved him, and he said to him: "One thing is lacking to
you. Go, sell whatever you have, and give to the poor, and then you will have
treasure in heaven. And come, follow me."
and said unto him, One thing thou lackest.
This was love. He had kept the
individual commandments, but he had not yielded his heart to the one great
commandment that is underneath them all.
Cf. Jesus' words in 12:28-31. [35]
In his case wealth was
the hindrance; in another case it might be something else. All we have belongs to Christ, and we hold it
aright only when it is subordinate to Him.
[11]
No man is obliged to sell all that he has
because Christ gave such a command to one person, any more than he is
obliged to sacrifice his son, because God commanded Abraham to do so, and yet,
doubtless, these were written for our instruction, that we might be ready
always to obey the severest calls of Providence. [24]
sell whatsoever thou hast. The
socialist would justify by this verse a universal confiscation. But he forgets that the spirit which seizes
is widely different from that which gives all freely: that Zacchaeus
retained half his goods; that Joseph of Arimathea was
rich; that the property of Ananias was his own, and
when he sold lit the price was in his own power; that St. James warned the rich
in this world only against trusting in riches instead of trusting
God. Soon after this, Jesus accepted a
feast from His friends in
This literal command is
not given by Jesus to every one but He requires every one so in heart to lay
his all upon God's altar as to be ready to obey the command to whatever
extent it may be given. He says for all,
“Whosoever forsaketh not all that he hath, he
cannot be my disciple." [45]
and give to
the poor. Not to the government to give to the poor or
to some charitable effort to do so, but as if he personally is going to
oversee its distribution. We sometimes
speak of “the deserving poor” (as in contrast to those who make no real effort
at self-betterment) but there are always those who instinctively tend to lump
all of the poor into that narrower category.
Personal involvement would go far to remove that illusion today. In addition, personally helping those
genuinely struggling would encourage treating those with greater respect and
courtesy. [rw]
and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me. Besides
the sacrifices demanded, positive service was also required. [45]
Giving up his excess would be a one time event; discipleship, in
contrast, would be a lifetime one. [rw]
WEB: But his
face fell at that saying, and he went away sorrowful, for he was one who had
great possessions.
Young’s: And he --
gloomy at the word -- went away sorrowing, for he was having many possessions.
Conte (RC): But he went
away grieving, having been greatly saddened by the word. For
he had many possessions.
and went away grieved. This
has been termed “the great refusal."
And how quietly it was made! He
simply turned away with a sad countenance and a troubled heart. How often since this has been repeated! The sinner having come to the critical point
in his soul's history, when he must decide between the gospel offer and the
world, turns away to his doom, if with less conscious sorrow or less
definiteness of decision, with the same fatal consequences. [45]
for he had
great possessions. "Great,"
or literally, "many" possessions may refer to various kinds of
property, or a large amount of property.
The former is the strict meaning of the Greek. [8]
WEB: Jesus
looked around, and said to his disciples, "How difficult it is for those
who have riches to enter into the
Young’s: And Jesus having looked round, saith
to his disciples, 'How hardly shall they who have riches enter into the reign
of God!'
Conte (RC): And Jesus,
looking around, said to his disciples, "How difficult it is for those who
have riches to enter into the
and saith unto His disciples. Verses
23-31 are evidently suggested by the case of this young man, and deal with the
possession of riches as a hindrance to entering the kingdom. [44]
How hardly [hard, NKJV] shall that have riches enter into the
how hardly . . . [to] enter into the
WEB: The
disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus answered again, "Children,
how hard is it for those who trust in riches to enter into the
Young’s: And the disciples were astonished at his words, and Jesus
again answering saith to them, 'Children, how hard is
it to those trusting on the riches to enter into the reign of God!
Conte (RC): And the disciples
were astonished at his words. But Jesus, answering again, said to them:
"Little sons, how difficult it is for those who trust in money to enter
into the
But Jesus answered again, and saith
unto them, Children. Children
in their short-sightedness, their emphasis on the present. [51]
Or: A title intended to soften the sadness and
sternness of His words. [8]
how hard is it
for them that trust in riches to enter
into the
WEB: It is
easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter
into the
Young’s: It is
easier for a camel through the eye of the needle to enter, than for a rich man
to enter into the reign of God.'
Conte (RC): It is easier
for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for the rich to enter
into the
Or: The proverb used by our Lord is intended to
express not the difficulty, but the impossibility of entering the kingdom of
heaven by human power or skill. So long
as he trusts in riches, to enter the kingdom is impossible from the very
nature of the kingdom. [51]
for a camel to go through the eye of
a needle. This
comparison may have been proverbial, as the Talmud contains, at a later date, a
closely similar saying. The Koran
exactly reproduces it from the New Testament.
[23]
The eye of a needle is
either the small door sometimes made in the city gates, called the needle's eye
by the Arabs--large enough for a man, but too small for a camel--or, rather,
the oriental needle, of burnished iron, from two to five inches long, or their
large ivory tape-needle. But it is now
generally thought that the calling this small gate “the needle's eye” is a
modern custom, and not in use in the time of Christ. [51]
than for a rich man to enter into the
What is it so difficult
for the rich to enter into the
Weymouth: They were
astonished beyond measure, and said to one another, "Who then *can* be
saved?"
WEB: They were
exceedingly astonished, saying to him, "Then who can be saved?"
Young’s: And they
were astonished beyond measure, saying unto themselves,
'And who is able to be saved?'
Conte (RC): And they
wondered even more, saying among themselves, "Who, then, can be
saved?"
saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
With such a standard, how would the kingdom receive any one? For was not the love of money
everywhere? and
how could the kingdom live, with a law so strict? [23]
WEB: Jesus,
looking at them, said, "With men it is impossible, but not with God, for
all things are possible with God."
Young’s: And Jesus, having looked upon them, saith,
'With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with
God.'
Conte (RC): And Jesus,
gazing at them, said: "With men it is impossible; but not with God. For
with God all things are possible."
saith, With men it is impossible. There
is no worldly principle known to men, no human power that can so dislodge
riches from the heart--where they have possession--as to admit therein the love
of God. [45]
but not with God: for with
God all things are possible. He can make new creatures of men. The implication is that, even though this
case looks so hopeless, God can yet find means of bringing the unwilling rich
man to a better mind. In His hands are
even life and death. [23]
There is no limit to
God's power, within the compass of what is morally right. [45]
WEB: Peter
began to tell him, "Behold, we have left all, and have followed you."
Young’s: And Peter began to say to him, 'Lo, we left all, and we
followed thee.'
Conte (RC): And Peter
began to say to him, "Behold, we have left all things and have followed
you."
Lo, we have left all
and have followed Thee. As Jesus did not reprove
the Twelve for this, and as they were speaking about salvation, and heavenly
rewards, we have no right to assume, as some do, that a mercenary spirit
prompted them to make the statement here given.
[45]
It is probable that the
sacrifice which Peter and the rest of the disciples had made when they became
His followers was small compared with the sacrifice which our Lord demanded of
the rich young ruler. Nevertheless, they
forsook their all, whatever it was. They
had forsaken their boast and their nets.
They had forsaken their means of subsistence. They had forsaken things which, though they were
not much in themselves, were nevertheless such things as they would have
desired to keep. [39]
Weymouth: "In
solemn truth I tell you," replied Jesus, "that there is no one who
has forsaken house or brothers or sisters, or mother or father, or children or
lands, for my sake and for the sake of the Good News,
WEB: Jesus
said, "Most certainly I tell you, there is no one who has left house, or
brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for
my sake, and for the sake of the Good News,
Young’s: And Jesus
answering said, 'Verily I say to you, there is no one who left house, or
brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields,
for my sake, and for the good news',
Conte (RC): In response,
Jesus said: "Amen I say to you, There is no one
who has left behind house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or
children, or land, for my sake and for the Gospel,
house, or brethren, or sisters, or
father, or mother, or wife, or children. No man, no one, no person,
nobody--without regard to difference of age or sex. The list is not exhaustive but illustrative. [3]
or lands. Literally, fields, i.e., cultivated ground. [3]
for My sake, and the gospel's. Jesus wishes not to
be regarded apart from the gospel, nor can the gospel be regarded as a true
object of sacrifice apart from Jesus. So
in chapter 8:35. [23]
WEB: but he
will receive one hundred times more now in this time, houses, brothers,
sisters, mothers, children, and land, with persecutions; and in the age to come
eternal life.
Young’s: who may
not receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters,
and mothers, and children, and fields, with persecutions, and in the age that
is coming, life age-during;
Conte (RC): who will not
receive one hundred times as much, now in this time: houses, and brothers, and
sisters, and mothers, and children, and land, with persecutions, and in the
future age eternal life.
an hundredfold now in this time,
houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands. Not arithmetically, but in
real value to the man. [44]
It is often the case,
however, that a person who loses one friend for Christ actually gains a hundred
and that he who loses his home actually gains a hundred in the welcome which he
finds to the homes of his brethren. [38]
with persecutions.
The “hundred-fold" will not prevent the persecutions; but
neither will the persecutions interfere with the coming of the hundred-fold. [23]
and in the world to come eternal life. The
rewards come both immediately and in the long term—but come, they will,
He assures us. [rw]
WEB: But many
who are first will be last; and the last first."
Young’s: and many
first shall be last, and the last first.'
Conte (RC): But many of
the first shall be last, and the last shall be first."
Or: God is judge and rewarder
and His judgments are not always in agreement with those of men. Peter felt that he and his fellow-apostles
had made great sacrifices (vs. 28).
Jesus assures him that no one shall lose his reward, but adds that
others who seem to him to have given up less may in fact receive more. [44]
Weymouth: They were
still on the road going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was walking ahead of them;
they were full of wonder, and some, though they followed, did so with fear.
Then, once more calling to Him the Twelve, He began to tell them what was about
to happen to Him.
WEB: They were
on the way, going up to
Young’s: And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was
going before them, and they were amazed, and following they were afraid. And
having again taken the twelve, he began to tell them the things about to happen
to him,
Conte (RC): Now they
were on the way ascending to
and Jesus went
before them; they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. They
were amazed that he would go to
Alternative
interpretation: No hint is given of
the reason for this; the portrait is not drawn, after all, but only
suggested. Yet we cannot be in
doubt: it was something in the
appearance and manner of Jesus that filled friends and strangers with this
solemnity. It must have been the
preoccupied, solemn, and determined look with which He was silently pressing on
to death. [23]
And He took again the
twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him. For the third time He tells them privately of
His coming suffering. The two previous
occasions are described in (1) Mark 8:31, in the neighborhood of Caesarea
Philippi, just after Peter's confession, and (2) Mark
WEB: "Behold,
we are going up to
Young’s: -- 'Lo, we
go up to
Conte (RC): "For
behold, we are going up to
and the Son of
Man shall be delivered unto the chief
priests, and unto the scribes. Put here for the
Sanhedrim, composed largely of these two classes. [45]
and they shall
condemn him to death. Which indicates it won’t be pure mob
justice; it will be a “legally” sanctioned killing. But since there is nothing legitimate for
which to carry it out, it will have to be a case in which the evidence is
either twisted or made up. It was not the first nor the last time in history that the power
brokers used the formalities of justice in a thoroughly dishonorable
manner. [rw]
and shall deliver Him
to the Gentiles. This
statement Jesus had not made before when He had spoken of His death. The Jewish court was not allowed to put a man
to death. This power belonged to the
Roman procurator, an officer appointed by the emperor at
Roman legal authority aside, to the extent that they could drag the
Romans into the mire, the better it was for them. If there were a catastrophic reaction against
the execution and the Romans had their seal of approval on it, any
retribution from the masses would automatically be rebellion against them as
well and they would have to come to the assistance and protection of the
Sanhedrin. [rw]
WEB: They will
mock him, spit on him, scourge him, and kill him. On the third day he will rise
again."
Young’s: and they
shall mock him, and scourge him, and spit on him, and kill him, and the third
day he shall rise again.'
Conte (RC): And they
will mock him, and spit on him, and scourge him, and put him to death. And on
the third day, he will rise again."
and shall scourge Him. See [Mark] 15:15. [45]
and shall spit on Him. See [Mark] 15:19. [45]
and shall kill Him. Or, as Matthew adds,
"crucify Him" (Matthew
and the third
day He shall rise again. What His
enemies had expected to bring to an end by judicial murder, would not work out
that way after all. Through the
resurrection, He would escape the victory of their intentions and bring to
fruition His own. [rw]
WEB: James and
John, the sons of Zebedee, came near to him, saying,
"Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we will ask."
Young’s: And there come near to him James and John, the sons of Zebedee, saying, 'Teacher, we wish that whatever we may ask
for ourselves, thou mayest do for us;'
Conte (RC): And James
and John, the sons of Zebedee, drew near to him,
saying, "Teacher, we wish that whatever we will ask, you would do for
us."
Master, we would that thou shouldest
do for us whatsoever we shall desire. My
generation called this kind of ambiguity—covering anything, everything, and
nothing in particular--“wanting a blank check.”
Many a child tried such calculated rhetoric with their parents for
something they already knew their parents would be extremely reluctant to
grant. Having to put up with such behavior
from adults, however, had to have been extremely annoying for Jesus. [rw]
WEB: He said
to them, "What do you want me to do for you?"
Young’s: and he
said to them, 'What do ye wish me to do for you?'
Conte (RC): But he said
to them, "What do you want me to do for you?"
Like a wary parent, He commits to nothing. [rw]
WEB: They said
to him, "Grant to us that we may sit, one at your right hand, and one at
your left hand, in your glory."
Young’s: and they
said to him, 'Grant to us that, one on thy right hand and one on thy left, we
may sit in thy glory;'
Conte (RC): And they
said, "Grant to us that we may sit, one at your right and the other at
your left, in your glory."
that we may sit, one on Thy right hand
and the other on Thy left, in thy glory. The two places on the
right and left hand of a king or other person of dignity have ever been
recognized, East and West, as the positions of honor. [8]
It is a remarkable fact
that each revelation of His approaching death was followed by exhibitions of a
worldly spirit and a desire for pre-eminence.
Peter began to rebuke his Lord after the first, but received a rebuke
himself for his worldly spirit (
WEB: But Jesus
said to them, "You don't know what you are asking. Are you able to drink
the cup that I drink, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized
with?"
Young’s: and Jesus
said to them, 'Ye have not known what ye ask; are ye able to drink of the cup
that I drink of, and with the baptism that I am baptized with -- to be
baptized?'
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said to them: "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink
from the chalice from which I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with
which I am to be baptized?"
can ye drink
of the cup that I drink of?
Compare John 18:11, "The cup which My Father hath given me, shall I
not drink it?" and
Mark
and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized
with? Both cup and baptism are figurative
expressions for the painful experiences through which Jesus foresaw that He
must pass. [35]
There can be no doubt that Jesus here
refers to His last sufferings, of which He had just given a brief prophetic
description (verses 32-34). They are
called a baptism, because, while enduring them, His soul was sunk in sorrow as
the body when buried in baptism. It is
impossible to think of baptism in the light of this metaphor as anything else
than immersion. Sprinkling, if used
metaphorically for suffering, could represent only a slight degree of it. [38]
WEB: They said
to him, "We are able." Jesus said to them, "You shall indeed
drink the cup that I drink, and you shall be baptized with the baptism that I am
baptized with;
Young’s: And they said to him, 'We are able;' and Jesus said to them,
'Of the cup indeed that I drink of, ye shall drink, and with the baptism that I
am baptized with, ye shall be baptized;
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said to them: "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink
from the chalice from which I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with
which I am to be baptized?"
And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall
indeed drink of the cup that I drink of, and with the baptism that I am
baptized withal shall ye be baptized. They should also endure suffering,
although it might not be the same or so severe.
[39]
"The one of them
was the first of the Apostles to drink the cup of suffering and be baptized
with the baptism of blood (Acts 12:1-2); the other had the longest experience
among them of a life of trouble and persecution” (Alford). For all this unworthy ambition they were
blessed men, and their Lord new it; and perhaps the foresight of what they
would have to pass through, and the courageous testimony He would yet receive
from them, was the cause of that gentleness which we cannot but wonder at in
His reproof. [43]
WEB: but to
sit at my right hand and at my left hand is not mine to give, but for whom it
has been prepared."
Young’s: but to sit
on my right and on my left, is not mine to give, but -- to those for whom it
hath been prepared.'
Conte (RC): But to sit
at my right, or at my left, is not mine to give to you, but it is for those for
whom it has been prepared."
is not Mine to give. As a matter
of private friendship or of present favor, apart from the Divine plan of human
redemption. [24]
but it shall be given to them for
whom it is prepared. But who are they for whom the highest
rank has been prepared by the Father?
See verses 42-44. They are the
disciples who are most like the Master.
The nearest thrones are prepared for the truest followers, just as the
crown is prepared for the successful contestant (1 Corinthians
In depth:
Does the verse put a limitation on Jesus' right as Deity [45]? This verse has along been used in the
argument against the Deity of Christ, since it seems to imply a limitation to
His power or right. But a fair
interpretation gives it no such force.
It may mean: It is no part of my present
commission, whilest suffering to redeem the kingdom,
to distribute its honours; but they shall in due time
be given to those for whom the Father (Matthew
Weymouth: The other ten, hearing of it, were at first highly indignant
with James and John.
WEB: When the
ten heard it, they began to be indignant towards James and John.
Young’s: And the ten having heard, began to be much displeased at
James and John,
Conte (RC): And the ten,
upon hearing this, began to be indignant toward James and John.
They began to be greatly displeased with James and John. “Were
moved with indignation,” as the same word is rendered in Matthew 20:24. And can we blame them? [43]
It was human
nature: they thought it very wrong when
two petitioned for what all would gladly have claimed. [23]
WEB: Jesus
summoned them, and said to them, "You know that they who are recognized as
rulers over the nations lord it over them, and their
great ones exercise authority over them.
Young’s: but Jesus
having called them near, saith to them, 'Ye have
known that they who are considered to rule the nations do exercise lordship
over them, and their great ones do exercise authority upon them;
Conte (RC): But Jesus,
calling them, said to them: "You know that those who seem to be leaders
among the Gentiles dominate them, and their leaders exercise
authority over them.
and saith unto them, Ye know that
they which are accounted to ruler over the Gentiles. Officials, governors, etc.
[35]
exercise lordship
over them. Domineer, rule according to their own pleasure. [35]
Peter, in his first
epistle (5:3), warns the elders of the church against "being lords over
God's heritage." [8]
and their
great ones exercise authority over
them. Presumably those of even higher rank than
provincial ones or those who held de facto rather than de jure
status over them: for example, those sent out on behalf of the emperor to
deal with or investigate a matter held vast inherent prestige and clout
regardless of whether formally appointed to a position in the place they were
sent. [rw]
In these words our Lord does not find fault
with power or authority for this is necessary in every state and so is
sanctioned by Divine and human law. What
He condemns is the arbitrary and tyrannical exercise of such power, which the
princes of the Gentiles were accustomed to.
[39]
WEB: But it
shall not be so among you, but whoever wants to become great among you shall be
your servant.
Young’s: but not so
shall it be among you; but whoever may will to become great among you, he shall
be your minister,
Conte (RC): But it is
not to be this way among you. Instead, whoever would become greater shall be
your minister;
but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your servant. Diakonos, attendant or assistant, i.e., he will
make himself a helper to his brethren. [23]
Jesus reverses wholly
the common conception of the business of a ruler. The ruler is to serve the ruled: eminence is to be attained by service. [44]
WEB: Whoever
of you wants to become first among you, shall be bondservant of all.
Young’s: Whoever of
you wants to become first among you, shall be
bondservant of all.
Conte (RC): and whoever
will be first among you shall be the servant of all.
shall be servant.
A slave (doulos). [23]
[A] servant of the
lowest grade. [43]
of all. Not merely below some, but below everyone—as
humble and restrained as he wished to be prideful in having the top
position. [rw]
WEB: For the
Son of Man also came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many."
Young’s: for even
the Son of Man came not to be ministered to, but to minister, and to give his
life a ransom for many.'
Conte (RC): So, too, the
Son of man has not come so that they would minister to him, but so that he
would minister and would give his life as a redemption for many."
and to give His life a ransom. “Ransom” may mean only the payment for a
life destroyed (Exodus
The sacrificial and
vicarious nature of Christ's death is here expressed by Himself as plainly as
the manner of His death is foretold a few verses before. And to say that this was merely in
accommodation to Jewish ideas, is to dishonour the
teaching of our Lord and degrade Judaism to a level with the rites of Paganism. [43]
for many. “Many”
is here to be taken, not in contrast with “few” or with "all,” but in
opposition to “one"--the one Son of Man for the many sinners. [43]
WEB: They came
to
Young’s: And they come to Jericho, and as he is going forth from
Jericho, with his disciples and a great multitude, a son of Timaeus
-- Bartimaeus the blind -- was sitting beside the way
begging,
Conte (RC): And they
went to
and as He went
out of
blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus. This blind beggar is introduced as a
well-known character. Mark does not
introduce him as a certain blind man, whose name was Bartimaeus,
the usual manner of introducing a stranger, but simply as “blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus." He had probably become well known by his zeal
and activity in the cause of Christ subsequent to the recovery of his
eye-sight. His notoriety accounts for
the fact that Mark describes his restoration to sight without saying anything
of the other who sat with him and was healed at the same time. [38]
sat by the
highway side, begging. How else was he to earn any money to pay for
food to survive? [rw]
In depth:
Differences in chronology and details between Mark's account of the
healing and that found in Matthew (
1st: That three blind men were healed; one
mentioned by Luke, as He approached the city; two mentioned by Matthew (Mark
speaks only of one) as He was leaving the city.
Some, as Osiander, make four to have been
healed.
2d: That the cases of healing were two, and
distinct; one being on His entry into the city, the other on His
departure. According to this solution,
Matthew combines the two in one, and deeming the exact time and place
unimportant, represents them as both occurring at the departure of the Lord
from the city.
3d: That two were healed, and both at His entry;
but one being better known that the other, he only is mentioned by Mark and
Luke.
4th: That one of the blind men sought to be healed
as the Lord approached the city, but was not; that the next morning, joining
himself to another, they waited for Him by the gate, as He was leaving the
city, and were both healed together. Luke,
in order to preserve the unity of his narrative, relates the healing of the
former, as if it had taken place on the afternoon of the entry.
5th: That only one was healed, and he when the
Lord left the city. Matthew, according
to his custom, uses the plural where the other Evangelists use the singular.
6th: That Luke's variance with Matthew and Mark,
in regard to place, may be removed by interpreting "as He was come nigh to
Jericho" (18:35) in the general sense of being near to Jericho, but without
defining whether He was approaching to it or departing from it. Its meaning here is determined by Matthew and
Mark: He was leaving the city, but still
near to it.
Other solutions of the
discrepancy in regard to place have been given, as by Newcome,
that Jesus spent several days at Jericho, that He went out of the city, as
mentioned by Matthew and Mark, for a temporary purpose, and that on His return
He healed the blind men; by McKnight, that there were two Jerichos,
old and new; and the blind men, sitting on the road between them, were healed
as the Lord was departing from one and entering the other.
WEB: When he
heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out, and say,
"Jesus, you son of David, have mercy on me!"
Young’s: and having heard that it is Jesus the Nazarene, he began to
cry out, and to say, 'The Son of David -- Jesus! deal kindly with me;'
Conte (RC): And when he
had heard that it was Jesus of
he began to cry out. Immediately,
as soon as he had heard this, and continued to do so until he gained his end. [3]
and say,
Jesus, thou Son of David. This
is the first instance in the gospel of Mark or of Luke in which anyone (other
than a demoniac) has publicly addressed Jesus by a Messianic title. [44]
have mercy on me. An acknowledgment of
misery, unworthiness, and helplessness, as well as strong confidence in
Christ's ability and willingness to help him. [3]
WEB: Many
rebuked him, that he should be quiet, but he cried out much more, "You son
of David, have mercy on me!"
Young’s: and many
were rebuking him, that he might keep silent, but the more abundantly he cried
out, 'Son of David, deal kindly with me.'
Conte (RC): And many
admonished him to be quiet. But he cried out all the more, "Son of David,
take pity on me."
but he cried the more a great deal. He
was in good earnest and would not be restrained. A useful lesson is here suggested to all. [39]
Thou Son of David, have mercy on me. He
couldn’t make Jesus heal him, but he could assure that Jesus could not
avoid knowing he was present! [rw]
WEB: Jesus
stood still, and said, "Call him." They called the blind man, saying
to him, "Cheer up! Get up. He is calling you!"
Young’s: And Jesus having stood, he commanded him to be called, and
they call the blind man, saying to him, 'Take courage, rise, he doth call
thee;'
Conte (RC): And Jesus,
standing still, instructed him to be called. And they called the blind man,
saying to him: "Be at peace. Arise. He is calling you."
And they call the blind man.
Doubtless they were new voices, not the same: friends of Jesus now called. [23]
Saying unto him, Be of good comfort [cheer, NKJV]. If he
had gotten Jesus’ attention, how could anything but good possibly come out of
it! [rw]
rise,
He calleth thee. This
is evidently spoken of as something strange and unexpected to themselves, if
not to Bartimeus.
[3]
Weymouth: The man flung away his outer garment, sprang to his feet,
and came to Jesus.
WEB: He,
casting away his cloak, sprang up, and came to Jesus.
Young’s: and he,
having cast away his garment, having risen, did come unto Jesus.
Conte (RC): And casting
aside his garment, he leapt up and went to him.
He cast off his outward
covering: a blanket or loose piece of
cloth, the usual upper garment of an Asiatic mendicant, which kept him from the
inclemency of the weather, that he might have nothing to hinder him from
getting speedily to Christ. [21]
rose, and came
to Jesus. Having sought this opportunity, he wasn’t
about to pass it by. [rw]
WEB: Jesus
asked him, "What do you want me to do for you?" The blind man said to
him, "Rabboni, that I may see again."
Young’s: And answering, Jesus saith to him,
'What wilt thou I may do to thee?' and the blind man said to him, 'Rabboni, that I may see again;
Conte (RC): And in
response, Jesus said to him, "What do you want, that I should do for
you?" And the blind man said to him, "Master, that
I may see."
The blind
man said unto him, Lord [Rabboni, NKJV]. [It] is used only here and at John
20:16. It is an intensified form of
"Rabbi." [23]
Lord, that I might
receive my sight. The [Greek] word
translated "receive my sight" strictly means to see again, or to
recover sight; and it has sometimes been inferred that Bartimaeus
had not always been blind. But the same
word is used in John
WEB: Jesus
said to him, "Go your way. Your faith has made you well." Immediately
he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way.
Young’s: and Jesus
said to him, 'Go, thy faith hath saved thee:' and
immediately he saw again, and was following Jesus in the way.
Conte (RC): Then Jesus
said to him, "Go, your faith has made you whole." And immediately he
saw, and he followed him on the way.
thy faith hath made thee whole. His
faith saved him by causing him to employ the means necessary to arrest the
attention of Jesus and to secure the coveted blessing. Faith without action could not have made the
blind man whole nor can it bring the sinner out of darkness into light. [38]
And immediately he received his sight. Matthew says (not Mark or Luke) that the act
was performed by a touch. All record
that the man followed Jesus. [23]
And followed Jesus. As
Jesus healed the man, he said to him, “Go thy way;" and this gave him
liberty to go in any way that he might choose; but he chose to "follow
Jesus in the way." "glorifying
God” (Luke
in the way [on the road, NKJV].
Along the road to