TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Commentary on Mark 10 verses 1–12
Our Lord Jesus was an itinerant Preacher, did not continue long in a place, for the whole land of Canaan was his parish, or diocese, and therefore he would visit every part of it, and give instructions to those in the remotest corners of it. Here we have him in the coasts of Judea, by the further side of Jordan eastward, as we found him, not long since, in the utmost borders westward, near Tyre and Sidon. Thus was his circuit like that of the sun, from whose light and heat nothing is hid. Now here we have him,
I. Resorted to by the people, Mar 10:1. Wherever he was, they flocked after him in crowds; they came to him again, as they had done when he had formerly been in these parts, and, as he was wont, he taught them again. Note, Preaching was Christ's constant practice; it was what he was used to, and, wherever he came, he did as he was wont. In Matthew it is said, He healed them; here it is said, He taught them: his cures were to confirm his doctrine, and to recommend it, and his doctrine was to explain his cures, and illustrate them. He taught them again. Note, Even those whom Christ hath taught, have need to be taught again. Such is the fulness of the Christian doctrine, that there is still more to be learned; and such our forgetfulness, that we need to be reminded of what we do know.
II. We have him disputed with by the Pharisees, who envied the progress of his spiritual arms, and did all they could to obstruct and oppose it; to divert him, to perplex him, and to prejudice the people against him.
Here is, 1. A question they started concerning divorce (Mar 10:2); Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? This was a good question, if it had been well put, and with a humble desire to know the mind of God in this matter; but they proposed it, tempting him, seeking an occasion against him, and an opportunity to expose him, which side soever he should take of the question. Ministers must stand upon their guard, lest, under pretence of being advised with, they be ensnared.
2.Christ's reply to them with a question (Mar 10:3); What did Moses command you? This he asked them, to testify his respect to the law of Moses, and to show that he came not to destroy it; and to engage them to a universal impartial respect for Moses's writings and to compare one part of them with another.
3.The fair account they gave of what they found in the law of Moses, expressly concerning divorce, Mar 10:4. Christ asked, What did Moses command you? They own that Moses only suffered, or permitted, a man to write his wife a bill of divorce, and to put her away, Deu 24:1. "If you will do it, you must do it in writing, delivered into her own hand, and so put her away, and never return to her again."
4.The answer that Christ gave to their question, in which he abides by the doctrine he had formerly laid down in this case (Mat 5:32), That whosoever puts away his wife, except for fornication, causeth her to commit adultery. And to clear this he here shows,
(1.)That the reason why Moses, in his law, permitted divorce, was such, as that they ought not to make use of that permission; for it was only for the hardness of their hearts (Mar 10:5), lest, if they were not permitted to divorce their wives, they should murder them; so that none must put away their wives but such as are willing to own that their hearts were so hard as to need this permission.
(2.)That the account which Moses, in this history, gives of the institution of marriage, affords such a reason against divorce, as amounts to a prohibition of it. So that if the question be, What did Moses command? (Mar 10:3), it must be answered, "Though by a temporary proviso he allowed divorce to the Jews, yet by an eternal reason he forbade it to all the children of Adam and Eve, and that is it which we must abide by."
Moses tells us, [1.] That God made man male and female, one male, and one female; so that Adam could not put away his wife and take another, for there was no other to take, which was an intimation to all his sons, that they must not. [2.] When this male and this female were, by the ordinance of God, joined together in holy marriage, the law was, That a man must leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife (Mar 10:7); which intimates not only the nearness of the relation, but the perpetuity of it; he shall so cleave to his wife as not to be separated from her. [3.] The result of the relation is, That, though they are two, yet they are one, they are one flesh, Mar 10:8. The union between them is the most intimate that can be, and, as Dr. Hammond expresses it, a sacred thing that must not be violated. [4.] God himself was joined them together; he has not only, as Creator, fitted them to be comforts and helps meet for each other, but he has, in wisdom and goodness, appointed them who are thus joined together, to live together in love till death parts them. Marriage is not an invention of men, but a divine institution, and therefore is to be religiously observed, and the more, because it is a figure of the mystical inseparable union between Christ and his church.
Now from all this he infers, that men ought not to put their wives asunder from them, whom God has put so near them. The bond which God himself has tied, is not to be lightly untied. They who are divorcing their wives for every offence, would do well to consider what would become of them, if God should in like manner deal with them. See Isa 50:1; Jer 3:1.
5.Christ's discourse with his disciples, in private, about this matter, Mar 10:10-12. It was an advantage to them, that they had opportunity of personal converse with Christ, not only about gospel mysteries, but about moral duties, for further satisfaction. No more is here related of this private conference, that the law Christ laid down in this case - That it is adultery for a man to put away his wife, and marry another; it is adultery against the wife he puts away, it is a wrong to her, a breach of his contract with her, Mar 10:11. He adds, If a woman shall put away her husband, that is, elope from him, leave him by consent, and be married to another, she commits adultery (Mar 10:12), and it will be no excuse at all for her to say that it was with the consent of her husband. Wisdom and grace, holiness and love, reigning in the heart, will make those commands easy which to the carnal mind may be as a heavy yoke.
This second question is said to be asked again by the Apostles, because it is on the subject of which the Pharisees had asked Him, that is, concerning the state of marriage; and this is said by Mark in his own person.
(Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc. et v. Chrys. Hom. 62) For being asked, whether it is lawful, he does not immediately reply, it is not lawful, lest they should raise an outcry, but He first wished them to answer Him as to the sentence of the law, that they by their answer might furnish Him with what it was right to say. Wherefore it goes on, And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? And afterwards, And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. They put forward indeed this that Moses had said either on account of the question of our Saviour, or wishing to excite against Him a multitude of men. For divorce was an indifferent thing among the Jews, and all practised it, as though it were permitted by the law.
(ubi sup.) If however he had wished one wife to be put away and another to be brought in, He would have created several women. Nor did God only join one woman to one man, but He also bade a man quit his parents and cleave to his wife. Wherefore it goes on: And he said, (that is, God said by Adam,) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife. From the very mode of speech, showing the impossibility of severing marriage, because He said, He shall cleave.
(ubi sup.) Being framed out of one root, they will join into one body. It goes on: So then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
(ubi sup.) After this, bringing forward an awful argument, He said not, do not divide, but He concluded, What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
(non occ.) But if two persons, whom God has joined together, are not to be separated; much more is it wrong to separate from Christ, the Church, which God has joined to Him.
(de Con. Evan. 2. 62) It makes nothing, however, to the truth of the fact, whether, as Matthew says, they themselves addressed to the Lord the question concerning the bill of divorcement, allowed to them by Moses, on our Lord's forbidding the separation, and confirming His sentence from the law, or whether it was in answer to a question of His, that they said this concerning the command of Moses, as Mark here says. For His wish was to give them no reason why Moses permitted it, before they themselves had mentioned the fact; since then the wish of the parties speaking, which is what the words ought to express, is in either way shown, there is no discrepancy, though there be a difference in the way of relating it. It may also be meant that, as Mark expresses it, the question put to them by the Lord, What did Moses command? was in answer to those who had previously asked His opinion concerning the putting away of a wife; and when they had replied that Moses permitted them to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away, (Matt. 19:4) His answer was concerning that same law, given by Moses, how God instituted the marriage of a male, and a female, saying those things which Matthew relates; on hearing which they again rejoined what they had replied to Him when He first asked them, namely, Why then did Moses command?
(Cat. in Marc. Oxon.) Or else, it is said, For the hardness of your hearts, because it is possible for a soul purged from desires and from anger to bear the worst of women; but if those passions have a redoubled force over the mind, many evils will arise from hatred in marriage. (Chrys. ubi sup.). Thus then, He saves Moses, who had given the law, from their accusation, and turns the whole upon their head. But since what He had said was grievous to them, He at once brings back the discourse to the old law, saying, But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.
(Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.) The Lord calls by the name of adultery cohabitation with her who is not a man's wife; she is not, however, a wife, whom a man has taken to him, after quitting his first; and for this reason he commits adultery upon her, that is, upon the second, whom he brings in. And the same thing is true in the case of the woman; wherefore it goes on, And if a woman shall put away her husband, and marry another, she committeth adultery; for she cannot be joined to another as her own husband, if she leave him who is really her own husband. The law indeed forbade what was plainly adultery; but the Saviour forbids this, which was neither plain, nor known to all, though it was contrary to nature.
(Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.) There is no contrariety in Matthew's relating that He spoke these words to the Pharisees, though Mark says that they were spoken to the disciples; for it is possible that He may have spoken them to both.
"What," he said, "did Moses command you?" They replied, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away." To which Jesus responded, "It was because of the hardness of your hearts that he wrote you this, etc." What he says is this: Can God be contrary to himself, commanding one thing at first and then breaking his own decree with a new command? It should not be thought so. But Moses, when he saw that due to the desire for subsequent wives, who might be wealthier, younger, or more beautiful, the first wives were either being killed or leading a miserable life, chose to allow discord rather than for hatred and murders to continue and be perpetrated. At the same time, notice that he did not say, because of the hardness of your hearts, God permitted you, but Moses; that, according to the Apostle, it may be seen as the counsel of a man, not a command of God.
(in Marc. 3, 40) Up to this time Mark hath related what our Lord said and did in Galilee; here he begins to relate what He did, taught, or suffered in Judæa, and first indeed across the Jordan on the east; and this is what is said in these words: And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Jadœa, by the farther side of Jordan; then also on this side Jordan, when He came to Jericho, Bethany, and Jerusalem. And though all the province of the Jews is generally called Judæa, to distinguish it from other nations, more especially, however, its southern portion was called Judæa, to distinguish it from Samaria, Galilee, Decapolis, and the other regions in the same province.
(ubi sup.) Mark the difference of temper in the multitude and in the Pharisees. The former meet together, in order to be taught, and that their sick may be healed, as Matthew relates; the latter come to Him, to try to deceive their Saviour by tempting Him. Wherefore there follows, And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting Him. (Matt. 19:2)
(ubi sup.) He says not male and females, which the sense would have required had it referred to the divorce of former wives, but male and female, so that they might be bound by the tie of one wife.
(ubi sup.) And in like manner, because He says, he shall cleave to his wife, not wives. It goes on: And they twain shall be one flesh.
(ubi sup.) The reward then of marriage is of two to become one flesh. Virginity being joined to the Spirit, becomes of one spirit.
(ubi sup.) What therefore God hath conjoined by making one flesh of a man and a woman, that man cannot separate, but God alone. Man separates, when we dismiss the first wife because we desire a second; but it is God who separates, when by common consent, for the sake of serving God, we so have wives as though we had none.n
(ubi sup.) In Matthew it is more fully expressed, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication. (Matt. 19:9.) The only carnal cause then is fornication; the only spiritual cause is the fear of God, that a man should put away his wife to enter into religiono, as we read that many have done. But there is no cause allowed by the law of God for marrying another, during the lifetime of her who is quitted.
But He enters the region of Judæa, which the envy of the Jews had often caused Him to leave, because His Passion was to take place there. He did not, however, then go up to Jerusalem, but to the confines of Judæa, that He might do good to the multitudes, who were not evil; for Jerusalem was, from the malice of the Jews, the worker of all the wickedness. Wherefore it goes on: And the people resort unto him again, and, as he was wont, he taught them again.
They come to Him indeed, and do not quit Him, lest the multitudes should believe on Him; and by continually coming to Him, they thought to bring Him into difficulty, and to confuse Him by their questions. For they proposed to Him a question, which had on either side a precipice, so that whether He said that it was lawful for a man to put away his wife, or that it was not lawful, they might accuse Him, and contradict what He said, out of the doctrines of Moses. Christ, therefore, being Very Wisdom, in answering their question, avoids their snares.
But the disciples were offended, as not being fully satisfied with what had been said; for this reason they again question Him, wherefore there follows, And in the house, his disciples asked him again of the same matter.
(non occ.) For a repetition of a saying of the Word, produces not weariness, but thirst and hunger; (Ecclus. 24:29) wherefore it is said, They that eat me shall yet be hungry, and they that drink me shall yet be thirsty; for the tasting of the honied words of wisdom yields all manner of savour to them who love her. Wherefore the Lord instructs His disciples over again; for it goes on, And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another, committeth adultery upon her.
Continue studying Mark 10:3 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
In Mark 10:3, Jesus strategically responds to the Pharisees' provocative question about the legality of divorce by redirecting their focus to the Mosaic Law. This verse initiates a profound discourse where Jesus transcends mere legalistic interpretation, compelling His interrogators to confront the true intent and limitations of the Law, thereby laying the groundwork for His teaching on God's original, perfect design for marriage.
CONTEXT
Literary Context: This verse is the pivotal turning point in an exchange initiated by the Pharisees, who approach Jesus in Mark 10:2 with a question designed to trap Him: "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" Their query was a loaded one, aimed at forcing Jesus into a position that would either contradict the Mosaic Law (specifically Deuteronomy 24:1-4) or alienate Him from one of the prominent rabbinic schools of thought (Hillel, who permitted divorce for almost any reason, or Shammai, who held a stricter view). Instead of directly answering with a "yes" or "no," Jesus, with divine wisdom, immediately turns the question back on them, compelling them to articulate their own understanding of the Law. This counter-question in Mark 10:3 sets the stage for Jesus to move beyond their legalistic debate and reveal God's original, foundational intent for marriage, as detailed in the subsequent verses (Mark 10:6-9).
Historical & Cultural Context: During Jesus' time, the issue of divorce was a hotly debated topic among Jewish rabbis, primarily revolving around the interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1. The key phrase "some indecency" (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר, ervat davar) was interpreted broadly by the school of Hillel to include almost any cause for displeasure, even burning a meal, while the school of Shammai held a much stricter view, limiting divorce to cases of sexual immorality. The Pharisees' question to Jesus was not a genuine search for truth but a calculated attempt to align Him with one school or the other, thereby either discrediting Him with the opposing faction or forcing Him into conflict with the Mosaic Law. Galilee, where this exchange likely took place, was a region where various interpretations coexisted, making the issue particularly sensitive. Jesus' response, by appealing directly to "Moses," forces the Pharisees to engage with the scriptural text they claimed to uphold, rather than their traditional interpretations.
Key Themes: This verse contributes significantly to several key themes within Mark's Gospel and broader biblical theology. Firstly, it highlights Jesus' Divine Wisdom and Authority, demonstrating His ability to navigate complex theological and legal traps with unparalleled insight, always redirecting the conversation to foundational truths rather than superficial disputes. His counter-question asserts His authority to interpret and clarify the Law, even over the most learned religious leaders. Secondly, it underscores the Supremacy of Scripture, as Jesus immediately appeals to the written Word of God as the ultimate arbiter of truth, rather than human traditions or interpretations. This sets the stage for His subsequent teaching, which goes beyond the Mosaic concession to God's original design for marriage, as found in Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24. Finally, the exchange illuminates the Nature of the Mosaic Law, revealing that while it was given by God, certain provisions, like the bill of divorce, were concessions to human sinfulness and "hardness of heart" (Mark 10:5), rather than expressions of God's perfect, original will.
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
The primary literary device employed by Jesus in this verse is a Rhetorical Question. By asking "What did Moses command you?", Jesus does not seek new information but rather prompts the Pharisees to reflect on their own knowledge and assumptions. This serves to expose their underlying legalistic mindset and prepares them for a deeper theological discussion. This technique is also an example of the Socratic Method (or maieutic method), where the teacher guides the student to discover truth through a series of questions. There is also a subtle Irony at play: the Pharisees, who prided themselves on their mastery of the Law, are now being questioned about its very contents by Jesus, revealing their superficial understanding compared to His divine insight.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
This verse is foundational for understanding Jesus' approach to the Law and His teaching on marriage. By asking "What did Moses command you?", Jesus immediately shifts the conversation from human tradition and legalistic loopholes back to the divine standard. He implicitly challenges the Pharisees' interpretation of Deuteronomy 24:1, which they often understood as a command for divorce, rather than a regulation of an already existing, sinful practice. Jesus' subsequent teaching in Mark 10:6-9 reveals that God's original design for marriage, established in creation (Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24), predates and supersedes the Mosaic concession made "because of your hardness of heart" (Mark 10:5). This highlights a crucial theological distinction between God's ideal will and His permissive will, given human sinfulness.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Jesus' strategic question to the Pharisees in Mark 10:3 provides a timeless model for how believers should approach complex ethical and theological issues today. Instead of getting entangled in debates driven by human opinions, cultural norms, or legalistic interpretations, Jesus consistently directs us back to the foundational truths of God's Word. This teaches us the importance of rigorous biblical literacy and a commitment to understanding God's original intent for all aspects of life, especially those as foundational as marriage. It challenges us to ask, "What does God's Word truly command and reveal?" rather than "What do traditions permit?" or "What is culturally acceptable?" This approach encourages a deeper, more intentional pursuit of God's perfect will, fostering spiritual discernment and a robust faith that is rooted in divine truth rather than human expediency.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Jesus ask "What did Moses command you?" instead of directly answering the Pharisees' question about divorce?
Answer: Jesus' question was a brilliant rhetorical strategy. The Pharisees' question in Mark 10:2 was a trap designed to force Him into a controversial position. By asking "What did Moses command you?", Jesus did several things:
What was the significance of Jesus using the word "command" instead of "permit" when referring to Moses?
Answer: The choice of "command" (Greek, entéllomai) is highly significant. The Pharisees often interpreted Deuteronomy 24:1 as a positive command to issue a certificate of divorce under certain circumstances, thereby making divorce lawful. However, Jesus' use of "command" forces them to consider if Moses truly commanded divorce, or merely regulated a practice that was already occurring due to human sin. By posing the question this way, Jesus subtly challenges their understanding and prepares them for His teaching that the Mosaic provision was a concession, not an ideal, and that God's original "command" regarding marriage was for a lifelong, indissoluble union as "one flesh" (Mark 10:6-9).
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
In Mark 10:3, Jesus, as the ultimate interpreter of God's Law, demonstrates His divine authority and wisdom by redirecting the Pharisees' legalistic inquiry back to the very heart of the Mosaic Law. This act foreshadows His role as the one who does not abolish the Law but fulfills it (Matthew 5:17). He reveals that the true intent of God's commands, even those given through Moses, points beyond mere external adherence to the internal disposition of the heart and God's perfect, original design. Jesus, the Son of God, is the one who perfectly embodies God's will and establishes a new covenant where the "hardness of heart" that necessitated Mosaic concessions is overcome by the transforming power of the Holy Spirit (Jeremiah 31:33). Through His life, death, and resurrection, Christ provides the grace and power for believers to live according to God's original, ideal standards, including the sacred institution of marriage, which He elevates to a profound mystery reflecting His own union with the Church (Ephesians 5:31-32). Thus, Jesus is not just clarifying Moses' command but revealing the ultimate purpose of the Law within His redemptive plan, leading humanity to a deeper relationship with God and one another, founded on love and faithfulness, not legalistic loopholes.