TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Mark 10:1–12. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
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.
Historical interpretation
Nine Centuries of Reception
8 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
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 10:4 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
Mark 10:4 records the Pharisees' attempt to justify their practice of divorce by appealing to the Mosaic Law. In response to Jesus' question about Moses' command, they assert that Moses "suffered" or permitted the writing of a certificate of divorce and the putting away of a wife. This statement reveals their legalistic interpretation of the Law, focusing on a concession rather than God's original, ideal design for marriage, setting the stage for Jesus' profound re-establishment of the sanctity and permanence of the marital covenant.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is an integral part of a pivotal discourse between Jesus and the Pharisees concerning marriage and divorce, initiated by the Pharisees' direct question in Mark 10:2: "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife?" Their query was likely a trap, designed to force Jesus into taking a side in the contentious rabbinic debates of the day, particularly between the lenient school of Hillel and the stricter school of Shammai. Jesus, however, bypasses their legalistic framework by first asking them what Moses commanded, leading directly to their reply in Mark 10:3-4. Their answer in Mark 10:4 then provides the perfect foil for Jesus' subsequent teaching, where He redirects the discussion from Mosaic concession to God's original creation intent for marriage, as detailed in Mark 10:5-9.
Historical & Cultural Context
First-century Jewish society, particularly during the time of Jesus, was deeply influenced by the Mosaic Law, which included provisions for divorce found in Deuteronomy 24:1-4. However, the interpretation of these laws varied significantly. The primary debate revolved around the phrase "some indecency" (עֶרְוַת דָּבָר, ervat davar). The school of Shammai interpreted this narrowly, limiting grounds for divorce primarily to sexual immorality. In stark contrast, the school of Hillel interpreted it broadly, allowing divorce for almost any reason, including a wife burning a meal or simply displeasing her husband. The Pharisees' question to Jesus was rooted in this ongoing rabbinic dispute, seeking to ascertain which school of thought He aligned with, or perhaps to provoke a statement that could be used against Him. The "bill of divorcement" was a crucial legal document, protecting the woman by formally dissolving the marriage and allowing her to remarry, thus preventing accusations of adultery.
Key Themes
This verse contributes significantly to several overarching themes within Mark's Gospel and biblical theology. It highlights the tension between Mosaic Law and God's Original Intent, revealing how human sinfulness (the "hardness of heart" mentioned in Mark 10:5) necessitated concessions in the Law, which were not God's ideal. It also underscores the theme of Jesus' Authority as Interpreter of the Law, as He does not merely side with one rabbinic school but transcends their debates by pointing back to the foundational principles of creation in Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24. Furthermore, it sets the stage for the Sanctity and Permanence of Marriage, a core theological theme that Jesus emphatically re-establishes, emphasizing marriage as a divine covenant, not merely a human contract.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb (G2010) means "to turn over (transfer), i.e. allow," "give leave (liberty, license), let, permit." The Pharisees use this word to indicate that Moses "permitted" or "allowed" the practice of divorce, rather than "commanded" it. This distinction is crucial, as Jesus later clarifies that this permission was a concession due to human "hardness of heart" (Mark 10:5), not an endorsement of divorce as God's original will.
This primary verb (G1125) means "to 'grave', especially to write; figuratively, to describe." In this context, it refers to the legal act of creating a formal document. The requirement to "write" a bill of divorcement was a safeguard, ensuring that divorce was not a hasty or arbitrary act, and providing a legal record for the woman's protection and ability to remarry.
Biblíon (G975) is a diminutive of bíblos, meaning "a roll," hence "a bill, book, scroll, writing." Apostásion (G647) is neuter of a presumed adjective from a derivative of aphístēmi, meaning "something separative, i.e. (specially) divorce." Together, "bill of divorcement" refers to the formal legal document (a "scroll" or "writing") that served as a certificate of divorce, legally severing the marital bond and allowing the woman to remarry. This document was mandated by Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 24:1).
Verse Breakdown
"And they said, Moses suffered"
The Pharisees, in their attempt to justify the widespread practice of divorce, appeal directly to the authority of Moses. Their use of "suffered" (ἐπέτρεψεν, epetrepsen) is key, indicating that they understood Moses' instruction not as a direct command from God for divorce, but as a permission or concession. This implicitly acknowledges that divorce was not ideal, yet they treated this concession as a primary justification for their actions.
"to write a bill of divorcement"
This clause refers to the specific legal requirement under Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 24:1) that a man, upon divorcing his wife, must provide her with a written certificate. This "bill" (biblíon) of "divorcement" (apostásion) was a formal document that legally dissolved the marriage and protected the woman's rights, particularly her right to remarry. It served as a legal safeguard against arbitrary dismissal and ensured a clear legal status for the divorced woman.
"and to put [her] away"
This phrase directly describes the act of divorce itself – the man dismissing his wife from the marital home and relationship. The "putting away" (ἀπολῦσαι, apolysai) signifies the termination of the marriage. The entire statement from the Pharisees reflects their focus on the legalistic provisions of the Law, using Moses' allowance as the ultimate authority to validate their practice, without delving into the underlying divine intent for marriage.
Literary Devices
The verse employs Appeal to Authority as the primary literary device, where the Pharisees invoke Moses' name to legitimize their practice of divorce. This serves as a rhetorical strategy to challenge Jesus, placing Him in a position where He must either affirm or contradict a revered figure of Jewish law. Furthermore, there is an element of Irony present; while the Pharisees believe they are citing Moses' command as a strong justification, Jesus will immediately pivot to reveal that Moses' allowance was a concession due to human "hardness of heart" (Mark 10:5), thereby undermining their supposed authority and revealing their misinterpretation of divine intent. The phrase "bill of divorcement" also functions as Metonymy, where the document itself stands for the entire legal process and act of divorce.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Mark 10:4 highlights a profound theological tension between divine ideal and human fallenness. The Pharisees' appeal to Moses' "suffering" or permitting divorce underscores a common human tendency to interpret God's allowances as His perfect will, rather than understanding them as concessions made in light of sin. This verse sets the stage for Jesus to reveal that while the Law accommodated human "hardness of heart" in certain areas, it did not negate God's original, perfect design for creation and covenant. Jesus consistently redirects the conversation from legalistic exceptions back to the foundational principles of God's unchangeable character and His original intent for humanity, particularly concerning the sacred institution of marriage as a lifelong, exclusive union.
Reflection and Application
This seemingly simple verse from the Pharisees carries profound implications for our understanding of God's will and our application of Scripture. It challenges us to look beyond the letter of the law to discern the spirit and original intent behind God's commands, especially when grappling with complex ethical and relational issues. The Pharisees were content to operate within a framework of permission, even if that permission arose from human failing, rather than striving for the divine ideal. For us, this means that while God, in His grace, may make allowances for our fallenness, His ultimate desire is always for us to conform to His perfect will, which is rooted in love, holiness, and covenant faithfulness. We are called to pursue reconciliation, forgiveness, and the preservation of sacred bonds, understanding that God's design for marriage is a reflection of His own covenant faithfulness to His people.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Did Moses command divorce, or merely permit it?
The text of Mark 10:4, as stated by the Pharisees, uses the word "suffered" (ἐπέτρεψεν, epetrepsen), which means "permitted" or "allowed," not "commanded." This is a crucial distinction. Jesus later clarifies in Mark 10:5 that Moses allowed divorce due to the "hardness of your heart," implying it was a concession to human sinfulness, not God's original or ideal design for marriage. The Mosaic Law in Deuteronomy 24:1 regulated divorce, but it did not institute or command it as a practice.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Mark 10:4 records the Pharisees' appeal to Moses' allowance for divorce, Jesus, the ultimate interpreter of the Law, swiftly redirects the conversation from Mosaic concession to God's original creation intent, thereby revealing the true heart of God concerning marriage. Jesus, as the new Moses and the fulfillment of the Law, does not abolish the Law but perfects it, pointing beyond legalistic interpretations to the divine design established "from the beginning of creation" (Mark 10:6). He elevates marriage to its sacred status as a covenant where "the two shall become one flesh" (Mark 10:8), a union so profound that "what therefore God has joined together, let not man separate" (Mark 10:9). Christ's teaching on marriage, therefore, is not merely a legal ruling but a revelation of God's redemptive purpose for human relationships, echoing the unbreakable covenant He makes with His church, His bride (Ephesians 5:25-32). He embodies the perfect faithfulness that marriage is meant to reflect, ultimately demonstrating that true covenant love, which enables perseverance in marriage, is only fully possible through His transformative grace and the power of the Holy Spirit (Philippians 4:13).