1And it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judaea beyond Jordan; 2and great multitudes followed him; and he healed them there. 3The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
Jesus left Capernaum (17.24) and came to the border of Judaea on the east side of the Jordan River. He has now begun His approach to Jerusalem and to His death at the cross. It seems significant that the Pharisees at this point open the topic of divorce. Both the timing of their question and Jesus’ answer to them in the following verses seem to reflect the words in Isaiah 50:1: Thus saith the LORD, Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away. Yahweh is about to put away Israel for a time because of their transgression in rejecting Him when He came. Yet Isaiah also prophesied of a future day when Israel will again be received: Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called Hephzibah, and thy land Beulah: for the LORD delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married. For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee (Isaiah 62:4-5).
4And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
In verses 4 and 5, Jesus quoted Genesis 1:27; 2.24; and 5:2. By doing so, clearly He also affirmed that the Genesis account of God’s creation of humankind is accurate and is to be foundational to our reasonings about life decisions today.
Jesus first said that God made the people he created male and female. Jesus used that fact as a starting principle for His answer to a question being asked thousands of years later. Thus, Jesus affirmed that God’s original design for humankind had not changed. Also, His argument assumes that the form given to each person by God in creation is the form in which that person is to function.
Jesus then said that according to God’s word in Genesis, it is the role of a man to leave the home of his father and mother and to become attached to his wife. The man and his wife would become one flesh. Thus, Jesus concluded, since God joined the man and his wife together (Greek: “συνεζευξεν” : “yoked together”), no human agent should separate them.
In His answer to the Pharisees in these verses, Jesus went back to a time before there was sin in the world. He went back to a time when there had never been an act of unfaithfulness in a marriage, a time when there had never been an act of physical abuse or desertion, a time when there was no unbelief or rebellion against God in the world. The entrance of sin into the world brought a multiplicity of complex situations to marriage. Yet, Jesus’ words tell us that even after the passing of thousands of years, God’s design had not changed and was not to be violated. In the coming verses He will address some of those complexities.
7They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? 8He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
The Pharisees may have heard about Jesus’ words on this subject in Matthew 5:31-32. It may be for that reason that they tried to trap Him with this question. Would Jesus contradict what Moses had said?
The Pharisees made reference to Deuteronomy 24:1-4:
When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife. And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the LORD: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
The Pharisees said that Moses commanded the man to give a writing of divorcement. Jesus said that Moses permitted (“suffered”) them to put away their wives. The grammar of the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 supposes a set of circumstances in which a divorce and remarriage takes place. Then a conclusion is given: her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife. That conclusion is the point of these verses. The Hebrew text of the Deuteronomy passage does not command the divorce, but by supposing such a situation, it implies that the divorce is permitted.
Thus, with their second question, the Pharisees jumped forward in time from the garden of Eden to the time of Moses. Jesus had spoken of God’s original design in creation; His words in verse 6 imply that God’s original design has not changed. But, His answer to the Pharisees’ second question says that people did change after Adam’s sin. The hardness of heart that Jesus spoke of is the property not just of the Israelites but of all of Adam’s descendants. In the Law that God gave to Moses, He allowed divorce, but it was not part of His original design for marriage.
9And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
After speaking of God’s original design for marriage and of the hardness of heart of Adam’s descendants, Jesus said, “And I say unto you….” He spoke with authority. He said that there is only one ground for divorce and remarriage: marital unfaithfulness. If a separation takes place, the defining bridge that must not be crossed is remarriage, unless there has been unfaithfulness.
Mark also recorded Jesus’ words:
And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery (Mark 10:11-12).
Jesus’ dialog with the Pharisees did not answer all questions. It was not intended to. The Pharisees were only trying to trap Him in His words. In I Corinthians 7, Paul also addressed questions about marriage. But if a believer is guilty of a marriage-related sin, that sin can be confessed to God (I John 1:9), and He will forgive and completely cleanse, by the blood Jesus shed for us at the cross. Confession and forgiveness after a broken marriage does not, however, set a person free to go on and remarry, unless the cause of the divorce was unfaithfulness in the spouse.
10His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. 11But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. 12For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
The disciples’ reaction to Jesus’ words indicates that at that time in Israel divorce was both common and considered to be an acceptable way out if a marriage was no longer desired. The disciples said, “If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.” Jesus’ response to their comment implied that there are only two choices in the matter of sexual relations: marriage or celibacy. He said that celibacy wouldn’t work for everyone, but only for those “to whom it is given.” Paul said something very similar in I Corinthians 7:7: But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
Jesus’ statement that there are only two acceptable choices, marriage or celibacy, is made even more emphatic by His statement concerning celibacy. He said that some men are born incapable of having sexual relations and that other men are made eunuchs by human agency. The second case probably refers to the physical emasculation of men for service in the courts of kings in history. The third possibility is that a person choose to live as a celibate for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Paul spoke of this possibility in I Corinthians 7:32-34:
He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife. There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.
An example of celibacy is found in Revelation 14:1-5. In the future seven-year Tribulation period, God will use 144,000 unmarried Jewish young men to be His witnesses.
Jesus said that the choice of celibacy is not for everyone. Jesus was thus telling His disciples that God’s plan for marriage is the only other choice. Jesus’ words hold great significance for us today, as they did for His disciples then. Apart from the case of marital infidelity, God makes no allowance for remarriage. And, marriage and celibacy are the only two life choices that God accepts. If a person has already made a wrong choice, the way forward is repentance, confession of the sin to God (I John 1:9), and seeking His will for the future.
13Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 14But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 15And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.
In chapter 18, Jesus told His disciples, “Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (18:3), but the disciples failed to make connection with those words now, just one chapter later. Instead, the disciples rebuked those who were bringing the little children to Jesus. Probably the disciples considered the children and those who brought them to be a bother and unworthy of Jesus’ and their time. But Jesus said, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”
What is it about children and those who come to Jesus like children that makes them eligible to have place in the kingdom of heaven? In all three of the Gospel accounts in which this encounter is recorded, there follows another encounter with a rich young ruler who felt that he could make himself worthy of eternal life. The contrast between the children and this rich young ruler may give us the answer to what Jesus’ words meant. Unlike the rich young ruler, little children don’t come with a resume of accomplishments or personal status or proofs that they are good enough for heaven. They just come as they are, with nothing to offer God. Mark records that Jesus “took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them” (Mark 10:16). So will the Lord Jesus receive every person who comes to Him without their own claims of worthiness.
What about those particular children that day? Are we to conclude that all of them will be in heaven? After all, didn’t Jesus Himself bless them? But Jesus also brought blessing to many, many other people in Israel when He healed them of afflictions and diseases by a touch or by His word. Yet probably many of those healed were like the nine lepers in Luke 17 who went away physically healed but never looked back to even say, “thank you.” To the one leper who did come back to give glory to God, Jesus said, “Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole” (Luke 17:19).
Blessing requires a response. When the children grew up, they would one day have to make a decision for themselves about who Jesus is and about faith in Him. Perhaps some of those children became like the rich young ruler in the following verses who failed to respond rightly to Jesus. Perhaps some of them looked back to give thanks like the one leper who had genuine faith in Christ.
16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
In these two verses, the word “good” occurs four times. “Goodness” is the issue in this dialog. The young man who came to Jesus is called a ruler in Luke 18:18. He had youth (verse 20), he had position, and, as we will read in the following verses, he had wealth. In a one-sentence question to Jesus, this young man told all the error of his thinking. In one breath he called Jesus “Good Master” [“Good Teacher”], and he spoke of some “good” thing that he himself could do to have eternal life. This rich young ruler put his own goodness on the same level as that of Jesus.
Jesus’ response speaks to the error in the young man’s thinking. Jesus said, “Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God….” Jesus said that goodness is an absolute and that only God is absolutely good. If the young man rightly calls Jesus “good,” he must do it in recognition of Jesus’ deity. And if only God possesses absolute goodness, then any “good thing” that the young man might do would fall short of God’s perfect standard.
Jesus then told the young man that if he wanted to enter life, he should keep the commandments. Jesus is giving the young man the answer found in the Old Testament Law. In Leviticus 18:5, God said, “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am the LORD.” The Law offered life with a very big “if.” If a person keeps the law as God, who is absolutely good, intended it, then that person will live.
The young man came with the presupposition that he could do something to make himself worthy of eternal life, so Jesus answered him with truth according to his presupposition.
18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Like his original question, this young man’s follow-up question exposes the error of his thinking. He wanted to narrow down and define exactly which commandments he was responsible to do in order to have eternal life. He still thought that he could pass God’s test by his own good works.
Jesus answered the young man’s question by listing the commandments in Exodus 20 which address relationships between people. Mark records that Jesus also said, “Defraud not” (Mark 10:19). Matthew records that Jesus ended the list with the commandment from Leviticus 19:18, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” All three of the Gospels in which this event is recorded place the fifth commandment, “Honour thy father and thy mother,” after the other commandments from Exodus 20.
What does it mean? Why did Jesus answer the young man like this? And why did He not directly state the tenth commandment, which says, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's (Exodus 20:17)? Probably covetousness was the young man’s outstanding problem. The covetousness kept him from loving his neighbor as himself and probably also kept him from supporting his father and mother as he should have. It seems that Jesus is gradually bringing the young man to recognize his own sin.
20The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
The young man expressed confidence that he had kept all of the commandments that Jesus listed, yet his question, “what lack I yet?” shows that he still had no peace in himself that the issue was settled.
Jesus’ answer to this third question asserts that that the real issue for that young man and for us is perfection. The word “perfect” that Jesus used means “complete” or “having reached the goal.” God’s requirement for a person to have eternal life is complete righteousness, which none of us have in ourselves. To make this young man understand that, Jesus told him what completeness would look like. Completeness would mean transferring his trust from his money to God. Then God would give him a treasure that he could never gain by himself. The young man went away sorrowing because he couldn’t change his heart’s loyalty from his possessions to God.
Jesus never told anyone else to sell what they had and give it away. He wasn’t making a new condition for salvation. He was making one individual face up to his own sin. Giving up our possessions is not a requirement for eternal life, but recognizing that we have sinned and need God’s forgiveness is essential.
Jesus lastly told the young man, “and come and follow me.” With that invitation and command, He was also implying that this young man, who would then have no material possessions left, would be provided for. When Jesus said, “and come and follow me,” He was also saying, “I will take care of you.”
23Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
Mark records that Jesus also said, “Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” (Mark 10:24) The issue is not the money itself. The issue is what a person trusts in. In Matthew 5:3, we read in the first of the Beatitudes, “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Before a person can receive treasure in heaven (verse 21), he or she must be poor in spirit. Every person must recognize that they have nothing to offer God to make them deserve entrance into His kingdom. For rich persons who feel that their wealth makes them worthy of status and protection, their wealth stands as an obstacle to their becoming poor in spirit.
To the disciples, the thought that a rich person was somehow spiritually disadvantaged was totally foreign. Probably they had in mind the rich people who were prominent in Israel, who could afford to offer expensive sacrifices and make large donations in the temple. If those people could not enter the kingdom of God, who could?
When Jesus answered the disciples, He did not name some other economic class of people who had a better chance of getting into God’s kingdom. After all, the real issue is not money, but what a person trusts in. Jesus said, “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.” God is able to bring a rich person – or a poor person – to recognize that he or she needs a Savior. The rich young ruler is the counterexample to the children brought to Jesus in verses 13-15. The rich young ruler was not poor in spirit, but the children came without any false security in wealth or position.
In these verses Jesus used the two terms, “the kingdom of heaven” (verse 23) and “the kingdom of God” (verse 24) interchangeably. These two terms speak of the same thing.
27Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore? 28And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
Probably Peter asked his question with Jesus’ words to the rich young ruler in mind. Jesus told the rich young ruler to go and sell his possessions. Peter said, in effect, “We left behind all that we had to follow You; what do we get?” Perhaps amazingly to us, Jesus did not rebuke Peter. In fact, He gave Peter a very encouraging answer: the disciples would be given governing responsibility in Jesus’ kingdom.
Jesus spoke of “the regeneration.” He said that this new beginning would take place when He Himself “shall sit in the throne of his glory.” Jesus used that expression once more in the book of Matthew, in chapter 25: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory…” (25:31). The regeneration that Jesus spoke of will take place when He comes in His glory and all the holy angels with Him. At that time, when He takes governance as King over the earth, the disciples who followed Him will receive responsibility as governors over the twelve tribes of Israel.
In verse 29, Jesus broadened His promise to include everyone who for the sake of His Name sets aside the things they could have had to follow Him. They will receive much more than they gave up, and, by their trust in Him, will also receive eternal life.
So is it wrong to have things? Luke 8:3 makes reference to women who ministered to Jesus by their material wealth. In Luke 10, Jesus spoke of a Samaritan who helped someone who had been robbed and beaten up. The Samaritan took this person to an inn and told the innkeeper, “Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee” (Luke 10:35). People who have material wealth can be used by God to accomplish His will. Paul said, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service” (Romans 12:1). If we first give ourselves to God, then what we have will be His, too.
30But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.
Jesus will repeat this statement in the next chapter after giving a parable that further explains what it means. In that parable, it seems that “first” and “last” refer to time, not status. But the two concepts of time and status come together in the Israel in which Jesus spoke these words.
In Luke 13:25-30, Jesus said,
“When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are: then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God. And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.”
In these words Jesus spoke of Jews living at that time who did not believe in Him as “first” ones who would become “last” ones. He also spoke of people from other nations who would believe in Him later in time as “last” ones who would become “first” ones. Israel had the first opportunity to receive Jesus as the Christ, God’s Son. Like the rich young ruler, many of those in Israel counted themselves to have religious status because of their heritage. They were first in time and considered themselves to be first in status.
Jesus promised the disciples who had followed Him great blessing when He comes in His glory. That, however, will not be true for all who were in Israel at that time.
Note: All Scriptures are quoted from the King James Version of the Bible.