About Mark

Mark presents Jesus as the suffering Servant of God, emphasizing His actions and authority.

Author: John MarkWritten: c. AD 50-65Reading time: ~7 minVerses: 52
ServantActionAuthoritySufferingDiscipleshipMessianic Secret

King James Version

Mark 10

52 verses with commentary

Teaching About Divorce

And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again.

View commentary
Jesus 'arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan' (ἀναστὰς ἐκεῖθεν ἔρχεται εἰς τὰ ὅρια τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου). This geographical note marks Jesus' journey toward Jerusalem and crucifixion. Mark 10-15 chronicles Jesus' final approach to His death. The phrase 'the multitudes resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again' (συμπορεύονται πάλιν ὄχλοι πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ ὡς εἰώθει πάλιν ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς) emphasizes Jesus' consistent teaching ministry. The adverb 'again' (palin, πάλιν) appears twice, stressing continuity—Jesus faithfully taught despite approaching death. This models ministerial faithfulness regardless of circumstances. The crowds' gathering shows continued popular interest, though many would later cry 'Crucify him!' (Mark 15:13-14), revealing the fickle nature of public acclaim.

And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

View commentary
Pharisees came to Jesus 'and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him' (ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀνδρὶ γυναῖκα ἀπολῦσαι, πειράζοντες αὐτόν). The verb 'tempting' (peirazontes, πειράζοντες) indicates malicious intent—not genuine inquiry but attempted entrapment. This was a controversial issue in first-century Judaism: the school of Hillel permitted divorce for virtually any cause; the school of Shammai restricted it to sexual immorality. Any answer Jesus gave would alienate one faction. Additionally, John the Baptist was executed for condemning Herod's unlawful marriage (Mark 6:17-18)—Jesus was in Herod's territory (Perea), so strict teaching on marriage could provoke similar persecution. The Pharisees' question was calculated to create political or theological difficulty. Jesus' response transcends the debate by returning to creation ordinance (vv. 6-9).

And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?

View commentary
Jesus responded to the Pharisees' question with His own: 'What did Moses command you?' (Τί ὑμῖν ἐνετείλατο Μωϋσῆς;). This counter-question is pedagogically brilliant—Jesus forces His opponents to articulate the scriptural basis for their position before revealing the deeper issue. He uses 'command' (eneteilato, ἐνετείλατο), though Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is actually a permission, not command—Moses regulated but didn't mandate divorce. By asking what Moses 'commanded,' Jesus subtly highlights that divorce wasn't God's ideal but a concession. This method—answering questions with questions—appears throughout Jesus' teaching (Mark 2:25; 11:30; 12:24). It engages opponents' minds, reveals their assumptions, and prepares for deeper truth. Jesus never merely answered surface questions but addressed underlying heart issues.

And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.

View commentary
The Pharisees answered, 'Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away' (Μωϋσῆς ἐπέτρεψεν βιβλίον ἀποστασίου γράψαι καὶ ἀπολῦσαι). They cite Deuteronomy 24:1's provision for divorce certificate (biblion apostasiou, βιβλίον ἀποστασίου, 'certificate of dismissal'). Notably, they changed Jesus' word 'command' (v. 3) to 'suffered' (epetrepsen, ἐπέτρεψεν, 'permitted')—tacitly acknowledging this was concession, not divine ideal. The certificate's purpose was to protect the divorced woman—providing legal documentation of her freedom to remarry without being charged with adultery. This regulation assumed divorce's reality and sought to mitigate harm, but didn't endorse divorce as good. The Pharisees' answer reveals their focus on legal technicalities rather than God's heart for marriage.

And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.

View commentary
Jesus explained Moses' concession: 'For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept' (πρὸς τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν τὴν ἐντολὴν ταύτην). The term 'hardness of heart' (sklērokardian, σκληροκαρδίαν) indicates stubborn refusal to obey God—literally 'hard-heartedness' or callous indifference to divine will. This phrase appears in contexts of rebellion (Deuteronomy 10:16; Jeremiah 4:4; Ezekiel 36:26). Jesus identifies divorce not as divine design but as accommodation to sinful human stubbornness. God permitted divorce to regulate an evil practice, preventing worse harm (forced cohabitation in hostile marriages, wife-abuse, unlawful remarriage). But permission doesn't equal approval. This interpretive principle is crucial: Old Testament concessions to sin (polygamy, divorce, slavery) aren't normative but demonstrate God's patient accommodation to human fallenness. Jesus points beyond concession to God's creational intent (vv. 6-9).

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

View commentary
Jesus answered the Pharisees' question about divorce by returning to creation: 'from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female' (ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεός). This quotes Genesis 1:27, establishing that binary sexual differentiation (male and female) is God's creational design, not social construct. The phrase 'from the beginning' (ap' archēs, ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς) makes creation God's normative revelation for marriage, predating the fall and Mosaic legislation. Jesus teaches that God's original design, not later accommodations to sin, reveals His will. This hermeneutical principle—reading Scripture through creation lens—grounds Christian ethics in God's pre-fall design. Gender complementarity is foundational to marriage, rooted in how God created humanity.

For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

View commentary
Jesus continued: 'For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife' (ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ). This quotes Genesis 2:24, establishing marriage's essential elements: (1) leaving parents, (2) cleaving to spouse, (3) becoming one flesh (v. 8). 'Leave' (kataleipsei, καταλείψει) means forsake primary family bonds for new marital bond. 'Cleave' (proskollēthēsetai, προσκολληθήσεται) means adhere or be glued to—permanent, exclusive attachment. Marriage creates new fundamental social unit, transcending even parent-child bonds. This pattern is creation ordinance—universal, permanent, normative for all cultures. The exclusive pronouns ('his wife') establish monogamy as creation norm, though patriarchal cultures practiced polygamy.

And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

View commentary
Jesus concluded: 'the twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh' (ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν· ὥστε οὐκέτι εἰσὶν δύο ἀλλὰ μία σάρξ). The phrase 'one flesh' (mia sarx, μία σάρξ) describes profound unity—physical, emotional, spiritual. 'Flesh' (sarx) refers to whole person, not just physical body. Marriage creates ontological union where two individuals become single entity. This unity is God's creative act ('they are' is passive—God makes them one). The emphatic repetition—'no more twain, but one'—stresses indissoluble unity. This establishes marriage as covenant creating permanent bond, not contract dissolvable at will. Divorce doesn't merely violate agreement; it tears apart what God joined. Paul applies this to Christ and the church (Ephesians 5:31-32)—marital one-flesh union images Christ's union with believers.

What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

View commentary
Jesus commanded: 'What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder' (ὃ οὖν ὁ θεὸς συνέζευξεν ἄνθρωπος μὴ χωριζέτω). The verb 'joined together' (synezeuxen, συνέζευξεν) means yoked or paired—God actively unites husband and wife. The aorist tense indicates definitive, completed action at marriage. God, not merely human agreement, creates marital bond. Therefore 'let not man put asunder' (chōrizetō, χωριζέτω, separate or divorce). Human beings shouldn't dissolve what God established. This principle grounds Christian opposition to no-fault divorce—marriage isn't human institution dissolvable by mutual consent but divine ordinance requiring God's authority to dissolve. The only exception Jesus allowed was sexual immorality (Matthew 19:9), and even then as permission, not command. God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) because it violates His creation design and images Christ-church union.

And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter.

View commentary
And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter (εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν...ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν, eis tēn oikian...epērōtōn auton). Mark's Gospel repeatedly shows Jesus teaching crowds publicly, then explaining privately to disciples "in the house" (7:17; 9:28, 33; 10:10). This pattern reveals Jesus' pedagogical method—public proclamation followed by private instruction for those genuinely seeking understanding.

The phrase "asked him again" (ἐπηρώτων, epērōtōn—imperfect tense) suggests persistent questioning, indicating the disciples found Jesus' radical teaching on divorce and remarriage (10:2-9) difficult to comprehend. First-century Jewish practice permitted divorce relatively easily (Deuteronomy 24:1-4), with rabbinic debate centering on valid grounds—the school of Shammai permitted divorce only for sexual immorality, while Hillel's school allowed divorce for virtually any displeasure. Jesus' teaching that divorce and remarriage constitute adultery (10:11-12) shocked His hearers by elevating marriage's permanence beyond prevailing practice.

And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.

View commentary
Jesus intensified His teaching: 'Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her' (ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται ἐπ' αὐτήν). In Jewish law, only wives committed adultery against husbands; husbands could divorce wives and remarry without adultery charge. Jesus revolutionized this—husbands who divorce and remarry commit adultery 'against her' (the divorced wife). This established marital symmetry and women's personhood. The phrase 'committeth adultery' (moichatai, μοιχᾶται) indicates that remarriage after unlawful divorce is ongoing adultery, not single sinful act. Reformed theology debated whether such remarriage requires dissolution or whether repentance allows continuation. The principle is clear: divorce doesn't dissolve one-flesh union before God; remarriage after unlawful divorce constitutes adultery.

And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

View commentary
Jesus continued: 'if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery' (ἐὰν γυνὴ ἀπολύσῃ τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς καὶ γαμηθῇ ἄλλῳ μοιχᾶται). This verse addresses women divorcing husbands—unusual in Jewish law but possible under Roman law. Mark, writing for Roman audience, includes this application. Jesus established complete marital symmetry—both spouses equally bound by covenant, both commit adultery if divorcing and remarrying unlawfully. This countered ancient patriarchal structures treating women as property. Christian marriage theology emphasizes mutual covenant faithfulness (1 Cor 7:3-4; Eph 5:21-33). The same standard applies to both—no double standard. This reflects gospel equality: in Christ 'there is neither male nor female' (Gal 3:28) regarding salvation and spiritual dignity.

Jesus Blesses the Children

And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.

View commentary
People 'brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them' (προσέφερον αὐτῷ παιδία ἵνα αὐτῶν ἅψηται· οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ἐπετίμων τοῖς προσφέρουσιν). Parents sought Jesus' blessing on children—common practice with respected rabbis. The disciples rebuked them, likely viewing children as unworthy of Jesus' time or as interruptions to 'important' ministry. This reveals misplaced priorities—valuing 'significant' people and activities over humble service. Jesus' response (v. 14-16) corrects this, modeling God's heart for children and the seemingly insignificant. The disciples' error warns against elitism in ministry—dismissing those deemed unimportant while pursuing impressive results. True greatness serves the lowly (Mark 9:35).

But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

View commentary
When Jesus saw it he was much displeased and said unto them Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is kingdom of God. Saw it eidōn observed. Much displeased ēganaktēsen angered indignant. Said eipen. Suffer aphete permit allow. Little children paidia young children. Come elthein approach. Unto me pros eme to Jesus. Forbid kōluete hinder prevent. Of such toioutōn such as these. Kingdom of God basileia tou theou. Children welcomed blessed. Disciples rebuked for hindrance. Childlike faith humility receptivity required for kingdom. Not that children automatically saved but exemplify qualities needed. Reformed theology affirms covenant children promise to believers families but emphasizes necessity of personal faith. Infant baptism or believer baptism debate.

Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein .

View commentary
Verily I say unto you Whosoever shall not receive kingdom of God as little child shall not enter therein. Verily amēn solemn affirmation. Receive dexētai welcome accept. Kingdom of God basileia. As hōs in manner of. Little child paidion young child. Shall not enter eiselthē access. Therein eis autēn into it. Requirements for kingdom entrance. Must receive like child humble dependent trusting. Cannot earn merit achieve. Must receive as gift. Pride self-sufficiency obstacles. Reformed theology emphasizes salvation is gift by grace through faith. Monergism God alone effects salvation. Synergism human cooperation heresy. Must receive passively not achieve actively.

And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

View commentary
After Jesus' teaching about divorce, disciples asked privately (v. 10), and Jesus 'said unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her' (λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται ἐπ' αὐτήν). [Note: This is duplicate of v. 11 analysis, so continuing with v. 16 about Jesus blessing children] Jesus was 'much displeased' (ἠγανάκτησεν) at disciples rebuking those bringing children. This is strong language—Jesus expressed indignation, anger at their action. He commanded: 'Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God' (Ἄφετε τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός με, μὴ κωλύετε αὐτά· τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ). Jesus welcomed children and declared they exemplify kingdom citizens. Children's humble dependence, receptivity, and powerlessness model kingdom entrance.

The Rich Young Man

And when he was gone forth into the way , there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?

View commentary
After the rich young ruler departed, Jesus looked at His disciples and said: 'How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!' (Πῶς δυσκόλως οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελεύσονται). The adverb 'hardly' (dyskolōs, δυσκόλως) means with difficulty. Wealth doesn't disqualify from salvation, but it creates obstacles: self-reliance replacing dependence on God, material comfort dulling spiritual hunger, possessions competing with Christ for supreme affection. The young man's wealth prevented him from following Jesus (vv. 21-22). Jesus generalizes from this example—wealth often hinders salvation. This isn't prosperity gospel (wealth as blessing) but warning that riches tempt toward self-sufficiency, the opposite of childlike dependence (v. 15). Paul warned that 'love of money is the root of all evil' (1 Timothy 6:10). Riches aren't evil, but trust in riches is deadly.

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

View commentary
A man asked Jesus, 'Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?' (Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ, τί ποιήσω ἵνα ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω;). The address 'Good Master' (Didaskale agathe, Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ) prompts Jesus' response about goodness (v. 18). The question 'what shall I do' reveals works-righteousness assumption—earning eternal life through personal achievement. The verb 'inherit' (klēronomēsō, κληρονομήσω) oddly pairs with 'do'—inheritance is received, not earned. This theological confusion prompts Jesus' corrective teaching: salvation comes through God's grace, not human merit (vv. 21-27). The man's question represents humanity's universal error—attempting to achieve righteousness through works rather than receiving it by faith (Romans 3:20-28; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.

View commentary
Jesus responded, 'Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God' (Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός). This isn't Jesus denying His goodness or deity but forcing the man to consider what 'good' means. If only God is good, and the man calls Jesus good, he must grapple with Jesus' identity. Is Jesus merely a human teacher or is He God incarnate? The question also exposes human inability to achieve goodness—'none good' includes all humanity apart from God. The man sought to 'do good' to earn life, but Jesus reveals that true goodness belongs exclusively to God. This prepares for Jesus' teaching that salvation is impossible for humans but possible for God (v. 27). Reformed theology emphasizes total inability—humans cannot achieve the goodness God requires; salvation requires divine intervention.

And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.

View commentary
Jesus listed commandments: 'Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother' (Μὴ μοιχεύσῃς, Μὴ φονεύσῃς, Μὴ κλέψῃς, Μὴ ψευδομαρτυρήσῃς, Μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς, Τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα σου). Jesus cited commandments from the Decalogue's second table (human relationships), omitting first table (duties to God). The addition 'defraud not' isn't explicit in Exodus 20 but summarizes various laws about economic justice (Leviticus 19:13; Deuteronomy 24:14-15; Malachi 3:5). Jesus' selective citation sets up His later diagnosis—the man kept horizontal commandments but missed the first, greatest commandment: love God supremely (v. 21). External moral conformity doesn't equal heart righteousness. The list reveals law's function: exposing sin and driving to grace (Romans 3:20; Galatians 3:24).

Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

View commentary
Jesus beholding him loved him said One thing thou lackest go sell whatsoever thou hast give to poor thou shalt have treasure in heaven come take up cross follow me. Beholding emblepsas looked intently. Loved ēgapēsen genuine affection. Said eipen. One thing hen single issue. Lackest hysterei lacking missing. Go hypage depart. Sell pōlēson liquidate. Whatsoever hosa possessions. Give dos distribute. To poor ptōchois destitute. Treasure thēsauron wealth. In heaven en ouranō eternal. Come deuro return. Take up aras burden. Cross stauron instrument of death. Follow me akolouthei discipleship. Jesus loved rich young ruler but demanded total surrender. One thing lacked total allegiance. Wealth was idol. Jesus does not demand all sell all but this man needed to. Reformed theology affirms nothing can compete with Christ for supreme allegiance.

And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

View commentary
After teaching about divorce, Jesus addressed remarriage: 'whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery against her' (ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται ἐπ' αὐτήν). [Note: This appears to be duplicate of earlier verse 11. Let me use verse 23 instead] The disciples exclaimed: 'If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry' (Matthew 19:10, parallel passage). Jesus' strict teaching shocked them—if divorce and remarriage constitute adultery, perhaps remaining single is safer. Jesus didn't endorse this conclusion but used it to teach about singleness as gift (Matthew 19:11-12). Some are called to celibacy for kingdom service; most are called to lifelong marital faithfulness. Either path requires divine grace. Jesus elevated marriage's permanence while honoring singleness, both serving God's purposes.

And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

View commentary
After teaching about wealth's danger, 'Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!' (περιβλεψάμενος ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, Πῶς δυσκόλως οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ εἰσελεύσονται). Jesus 'looked round about' (periblepsamenos, περιβλεψάμενος), scanning His disciples to ensure they heard. The phrase 'they that have riches' (hoi ta chrēmata echontes, οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες) literally means 'those having possessions.' Jesus repeated (from v. 23) that entering God's kingdom with wealth is difficult (dyskolōs, δυσκόλως). Wealth creates obstacles: self-reliance, material comfort, divided affections. The rich young ruler's departure illustrated this—unable to forsake riches for Christ. Jesus' warning challenges prosperity gospel and calls for radical evaluation of our relationship with money.

And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!

View commentary
Jesus answereth saith Children how hard it is for them trust riches to enter kingdom of God. Jesus responds to disciples amazement. Children endearment. Hard duskolon difficult. Trust riches pepoithotas relying wealth. Enter eiselthein access. Kingdom basileia. Riches create false security illusion self-sufficiency. Trust in wealth replaces trust in God. Impossible for those trusting riches. Only through divine intervention. Reformed theology emphasizes human inability divine necessity.

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.

View commentary
Easier for camel go through eye of needle than rich man enter kingdom. Easier eukopōteron less difficult. Camel kamēlon largest animal Palestine. Go through dielthein pass. Eye trēmatos opening. Needle raphidos sewing needle. Impossible image. Some suggest camel wrong translation should be rope kamēlos versus kamilos. Others suggest needle small gate requiring camel unload kneel. But likely hyperbole impossible. Rich entering kingdom humanly impossible. Only God can save rich. Salvation wholly grace. Reformed theology emphasizes divine necessity regeneration.

And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?

View commentary
The disciples 'were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?' (οἱ δὲ περισσῶς ἐξεπλήσσοντο λέγοντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς, Καὶ τίς δύναται σωθῆναι;). After Jesus said it's easier for camel to pass through needle's eye than rich enter kingdom (v. 25), disciples despaired. If wealthy people (who seemed most blessed by God, per prosperity theology common in Judaism) couldn't be saved, who could? Their question reveals human inability—no one can save themselves. Jesus' answer (v. 27) resolves this: salvation is impossible for humans but possible for God. This is gospel essence: humans are spiritually dead, unable to save themselves (Ephesians 2:1-3, 8-9); God makes alive (Ephesians 2:4-5). Salvation is monergistic—God's work alone, not human cooperation. The disciples' despair was appropriate—recognizing human inability is prerequisite for embracing divine grace.

And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

View commentary
This verse articulates the fundamental principle of divine omnipotence and its pastoral application to human despair. 'With God all things are possible' (para theo panta dynata) establishes that the scope of divine capability encompasses all conceivable possibilities. The Greek 'dynata' (things able, possible) indicates not merely theoretical possibilities but practical possibilities - what God can actually accomplish. 'Para theo' (beside God, with God) uses a preposition suggesting God's presence and partnership, not distant transcendence. The statement follows Jesus' declaration that it is easier for a camel to enter a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter God's kingdom - an apparent impossibility suggesting human salvation through wealth-renunciation is humanly impossible. The disciples respond with existential despair: 'Who then can be saved?' This verse responds not by minimizing the difficulty but by recontextualizing it. The human impossibility of self-generated righteousness becomes irrelevant when divine omnipotence enters the equation. What cannot be accomplished through human effort, discipline, or achievement becomes possible through God's transformative grace. The theological movement here is essential to Christian soteriology: salvation requires not better human effort but divine intervention. The principle extends beyond soteriology - it addresses any human situation where circumstances appear intractable. Divine omnipotence provides the ultimate hope for believers facing terminal illness, seemingly impossible reconciliation, or entrenched patterns of sin and brokenness.

Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee.

View commentary
Peter began say unto him Lo we have left all and followed thee. Peter spokesman. Began ērxato initiated. Say legein proclaim. Lo idou attention. We hēmeis apostles. Left aphēkamen abandoned. All panta everything. Followed ēkolouthēkamen discipleship. Peter statement both true and problematic. True they left businesses families comforts. Problematic suggesting merit reward. Jesus response affirms sacrifice promises reward (vv. 29-30). Not earning salvation but demonstrating genuine faith. Works are fruit not root. Reformed theology affirms justification by faith alone sanctification produces fruit.

And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,

View commentary
Jesus answered said Verily I say unto you no man has left house brethren sisters father mother wife children lands for my sake gospel. Verily amēn solemn affirmation. Left aphēken abandoned. House oikian home. List relationships family ties. Wife gynaika spouse. Lands agrouse property. For my sake heneken emou because of Christ. Gospel euangelion good news. Sacrifices for Christ kingdom will be rewarded. Not salvation by works but demonstrating faith priority. Giving up temporal for eternal. Reformed theology affirms all who come to Christ experience some level of loss persecution from world.

But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

View commentary
But shall receive hundredfold now in this time houses brethren sisters mothers children lands with persecutions and world come eternal life. Shall receive labē obtain. Hundredfold hekatontaplasiona multiplied. Now nyn present. This time kairō age. List houses family lands. With meta accompanied by. Persecutions diōgmōn opposition. And kai addition. World come aiōni future age. Eternal life zōēn aiōnion. Promises temporal blessings spiritual family community. But alongside persecutions. Not prosperity without suffering but blessing amid trials. Eternal life is ultimate reward. Reformed theology emphasizes now and not yet kingdom already partially here fully at return.

But many that are first shall be last; and the last first.

View commentary
Peter said, 'Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee' (Ἰδοὺ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα καὶ ἠκολουθήκαμέν σοι). After the rich man departed, Peter noted the disciples' sacrifice—they left everything to follow Jesus. The emphatic 'we' (hēmeis, ἡμεῖς) contrasts disciples with the rich man. They did what he couldn't—forsook all for Christ. Yet Peter's statement hints at self-righteousness—'we left all, so what's our reward?' This prompts Jesus' promise (vv. 29-30) but also warning about pride (v. 31). Peter's question reflects natural human tendency to calculate costs/benefits and seek recognition for sacrifice. Jesus' response teaches that true discipleship doesn't bargain but trusts God's generous reward for any sacrifice made for the gospel.

Jesus Foretells His Death a Third Time

And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him,

View commentary
As Jesus journeyed toward Jerusalem, 'Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid' (ἦν προάγων αὐτοὺς ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ ἐθαμβοῦντο, οἱ δὲ ἀκολουθοῦντες ἐφοβοῦντο). The verb 'went before' (proagōn, προάγων) shows Jesus leading deliberately toward His death. The disciples' amazement (ethambount, ἐθαμβοῦντο) and fear (ephobounto, ἐφοβοῦντο) reveal their growing awareness of danger. Jesus 'took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him' (παραλαβὼν πάλιν τοὺς δώδεκα ἤρξατο αὐτοῖς λέγειν τὰ μέλλοντα αὐτῷ συμβαίνειν). This is the third explicit passion prediction. Jesus' deliberate march toward death demonstrates sovereign purpose—not passive victim but active Savior choosing the cross. His courage models faithful obedience despite certain suffering.

Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles:

View commentary
Jesus predicted: 'Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles' (Ἰδοὺ ἀναβαίνομεν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδοθήσεται τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσιν καὶ τοῖς γραμματεῦσιν, καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτὸν θανάτῳ καὶ παραδώσουσιν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν). This third passion prediction is most detailed, specifying: (1) delivery to Jewish leaders, (2) condemnation, (3) delivery to Gentiles (Romans), (4) mocking, scourging, crucifixion (v. 34), (5) resurrection. The precision demonstrates foreknowledge. Jesus wasn't surprised by betrayal or overwhelmed by events—He knew exactly what awaited and chose it willingly. The passive voice 'shall be delivered' (paradothēsetai, παραδοθήσεται) indicates divine sovereignty—God ordained these events for redemption.

And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.

View commentary
Jesus continued describing His passion: 'they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again' (ἐμπαίξουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ μαστιγώσουσιν αὐτὸν καὶ ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν αὐτόν, καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστήσεται). The verbs describe extreme humiliation: mocking (empaizō, ἐμπαίζω), scourging (mastigoō, μαστιγώσουσιν, Roman flagellation tearing flesh), spitting (emptyō, ἐμπτύσουσιν, supreme insult), killing (apokteinō, ἀποκτενοῦσιν). All occurred exactly as Jesus predicted (Mark 14:65; 15:15-20). Yet Jesus emphasizes resurrection—'the third day he shall rise again' (anast​ēsetai, ἀναστήσεται). Suffering doesn't end the story; vindication follows. This pattern—suffering then glory—characterizes Jesus' path and ours (Romans 8:17; 2 Timothy 2:11-12; 1 Peter 4:13).

The Request of James and John

And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire.

View commentary
James and John made presumptuous request: 'Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire' (Διδάσκαλε, θέλομεν ἵνα ὃ ἐὰν αἰτήσωμέν σε ποιήσῃς ἡμῖν). This blank-check request reveals spiritual immaturity and selfish ambition. They wanted Jesus to promise before hearing their request—manipulative approach treating Jesus as genie granting wishes. Their subsequent request for throne seats (v. 37) exposed motives: personal glory, not kingdom service. This immediately followed Jesus' third passion prediction (vv. 33-34)—while Jesus described suffering, disciples sought status. Their error warns against approaching God with demands rather than submission. True prayer asks according to God's will (1 John 5:14), not presuming God exists to fulfill our ambitions. Jesus' response (vv. 38-45) teaches that greatness comes through suffering and service, not self-promotion.

And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you?

View commentary
What would ye that I should do for you? (τί θέλετε ποιήσω ὑμῖν, ti thelete poiēsō hymin). Jesus' question appears gracious—He invites James and John to state their request openly. Yet the question also tests and exposes their hearts, giving them opportunity to recognize the selfishness of their ambition before voicing it.

This question mirrors exactly what Jesus asks blind Bartimaeus in verse 51: "What wilt thou that I should do unto thee?" The parallel is devastating—Bartimaeus humbly requests healing from his affliction, while James and John arrogantly request positions of honor. One man recognizes his spiritual poverty and need; two disciples presume upon Jesus' power for selfish advancement. The identical question exposes radically different heart conditions—humble dependence versus presumptuous entitlement.

They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory.

View commentary
Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory (δὸς ἡμῖν ἵνα...καθίσωμεν, dos hēmin hina...kathisōmen). The verb δὸς (dos) is an imperative—"Grant!"—revealing presumptuous boldness. They demand rather than humbly request, assuming entitlement to positions of honor.

The phrase "thy right hand and thy left" (ἐκ δεξιῶν σου καὶ εἷς ἐξ εὐωνύμων σου, ek dexiōn sou kai heis ex euōnymōn sou) refers to the places of highest honor beside a king's throne—positions of chief authority and prestige. Matthew's parallel account (20:20-21) notes their mother Salome made the request, suggesting family coordination for dynastic positioning.

The phrase "in thy glory" (ἐν τῇ δόξῃ σου, en tē doxē sou) reveals they envision Jesus' kingdom in earthly, political terms—a visible throne with positions of power. They completely misunderstand that Jesus' glory comes through crucifixion (John 12:23-24) and that kingdom greatness means servant leadership (Mark 10:43-44). Ironically, at Jesus' crucifixion, two others will occupy positions at His right and left—two thieves on crosses (Mark 15:27).

But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?

View commentary
Jesus answered James and John: 'Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?' (Οὐκ οἴδατε τί αἰτεῖσθε. δύνασθε πιεῖν τὸ ποτήριον ὃ ἐγὼ πίνω, καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι βαπτισθῆναι;). Jesus exposed their ignorance—'ye know not what ye ask.' They sought glory without understanding the cost. The 'cup' (potērion, ποτήριον) refers to suffering and God's wrath (Isaiah 51:17; Jeremiah 25:15; Mark 14:36). The 'baptism' (baptisma, βάπτισμα) symbolizes overwhelming suffering—being immersed in affliction. Jesus would drink the cup of wrath at the cross and be baptized in suffering and death. True greatness requires sharing Christ's sufferings (Romans 8:17; Philippians 3:10; 1 Peter 4:13). James and John couldn't comprehend this—they'd later flee at Jesus' arrest (Mark 14:50). Only after resurrection and Spirit's coming did they understand.

And they said unto him, We can. 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:

View commentary
Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized (τὸ ποτήριον ὃ ἐγὼ πίνω πίεσθε, καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι βαπτισθήσεσθε, to potērion ho egō pinō piesthe, kai to baptisma ho egō baptizomai baptisthēsesthe). Jesus prophesies James and John will share in His sufferings, though not in the way they imagine.

The "cup" (ποτήριον, potērion) throughout Scripture symbolizes divine wrath, judgment, and suffering (Psalm 75:8; Isaiah 51:17; Jeremiah 25:15). In Gethsemane, Jesus prays, "Take away this cup from me" (Mark 14:36)—the cup of bearing sin's penalty. James and John will drink from this cup of suffering: James becomes the first apostolic martyr (Acts 12:2), beheaded by Herod Agrippa around AD 44; John suffers persecution, exile to Patmos (Revelation 1:9), and outlives all other apostles, witnessing the church's trials.

The "baptism" (βάπτισμα, baptisma) metaphorically represents being overwhelmed by suffering, submerged in affliction. Jesus uses this imagery for His crucifixion—being plunged into death. The disciples will share Christ's sufferings, experiencing persecution, rejection, and martyrdom for the gospel's sake.

But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.

View commentary
But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared (τὸ δὲ καθίσαι ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἢ ἐξ εὐωνύμων οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸν δοῦναι, ἀλλ᾽ οἷς ἡτοίμασται, to de kathisai ek dexiōn mou ē ex euōnymōn ouk estin emon dounai, all' hois hētoimastai). Jesus affirms divine sovereignty in kingdom appointments—positions of honor aren't dispensed through human favoritism, nepotism, or presumption, but according to the Father's eternal purposes.

The phrase "not mine to give" has sparked theological discussion. Does this limit Jesus' authority? Reformed theology understands this as Jesus speaking in His mediatorial office as incarnate Son—kingdom positions aren't arbitrary gifts Jesus dispenses based on personal preference, but divinely determined according to the Father's will. Matthew's parallel (20:23) adds "but for them for whom it is prepared of my Father," clarifying the Father's sovereign role.

The verb ἡτοίμασται (hētoimastai, "has been prepared") uses the perfect tense, indicating completed action with ongoing results—God has already determined kingdom positions according to His eternal counsel. This doesn't eliminate human responsibility but emphasizes that greatness in God's kingdom isn't achieved through self-promotion but through faithful service according to divine calling.

And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John.

View commentary
And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John (ἤρξαντο ἀγανακτεῖν περὶ Ἰακώβου καὶ Ἰωάννου, ērxanto aganaktein peri Iakōbou kai Iōannou). The verb ἀγανακτεῖν (aganaktein) means "to be indignant, angry, greatly annoyed." The ten didn't respond with spiritual maturity or correction of James and John's error—they became angry because they wanted the same positions for themselves.

Their displeasure reveals that all twelve disciples shared the same worldly ambition—James and John were simply bold enough to voice it. The other ten were angry not because the request was wrong, but because they didn't think of it first. This exposes the pervasive nature of selfish ambition—it infected the entire apostolic band. Mark's honest portrayal of apostolic failure demonstrates Scripture's trustworthiness—he doesn't sanitize the disciples' flaws or create hagiographical portraits, but presents them as deeply flawed men whom Jesus patiently transforms.

But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. are: or, think good

View commentary
But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them (οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν τῶν ἐθνῶν κατακυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν καὶ οἱ μεγάλοι αὐτῶν κατεξουσιάζουσιν αὐτῶν, oidate hoti hoi dokountes archein tōn ethnōn katakyrieuousin autōn kai hoi megaloi autōn katexousiazousin autōn). Jesus contrasts two models of leadership—worldly domination versus kingdom servanthood.

The phrase "exercise lordship" (κατακυριεύουσιν, katakyrieuousin) intensifies the verb κυριεύω (to lord over)—it means "to domineer, rule tyrannically, subjugate." The prefix κατα- adds the sense of "down upon"—exercising power over subordinates from above. Similarly, "exercise authority" (κατεξουσιάζουσιν, katexousiazousin) means "to wield authority oppressively." Jesus describes Gentile rulers' pattern: hierarchical authority structures where those at the top dominate those below.

Jesus doesn't condemn all authority or leadership, but the self-serving, domineering style characteristic of pagan rulers—those who use positions for personal benefit, demand submission, and assert superiority. This describes Roman imperial governance, Herodian dynasty politics, and typical ancient Near Eastern kingship.

But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister:

View commentary
Jesus taught kingdom principles: 'whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister' (ὃς ἂν θέλῃ γενέσθαι μέγας ἐν ὑμῖν, ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος). This inverts worldly hierarchy—greatness comes through service (diakonia, διακονία), not domination. The term 'minister' (diakonos, διάκονος) means servant or deacon—one who serves others' needs. True leadership in God's kingdom means sacrificial service, not self-promotion. Jesus modeled this (v. 45)—the Son of Man came to serve. Paul echoed it: leaders are servants of Christ and stewards of God's mysteries (1 Corinthians 4:1). This principle revolutionized leadership—not lording over others but laying down life for them. Pastoral ministry, eldership, and all Christian leadership must follow this servant-leader pattern. The world seeks prominence; Jesus demands servanthood.

And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.

View commentary
Jesus intensified His teaching: 'whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all' (ὃς ἂν θέλῃ ὑμῶν εἶναι πρῶτος, ἔσται πάντων δοῦλος). If 'great' requires being 'minister/servant' (v. 43), being 'chiefest' (prōtos, πρῶτος, first/foremost) requires being 'servant of all' (doulos pantōn, δοῦλος πάντων, slave of all). Jesus escalated from diakonos (minister) to doulos (slave/bondservant)—lowest social status. The 'chiefest' Christian serves everyone, considering themselves slave to all. This is radical humility and comprehensive service. Paul exemplified this: 'though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all' (1 Corinthians 9:19). The principle applies universally—in church, family, workplace. Those in authority serve those under them. Parents serve children; pastors serve congregations; employers serve employees. This inverts every human hierarchy, establishing Christ's upside-down kingdom.

For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

View commentary
This verse articulates the heart of Christ's mission and the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. Jesus contrasts His purpose with worldly leadership—He "came not to be ministered unto, but to minister" (ouk ēlthen diakonēthēnai alla diakonēsai, οὐκ ἦλθεν διακονηθῆναι ἀλλὰ διακονῆσαι). The verb diakonēsai (διακονῆσαι, "to serve") denotes menial service, even table-waiting—a shocking role for the Son of God. The climactic phrase "to give his life a ransom for many" (dounai tēn psychēn autou lytron anti pollōn, δοῦναι τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν) introduces the atonement's central metaphor. Lytron (λύτρον, "ransom") was the price paid to free slaves or prisoners. Anti (ἀντί, "for/instead of") indicates substitution—Christ's life in exchange for "the many." This fulfills Isaiah 53:11-12, where the Suffering Servant bears the sin of many. Reformed theology emphasizes that Christ's death was penal (bearing God's wrath), substitutionary (in our place), and particular ("for many," not all indiscriminately), accomplishing actual redemption, not merely potential salvation.

Jesus Heals Blind Bartimaeus

And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging.

View commentary
And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging (Βαρτιμαῖος...τυφλὸς προσαίτης ἐκάθητο παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, Bartimaios...typhlos prosaitēs ekathēto para tēn hodon). Mark identifies this beggar by name—Bartimaeus (Βαρτιμαῖος), Aramaic bar-Timai meaning "son of Timaeus." Mark's inclusion of both Aramaic and Greek names suggests eyewitness testimony and that Bartimaeus became known in the early church.

The word τυφλὸς (typhlos, "blind") describes physical blindness that becomes metaphor for spiritual illumination throughout this passage. Bartimaeus "sat by the highway" (ἐκάθητο παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν)—the verb ἐκάθητο (ekathēto, imperfect tense) indicates habitual action: he regularly sat begging. The term προσαίτης (prosaitēs) means "beggar," one who asks for alms. In ancient society, blindness meant unemployment and destitution—beggars positioned themselves on roads to major cities like Jericho, where traffic and pilgrims provided almsgiving opportunities.

The phrase "by the highway" (παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, para tēn hodon) recalls Mark's repeated use of ὁδός (hodos, "way") for the journey to Jerusalem and the cross (8:27; 9:33-34; 10:32, 52). Bartimaeus sits beside "the way"—physically on the roadside, spiritually outside the kingdom. Jesus will bring him into "the way," following Christ to Jerusalem.

And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on me.

View commentary
And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou Son of David, have mercy on me (ἤρξατο κράζειν καὶ λέγειν, Υἱὲ Δαυίδ Ἰησοῦ, ἐλέησόν με, ērxato krazein kai legein, Huie Dauid Iēsou, eleēson me). The verb κράζειν (krazein) means "to cry out loudly, shout"—Bartimaeus doesn't politely request but desperately cries out, refusing to be silenced or ignored.

The title "Son of David" (Υἱὲ Δαυίδ, Huie Dauid) is explicitly messianic, acknowledging Jesus as the promised descendant of David who would establish God's eternal kingdom (2 Samuel 7:12-16; Isaiah 11:1-10). This is the only place in Mark where someone outside Jesus' inner circle uses this title publicly. Bartimaeus's spiritual insight contrasts dramatically with the physically-sighted disciples who remain spiritually blind to Jesus' messianic identity and mission.

The plea "have mercy on me" (ἐλέησόν με, eleēson me) uses the verb ἐλεέω (eleeō), meaning "to show compassion, mercy, pity." This is covenant language—the cry for divine mercy based on God's faithful love. Bartimaeus doesn't demand healing as a right but appeals to Jesus' compassion, recognizing his utter dependence and Jesus' sovereign power.

And many charged him that he should hold his peace: but he cried the more a great deal, Thou Son of David, have mercy on me.

View commentary
And many charged him that he should hold his peace: but he cried the more a great deal, Thou Son of David, have mercy on me (ἐπετίμων αὐτῷ ἵνα σιωπήσῃ· ὁ δὲ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἔκραζεν, Υἱὲ Δαυίδ, ἐλέησόν με, epetimōn autō hina siōpēsē; ho de pollō mallon ekrazen, Huie Dauid, eleēson me). The verb ἐπετίμων (epetimōn, imperfect tense) means "they were rebuking him," indicating repeated, ongoing attempts to silence Bartimaeus. The crowd—perhaps including disciples—considered his shouting inappropriate, embarrassing, or disruptive.

The phrase "but he cried the more a great deal" (ὁ δὲ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἔκραζεν, ho de pollō mallon ekrazen) uses πολλῷ μᾶλλον (pollō mallon, "much more, far more intensely") to intensify the verb κράζω (krazō, "to cry out"). The more the crowd tried to silence him, the louder and more persistent Bartimaeus became. His desperation to reach Jesus overcame social pressure, embarrassment, and religious propriety.

This scene portrays a collision between religious respectability and desperate faith. The crowd represents those concerned with maintaining decorum, not disturbing the Teacher, keeping the marginalized in their place. Bartimaeus represents radical faith that refuses to be silenced, recognizing this may be his only opportunity for transformation. His persistence contrasts with the rich young ruler (10:17-22) who walked away when challenged.

And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called. And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be of good comfort, rise; he calleth thee.

View commentary
And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called (στὰς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Φωνήσατε αὐτόν, stas ho Iēsous eipen Phōnēsate auton). The participle στὰς (stas, "standing still") indicates Jesus stopped His journey—the same Jesus who "resolutely set His face toward Jerusalem" (Luke 9:51), determined to reach the cross, pauses for one blind beggar. This demonstrates Jesus' compassion and accessibility despite His mission's cosmic importance.

The verb Φωνήσατε (Phōnēsate, "call him") is an imperative—Jesus commands the very crowd that tried to silence Bartimaeus to now summon him. The same people who rebuked him must now reverse course and encourage him. This reversal illustrates how Jesus elevates the lowly and humbles the proud.

And they call the blind man, saying unto him, Be of good comfort, rise; he calleth thee (θάρσει, ἔγειρε, φωνεῖ σε, tharsei, egeire, phōnei se). The imperative θάρσει (tharsei, "take courage, be confident") appears throughout the Gospels when Jesus addresses fear or distress (Matthew 9:2, 22; 14:27). The verb ἔγειρε (egeire, "rise, get up") is the same word used for resurrection—Bartimaeus's rising from his begging position symbolizes resurrection from spiritual death to new life.

And he, casting away his garment, rose, and came to Jesus.

View commentary
This verse describes blind Bartimaeus' response to Jesus' call. The Greek apobálōn (ἀποβαλών, "casting away") indicates deliberate, forceful throwing off—not careful folding but urgent abandonment. The "garment" (himation, ἱμάτιον) likely refers to his outer cloak, which served as both clothing and blanket. For a blind beggar, this garment was probably his most valuable possession, used for warmth at night and as a collection receptacle for alms during the day. Bartimaeus abandoned his security to pursue Jesus. The verb anastas (ἀναστάς, "rose") carries resurrection imagery throughout the Gospels—the same word describes Jesus rising from the dead. Bartimaeus' rising from his begging posture symbolizes transition from one state of existence to another. The phrase ēlthen pros ton Iēsoun (ἦλθεν πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν, "came to Jesus") demonstrates faith in action. Despite his blindness, he navigated toward Jesus' voice, trusting that if Jesus called him, Jesus would receive him. This brief verse powerfully illustrates the nature of true faith: (1) urgent response to Jesus' call, (2) abandonment of earthly security, (3) movement from spiritual death (represented by sitting in darkness) to spiritual life (rising at Jesus' word), and (4) determination to reach Christ despite obstacles. Bartimaeus didn't let blindness, the crowd's earlier rebuke (v. 48), or concern for his possessions prevent him from coming to Jesus when summoned.

And Jesus answered and said unto him, What wilt thou that I should do unto thee? The blind man said unto him, Lord, that I might receive my sight.

View commentary
And Jesus answered and said unto him, What wilt thou that I should do unto thee? (Τί σοι θέλεις ποιήσω, Ti soi theleis poiēsō). This question mirrors exactly what Jesus asked James and John in verse 36. The parallel is intentional and devastating—James and John requested positions of glory; Bartimaeus requests healing from blindness. The same question exposes radically different heart conditions and spiritual understanding.

The blind man said unto him, Lord, that I might receive my sight (Ῥαββουνί, ἵνα ἀναβλέψω, Rabbouni, hina anablepsō). The title Ῥαββουνί (Rabbouni) is Aramaic, meaning "my master, my teacher"—an intensely personal, reverential address. Only here and in John 20:16 (Mary Magdalene addressing the risen Jesus) does this precise form appear. It expresses intimate devotion and submission.

The verb ἀναβλέψω (anablepsō) means "to look up, receive sight, see again." The prefix ἀνα- (ana, "up, again") suggests restoration—Bartimaeus may not have been born blind but lost sight through disease or injury. His request is humble, specific, and urgent—he asks for healing, not status. This contrasts with the disciples' ambition and demonstrates the humility Jesus requires: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3).

And Jesus said unto him, Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole. And immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way. made: or, saved thee

View commentary
When Jesus healed blind Bartimaeus, He said: 'Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole' (Ὕπαγε, ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέν σε). The verb 'made whole' (sesōken, σέσωκέν) means saved, healed, made whole—physical healing symbolizing spiritual salvation. Jesus attributed healing to 'thy faith' (hē pistis sou, ἡ πίστις σου)—not the man's merit but his trust in Christ. Bartimaeus demonstrated faith by: (1) crying out persistently despite rebuke (vv. 47-48), (2) coming immediately when called (v. 50), (3) asking specifically for sight (v. 51). True faith persists, responds to Jesus' call, and asks boldly. The phrase 'go thy way' normally dismisses healed persons to resume life, but Bartimaeus 'followed Jesus in the way' (v. 52)—he became a disciple. Genuine healing produces discipleship, not mere gratitude and departure.

Test Your Knowledge

Continue Your Study