Matthew 19:1-2 The connection between chaps. 18 and 19 may be a continuation on forgiveness, not only with others, but especially in marriage where unfaithfulness and divorce may occur. These first two verses of chapter 19 mark a significant transition in Jesus’ ministry. The focal point of ministry moves from the Galilee to Judea in the south. This begins the final stage of his ministry leading to his crucifixion. This is what he forewarned his disciples about in Matthew 16 and in Matthew 18.
His journey to Jerusalem was not the most direct He went south into the region the other side of the Jordan. This region later came to be called Perea, a name taken from the Greek “Peran”, which means “beyond”. From Mark 10:1 we know that great multitudes in this area followed Him and He healed many there.
19:3 The Pharisees’ question Yeshua regarding divorce as an attempt to trap Jesus and use His answers against Him we see this at the end of Mark 10:2, with comment “testing Him”. No Old Testament law deals comprehensively with the issue of divorce. In the texts that mention it, the focus is to place limitations on the practice as in Deuteronomy 22:19, 29. These verses do not institute, encourage, or approve divorce, but treat it as a practice already operating.
Divorce had been the subject of great debate among the Jewish people for centuries. Based on the teachings of some of the shepherds of Israel women came to be treated with great disrespect and like property owned by their husbands. To justify their lusts for other women, some of the Pharisees had become the leading exponents of easy divorce. They were known for frequently divorcing their wives for any cause at all so they could marry another woman teaching that this was not only permissible but sometimes mandatory. This liberal perspective came from rabbi Hillel, who had died only about twenty years before Jesus began His ministry. He taught that a man could divorce his wife for the most trivial of reasons, for such things as taking her hair down in public or talking to other men and even for burning the bread or putting too much salt in the food. For her to speak ill of her mother-in-law or to be infertile all were sufficient grounds for divorce.
At the other extreme was the school of Shammai, who maintained that divorce was never permissible. That narrow-minded, hardline view not only was unpopular but, like the liberal position of the school of Hillel it too was unscriptural.
From His previous teaching, the Pharisees knew Jesus did not hold to such a liberalized view of divorce. They had heard Him say that “everyone who divorces his wife, except for the cause of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery” (Matt. 5:32). They now expected Him to take the same stand and alienate the many who accepted the idea of divorce for any cause at all. They hoped to discredit Him by identifying Him in the minds of the people with the narrow and intolerant view of the Shammai school.
The Pharisees also understood Perea, where Jesus is now teaching, was under the rule of Herod Antipas, who had John the Baptist imprisoned and eventually beheaded for condemning his unlawful marriage to Herodias, who had been the wife of his brother Philip (Matt. 14:3–12). The Pharisees likely thought that, by denouncing divorce for any cause, Jesus would be publicly condemning Herod’s adulterous relationship just as John had done and so suffer John’s fate.
19:4-6 Jesus’ answer is a rebuke of the Pharisees’ total disregard for the intent of the law. He answers that God’s intent was that marriage be permanent. The biblical teaching on divorce can only be understood against the background of Jesus’ view of marriage. Yeshua came to bring both grace and truth. Marriage was a sacred covenant to Yeshua and a work of God in bringing a man and woman together. The permanence of the marital union is stressed by the fact that two people become one flesh. No one would contemplate severing even a limb, much less half of his torso. Yet, this is the emotional and spiritual result of divorce. Divorce was a way to annul what God has done in providing a wife for the man and thus challenging the authority of God. Jesus cited Gen 1-2 where God brought Adam and Eve together for sharing a common life which included sexual union (one flesh). This union superseded all other family relationships (shall leave his father and mother). Serial monogamy was not, and is not, God’s design.
God spoke through Malachi on the covenantal holiness of marriage and his hatred of divorce. Marriage is a mutual covenant, a God-ordained obligation between a man and a woman to lifelong companionship. When rebuking the Israel for their adultery and frequent divorces, the Lord declared that by divorcing his wife a man “dealt treacherously” with her, “though she is your companion and your wife by covenant” (Mal. 2:14–16). Yeshua taught that when the covenant of marriage is entered God is behind it and so he said “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
19:7-9 The Pharisees misrepresented Deut. 24:1–4. It was not a “command” for divorce, but a limitation on remarriage in the event of a divorce. There we learn that God allowed divorce when a man “found some indecency” in his wife which Yeshua explained was here as a sexual sin. The passage in Deut. 24 recognizes that divorce occurs and permits it only on certain grounds. The case there teaches that divorce results in defilement. Here we learn that if a man finds some impurity in his wife as described in Deut. 23:14 “Since the LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp to deliver you and to defeat your enemies before you, therefore your camp must be holy; and He must not see anything indecent among you or He will turn away from you. This must be something other than adultery, since that was punished by execution (Deut. 22:22). He may legally divorce her, though God hates divorce, as Mal. 2:16 says. Marriage was given by God for as long both the husband and wife live, as Gen. 2:24 teaches. Yeshua clarifies here that God allowed divorce because of the hardness of the hearts of men. Deut. 24:4 that if the divorced his wife and then marries another man and the new husband dies or divorces her, that woman was not permitted to remarry her first husband. This was because she was “defiled” by her husband’s divorce. Remarriage was deemed by God as an abomination and a pollution of the Promised Land. What probably made her defiled was that there was no ground for the divorce in the first place. So that when she remarried, she became an adulteress (Matt. 5:31–32) and as such became defiled so that her former husband was not allowed to take her back. Illegitimate divorce from hard hearted men defiled the Holy Land and the people who also were called to be holy as the Lord.
One other significant truth regarding marriage and divorce is the example that God gave to Israel in His relationship with her. The covenant at Mt. Sinai was the marriage of God to Israel as described by Jeremiah 31:31-33: Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. Jeremiah 3:8 describes how God divorced Israel for adultery but never remarried. Israel will one day be remarried to the Lord. The church is betrothed to the Lord, by virtue of the New Covenant that Jeremiah spoke of we this in 2 Cor. 11:2: “For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, so that to Christ I might present you as a pure virgin”. The remarriage will be sometime after “All Israel” is saved (Rom. 11:25) at the Marriage of the Lamb Rev. 19:7&9.
19:10-12 – The Pharisees seem to have disappeared, and Jesus is alone with His disciples and they respond to Jesus’ teaching that it would be better not to marry. They were raised in a society where divorce was quick and easy. The Rabbi’s taught “a bad wife is like leprosy to her husband. What is the remedy? Let him divorce her and be cured of his leprosy.” No wonder the disciples questioned Him. His response was to agree with them, but to remind them that not all men can accept that statement. This does not mean that He did not regard marriage as sacred and blessed, but that it took away from one’s devotion to the Lord. This is what Paul was getting at in 1 Corinthians 7. V. 12 does not value celibacy or asceticism over the normal relationships of family life. Some are excluded from marriage by natural causes and others by the violence acts of men, i.e., they “were made eunuchs by men”. Some who serve the King and His kingdom may decide to refrain from marriage or a second marriage. Paul had the gift of celibacy and strongly exhorted others who had the gift to be content with it. (1 Corinthians 7:32-34).
19:13-15 – Little children were brought to Jesus for Him to bless but the disciples rebuked the parents. For two years the disciples were with Jesus, and they still did not understand his heart for children. Only a few days earlier Jesus took a little child in His arms in their presence. The context was who was greatest in the kingdom of heaven. The fact is that no church or movement of God’s will be blessed without ministry to children. Children have a natural love and faith in God. His response is to be angry with his disciples telling them not to hinder children from coming to Him. His anger was likely based on a number of things; for their spiritual dullness and that they didn’t understand that all are welcome to come to him and for the disciples presumption of who could or could not approach Him.
19:16-22 – A wealthy young man approaches Jesus asking what he can do to inherit eternal life. His request seems to be a genuine. By eternal life, he wanted to know what it would take to enter the Messianic Kingdom. To ask Jesus “what must I do”, is not out of line. Some believe that the young man did not understand that we are saved by faith and not by works. But how would he know any different considering the domination by the pharisees. But note that Jesus does not rebuke him for his question. In fact, Jesus goes on to tell him what he must do. The fact of the matter is that there are some works that we must do to be saved. The work of faith in what Jesus as our sin bearer, and the only one who can bring us to faith.
Jesus responds to his question, with another question that is most startling, “Why do you ask me about what is good?” This question was asked to get the young man to articulate what was in his heart, and to realize that the One he was asking was the source of all that was good. The young man wanted what was good but not the One who was good. In other words, the young man wanted a better life for himself rather than seeking what God wanted, which was keeping God’s commands. To which he asks “Which ones?” There were many commandments (613) and on top of that there were many different schools of interpretation on what and how the commandments were to be followed. Jesus responds by quoting six of them. He responds saying that he had kept those commands, which was one of the basic problems of the day, the lack of understanding of how needy they really were.
In response, Jesus tells the man to sell all of his possessions and give it to the poor, and follow Him. Jesus here in not teaching that salvation is achieved by divesting oneself of all possessions, even for charitable purposes. However, this young man had a concern greater than his desire to have life eternal. His possessions occupied the primary devotion in his life. Until he was willing to seek God regardless of the cost, seeking first His kingdom and righteousness, and then all these things will be given to you as well (Mat. 6:33), he would not find eternal life.
19:23-29 – It is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven and to come under the rule of God. The reason is because wealth and and its management takes up so much of our time. Jesus consciously uses hyperbole (exaggeration) to stress His point. The “eye of a needle” is thought by some to refer to a narrow gate in the wall of Jerusalem through which a beast loaded with a burden could not pass.
Others hold that by changing one letter of the word “camel,” and with change the Aramaic word for “rope” appears. Most likely this is simply a proverbial saying underscoring the impossibility of putting something large through the eye of a needle, and thus illustrating the impossibility of entry into the kingdom for a man who worships wealth. Jesus was not saying that the rich were further from the things of God than the poor, but that their money poses an obstacle to walking with the King.
The disciples were once again shocked by this answer. They were raised with the understanding that wealth was a sign of blessing from God. If these who have apparently been mightily blessed of God are not suitable for heaven, who then is? He then teaches that with men heaven and the things of God are impossible, but with God all is possible.
Here Jesus attributes the initiation of salvation not to man but to the drawing power of God John 6:37 “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. Human response is always dependent on God’s initiative (Eph 2:8-9).
Peter responds by asking since they have left all to follow Jesus, what will they gain? He was wondering if he and the apostles would receive eternal life. Jesus did not rebuke Peter but acknowledged that indeed they had left all and were following Him. He goes on to tell them that at the regeneration they would be judging the 12 tribes of Israel. “The regeneration” here Jesus was speaking of “the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long ago” (Acts 3:21). This is a reference to the earthly kingdom described in Rev. 20:1–15, when believers will sit with Yeshua on his throne (Rev. 3:21) where they will serve as judges.
The idea of restoration is certainly found elsewhere in the New Testament. The creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time (Rom 8:21-22). The time of the regeneration mentioned here points to the millennial restoration period prior to the forming of the new heaven and new earth in the eternal state (Rev 20:1-6). V 29 further declares a hundredfold reward both now and in Kingdom to come, in addition to everlasting life, as the benefit given to the disciples.
