Mk. 10:13-16; Hos. 9:10-16, Let the Children Come to Me!

Child-bearing has been God’s plan from the beginning.  Child-bearing did not become a “thing” in Gen. 3 when God told Eve she would bear children in pain.  The pain was part of the curse, but the way it reads, and the command to multiply in Gen. 1:28, indicate child-bearing was always God’s plan.  God designed the man and woman for child-bearing.  How wise and wonderful is our Creator!  Thus, how logical Jesus’ attitude towards children.  Not only did He command to “let the little children come to Me;” He also said “do not forbid them!” Faith and repentance.

On the other hand, part of the foolishness of our current generation is the disdain for children.  Note the following “news” bytes.

While it's impossible to definitively say that Americans love their dogs more than their children, a growing trend indicates a shift in pet ownership and a strong emotional connection between owners and their furry companions. Studies show that a significant percentage of Americans prefer pets over children, often citing ease of care and lower financial burdens as reasons. Additionally, a considerable number of dog owners consider their dogs to be family members, even going as far as to view them as their children. 

A new Harris Poll study of 2,000 Americans reveals a trend where 43% now prefer pets over children, with many Gen Z and Millennials citing pets as easier to care for and less financially burdensome.  

On average, American pet owners spend $4,366 annually on their pets.  63% say they would give up years of their life to extend their pet’s lifespan.  93% say they would feel happier at their job if allowed to bring pets to work.  46% are advocating for ‘pawternity leave,’ underscoring a shift in workplace benefits that reflect the realities of pet parenthood.  An emerging trend among 43% of Americans is a preference for pets over children, with many Gen Z and Millennials noting that pets are easier to care for and come with fewer financial burdens.

You can add to the above the fact of abortion, the killing of children before they are born, and what you have is what the prophet Hosea described as a judgment of God on corrupt Israel: …their glory shall fly away like a bird – no birth, no pregnancy and no conception (9:11)! Give them, O LORD – what will You give?  Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts (9:14)! Yes, were they to bear children, I would kill the darlings of their womb (v16).  Children are a blessing from the LORD; happy is the man who has his quiver full of them (Ps. 127:3-5).  Thus, the lack of children, should be viewed not only as the result of selfish people.  It is God’s curse on a sinful people!

We should be obedient to Christ.  As parents, do everything we can to bring children to Him.  It means bringing Christ and the gospel to them, to children.  Don’t dare do anything to put a hindrance in their way. 

1 Cor. 6:12-20; 7:1-5, The Question of Remarriage

JESUS CONCLUDED THAT REMARRIAGE WAS ASSUMED AND ADULTEROUS.

Before we consider this statement, we need to see a couple of things.  First, Jesus spoke the words of Mk. 10:11-12 (whoever marries a divorced person commits adultery against them) to the disciples in private and not to the crowd.  The disciples responded, wondering why anyone would get married, given the difficulty of marriage (cf. Mt. 19:9). 

Second, there is a difference between Matthew and Mark.  Matthew says Jesus spoke of the man, who divorces his wife and then marries another, that man has committed adultery.  Mark’s account says Jesus applied this rule to both the husband and wife.  The difference is accounted for by the audience of each writer.  Matthew wrote to the Jewish culture where men had the right of divorce.  Mark wrote to the Roman culture where both men and women could initiate divorce.

As to the above principle, saying that remarriage was “assumed” is evident both in the Deut. 24:1-4 passage as well as Jesus words here.  Both Moses and our Lord speak as if it is expected that, after divorce, there will be remarriage.  Neither said “if” but gave instruction as if it should be expected for divorced people to remarry. 

As we have said, the Law of Moses made plans for remarriage, both for the sake of the wife, the weaker vessel, who needed protection, as well as for the good of society.  Remaining single had its own difficulties, as the Bible indicates.  Jesus said that not everyone had the “gift” of remaining single (Mt. 19:11-12).  Paul said it was better to marry than to burn with lust (1 Cor. 7:1-5). 

If remarriage is a protection against sexual immorality, why does Jesus say that remarriage is always immoral?  The reason is the “one flesh” principle.  To take a second spouse while the first spouse is still living violates God’s law concerning the permanence of marriage (Rom. 7:1-2).  Remember that God, who intended that marriage should be a lifelong relationship, also allowed for divorce because of the hardness of people’s hearts.  That is what sin does.  It brings into our lives what we might call “no-win” situations when it comes to living in righteousness.  This is why Paul’s advice to separated spouses if that they should not remarry if the other spouse is still available for reconciliation (1 Cor. 7:11). 

The conclusion to all this is that while marriage is hard, divorce is even more difficult.  We who are married should seek, by God’s grace, to build up our marriages (Prov. 5:15-20; Eph. 5:22-33).  We should also understand that the sin that hardens our hearts needs to be confessed, acknowledged, and repented of.  As Malachi said, “take heed to your spirit.”  Be kind and tenderhearted with each other, and let not the sun go down upon your wrath (Eph. 4:25-32).

Psalm 52

The Psalms begin by affirming, “The LORD knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish” (Psalm 1:6).  Psalm 52 is a song of faith, trusting God in that very issue.  God shall likewise destroy you forever, David says to the wicked.  Of himself he says, I trust in the mercy of God forever and ever.  The distinction is clear in what is a true “black and white” matter.  In that sense this Psalm is not unusual as other hymns do the same.

What is uniquely valuable for God’s people in this Psalm is the context.  The title, of course, ties it to the story of King Saul’s massacre of the priests when Doeg the Edomite reported seeing the renegade David speaking with the priest Ahimelech (1 Sam. 22:6-23).  Not only did Doeg inform the king; when the king’s soldiers would not kill the priests he called on Doeg to do it.  He was more than willing.

The title is, of course, not part of the inspired text.  It is likely true.  But in any case it simply provides us with a picture to attach to David’s words.  The picture is of an evil man, who is mighty (i.e. has great strength as Doeg did, being one of Saul’s administrators), and who has the king’s ear.  It’s the wicked man’s words that most occupy David’s attention (v2-4), though in the end David understands what we should understand: the love of money is the root of all evil (v7). 

And the true bottom line is trust.  The evil man does not make God his strength while the saints will wait on Your name.  David waited for several years, running from Saul, before he experienced “the goodness of God” (v1) and “the mercy of God” (v8) which are forever.  The wicked seemed to gain an initial victory; what a display of the power of wickedness was the death of 85 priests that day.  But in the end victory was with David.

While this Psalm is not Messianic (in the sense that it is not so used in the New Testament) it still reminds us of our Lord Jesus Christ.  As He Himself said in the Garden of Gethsemane, “this is your hour, and the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53).  But three days later the risen Lord would say, “Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” (Luke 24:26). 

And what then can we say for ourselves, who by faith are trusting Christ?  What did He say of us?  If we would follow Him we must deny ourselves and take up our cross daily!  We cannot follow Him without a life that is headed to Jerusalem, to the cross.  In other words, in this world it is to be expected that we will encounter mighty evil people, those who brag about their evil intentions and deeds, those who trust in their wealth and not in God.  May the words of our hearts encourage us as we trust God:

Why do you boast in evil, O mighty man?

The goodness of God endures continually ( literally, the goodness of God is for all the day).

Deut. 24:1-4, Divorce Permitted by our God of Mercy

The end of the previous post requires that we take a moment to note what we have in Christ to deal with the difficulties of marriage.  In Gen. 1-2 there were no commands to Adam to love his wife and Eve to submit to her husband.  That’s because, being created in the image of God, these were natural to them.  But for us, sin is an issue, so we have these commands in the NT (Eph. 5:22-33; Col. 3:18-19; 1 Pt. 3:1-7).  But we also have what Christ has provided for us because we are “in Christ” so that His life is being worked out in our bodies.  Remember: Jesus is the living description of love and submission.  Believing husbands and wives are being transformed into His likeness, and this includes being like Him in the home. 

Let us return to Mark 10.  Jesus taught that marriage was a lifelong relationship between one man and one woman.  He acknowledged that marriage was difficult.

THIRD, JESUS EXPLAINED THAT DIVORCE WAS PERMITTED BY GOD BECAUSE OF SIN.

Divorce was permitted by God because of sin, but in a deeper sense, because of His mercy.  If you read Deut. 24:1-4 you see this.  In the OT culture of Israel, marriage was God’s means of providing for a woman.  The man provided for his wife through his work, and she helped her husband in whatever ways were appropriate.  Since marriage was difficult, and both men and women were treacherous, because of sin, there needed to be a way so that the divorced woman could be cared for.  She might go back to her father’s house, if he was still living, or to the older brother’s house.  Or she could marry another man.  In any of these cases she needed evidence that she no longer belonged to her husband. 

Furthermore, the Israelite society needed some safeguards to maintain the high position of marriage.  God, through Moses, also made a law forbidding a couple from divorcing, then marrying another, and then divorcing and returning to the first partner.  This practice would have cheapened the institution, so God was being wise in dealing with people who were sinners from birth.

Let us be careful to keep together all that Jesus said.  He did acknowledge the difficulty of the marriage relationship because of the effect of sin.  He gave the true reason God permitted divorce under the law: because of the hardness of men’s hearts.  But He also was clear, that the aim of those who follow Him, who have entered the Kingdom of God, is for a permanent union.  And of course, we also understand that under the New Covenant, those who follow Christ have available all that is needed for life and godliness.  Christ intends that we deny ourselves and bear our cross at home.  Submission to Christ is fundamental to fulfilling God’s purpose in marriage and family.

Mal. 2:13-16; Gen. 3:12-19, Marriage is Difficult!

What is marriage?  Let us refine that: what is marriage in the Bible?  Good, and some not so good, books have been written on the subject.  For us, let us note simply two words: companionship and covenant. 

The LORD has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, with whom you have dealt treacherously; yet she is your companion and your wife by covenant.  (Mal. 2:14)

In Prov. 2:17, the immoral woman (a woman who would seek to be one flesh with a man who is not her husband), describes her as one who forsakes the companion of her youth, and forgets the covenant of her God.

Surely you see the two words: companion and covenant.  These define marriage.  “Covenant” is the word used of the great covenants God made with Noah, Abraham and David.  Note that this “marriage” covenant is also a great covenant, and it is a covenant that concerns the husband and wife (your wife by covenant) but it is not made with the spouse but is made with God (the covenant of her God).  Each marriage companion makes a covenant with God to be to the other what God intended him or her to be.  In these days, you can have all the arguments you want about the value of “living together before marriage” but in the end, it is not a Biblical relationship.  It is, from the Bible’s point of view, sexual immorality.

SECOND, JESUS ACKNOWLEDGED THAT MARRIAGE IS DIFFICULT.

He asked the Pharisees what the Law of Moses said about divorce and they rightly noted that Moses required a certificate of divorce to make it legal (cf. Deut. 24:1-4).  Jesus’ response to this was to say that Moses made this arrangement because of the hardness of your heart.  It was not God’s design from the beginning but became a necessity after Gen. 3 when the first couple sinned. 

The curse on the woman included this “prophecy:” your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you (Gen. 3:16).  You might think this means she would want to be with her husband and he would be the loving leader.  That was God’s original intent (cf. Gen. 2 where Eve was Adam’s helper).  If you think that you are wrong.  First, this is a “curse.”  That should make it clear that this is something difficult.  And sure enough, a study of the words bears that out.

·       “desire” is used 3X in the OT.  Here, the woman desires the husband.  In Gen. 4:7 sin desires to control Cain.  In Song of Solomon 7:10 the desire of the “beloved” (the husband) is for his wife.  It is a desire appropriate for the husband to have, but because of sin the wife seeks the role of leadership.

·       “rule” is also in Gen. 4:7, of the rule Cain needed over sin.  That rule was not the gentle leadership of a loving husband but the domination of something bad.

What the curse predicted was a wife in rebellion and a husband in oppression.  If you see the world from a Biblical point of view, this makes perfect sense!

Mark 10:1-12, Jesus Teaches on Marriage

The subject of family came up through a tricky question raised by some Pharisees.  They were testing Him (v2).  They were not particularly concerned with Jesus view on the matter, other than to try to pigeon-hole Him.

The question came from Deut. 24:1, where Moses said in the Law, When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, …  The question was, what is meant by “uncleanness?”  There were two schools of thought in Judaism.  The school of Shammai said that unchastity was the only moral reason, the only form of “uncleanness,” that warranted divorce.  The school of Hillel held that essentially anything could be called “uncleanness:” the wife burnt the toast, she wouldn’t clean the camel barn, her hair was turning gray, or whatever. 

Before we note Jesus’ answer, those two answers are prominent today.  I know of a lot of pastors and evangelical scholars who would say that “immorality” is the only allowable reason for divorce for Christians.  On the other hand, in our society, we essentially have “no fault” divorce.  You don’t really have to have a reason.  So Jesus did not follow either school but rather returned to the very beginning of marriage, which was in God’s plan of creation in Genesis.

FIRST, JESUS TAUGHT THAT MARRIAGE WAS INTENDED TO BE A LIFELONG RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

Jesus did not mention the “one man/one woman” issue because of the present-day abuse of marriage.  He mentioned it (10:6) because it was the plan from the beginning (Gen. 1:27; 2:23-25). 

The key idea in their “relationship” was that the man and woman were to be “one flesh.”  Paul referred to this in 1 Cor. 6:16 when he was speaking of sexual sin: “Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.””  The sexual connection of husband and wife is not the sum-total of their relationship, but it speaks of the depth of their union.  There is the joining of two people, two wills, two souls, and two bodies.

The “lifelong” aspect is seen in Jesus conclusion: Therefore, what God has joined together, let not man separate (10:9).  The prophet Malachi said that God hated divorce (Mal. 2:13-16).  The prophet recognized that it was a means of dealing “treacherously” with one’s spouse.  That was at the base of the rabbinic disagreement mentioned above.  Those asking the question likely had a vested interest, wanting to have “guilt-free” permission to get rid of one wife so he could marry another.  Anyone who has been part of divorce knows the prophet is right: there is a lot of “treachery” involved in the process of separating what God has joined together.