◀ All Reading Plans / Revised Common Lectionary (Semicontinuous) / Job 1:1; 2:1-10 (Job’s integrity in suffering); Psalm 26 (Your love is before my eyes); Hebrews 1:1-4; 2:5-12 (God has spoken by a Son); Mark 10:2-16 (Teaching on marriage) (New English Translation)

Prev Day

October 3, 2021

Next Day

Use the calendar to view readings from this devotional.

October 2021
Su	Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31

Return to today's reading

Revised Common Lectionary (Semicontinuous)

Daily Bible readings that follow the church liturgical year, with sequential stories told across multiple weeks.

Duration: 1245 days

Job 1:1

I. The Prologue (1:1-2:13)

Job’s Good Life^[a]

1 ^[b] There was a man^[c] in the land of Uz^[d] whose^[e] name was Job.^[f] And that man was blameless^[g] and upright,^[h] one who feared God and turned away from evil.^[i]

Footnotes

Job 1:1 sn See N. C. Habel, “The Narrative Art of Job,” JSOT 27 (1983): 101-11; J. J. Owens, “Prologue and Epilogue,” RevExp 68 (1971): 457-67; and R. Polzin, “The Framework of the Book of Job,” Int 31 (1974): 182-200.
Job 1:1 sn The book of Job is one of the major books of wisdom literature in the Bible. But it is a different kind of wisdom. Whereas the book of Proverbs is a collection of the short wisdom sayings, Job is a thorough analysis of the relationship between suffering and divine justice put in a dramatic poetic form. There are a number of treatises on this subject in the ancient Near East, but none of them are as thorough and masterful as Job. See J. Gray, “The Book of Job in the Context of Near Eastern Literature,” ZAW 82 (1970): 251-69; S. N. Kramer, “Man and His God, A Sumerian Variation on the ‘Job’ Motif,” VTSup 3 (1953): 170-82. While the book has fascinated readers for ages, it is a difficult book, difficult to translate and difficult to study. Most of it is written in poetic parallelism. But it is often very cryptic, it is written with unusual grammatical constructions, and it makes use of a large number of very rare words. All this has led some scholars to question if it was originally written in Hebrew or some other related Semitic dialect or language first. There is no indication of who the author was. It is even possible that the work may have been refined over the years, but there is no evidence for this either. The book uses a variety of genres (laments, hymns, proverbs, and oracles) in the various speeches of the participants. This all adds to the richness of the material. And while it is a poetic drama using cycles of speeches, there is no reason to doubt that the events represented here do not go back to a real situation and preserve the various arguments. Several indications in the book would place Job’s dates in the time of the patriarchs. But the composition of the book, or at least its final form, may very well come from the first millennium, maybe in the time of the flowering of wisdom literature with Solomon. We have no way of knowing when the book was written, or when its revision was completed. But dating it late in the intertestamental period is ruled out by the appearance of translations and copies of it, notably bits of a Targum of Job in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Among the general works and commentaries, see A. Hurvitz, “The Date of the Prose Tale of Job Linguistically Reconsidered,” HTR 67 (1974): 17-34; R. H. Pfeiffer, “The Priority of Job over Isaiah 40-55, ” JBL 46 (1927): 202ff. The book presents many valuable ideas on the subject of the suffering of the righteous. Ultimately it teaches that one must submit to the wisdom of the Creator. But it also indicates that the shallow answers of Job’s friends do not do justice to the issue. Their arguments that suffering is due to sin are true to a point, but they did not apply to Job. His protests sound angry and belligerent, but he held tenaciously to his integrity. His experience shows that it is possible to live a pure life and yet still suffer. He finally turns his plea to God, demanding a hearing. This he receives, of course, only to hear that God is sovereignly ruling the universe. Job can only submit to him. In the end God does not abandon his sufferer. For additional material, see G. L. Archer, The Book of Job; H. H. Rowley, “The Book of Job and Its Meaning,” BJRL 41 (1958/59): 167-207; J. A. Baker, The Book of Job; C. L. Feinberg, “The Book of Job,” BSac 91 (1934): 78-86; R. Polzin and D. Robertson, “Studies in the Book of Job,” Semeia 7 (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977).
Job 1:1 tn The Hebrew construction is literally “a man was,” using אִישׁ הָיָה (ʾish hayah) rather than a preterite first. This simply begins the narrative.
Job 1:1 sn The term Uz occurs several times in the Bible: a son of Aram (Gen 10:23), a son of Nahor (Gen 22:21), and a descendant of Seir (Gen 36:28). If these are the clues to follow, the location would be north of Syria or south near Edom. The book tells how Job’s flocks were exposed to Chaldeans, the tribes between Syria and the Euphrates (1:17), and in another direction to attacks from the Sabeans (1:15). The most prominent man among his friends was from Teman, which was in Edom (2:11). Uz is also connected with Edom in Lamentations 4:21. The most plausible location, then, would be east of Israel and northeast of Edom, in what is now North Arabia. The LXX has “on the borders of Edom and Arabia.” An early Christian tradition placed his home in an area about 40 miles south of Damascus, in Baashan at the southeast foot of Hermon.
Job 1:1 tn In Hebrew the defining relative clause (“whose name was Job”) is actually an asyndetic verbless noun-clause placed in apposition to the substantive (“a man”); see GKC 486 §155.e.
Job 1:1 sn The name “Job” is mentioned by Ezekiel as one of the greats in the past—Noah, Job, and Daniel (14:14). The suffering of Job was probably well known in the ancient world, and this name was clearly part of that tradition. There is little reason to try to determine the etymology and meaning of the name, since it may not be Hebrew. If it were Hebrew, it might mean something like “persecuted,” although some suggest “aggressor.” If Arabic it might have the significance of “the one who always returns to God.”
Job 1:1 tn The word תָּם (tam) has been translated “blameless” (so NIV, NLT, NASB). The verbal root תָּמַם (tamam) means “to be blameless, complete.” The word is found in Gen 25:27 where it describes Jacob as “even-tempered.” It also occurs in Ps 64:5 (64:4 ET) and Prov 29:10. The meaning is that a person or a thing is complete, perfect, flawless. It does not mean that he was sinless, but that he was wholeheartedly trying to please God, that he had integrity and was blameless before God.
Job 1:1 tn The word יָשָׁר (yashar, “upright”) is complementary to “blameless.” The idea is “upright, just,” and applies to his relationships with others (see Pss 25:21; 37:37).
Job 1:1 sn These two expressions indicate the outcome of Job’s character. “Fearing God” and “turning from evil” also express two correlative ideas in scripture; they signify his true piety—he had reverential fear of the Lord, meaning he was a truly devoted worshiper who shunned evil.

Job 2:1-10

Satan’s Additional Charge

2 Again the day came when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also arrived among them to present himself before the Lord.^[a] ²And the Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the Lord,^[b] “From roving about on the earth, and from walking back and forth across it.”^[c] ³Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? For there is no one like him on the earth, a pure and upright man, one who fears God and turns away from evil. And he still holds firmly^[d] to his integrity,^[e] so that^[f] you stirred me up to destroy him^[g] without reason.”^[h]

⁴But^[i] Satan answered the Lord, “Skin for^[j] skin!^[k] Indeed, a man will give up^[l] all that he has to save his life.^[m] ⁵But extend your hand and strike his bone and his flesh,^[n] and he will no doubt^[o] curse you to your face!”

⁶So the Lord said to Satan, “All right,^[p] he is^[q] in your power;^[r] only preserve^[s] his life.”

Job’s Integrity in Suffering

⁷So Satan went out from the presence of the Lord, and he afflicted^[t] Job with a malignant ulcer^[u] from the soles of his feet to the top of his head.^[v] ⁸Job took a shard of broken pottery to scrape^[w] himself^[x] with while he was sitting^[y] among the ashes.^[z]

⁹Then^[aa] his wife said to him, “Are you still holding firmly to your integrity?^[ab] Curse^[ac] God, and die!”^[ad] ¹⁰But he replied,^[ae] “You’re talking like one of the godless women^[af] would do! Should we receive^[ag] what is good from God, and not also^[ah] receive^[ai] what is evil?”^[aj] In all this Job did not sin by what he said.^[ak]

Footnotes

Job 2:1 tc This last purpose clause has been omitted in some Greek versions.
Job 2:2 tn Heb “answered the Lord and said” (also in v. 4). The words “and said” here and in v. 9 have not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons.
Job 2:2 tn See the note on this phrase in 1:7.
Job 2:3 tn The form is the Hiphil participle, “make strong, seize, hold fast.” It is the verbal use here; joined with עֹדֶנּוּ (ʿodennu, “yet he”) it emphasizes that “he still holds firmly.” The testing has simply strengthened Job in his integrity.
Job 2:3 tn This is the same word used to describe Job as “blameless, pure.” Here it carries the idea of “integrity”; Job remained blameless, perfect.
Job 2:3 tn The vav (ו) with the preterite is used here to express the logical conclusion or consequence of what was stated previously. God is saying that Job has maintained his integrity, so that now it is clear that Satan moved against him groundlessly (GKC 328 §111.l).
Job 2:3 tn The verb literally means “to swallow”; it forms an implied comparison in the line, indicating the desire of Satan to ruin him completely. See A Guillaume, “A Note on the Root bala`,” JTS 13 (1962): 320-23; and N. M. Sarna, “Epic Substratum in the Prose of Job,”JBL 76 (1957): 13-25, for a discussion of the Ugaritic deity Mot swallowing up the enemy.
Job 2:3 sn Once again the adverb חִנָּם (khinnam, “gratis”) is used. It means “graciously, gratis, free, without cause, for no reason.” Here the sense has to be gratuitously, for no reason.” The point of the verb חָנַן (khanan, “to be gracious”) and its derivatives is that the action is undeserved. In fact, they would deserve the opposite. Sinners seeking grace deserve punishment. Here, Job deserves reward, not suffering.
Job 2:4 tn The form is the simple preterite with the vav (ו) consecutive. However, the speech of Satan is in contrast to what God said, even though in narrative sequence.
Job 2:4 tn The preposition בְּעַד (b^eʿad) designates interest or advantage arising from the idea of protection for (“for the benefit of”); see IBHS 201-2 §11.2.7a.
Job 2:4 sn The meaning of the expression is obscure. It may come from the idea of sacrificing an animal or another person in order to go free, suggesting the expression that one type of skin that was worth less was surrendered to save the more important life. Satan would then be saying that Job was willing for others to die for him to go free, but not himself. “Skin” would be a synecdoche of the part for the whole (like the idiomatic use of skin today for a person in a narrow escape). The second clause indicates that God has not even scratched the surface because Job has been protected. His “skin” might have been scratched, but not his flesh and bone! But if his life had been put in danger, he would have responded differently.
Job 2:4 tc The LXX has “make full payment, pay a full price” (LSJ 522 s.v. ἐκτίνω).
Job 2:4 tn Heb “Indeed, all that a man has he will give for his life.”
Job 2:5 sn The “bones and flesh” are idiomatic for the whole person, his physical and his psychical/spiritual being (see further H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament, 26-28).
Job 2:5 sn This is the same oath formula found in 1:11; see the note there.
Job 2:6 tn The particle הִנּוֹ (hinno) is literally, “here he is!” God presents Job to Satan, with the restriction on preserving Job’s life.
Job 2:6 tn The LXX has “I deliver him up to you.”
Job 2:6 tn Heb “hand.”
Job 2:6 sn The irony of the passage comes through with this choice of words. The verb שָׁמַר (shamar) means “to keep; to guard; to preserve.” The exceptive clause casts Satan in the role of a savior—he cannot destroy this life but must protect it.
Job 2:7 tn The verb is נָכָה (nakhah, “struck, smote”); it can be rendered in this context as “afflicted.”
Job 2:7 sn The general consensus is that Job was afflicted with a leprosy known as elephantiasis, named because the rough skin and the swollen limbs are animal-like. The Hebrew word שְׁחִין (sh^ekhin, “boil”) can indicate an ulcer as well. Leprosy begins with such, but so do other diseases. Leprosy normally begins in the limbs and spreads, but Job was afflicted everywhere at once. It may be some other disease also characterized by such a malignant ulcer. D. J. A. Clines has a thorough bibliography on all the possible diseases linked to this description (Job [WBC], 48). See also HALOT 1460 s.v. שְׁחִין.
Job 2:7 tn Heb “crown.”
Job 2:8 tn The verb גָּרַד (garad) is a hapax legomenon (only occurring here). Modern Hebrew has retained a meaning “to scrape,” which is what the cognate Syriac and Arabic indicate. In the Hitpael it would mean “scrape himself.”
Job 2:8 sn The disease required constant attention. The infection and pus had to be scraped away with a piece of broken pottery in order to prevent the spread of the infection. The skin was so disfigured that even his friends did not recognize him (2:12). The book will add that the disease afflicted him inwardly, giving him a foul breath and a loathsome smell (19:17, 20). The sores bred worms; they opened and ran, and closed and tightened (16:8). He was tormented with dreams (7:14). He felt like he was choking (7:14). His bones were racked with burning pain (30:30). And he was not able to rise from his place (19:18). The disease was incurable, but it would last for years, leaving the patient longing for death.
Job 2:8 tn The construction uses the disjunctive vav (ו) with the independent pronoun with the active participle. The construction connects this clause with what has just been said, making this a circumstantial clause.
Job 2:8 sn Among the ashes. It is likely that the “ashes” refers to the place outside the city where the rubbish was collected and burnt, i.e., the ash-heap (cf. CEV). This is the understanding of the LXX, which reads “dung-hill outside the city.”
Job 2:9 tn The versions have some information here that is interesting, albeit fanciful. The Targum calls her “Dinah.” The LXX has “when a long time had passed.” But the whole rendering of the LXX is paraphrastic: “How long will you hold out, saying, ‘Behold, I wait yet a little while, expecting the hope of my deliverance?’ for behold, your memorial is abolished from the earth, even your sons and daughters, the pangs and pains of my womb which I bore in vain with sorrows, and you yourself sit down to spend the night in the open air among the corruption of worms, and I am a wanderer and a servant from place to place and house to house, waiting for the setting sun, that I may rest from my labors and pains that now beset me, but say some word against the Lord and die.”
Job 2:9 sn See R. D. Moore, “The Integrity of Job,” CBQ 45 (1983): 17-31. The reference of Job’s wife to his “integrity” could be a precursor of the conclusion reached by Elihu in 32:2 where he charged Job with justifying himself rather than God.
Job 2:9 tn The verb is literally בָּרַךְ, (barakh, “bless”). As in the earlier uses, the meaning probably has more to do with renouncing God than of speaking a curse. The actual word may be taken as a theological euphemism for the verb קִלֵּל (qillel, “curse”). If Job’s wife had meant that he was trying to justify himself rather than God, “bless God” might be translated “speak well of God,” the resolution accepted by God in 42:7-8 following Job’s double confession of having spoken wrongly of God (40:3-5; 42:1-6). sn The church fathers were quick to see here again the role of the wife in the temptation—she acts as the intermediary between Satan and Job, pressing the cause for him. However, Job’s wife has been demonized falsely. Job did not say that she was a foolish woman, only that she was speaking like one of them (2:10). Also, Job did not exclude her from sharing in his suffering (“should we receive”). He evidently recognized that her words were the result of her personal loss and pain as well as the desire to see her husband’s suffering ended. When God gave instructions for the restoration of Job’s friends because of their foolish words (42:7-9), no mention is made of any need for Job’s wife to be restored.
Job 2:9 tn The imperative with the conjunction in this expression serves to express the certainty that will follow as the result or consequence of the previous imperative (GKC 324-25 §110.f).
Job 2:10 tn Heb “he said to her.”
Job 2:10 tn The word “foolish” (נָבָל, naval) has to do with godlessness more than silliness (Ps 14:1). To be foolish in this sense is to deny the nature and the work of God in life its proper place. See A. Phillips, “NEBALA—A Term for Serious Disorderly Unruly Conduct,” VT 25 (1975): 237-41; and W. M. W. Roth, “NBL,” VT 10 (1960): 394-409.
Job 2:10 tn The verb קִבֵּל (qibbel) means “to accept, receive.” It is attested in the Amarna letters with the meaning “receive meekly, patiently.”
Job 2:10 tn The adverb גָּם (gam, “also, even”) is placed here before the first clause, but belongs with the second. It intensifies the idea (see GKC 483 §153). See also C. J. Labuschagne, “The Emphasizing Particle GAM and Its Connotations,” Studia Biblica et Semitica, 193-203.
Job 2:10 tn The two verbs in this sentence, Piel imperfects, are deliberative imperfects; they express the reasoning or deliberating in the interrogative sentences.
Job 2:10 tn A question need not be introduced by an interrogative particle or adverb. The natural emphasis on the words is enough to indicate it is a question (GKC 473 §150.a).sn The Hebrew words טוֹב (tov, “good”) and רַע (raʿ, “evil”) have to do with what affects life. That which is good benefits people because it produces, promotes and protects life; that which is evil brings calamity and disaster, it harms, pains, or destroys life.
Job 2:10 tn Heb “sin with his lips,” an idiom meaning he did not sin by what he said.

Psalm 26

Psalm 26^[a]

By David.

26 Vindicate me, O Lord,
for I have integrity,^[b]
and I trust in the Lord without wavering.
²Examine me, O Lord, and test me.
Evaluate my inner thoughts and motives.^[c]
³For I am ever aware of your faithfulness,^[d]
and your loyalty continually motivates me.^[e]
⁴I do not associate^[f] with deceitful men,
or consort^[g] with those who are dishonest.^[h]
⁵I hate the mob^[i] of evil men,
and do not associate^[j] with the wicked.
⁶I maintain a pure lifestyle,^[k]
so I can appear before your altar,^[l] O Lord,
⁷to give you thanks,^[m]
and to tell about all your amazing deeds.^[n]
⁸O Lord, I love the temple where you live,^[o]
the place where your splendor is revealed.^[p]
⁹Do not sweep me away^[q] with sinners,
or execute me along with violent people,^[r]
¹⁰who are always ready to do wrong^[s]
or offer a bribe.^[t]
¹¹But I have integrity.^[u]
Rescue me^[v] and have mercy on me!
¹²I am safe,^[w]
and among the worshipers I will praise the Lord.

Footnotes

Psalm 26:1 sn Psalm 26. The author invites the Lord to test his integrity, asserts his innocence and declares his loyalty to God.
Psalm 26:1 tn Heb “for I in my integrity walk.”
Psalm 26:2 tn Heb “evaluate my kidneys and my heart.” The kidneys and heart were viewed as the seat of one’s volition, conscience, and moral character.
Psalm 26:3 tn Heb “for your faithfulness [is] before my eyes.”
Psalm 26:3 tn Heb “and I walk about in your loyalty.”sn The psalmist’s awareness of the Lord’s faithfulness and…loyalty toward him motivates him to remain loyal to the Lord and to maintain his moral purity.
Psalm 26:4 tn Heb “sit.”
Psalm 26:4 tn Heb “go.” The psalmist uses the imperfect form of the verb to emphasize that he does not make a practice of associating with such people.
Psalm 26:4 tn Heb “[those who] conceal themselves.”
Psalm 26:5 tn Heb “assembly, company.”
Psalm 26:5 tn Heb “sit.” The psalmist uses the imperfect form of the verb to emphasize that he does not make a practice of associating with such people.
Psalm 26:6 tn Heb “I wash my hands in innocence.” The psalmist uses an image from cultic ritual to picture his moral lifestyle. The imperfect verbal emphasizes that this is his habit.
Psalm 26:6 tn Heb “so I can go around your altar” (probably in ritual procession). Following the imperfect of the preceding line, the cohortative with vav (ו) conjunctive indicates purpose or result.
Psalm 26:7 tn Heb “to cause to be heard the sound of thanksgiving.”
Psalm 26:7 tn The two infinitival forms (both with prefixed preposition ל, lamed) give the purpose for his appearance at the altar.
Psalm 26:8 tn Heb “the dwelling of your house.”
Psalm 26:8 tn Heb “the place of the abode of your splendor.”
Psalm 26:9 tn Heb “do not gather up my life with.”
Psalm 26:9 tn Heb “or with men of bloodshed my life.” The verb is supplied; it is understood by ellipsis (see the preceding line).
Psalm 26:10 tn Heb “who [have] in their hands evil.”
Psalm 26:10 tn Heb “and their right hand is full of a bribe.”
Psalm 26:11 tn Heb “and I in my integrity walk.” The psalmist uses the imperfect verbal form to emphasize this is his practice. The construction at the beginning of the verse (conjunction + pronoun) highlights the contrast between the psalmist and the sinners mentioned in vv. 9-10.
Psalm 26:11 tn Or “redeem me.”
Psalm 26:12 tn Heb “my foot stands in a level place.”

Hebrews 1:1-4

Introduction: God Has Spoken Fully and Finally in His Son

1 After God spoke long ago^[a] in various portions^[b] and in various ways^[c] to our ancestors^[d] through the prophets, ²in these last days he has spoken to us in a son,^[e] whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world.^[f] ³The Son is^[g] the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word,^[h] and so when he had accomplished cleansing for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.^[i] ⁴Thus he became^[j] so far better than the angels as^[k] he has inherited a name superior to theirs.

Footnotes

Hebrews 1:1 tn Or “spoke formerly.”
Hebrews 1:1 tn Or “parts.” The idea is that God’s previous revelation came in many parts and was therefore fragmentary or partial (L&N 63.19), in comparison with the final and complete revelation contained in God’s Son. However, some interpret πολυμερῶς (polumerōs) in Heb 1:1 to mean “on many different occasions” and would thus translate “many times” (L&N 67.11). This is the option followed by the NIV “at many times and in various ways.” Finally, this word is also understood to refer to the different manners in which something may be done, and would then be translated “in many different ways” (L&N 89.81). In this last case, the two words πολυμερῶς and πολυτρόπως (polutropōs) mutually reinforce one another (“in many and various ways,” NRSV).
Hebrews 1:1 tn These two phrases are emphasized in Greek by being placed at the beginning of the sentence and by alliteration.
Hebrews 1:1 tn Grk “to the fathers.”
Hebrews 1:2 tn The Greek puts an emphasis on the quality of God’s final revelation. As such, it is more than an indefinite notion (“a son”) though less than a definite one (“the son”), for this final revelation is not just through any son of God, nor is the emphasis specifically on the person himself. Rather, the focus here is on the nature of the vehicle of God’s revelation: He is no mere spokesman (or prophet) for God, nor is he merely a heavenly messenger (or angel); instead, this final revelation comes through one who is intimately acquainted with the heavenly Father in a way that only a family member could be. There is, however, no exact equivalent in English (“in son” is hardly good English style).sn The phrase in a son is the fulcrum of Heb 1:1-4. It concludes the contrast of God’s old and new revelation and introduces a series of seven descriptions of the Son. These descriptions show why he is the ultimate revelation of God.
Hebrews 1:2 tn Grk “the ages.” The temporal (ages) came to be used of the spatial (what exists in those time periods). See Heb 11:3 for the same usage.
Hebrews 1:3 tn Grk “who being…and sustaining.” Heb 1:1-4 form one skillfully composed sentence in Greek, but it must be broken into shorter segments to correspond to contemporary English usage, which does not allow for sentences of this length and complexity.
Hebrews 1:3 tn Grk “by the word of his power.”
Hebrews 1:3 sn An allusion to Ps 110:1, quoted often in Hebrews.
Hebrews 1:4 tn Grk “having become.” This is part of the same sentence that extends from v. 1 through v. 4 in the Greek text.
Hebrews 1:4 tn Most modern English translations attempt to make the comparison somewhat smoother by treating “name” as if it were the subject of the second element: “as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs” (cf. NAB, NIV, NRSV, CEV). However, the Son is the subject of both the first and second elements: “he became so far better”; “he has inherited a name.” The present translation maintains this parallelism even though it results in a somewhat more awkward rendering.sn This comparison is somewhat awkward to express in English, but it reflects an important element in the argument of Hebrews: the superiority of Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 2:5-12

Exposition of Psalm 8: Jesus and the Destiny of Humanity

⁵For he did not put the world to come,^[a] about which we are speaking,^[b] under the control of angels. ⁶Instead someone testified somewhere:

“What is man that you think of him^[c] or the son of man that you care for him?
⁷You made him lower than the angels for a little while.
You crowned him with glory and honor.^[d]
⁸You put all things under his control.”^[e]

For when he put all things under his control, he left nothing outside of his control. At present we do not yet see all things under his control,^[f] ⁹but we see Jesus, who was made lower than the angels for a little while,^[g] now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death,^[h] so that by God’s grace he would experience^[i] death on behalf of everyone. ¹⁰For it was fitting for him, for whom and through whom all things exist,^[j] in bringing many sons to glory, to make the pioneer^[k] of their salvation perfect through sufferings. ¹¹For indeed he who makes holy and those being made holy all have the same origin,^[l] and so^[m] he is not ashamed to call them brothers and sisters,^[n] ¹²saying, “I will proclaim your name to my brothers;^[o] in the midst of the assembly I will praise you.”^[p]

Footnotes

Hebrews 2:5 sn The phrase the world to come means “the coming inhabited earth,” using the Greek term which describes the world of people and their civilizations.
Hebrews 2:5 sn See the previous reference to the world in Heb 1:6.
Hebrews 2:6 tn Grk “remember him.”
Hebrews 2:7 tc Several witnesses, many of them early and significant (א A C D* P Ψ 0243 0278 33 1739 1881 al lat co), have at the end of v 7, “You have given him dominion over the works of your hands.” Other mss, not quite as impressive in weight, lack the words (P⁴⁶ B D² M). In spite of the impressive external evidence for the longer reading, it is most likely a scribal addition to conform the text of Hebrews to Ps 8:6 (8:7 LXX). Conformity of a NT quotation of the OT to the LXX was a routine scribal activity, and can hardly be in doubt here as to the cause of the longer reading.
Hebrews 2:8 tn Grk “you subjected all things under his feet.”sn A quotation from Ps 8:4-6.
Hebrews 2:8 sn The expression all things under his control occurs three times in 2:8. The latter two occurrences are not exactly identical to the Greek text of Ps 8:6 quoted at the beginning of the verse, but have been adapted by the writer of Hebrews to fit his argument.
Hebrews 2:9 tn Or “who was made a little lower than the angels.”
Hebrews 2:9 tn Grk “because of the suffering of death.”
Hebrews 2:9 tn Grk “would taste.” Here the Greek verb does not mean “sample a small amount” (as a typical English reader might infer from the word “taste”), but “experience something cognitively or emotionally; come to know something” (cf. BDAG 195 s.v. γεύομαι 2).
Hebrews 2:10 tn Grk “for whom are all things and through whom are all things.”
Hebrews 2:10 sn The Greek word translated pioneer is used of a “prince” or leader, the representative head of a family. It also carries nuances of “trailblazer,” one who breaks through to new ground for those who follow him. It is used some thirty-five times in the Greek OT and four times in the NT, always of Christ (Acts 3:15; 5:31; Heb 2:10; 12:2).
Hebrews 2:11 tn Grk “are all from one.”
Hebrews 2:11 tn Grk “for which reason.”
Hebrews 2:11 tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1, where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [adelphoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited). The context here also indicates both men and women are in view; note especially the collective τὰ παιδία (ta paidia) in v. 14.
Hebrews 2:12 tn Here, because of its occurrence in an OT quotation, τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς (tois adelphois) has been translated simply as “brothers” rather than “brothers and sisters” (see the note on the latter phrase in the previous verse).
Hebrews 2:12 sn A quotation from Ps 22:22.

Mark 10:2-16

²Then some Pharisees^[a] came, and to test him^[b] they asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his^[c] wife?”^[d] ³He answered them,^[e] “What did Moses command you?” ⁴They said, “Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.”^[f] ⁵But Jesus said to them, “He wrote this commandment for you because of your hard hearts.^[g] ⁶But from the beginning of creation he^[h] made them male and female.^[i] ⁷For this reason a man will leave his father and mother,^[j] ⁸and the two will become one flesh.^[k] So they are no longer two, but one flesh. ⁹Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

¹⁰In the house once again, the disciples asked him about this. ¹¹So^[l] he told them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her. ¹²And if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”^[m]

Jesus and Little Children

¹³Now^[n] people were bringing little children to him for him to touch,^[o] but the disciples scolded those who brought them.^[p] ¹⁴But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the little children come to me and do not try to stop them, for the kingdom of God^[q] belongs to such as these.^[r] ¹⁵I tell you the truth,^[s] whoever does not receive^[t] the kingdom of God like a child^[u] will never^[v] enter it.” ¹⁶After he took the children in his arms, he placed his hands on them and blessed them.

Footnotes

Mark 10:2 tc The Western text (D it) and a few others have only καί (kai) here, rather than καὶ προσελθόντες Φαρισαῖοι (kai proselthontes Pharisaioi, here translated as “then some Pharisees came”). The longer reading, a specific identification of the subject, may have been prompted by the parallel in Matt 19:3. The fact that the mss vary in how they express this subject lends credence to this judgment: οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι προσελθόντες (hoi de Pharisaioi proselthontes, “now the Pharisees came”) in W Θ 565 2542; καὶ προσελθόντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι (kai proselthontes hoi Pharisaioi, “then the Pharisees came”) in א C N (ƒ¹: καὶ προσελθόντες ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτὸν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι) 579 1241 1424 pm; and καὶ προσελθόντες Φαρισαῖοι in A B K L Γ Δ Ψ ƒ¹³ 28 700 892 pm. Further, the use of an indefinite plural (a general “they”) is a Markan feature, occurring over twenty times. Thus, internally the evidence looks rather strong for the shorter reading, in spite of the minimal external support for it. However, if scribes assimilated this text to Matt 19:3, a more exact parallel might have been expected: Matthew has καὶ προσῆλθον αὐτῷ Φαρισαῖοι (kai prosēlthon autō Pharisaioi, “then Pharisees came to him”). Although the verb form needs to be different according to syntactical requirements of the respective sentences, the word order variety, as well as the presence or absence of the article and the alternation between δέ and καί as the introductory conjunction, all suggest that the variety of readings might not be due to scribal adjustments toward Matthew. At the same time, the article with Φαρισαῖοι is found in both Gospels in many of the same witnesses (א M in Matt; א pm in Mark), and the anarthrous Φαρισαῖοι is likewise parallel in many mss (B L ƒ¹³ 700 892). Another consideration is the possibility that very early in the transmissional history, scribes naturally inserted the most obvious subject (the Pharisees would be the obvious candidates as the ones to test Jesus). This may account for the reading with δέ, since Mark nowhere else uses this conjunction to introduce the Pharisees into the narrative. As solid as the internal arguments against the longer reading seem to be, the greatest weakness is the witnesses that support it. The Western mss are prone to alter the text by adding, deleting, substituting, or rearranging large amounts of material. There are times when the rationale for this seems inexplicable. In light of the much stronger evidence for “the Pharisees came,” even though it occurs in various permutations, it is probably wisest to retain the words. This judgment, however, is hardly certain.sn See the note on Pharisees in 2:16.
Mark 10:2 tn In Greek this phrase occurs at the end of the sentence. It has been brought forward to conform to English style.
Mark 10:2 tn The personal pronoun “his” is not in the Greek text, but is certainly implied and has been supplied in the English translation to clarify the sense of the statement (cf. “his wife” in 10:7).
Mark 10:2 tn The particle εἰ (ei) is often used to introduce both indirect and direct questions. Thus, another possible translation is to take this as an indirect question: “They asked him if it were lawful for a man to divorce his wife.” See BDF §440.3.sn The question of the Pharisees was anything but sincere; they were asking it to test him. Jesus was now in the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas (i.e., Judea and beyond the Jordan) and it is likely that the Pharisees were hoping he might answer the question of divorce in a way similar to John the Baptist and so suffer the same fate as John, i.e., death at the hands of Herod (cf. 6:17-19). Jesus answered the question not on the basis of rabbinic custom and the debate over Deut 24:1, but rather from the account of creation and God’s original design.
Mark 10:3 tn Grk “But answering, he said to them.”
Mark 10:4 tn Grk “to divorce.” The pronoun has been supplied in the translation for clarity.sn An allusion to Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10).
Mark 10:5 tn Grk “heart” (a collective singular).
Mark 10:6 tc Most mss have ὁ θεός (ho theos, “God”) as the explicit subject of ἐποίησεν (epoiēsen, “he made”; A D W Θ Ψ ƒ^1,13 M lat sy), while the most significant witnesses, along with a few others, lack ὁ θεός (א B C L Δ 579 co). On the one hand, it is possible that the shorter reading is an assimilation to the wording of the LXX of Gen 1:27b where ὁ θεός is lacking. However, since it is mentioned at the beginning of the verse (Gen 1:27a) with ἐποίησεν scribes may have been motivated to add it in Mark to make the subject clear. Further, confusion could easily arise in this dominical saying, because Moses was the previously mentioned subject (v. 5) and inattentive readers might regard him as the subject of ἐποίησεν in v. 6. Thus, both on internal and external grounds, the most probable wording of the Ausgangstext here lacked ὁ θεός.
Mark 10:6 sn A quotation from Gen 1:27; 5:2.
Mark 10:7 tc ‡ The earliest witnesses, as well as a few other significant mss (א B Ψ 892* sy^s), lack the rest of the quotation from Gen 2:24, “and will be united with his wife.” Most mss ([A C] D [L N] W [Δ] Θ ƒ^[1],13 [579] M lat co) have the clause. It could be argued that the shorter reading was an accidental omission, due to this clause and v. 8 both beginning with καί (kai, “and”). But if that were the case, one might expect to see corrections in א or B. This can be overstated, of course; both mss combine in their errors on several other occasions. However, the nature of the omission here (both its length and the fact that it is from the OT) argues that א and B reflect the autographic wording. Further, the form of the longer reading is identical with the LXX of Gen 2:24, but different from the quotation in Matt 19:5 (προσκολληθήσεται vs. κολληθήσεται [proskollēthēsetai vs. kollēthēsetai], πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα vs. τῇ γυναικί [pros tēn gunaika vs. tē gunaiki]). The significance of this is that Matthew’s quotations of the OT are often, if not usually, directly from the Hebrew—except when he is following Mark’s quotation of the OT. Matthew in fact only departs from Mark’s verbatim quotation of the LXX in 15:4 and 19:19, both texts quoting from Exod 20:12/Deut 5:6 (and in both places the only difference from Mark/LXX is the dropping of σου [sou, “your”]). This might suggest that the longer reading here was not part of what the first evangelist had in his copy of Mark. Further, the reading without this line is harder, for the wife is not explicitly mentioned in v. 7; the casual reader could read “the two” of v. 8 as referring to father and mother rather than husband and wife. (And Mark is known for having harder, shorter readings that scribes tried to soften by explanatory expansion: In this chapter alone, cf. the textual problems in v. 6 [the insertion of ὁ θεός]; in v. 13 [the replacement of αὐτοῖς with τοῖς προσφέρουσιν or τοῖς φέρουσιν]; in v. 24 [insertion of ἐστιν τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐπὶ χρήμασιν, πλούσιον, or τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες; and perhaps in v. 2 [possible insertion of προσελθόντες Φαρισαῖοι or similar permutations].) Although a decision is difficult, the preferred reading lacks “and will be united with his wife.” NA²⁸ has the longer reading in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.
Mark 10:8 sn A quotation from Gen 2:24. The “two” refers to husband and wife, not father and mother mentioned in the previous verse. See the tc note on “mother” in v. 7 for discussion.
Mark 10:11 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “So” to indicate that Jesus’ statement is in response to the disciples’ question (v. 10).
Mark 10:12 sn It was not uncommon in Jesus’ day for a Jewish man to divorce his wife, but it was extremely rare for a wife to initiate such an action against her husband, since among many things it would have probably left her destitute and without financial support. Mark’s inclusion of the statement And if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery (v. 12) reflects more the problem of the predominantly Gentile church in Rome to which he was writing. As such it may be an interpretive and parenthetical comment by the author rather than part of the saying by Jesus, which would stop at the end of v. 11. As such it should then be placed in parentheses. Further NT passages that deal with the issue of divorce and remarriage are Matt 5:31-32; 19:1-12; Luke 16:18; 1 Cor 7.
Mark 10:13 tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic.
Mark 10:13 tn Grk “so that he would touch them.” Here the touch is connected with (or conveys) a blessing (cf. v. 16; also BDAG 126 s.v. ἅπτω 2.c).
Mark 10:13 tc “Those who brought them” (ἐπετιμῶν τοῖς προσφέρουσιν, epetimōn tois prospherousin) is the reading of most mss (A D W [Θ ƒ^1,13] M lat sy), but it is probably a motivated reading. Since the subject is not explicit in the earliest and best witnesses as well as several others (א B C L Δ Ψ 579 892), scribes would be prone to add “those who brought them” here to clarify that the children were not the ones being scolded. Both on external and internal grounds, the shorter reading is strongly preferred. Similar motivations are behind the translation here, namely, “those who brought them” has been supplied to ensure that the parents who brought the children are in view, not the children themselves.tn Grk “the disciples scolded them.”
Mark 10:14 sn The kingdom of God is a major theme of Jesus’ teaching. The nature of the kingdom of God in the NT and in Jesus’ teaching has long been debated by interpreters and scholars, with discussion primarily centering around the nature of the kingdom (earthly, heavenly, or both) and the kingdom’s arrival (present, future, or both). An additional major issue concerns the relationship between the kingdom of God and the person and work of Jesus himself.
Mark 10:14 sn The kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Children are a picture of those whose simple trust illustrates what faith is all about. The remark illustrates how everyone is important to God, even those whom others regard as insignificant.
Mark 10:15 tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amēn), I say to you.”
Mark 10:15 sn On receive see John 1:12.
Mark 10:15 sn The point of the comparison receive the kingdom of God like a child has more to do with a child’s trusting spirit and willingness to be dependent and receive from others than any inherent humility the child might possess.
Mark 10:15 tn The negation in Greek (οὐ μή, ou mē) is very strong here.

New English Translation (NET)

Prev Day

Top

Next Day

Use the calendar to view readings from this devotional.

Log in to read this devotional and:

Revised Common Lectionary (Semicontinuous)

I. The Prologue (1:1-2:13)

Job’s Good Life[a]

Footnotes

Satan’s Additional Charge

Job’s Integrity in Suffering

Footnotes

Psalm 26[a]

By David.

Footnotes

Introduction: God Has Spoken Fully and Finally in His Son

Footnotes

Exposition of Psalm 8: Jesus and the Destiny of Humanity

Footnotes

Jesus and Little Children

Footnotes

Job’s Good Life^[a]

Psalm 26^[a]