Daily Writing

Sunday, 21 June 2026

They said to Him, “Lord, that our eyes may be opened.” Matthew 20:33

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen)

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“They say to Him, ‘Lord, that they might be opened the ‘eyes, ours’.’” (CG)

In the previous verse, it said that Jesus stood and called the blind, asking what He could do for them. Matthew next records, “They say to Him, ‘Lord, that they might be opened the ‘eyes, ours’.’”

They use the same wording, open, as Isaiah concerning the blind. It was as if their eyes were doors that had been shut and were incapable of opening to the light. They are asking for that to be rectified. What Isaiah had said would have been known and anticipated by the people of Israel concerning the promises of the messianic era to come –

“Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
And the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.
⁶ Then the lame shall leap like a deer,
And the tongue of the dumb sing.” Isaiah 35:5, 6

As noted in previous commentaries, Mark and Luke focus on one person. Matthew focuses on two. Did both come forward as seems to be the case from Matthew, or did one speak on behalf of the other? The text leaves us guessing, but there is no reason to dismiss Matthew’s account.

It is generally assumed that Mark was written first. As such, he may have specifically written about Bartimaeus, having personally come to know him, or because he became known among the people. Later, however, Matthew, remembering the fuller aspect of the account, would have presented the event, acknowledging that there were two blind men.

Whatever the case is with these subtle differences, the request has been placed before Jesus.

Life application: Reading Scripture and comparing what Jesus did to what was promised concerning what the Messiah would do, it makes one wonder how Israel missed the significance of Jesus’ coming. It seems so obvious when the patterns, parallels, and prophecies are laid side by side to see how He fulfilled everything necessary to prove He is the Messiah.

And yet, they missed Him. To this day, they continue to do so. Why is this the case? The reason is the same as how many people treat Scripture, their relationship with God, and their interactions with the world around them.

If we look at the contents of the Bible from a me-centric focus, we will have pity parties when things don’t go well or when we think things are unfair about how our lives are in comparison to what is recorded in the word. If we look at God as the Giver of this word and think we should have been dealt a better hand, we will naturally find fault in God.

And when our interactions with others don’t put us ahead of everything and everyone else, then those around us will never meet our own misdirected expectations. But the world is not about us. The Bible, though including God’s redeemed in the overall plan, is not about us. And our interactions with God are no more difficult or unbearable than those presented in Scripture.

And more, seeing what God was willing to do to bring us back to Himself through the life and torturous death of Jesus, we should realize that God does love us despite whatever we are going through.

Understanding this, why did Israel miss the coming of their Messiah? It is because they have, and they continue to think that Scripture is about them. Their attitude is a culturally me-centric view of how things should be. When things don’t go well for them, they simply stop believing in God, pushing Him out of their mind, as innumerable Jews live today.

Whether it is Israel as a nation or humanity as individuals, in order to receive the full understanding and blessing of what Scripture is telling us, we need to remember that it is first and foremost about God, the infinitely good and gracious Creator, Sustainer, and Redeemer.

The fact that we have been included in what God has done should humble us and redirect our focus away from ourselves to Him. By doing this, we will have a fuller appreciation of Scripture, and we will have a much more directed focus on how to conduct our personal relationships with those around us.

“Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, ² looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” Hebrews 12:1, 2

Lord God, thank You for having loved us enough to send Jesus despite our sin and turning from You. May we have the right attitude concerning our position before You, accepting what You have done in our lives, even if it is difficult, painful, or tedious. This is a temporary walk. You have given us sure promises that the best is yet to come. May we patiently endure this present walk with our eyes focused on You. Amen.

Saturday, 20 June 2026

So Jesus stood still and called them, and said, “What do you want Me to do for you?” Matthew 20:32

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having stood, Jesus, He vocalized to them, and He said, ‘What you ‘will’ I should do to you?’” (CG)

In the previous verse, the two blind men continued to cry out to Jesus, begging for His mercy upon them. Their persistence paid off, as noted by Matthew. He notes, “And having stood, Jesus.”

Eventually, Jesus neared the blind men enough so that their voices could no longer be drowned out by the crowds. As such, and certainly wanting to know why they remained at a distance, it next says that “He vocalized to them.”

A new word is seen, phóneó, to emit a sound, and thus, to vocalize. It is used when a rooster crows. It was used to describe when Jesus cried out on the cross. One can see the etymological ancestor of our modern word “phone.” Of this word, the Topical Lexicon says –

“Strong’s Greek 5455 portrays the purposeful use of the voice—whether summoning, exhorting, pleading, or proclaiming. It occurs forty-three times across the New Testament, spanning the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ, the life of the early church, and a single eschatological scene. The verb’s settings cluster around five broad spheres: personal encounters with Jesus, miraculous works, parabolic instruction, apostolic ministry, and final judgment.”

Mark and Luke give different details concerning this. Mark says that Jesus commanded (using the word “vocalized”) that the blind should be called. They called Bartimaeus, telling him that he was being called. With that, he cast aside his garment and went to Jesus. Luke agrees with this, leaving off the details about the garment.

Each account agrees, but is given from a different perspective that builds into one full scene. With the details of the calling stated, all three accounts agree on the next words, “and He said, ‘What you ‘will’ I should do to you?’”

In Matthew, the address is plural. In Mark and Luke, it is singular. The attention being on one as opposed to two was addressed in an earlier verse. If there are two, then there is one. For whatever reason, Matthew chose to focus on both while Mark and Luke focused on one individual.

One possible explanation for the difference is that despite being at the exit of the city, they were on opposite sides of the gate. If two were sitting side by side, it may be that people would only give to one, and some would go to the opposite side to avoid giving at all. But with both sides of the gate covered, the potential for more givers would be realized.

As such, Matthew, being a tax collector, would have been keenly aware of such a system. The other two accounts focused on the one specifically called first, Bartimaeus. This is speculation, but it is a logical reason why the two accounts differ in this detail.

Life application: If you have ever been to a place where people beg, you will see the proposed scenario played out. Beggars don’t just lump together, as if a person will stop and give every person a coin. Rather, they divide up in order to avoid overwhelming someone to the point where nothing is given.

Having both sides of the gate covered reasonably resolves the variation between the two accounts. The two could talk between the two of them, both raised their voices as Jesus neared, and one could speak for the other if he were called. Bartimaeus could have been called and directly asked what he wanted, and then said, “I want to see, but so does that guy over there. We are blind, Sir.”

We should not have any doubt that the accounts happened exactly as all three gospels describe, even if the details seem contradictory at first. A little thought about how things actually work in such a situation makes the entire scene understandable.

Lord God, Your word is a treasure that we can study and contemplate for all our days. Even doing this, we will never be able to fully plumb its depths. Thank You that we have it to guide us, instruct us, and challenge us as we walk before You. Amen.

Friday, 19 June 2026

Then the multitude warned them that they should be quiet; but they cried out all the more, saying, “Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David!” Matthew 20:31

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“The ‘also crowd’, it admonished them that they should mute. The ‘also greater they croaked’, saying, ‘You compassionate us, Lord, ‘Son, David’!’” (CG)

In the previous verse, it was noted that two blind men were sitting by the road. When they heard Jesus was passing by, they cried out to Jesus for mercy, calling Him the Lord, and the Son of David. In their crying out, there was a reaction. Matthew records, “The ‘also crowd’, it admonished them that they should mute.”

As with everything in Scripture, scholars debate why the crowd would tell them to be silent. Various suggestions have arisen. They were at the gates for a reason, which was to beg for money. This is seen elsewhere, such as the lame man in Acts 3. They would be taken to the most propitious place for getting something to help pay for their daily needs.

Depending on the time of year, that might change. At this time, because this gate sat on the road to Jerusalem, it is certain that it would be a great choice. Many people who were going to Jerusalem for the Passover would traverse the Jordan and go through the city. In the city, they would get supplies, maybe stop for some chicken kabobs, and then head out.

Having stopped, they would be refreshed and happy as they set out on the road to Jerusalem. Thus, they would be predisposed to doing something nice for a blind beggar by tossing him a coin. This would be especially so as they were heading to the Passover celebrations. Their thought would be that it is always good to have done something favorable to another when going to meet the Lord at the temple.

As such, the crowd probably admonished them to shut up, supposing that these men wanted Jesus, the great Prophet, Teacher, and possible Messiah, to give them something. The scene would be perfectly normal to anyone living at the time and surrounded by such circumstances. Despite the admonitions of the crowd, Matthew continues, “The ‘also greater they croaked’.”

One can mentally picture it. They hear that their one chance to encounter the Messiah is happening right then as He passes through the city. They lift their voices in hopes of getting His attention. The people get annoyed at the two blind people, as if they are not important enough to get a moment of Jesus’ time. “Shush! He’s not going to give you anything. Just be quiet.”

Knowing that they have been rejected by the crowds would cause them to amplify their calls. If nobody was going to help them, they would have only themselves to bring about success. Therefore, they continued “saying, ‘You compassionate us, Lord, ‘Son, David’!’”

It is completely reasonable that the crowds would have thought they were looking for a handout. Beggars have to make themselves noticed. Thus, as people walked by, they would call out, “Help for the blind. Help for the blind.” Having them crying out at the top of their voices would be… annoying. If they realized their true intent, the crowds may have been a bit more sympathetic.

The blind men repeat the same words as the previous verse, calling Jesus Lord, ‘Son, David’. Their intent goes beyond a coin being handed out to them. They are looking for the same relief that they had surely heard others had received.

Life application: The old saying, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease,” is true of these two men. They are making noise in hopes of receiving relief. If they paid heed to the admonishments of the people, their chances of having their sight restored would probably never come about. Therefore, they not only ignored the crowd’s words but they also amplified their calls.

In Luke 18, Jesus gives a parable about a woman who went to a judge in the city to get justice from her adversary. She repeatedly went to him until he finally got tired of being bothered by her and agreed to resolve her case. Her persistence brought about the result she desired.

The same is true with the person in Luke 11 who went to his neighbor’s house at midnight to borrow bread. Jesus noted that the man in the house wouldn’t get up because they were friends. Rather, he would rise because of the other man’s persistence.

The point of these teachings, and what can be seen in the plight of these beggars, is that the Lord appreciates us diligently petitioning Him. He will respond when He sees the true nature of a person who is willing to extend himself to persistently call out for an answer to his request. As the Bible bears this out, we can learn from it and continue to present our requests, knowing that in His perfect timing, He will act according to His perfect will.

Lord God, sometimes it is hard to continue prodding You for our desires and needs through prayer, as if we are bothering You. But Lord, Your word tells us we should not feel this way. Help us to be bold in presenting our petitions to You, knowing that You will respond in the manner that is best for us. Thank You for hearing our prayers. Amen.

Thursday, 18 June 2026

And behold, two blind men sitting by the road, when they heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out, saying, “Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David!” Matthew 20:30

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And you behold! Two ‘blind’ sitting beside the road, having heard that Jesus, He passes, they croaked, saying, ‘You compassionate us, Lord, ‘Son, David’!’” (CG)

In the previous verse, it was noted that as they went out of Jericho, a great multitude followed Jesus. Along with that, Matthew records, “And you behold! Two ‘blind’ sitting beside the road.”

The issue of the seemingly contradictory time of Jesus encountering and healing the blind in this account, as recorded by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, was dealt with yesterday. Though getting ahead in the narrative, it was necessary at some point to rectify that.

However, that is not the only discrepancy between the accounts. The words “two ‘blind’ sitting beside the road” are also problematic for some. This is because Mark and Luke say –

“Now they came to Jericho. As He went out of Jericho with His disciples and a great multitude, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the road begging.” Mark 10:46

“Then it happened, as He was coming near Jericho, that a certain blind man sat by the road begging.” Luke 18:35

As such, detractors of the Bible immediately claim that there is a contradiction in Scripture. One account says two men, the other accounts refer to a single individual. The fact is that if there are two, there is one. This is not a contradiction at all. It is a way of focusing differently on a matter.

This “two as opposed to one” is seen elsewhere in the gospels, such as the two demoniacs in Matthew 8 as opposed to a single one in Mark and Luke. The same thing occurs in the accounts at the time of the resurrection, where one or two are mentioned. This is an issue of focus and presentation, not a contradiction.

Mark goes beyond both Matthew and Luke and names the blind person he focuses on. The reason for this could be that the blind person who was healed became well known later among the believers, whereas the second man faded out of the spotlight. There is no contradiction in a “two” or “one” record. Understanding this, Matthew continues, saying, “having heard that Jesus, He passes.”

This was explained yesterday. The commotion of Jesus traversing the city, from one end to the other, means that they had a chance to encounter Him as He did so. Those who could see would have rushed to meet Jesus as He entered, passing the blind on their way. As the people passed the blind, “they croaked, saying, ‘You compassionate us, Lord, ‘Son, David’!’”

The present tense verb “He passes” tells us that they were fully aware of Jesus passing through Jericho. This was probably the main route for one who had traveled south on the east side of the Jordan and then passed over the Jordan on a trek to Jerusalem. As such, it makes complete sense that Jesus would pass right through the city. It would also be why the blind sat at the exit gate, hoping for some pilgrim heading to Jerusalem to have mercy on them with a blessing.

The men were strategically positioned to be in the most favorable spot for such things. Calling Jesus “Lord, ‘Son, David’” means they fully accepted that He was the promised fulfillment of the messianic promises. Surely, they had heard of His miracles and believed that He had the ability to perform what no one else but the Messiah could do.

Life application: As with the previous verse, there is no reason to assume there is a contradiction between Matthew’s account and that of the other gospels. Matthew was there with Jesus. He would have seen the two men calling out to the Lord for healing.

Mark may or may not have been there, but his focus was on someone who became well known enough to be remembered by name. Luke was not there, but gathered his information from various sources. He focused on a certain blind man, maybe having spoken to Mark, who was excited to mention Bartimaeus.

The fact is that if all three accounts were identical, or even if they were a bit differently worded, but said the same thing, they would be considered forgeries, ripped off from a single writer, something the Jesus Project is famous for claiming.

Don’t get discouraged by those whose seeming sole purpose in life is to destroy people’s faith in God and in the surety of His word. Press on with the understanding that if this is God’s word, it is completely reconcilable with His perfect character.

Just because we do not understand a difficulty does not mean that there is a problem with what is presented. Most of us do not understand how a nuclear bomb is made, but we know that they explode. Nobody would say, “I just don’t see how such a little bit of plutonium can make an entire city disappear. Therefore, it can’t happen.”

And yet, this is how we treat the Bible when we believe some knucklehead’s assertion that the Bible is in error. When his claim proves to be incorrect, who then is the knucklehead? Don’t be a knucklehead! Accept that what you don’t know simply means there is a limitation in your knowledge, not a problem with what you are trying to understand.

Glorious Lord God, thank You for guiding us as we read and contemplate Your word. As we continue to read it, study it, meditate on it, and accept it as Your word, the more profitable it is to us in our walk with You. Thank You that this is so. May we be diligent in our study of it all our days. Amen.

Wednesday, 17 June 2026

Now as they went out of Jericho, a great multitude followed Him. Matthew 20:29

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at the “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And they, proceeding from Jericho, it followed Him, ‘crowd, great’.” (CG)

In the previous verse, Jesus explained that He did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many. The narrative continues, saying, “And they, proceeding from Jericho.”

This is the first mention of Hiericho, Jericho, in the New Testament. Depending on the root of the name, it has two possible meanings: Place of Fragrance or Place of the Moon. The account says that they, meaning Jesus and the disciples, were proceeding from Jericho.

This has caused a great deal of difficulty based on the words of Luke 18, where it says, “He was coming near Jericho” when the account occurred. This should not be a problem. The accounts can be reconciled by understanding the full picture.

Jesus is nearing Jericho (Luke 18:35). A blind man sat by the road begging. As Jesus approached, he heard the multitude. It does not say where he is, just that he heard the multitude as they were passing (meaning him) by (Luke 18:26). He asked what was going on and heard it was Jesus who was coming. He starts to cry out, having no idea where Jesus is, just that He is coming. People tell him to be quiet. It then happens that as Jesus and His disciples are on their way out of Jericho, the multitude followed Him (Matthew 20:29). It is at this time that Jesus will heal the blind. This is why it says in Luke 19:1, “And having entered, He traversed the ‘Jericho’” (CG).

The assumption people make from Luke’s account is that the blind were on the entrance side of Jericho. But that is only an assumption. Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. The blind would have heard the commotion from the very beginning of the ruckus as the entire city went out to see Jesus. The perspectives are given by each gospel writer:

Luke says He was coming near Jericho.
Mark says they came to Jericho.
Matthew says they were proceeding from Jericho.

Luke records the beginning of the encounter as Jesus approached Jericho: the blind man heard the crowd and began crying out. Matthew and Mark record the point at which the healing is associated with Jesus’ departure from Jericho. Whether the cry began on the approach and culminated near the departure, or whether the locality of Jericho is being described from different sides of the city/region, the accounts need not contradict. Luke 19:1 confirms that Jesus entered and passed through Jericho in connection with the same movement, so the event belongs to the whole Jericho passage, not necessarily to a single frozen instant at one gate.

When Jesus got to the other side of Jericho as He passed through, He would have come to where the blind man was (while exiting the city), and the two parties would have finally met. It is Luke 19:1 that solves this otherwise difficult and wholly misunderstood situation. Since the beginning, excuses have been made to justify the event. To read some of them, go to the Pulpit Commentary on Matthew 20:29.

The problem is that at times, the gospels present information categorically rather than chronologically. However, it is evident throughout the gospels that this is not the case. Unless something is described with a time marker, there is no reason to assume the information is chronological instead of categorical.

We tend to assume that everything happened all at once when reading the accounts, but the man is blind. He would not have gotten up and gone to the other side of Jericho. He would have sat and called out, hoping someone would assist him. But the accounts all say otherwise, saying to him that he should be quiet. As such, “he cried out all the more” (Luke 18:39 et al.).

To “hear” and to “be present with” are not the same things for a blind person as they are for the seeing. The people would have flocked to Jesus as He entered. The blind would have sat in misery-filled anticipation until Jesus finally exited. Understanding this “supposed” discrepancy, it next says, “it followed Him, ‘crowd, great’.”

This would include those who travelled with Jesus, those who met up with Him on His nearing Jericho, and those who were in Jericho who flocked to Him.

Life application: There are other supposed contradictions in Jesus’ movements as He traveled from the Galilee to and through Jericho. Some were mentioned in earlier commentaries. There are also supposed contradictions in the account of the healing that will take place. These are not contradictions.

However, when coming to the narratives found in Scripture, we have to insert ourselves into the surrounding events. After giving several options to resolve the matter discussed above, options which span nineteen hundred years of scholarly study, the Pulpit Commentary sadly says, “Inspiration extends not to petty circumstances, and the credibility of the gospel depends not on the rectification of such minutiae.”

That is a cheap and inexcusable way of handling God’s “inspiration.” If God inspired the word, then there will be a resolution to the matter. God deals in minutiae. He created the universe, and yet a single atom will not be out of place. He set forth His plan of salvation, and not a single saved person will be forgotten by Him. If God weren’t in the details, the whole universe would collapse in on itself.

By placing ourselves in the narrative and seeing it (at least in a non-visual way) as the blind saw it, there is no contradiction at all. If Luke 19:1 didn’t exist, the matter would be more difficult to reconcile. Despite this, if Luke 19:1 were not included, we could make our own assumptions, knowing that God had a reason for saying things the way He did.

Unfortunately, without having the right information, errors will naturally seem to arise. The NKJV does not say “And” in Luke 19:1. It says, “Then Jesus entered and passed through Jericho.” That would cause a real contradiction. But the Greek kai (and), not tote (then), is used. It is simply a statement of fact that Jesus entered and passed through without regard to time.

Commentaries will also muddy the waters. Benson says, “Jesus entered and passed through Jericho — Namely, after performing the miracle recorded at the close of the preceding chapter.” This is an assumption (as noted above) that the account of the events is chronological rather than categorical.

The thought Benson presents is that Jesus was entering Jericho, He healed the blind, and then proceeded through Jericho. But taking Matthew, Mark, and Luke together, along with considering Luke 19:1, there is no discrepancy.

Regardless of the fumbling of fallible man, God’s word will be vindicated. Be careful not to assume that a commentary (even this one) is correct until you have fully thought through what is being said. If you still cannot come to a resolution on the matter, you can still have faith that God is in the details. All will be made clear someday.

If this is true with His word, it is true with you as well. He is there with you as you struggle through life. Trust that it is so. Keep your eyes, heart, and affections on Him. You will be rewarded for your faith on that day when you stand before Him.

Lord God, thank You that we possess a sure word about what You are doing to bring us back to Yourself. Thank You that Jesus is in the details, and that we are on the right and proper path back to You. Help us to walk in faith each step of the way. To Your glory, we pray. Amen.