AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The same discourse in Matthew: commanded, permitted, put away verbal / quotation: confirmed
Mark 10:2 to 10:12 and Matthew 19:3 to 19:9 report one exchange. The shared vocabulary is dense and includes the hinge verb of this unit: ἐντέλλομαι (G1781, enjoin, only 15 verses) at Mark 10:3 and Matthew 19:7, with ἀπολύω (G630) and Μωσεύς (G3475) across Matthew 19:7 to 19:9, and γυνή with ἀπολύω twice over at Matthew 19:9 and Matthew 5:32. Barnes, JFB and Poole all simply refer the reader to Matthew 19 for this material, which is itself a fact about the sources here. Note carefully what the parallel does and does not settle: Matthew carries an exception clause ("except for sexual immorality") and Mark does not, and the commentators quoted above supply it to Mark from Matthew.
Matthew 19:7 · Matthew 19:8 · Matthew 19:9 · Matthew 5:32
basis: Verifier: Matthew 19:7 shares G1781 ἐντέλλομαι (in 15 vv), G3475 Μωσεύς (in 79 vv) and G630 ἀπολύω (in 61 vv); Matthew 19:8 shares G1135 γυνή (in 195 vv), G630, G3475; Matthew 19:9 and Matthew 5:32 share G630 ἀπολύω twice with G1135 γυνή. Greek to Greek within the New Testament, one discourse reported twice; the tier records the shared-lexeme cluster and the relatively rare ἐντέλλομαι, not a claim that one Evangelist quotes the other.
Glued: the two-verse word that Paul calls a mystery verbal / quotation: confirmed
προσκολλάω (G4347, to glue to) is the rarest lexeme in this unit: the Verifier finds it in two verses of the whole New Testament, Mark 10:7 and Ephesians 5:31. Both are quoting Genesis 2:24, and both pair it with καταλείπω (G2641, leave behind, 24 verses) and γυνή. Where Mark's Jesus uses the line to close off divorce, Paul uses the identical line to speak of Christ and the church. Gill reads Mark 10:8 through Paul already, inferring that the wife is to be loved as the husband's own body.
Ephesians 5:31
basis: Verifier: shared G4347 προσκολλάω (in 2 vv, the rarest available lexeme), G2641 καταλείπω (in 24 vv) and G1135 γυνή (in 195 vv). Greek to Greek within the New Testament; both verses quote the same Genesis line, so the verbal link is real in both directions.
Male and female: the creation pair as an argument verbal / quotation: confirmed
ἄρσην (G730) and θῆλυς (G2338) are rare (7 and 5 verses) and travel together. They stand in Mark 10:6 and its Matthew parallel as the datum of creation, in Romans 1:27 where Paul argues from the natural use of the female by the male, and in Galatians 3:28 where Paul says there is no male and female in Christ Jesus. Held together the three uses stop two opposite mistakes: Galatians 3:28 is not an erasure of the creational pair that Mark 10:6 invokes, and Mark 10:6 is not a charter of standing before God, which Galatians denies to any such distinction.
Matthew 19:4 · Galatians 3:28 · Romans 1:27
basis: Verifier: shared G730 ἄῤῥην (in 7 vv) and G2338 θῆλυς (in 5 vv) with Matthew 19:4, Galatians 3:28 and Romans 1:27; Galatians 3:28 also shares G1520 εἷς (in 288 vv). A rare shared pair, Greek to Greek within the New Testament. The theological comparison drawn in the body is ⚙ synthesis, not part of the computed basis.
Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 quoted as the higher court structural / thematic: confirmed
Verses 6 to 8 are two Old Testament quotations laid end to end: "male and female he made them" from Genesis 1:27, and "for this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh" from Genesis 2:24. The Hebraic ἔσονται εἰς ("shall be into one flesh") is the fingerprint of the Greek Old Testament wording in Mark's text. Cambridge's note on v. 9 registers the shift in speaker across the three places: Adam's words in Genesis, God's in Matthew, Christ's in Mark. Note that Mark's clause in v. 6 does not contain the noun God at all; the divine subject is supplied from Genesis and is not stated until v. 9.
Genesis 1:27 · Genesis 2:24
basis: An explicit quotation, but Greek to Hebrew: no shared Strong's number can exist across the Testaments, so the Verifier can compute no verbal basis and the link may not be tiered verbal. Recorded basis: the wording of Mark 10:6 to 10:8 reproduces Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:24 (including the Septuagintal ἔσονται εἰς construction), and Gill names Genesis 2:24 as the source text at Mark 10:7 and 10:8.
The scroll of standing-off: Deuteronomy 24 as the law in view structural / thematic: confirmed
The certificate the Pharisees appeal to is the provision of Deuteronomy 24:1 to 24:4. Poole names the chapter directly and shows how the argument was conducted, that the Pharisees leaned on "she find no favour in his eyes" and stretched the word for uncleanness to cover any deformity or cause of dislike. Gill names the same passage as the law behind v. 4. Jesus does not contest that Moses wrote it; he contests its standing, calling it a concession written with hardness of heart in view.
Deuteronomy 24:1
basis: Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme is possible and the verbal tier is excluded. Recorded basis: Poole cites Deu 24:1 explicitly as the law the Pharisees are interpreting, and Gill identifies Deuteronomy 24:1 as the source of the bill of divorcement in Mark 10:4; Mark 10:4 reproduces its two elements, the written scroll and the sending away.
Hardness of heart: the prophets' diagnosis and cure structural / thematic: confirmed
σκληροκαρδία (G4641) is not a Greek philosophical term but a translation of an Old Testament complaint. Israel is told to circumcise the foreskin of the heart (Deuteronomy 10:16), Jeremiah repeats the demand (Jeremiah 4:4), and Ezekiel promises what no command can produce, the removal of the heart of stone and the gift of a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26). Read against that background, Jesus' explanation of the Mosaic concession is not an attack on Moses but a dating of the whole legal era: the concession belongs to the time before the new heart. This is ⚙ synthesis built on the lexicon, not a claim any commentator in the brief makes.
Deuteronomy 10:16 · Jeremiah 4:4 · Ezekiel 36:26
basis: Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexeme is available and the verbal tier is excluded. Recorded basis: shared motif and idiom of the hardened, uncircumcised heart requiring divine replacement; the connection of Mark 10:5 to these three verses is our reading of the word-field, offered as motif only.
What God joined, and what God hates typological
Malachi's rebuke of Judah stands behind the logic of v. 9 more closely than any commentator in this brief notices: the prophet appeals to the wife of a man's covenant and to the one who made them, and declares God's hatred of the putting away (Malachi 2:14 to 2:16). Jesus' argument takes the same two steps, from the Creator's act to the prohibition of dismissal. We flag the limit of the claim: the wording connection cannot be computed across the Testaments, and the Hebrew of Malachi 2:16 is famously difficult, so we make no claim about its exact rendering.
Malachi 2:14 · Malachi 2:16
basis: Greek to Hebrew, so the verbal tier is excluded and no shared Strong's lexeme can be recorded. A figural and structural reading: Malachi grounds the prohibition of divorce in the Creator's making of the pair, as Mark 10:6 to 10:9 does. Attestation of the pairing is widespread in later Christian exposition, but no voice in this brief cites Malachi, and the Hebrew of Malachi 2:16 is textually contested; treat as our reading.
The same hardness, charged against the disciples flagged: verify source
σκληροκαρδία occurs in only three verses of the New Testament. One is Mark 10:5, where Jesus lays it on the Pharisees. Another, on the Verifier's count, is Mark 16:14, where the risen Christ reproaches the Eleven for their unbelief and hardness of heart. If the count holds, Mark uses the word once of Jesus' opponents and once of his own apostles, which turns the diagnosis of v. 5 back on the men who ask the private question in v. 10.
Mark 16:14
basis: Verifier: shared G4641 σκληροκαρδία (in 3 vv), a genuinely rare lexeme, Greek to Greek. Flagged not for the lexeme but for the verse: Mark 16:14 lies inside the longer ending of Mark (16:9 to 16:20), whose textual provenance is disputed in the manuscript tradition. The inference drawn in the body therefore rests on a contested passage and should be checked before it is leaned on.