Matthew 20:30

30. Behold, two blind men Mark mentions but one, and tells us his name. He was Bartimeus; and the very fact that he so names him seems to indicate that he was a well-known person at the time. As his was the case of special interest, whose cure Mark wishes to narrate, so he omits to state that another man was healed at the same time. It is very possible that Mark was not informed of that fact. Inspiration does not imply omniscience. One inspired writer may be more fully informed than another. Both may be perfectly true, so far as they go. But the naturalness of the picture of the two blind men, sitting by the road side, leaves but little doubt that Matthew, who was a disciple, (as Mark was not,) wrote as an eye-witness of the miracle. Heard Of course they could only learn the fact from hearing and not from sight. That Jesus passed by The “prophet of Galilee,” the raiser of Lazarus from the dead, the teacher and miracle worker of Perea, is not unknown by fame to these poor men. To the sufferers throughout the land that name would have a special interest. Its report would have a rapid circulation among the sons and daughters of affliction. They would somehow know more about him, and have more inclination for faith in him, than anybody else. Son of David Modern commentators have much difficulty with the genealogy of our Saviour in the first chapter of Matthew, by which he is shown to be the son of David; but these two blind men have not. They confess his pedigree. They believe that the true descendant of the ancient king of Israel is now approaching, and that he is the promised one for whom Israel is looking.