Mark 7
MCGARMark 7:1-23
(Time: One Year Less One Week.)
S R H D T (Galilee, probably Capernaum, Spring A. D. 29.) M 1-20; M 1-23; J 1.
[John told us in his last chapter that the passover was near at hand. He here makes a general statement which shows that Jesus did not attend this passover. The reason for his absence is given at .] [Evidently several days intervened between the address of . and the events recorded here, for the Pharisees and scribes would not be likely to leave Jerusalem until after the passover. ] [394] [These Pharisees coming from Jerusalem could find nothing wherein Jesus or his disciples transgressed the law, so they eagerly grasped this transgression of the tradition as affording ground for an accusation. Jesus does not deny their charge, but justifies his disciples by attacking the whole traditional system, basing his attack upon a pointed prophecy which condemns it. It is hard for us to learn and apply the distinction between serving God as God wishes to be served, and serving him according to our own wishes and notions.] [that is, God said it through Moses] [see , , , ] [Leaving for a moment the main question concerning uncleanness and washing, Jesus makes good his indictment against their tradition by giving an example of the mischievous way in which it set aside God’s commandments. The law required the honoring of parents, and for any one to cast off his parents in their old age, thus subjecting them to beggary or starvation, was to do more than to speak evil of them.
Such conduct was practically to curse them, and to incur the death penalty for so doing. But at this point the Pharisees interfered with their tradition, which taught that [395] a son could say of that part of his estate by which his parents might be profited, It is a gift; that is, a gift to God, and by thus dedicating that part to God, he would free himself from his obligation to his parents.
Thus tradition undid the law. God’s law leads to pure and acceptable worship, while human additions and amendments make worship vain, if not abominable. There is probably not one such addition or amendment which does not to a greater or less degree make some commandment void.] [Having been accused by the scribes and Pharisees of a breach of their tradition, Jesus points out to generally the iniquity of tradition, for it lay within their power as leaders to remedy the whole system of things. Having done this, he turns to the and answers before them as to the offense with which he is specifically charged. Thus he gives to the leaders general principles, and to the common people the single instance] [The entire speech offended them. He charged them with hypocrisy.
He showed that their tradition, which they reverenced as a revelation from God, led them into sin, and he disturbed their self-complacency by showing that the ceremonial cleanness, which was founded on tradition, and in which they prided themselves, was worthless in comparison with the moral cleanness required by God’s law, which they had ignored. It grieved the disciples to see Jesus offend these reverend gentlemen from Jerusalem.
Like many modern disciples their respect for men counteracted their zeal for truth.] [396] [God had planted the law with its doctrine: he had planted the Hebrew religion as given by Moses. He had not planted the tradition of the elders; so it, and the religion founded upon it, was doomed to be rooted up.] [This proverbial expression is found in the Sermon on the Mount. See , ). The words of Jesus are full of encouragement to those who adhere to the simple teachings of God; for they show that God guarantees that every error shall be uprooted, and that every teacher of error or false religion shall participate in the judgment which uproots, and shall fall into the pit of ruin; and his disciples, no matter how numerous, shall share his fate. In this particular instance, the destruction of Jerusalem was the pit. The Jewish leaders led their disciples into it, and God uprooted their system of tradition, that the pure gospel might be sowed in the room which they occupied.] [The word “parable” is used here in its looser sense to indicate an obscure saying.] [They asked what he meant by the words contained in the . [It was to be expected that the multitude, swayed by the teaching of the Pharisees, would be slow to grasp what Jesus said about uncleanness; but the disciples, having been so long taught of him, and having felt free to eat with unwashed hands, should have been more quick of understanding.] [397] [an envious eye] [Thus Jesus sets forth the simple doctrine that a man’s moral and spiritual state is not dependent upon the symbolic cleanness of his physical diet, much less is it dependent on ceremonial observances in regard to things eaten, or the dishes from which they are eaten.
Of course, Jesus did not mean at this time to abrogate the Mosaic law of legal uncleanness. These uncleannesses worked no defilement, but were merely typical of such; for the food in no way touched or affected the mind or soul, the fountains of spiritual life, but only the corporeal organs, which have no moral susceptibility.
The Pharisees had erred in confusing legal and spiritual defilement, and had added error to error by multiplying the causes of defilement in their tradition. By thus showing that legal defilement was merely symbolic, Jesus classed it with all the other symbolism which was to be done away with when the gospel reality was fully ushered in . In saying, therefore, that Jesus made all meats clean, Mark does not mean that Jesus then and there repealed the law. The declaration of such repeal came later . He means that he there drew those distinctions and laid down those principles which supplanted the Mosaic law when the kingdom of God was ushered in on the day of Pentecost. Here was the fountain whence Paul drew all his teaching concerning things clean and unclean.] [398]
[FFG 393-398]
Mark 7:24
M 21; M 24. . [The journey here is indicated in marked terms because it differs from any previously recorded, for it was the first time that Jesus ever entered a foreign or heathen country. Some commentators contend from the use of the word “borders” by Mark that Jesus did not cross over the boundary, but the point is not well taken, for shows that the journey led through Sidon. For the location of Tyre and Sidon, see . Jesus withdrew to escape the opposition of his enemies and the mistaken movements of his friends. As he was not on a missionary tour, it was perfectly proper for him to enter heathen territory.] [FFG 399]
Mark 7:31
M 29; M 31. [From Tyre Jesus proceeded northward to Sidon and thence eastward across the mountains and the headwaters of the Jordan to the neighborhood of Damascus. Here he turned southward and approached the Sea of Galilee on its eastern side. Somewhere amid the mountains on the eastern side he sat down; he ceased his journeying for some days.] [402] [FFG 402]
Mark 7:32-200
M 30-39; M 32- 9. [The man had evidently learned to speak before he lost his hearing. Some think that defective hearing had caused the impediment in his speech, but suggests that he was tongue-tied] [He separated him from the crowd to avoid publicity (see ] [These were the people who had asked Jesus to depart from their coast on account of the loss of their swine. A complete change in their feelings had taken place since that day.] [We have here an instance of the common difference between the narratives of Matthew and Mark. Where Matthew is wont to mention the healing of multitudes, Mark picks out one of the most remarkable cases and describes it minutely. The hasty action of those who brought in the sick and returned to bring in others is indicated by the way in which they cast down their burdens at Jesus’ feet] [The people whom Jesus healed were Jews, but daily intercourse with the heathen of Decapolis had tended to cool their religious ardor. The works of Jesus revived this ardor and caused them to praise the God whose prophet they esteemed Jesus to be.] [ while Christ was in Decapolis] [404] [When the five thousand had been caught in similar circumstances, the apostles had come with suggestions to Jesus, but now, being taught by experience, they keep silence and let Jesus manage as he will.
The multitude had not been three days without food, but it had been with Jesus three days and was without food.] [It seems strange that the apostles should ask such a question after having assisted in feeding the five thousand. But the failure to expect a miracle, despite previous experience, was a common occurrence in the history of Israel and of the twelve . In this case the failure of the apostles to expect miraculous relief suggests that they had probably often been hungry and had long since ceased to look for supernatural relief in such cases. Their disbelief here is so similar to their disbelief in the first instance that it, with a few other minor details, has led rationalistic commentators to confound the miracle with the feeding of the five thousand. But the words of Jesus forbid this– , , , .] [they were on the bleak mountain, and not in the grassy plain of Butaiha] [405] [FFG 403-406]