Mark Chapter Seven
Opposition of Pharisees and Scribes, 7:1-13.
(Matt. 15:1-9)
1. from Jerusalem.—See the note on Matthew 15:1.
2. defiled.—Defiled, not according to the law. but according to the tradition mentioned below at Mark 7:3.
3. Pharisees and all the Jews.—The term "all" is used in a restricted sense; for the Sadducees rejected tradition entirely: but they were a small body of men and had little influence with the people. The masses were influenced by the Pharisees and kept the traditions.
wash hands oft.—Literally "wash their hands with the fist," which means to wash them carefully, as when each hand is rubbed with the fist of the other.
holding the tradition.—See the notes, Matthew 3:7; 15:2.
4. except they wash.—By a mistranslation the text is here involved in a useless repetition. After saying that "except they wash their hands carefully they eat not," it is superfluous to add, that "when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not." Mark evidently intends to assert something that they did after coming from the market, which they did not on ordinary occasions. The difference is very clear in the original. The term rendered "wash, in verse 3, is nipsontai (νίψωνται), correctly so rendered, whereas the one rendered wash, in verse 4, is baptisontai (βαπτίσωνται), they immerse themselves. This rendering is required by the meaning of the word, and this act was required by the nature of the tradition. The tradition was an extension of the law of uncleanness, so as to hold a man unclean who had been in the marketplace; and the law for cleansing the unclean required the bathing of the whole flesh in water, which was accomplished by dipping one's self in the bath. (Comp. the note under Matt. 3:1.) When we remember that bathing was a daily practice among the Pharisees, we are less surprised at this observance.
washing of cups.—Here again the term "washing" yields a wrong sense. It was not peculiar to the Pharisees to wash cups, pots, brazen vessels, and couches; for every body did this, and every body does it yet. Surely Jesus did not reproach them for keeping clean their drinking and cooking vessels and their couches. But it was immersing them when they needed no washing, immersing them for an imaginary religious purification, for which he condemned them. Such is the meaning of the word (βαπτίσμους), and such the significance of the practice. It is objected to this, that couches (incorrectly rendered tables in the text) could not have been immersed. Even Alford affirms that "these βαπτίσμοι, as applied to couches, were certainly not immersions, but sprinklings or affusions of water." No reason is given to support this assertion, and the only one implied is the assumption that couches could not be immersed; but this is not true. They certainly could be immersed, and when the text declares that they were, this should be an end of controversy. Nothing but the modern practice of sprinkling for baptism, a practice which Alford himself admits was not known to the apostles, could have suggested the thought of sprinkling in this case.
5-13. Then the Pharisees and scribes.—The traditionary practices just mentioned, and the fact that the disciples were seen to eat with unwashed hands, gave rise to the discussion which now follows.
The points of argument are the same as reported by Matthew and already discussed (Matt. 15:1-9), but they are differently arranged and more piquantly expressed. One of the few examples of irony in the Savior's addresses is found here in the expression (verse 9), "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition."
Christ's Law of Uncleanness, 14-23.
(Matt. 15:10-20)
The subject of this paragraph it sufficiently discussed under the parallel place in Matthew.
Argument of Section 6
The testimony for Jesus furnished by the preceding section, is based chiefly on the opinions which men formed concerning him. The disciples, though slow and hard of heart to realize his true nature, were constrained by the continued demonstration to acknowledge his inherent divine power. The masses of the people who had witnessed his miracles were wild with excitement wherever he went, and they brought to him their sick from every quarter, a practice which could not possibly have been kept up had not his cures been real and unfailing. His enemies, though they differed in opinion as to the source of his miraculous power, with one consent acknowledged its reality, and none of them counted him less than a prophet. The strange conceit that he was John the Baptist, or that he was one of the old prophets raised to life again, attests the struggle of unbelieving minds in trying to solve the problem of his power and of his being. Even the Nazarenes, who, of all his enemies, knew him most intimately and rejected him most scornfully, were constrained to wonder whence he obtained his wisdom and his mighty works. There was only one solution of the problem which was satisfying to the mind, and those alone were satisfied with their own conclusion and rested in it, who believed him to be the Christ and the Son of God. And to this day the men who have rejected this conclusion and have tried to account for the career of Jesus in some other way, have been driven to conceits as baseless and as unreasonable as any of those adopted by the Jews.
Tour to Tyre and Sidon, 7:24-8:12
Cure of the Gentile Woman's Daughter, 24-30.
(Matt. 15:21-28)
24. borders of Tyre.—On the locality, see note on Matt. 15:21 would have no man know it.—This remark shows that Jesus had not gone into this Gentile region for the purpose of preaching and working miracles. He was doubtless aiming to give a large amount of private instruction to the twelve. We will see that this desire for privacy characterized the remainder of his stay in Galilee, although in some other places, as in this, it was found that "he could not be hid."
25, 26. a Greek, a Syrophenician.—The term "Greek" is here used, as it was frequently by the Jews, in the sense of Gentile. (Comp. 1 Cor. 1:24.) After Alexander's conquests, when all the world was in subjection to the Greeks, the Jews divided the world politically into Jews and Greeks. "Syrophenician" is compounded of Syrian and Phenician, and means a Syrian of Phenicia, Phenicia being at that time a part of the province of Syria. She was also a Canaanite. (See note, Matt. 15:25.)
30. laid upon the bed.—Demons, when expelled from persons, sometimes threw them into convulsions and left them in an extremely prostrate condition. (Comp. 1:26; 9:26.) Such was the case with this girl, who had probably been lifted from the floor and placed on the bed before her mother came in.
For further remarks on the paragraph, see the notes, Matt. 15:21-28.
A Deaf Stammerer Healed, 31-37.
(Matt. 15:29-31)
31. through Sidon.—If the corrected reading of this verse is adopted, it will appear that from the vicinity of Tyre, Jesus went farther north, so as to pass through Sidon, and then, by a detour to the east and south, reached Decapolis, southeast of the lake of Galilee, and passed through this district to the lakeshore; tor "toe came unto the sea of Galilee through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis."
32. deaf, and had an impediment.—The translation is too diffuse. The Greek words (κωφὸν μογιλάλον) rendered "one that was deaf, and had an impediment in his speech," mean simply "a deaf stammerer." He was not entirely without hearing, or he would have been dumb.
33. took him aside.—Jesus was still aiming to preserve a good degree of privacy; hence his withdrawal from the multitude when about to heal this man, and his subsequent charge to the man's friends, "that they should tell no man." (Mark 7:36; comp. Mark 7:24.)
put his fingers.—The process adopted in this case was peculiar. He first put his fingers in the man's ears, one finger in each ear. Then he spit: we are not told where, but the natural inference is that he spit on the ground. The object of the spitting we can not state; no conjecture that we have seen appears even plausible. He then touched the man's tongue—no doubt with his thumbs, one finger of each hand being in his ear—looked up to heaven, heaved a sigh, and exclaimed, "Be opened," and "the string of his tongue was loosed, and he spoke plain." The entire procedure indicates the deepest solemnity on the part of Jesus, and was calculated to strike the bystanders with awe.
35. string of his tongue.—"String" is too specific. It was ὁ δεσμὸς, the bond or hinderance, that prevented him from speaking freely.
36. the more they published it.—By a singular, but very common freak of human nature, the more he charged them to keep the cure a secret, "the more a great deal they published it." His very anxiety to avoid publicity made him the more wonderful in their eyes, and inspired them with a greater desire to sound his praise abroad.
37. He hath done all things well.—A great change had come over these people since the legion of demons was cast out. They had then feared him greatly, and desired him to leave their coasts; but now they exclaim, with reference both to that miracle and this, "He hath done all things well."
In this paragraph, and the parallel in Matthew, a characteristic difference between the two writers is seen. Matthew says that "great multitudes came to him, having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and cast them down at Jesus' feet, and he healed them" (Matt. 15:30); but he gives no particular description of any single case. Mark, on the other hand, selects a single one of these cures, perhaps the first of all, and describes minutely both it and its effect on the people.
The New Testament Commentary: Vol. I - Matthew and Mark.
(Matt. 15:1-9)
1. from Jerusalem.—See the note on Matthew 15:1.
2. defiled.—Defiled, not according to the law. but according to the tradition mentioned below at Mark 7:3.
3. Pharisees and all the Jews.—The term "all" is used in a restricted sense; for the Sadducees rejected tradition entirely: but they were a small body of men and had little influence with the people. The masses were influenced by the Pharisees and kept the traditions.
wash hands oft.—Literally "wash their hands with the fist," which means to wash them carefully, as when each hand is rubbed with the fist of the other.
holding the tradition.—See the notes, Matthew 3:7; 15:2.
4. except they wash.—By a mistranslation the text is here involved in a useless repetition. After saying that "except they wash their hands carefully they eat not," it is superfluous to add, that "when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not." Mark evidently intends to assert something that they did after coming from the market, which they did not on ordinary occasions. The difference is very clear in the original. The term rendered "wash, in verse 3, is nipsontai (νίψωνται), correctly so rendered, whereas the one rendered wash, in verse 4, is baptisontai (βαπτίσωνται), they immerse themselves. This rendering is required by the meaning of the word, and this act was required by the nature of the tradition. The tradition was an extension of the law of uncleanness, so as to hold a man unclean who had been in the marketplace; and the law for cleansing the unclean required the bathing of the whole flesh in water, which was accomplished by dipping one's self in the bath. (Comp. the note under Matt. 3:1.) When we remember that bathing was a daily practice among the Pharisees, we are less surprised at this observance.
washing of cups.—Here again the term "washing" yields a wrong sense. It was not peculiar to the Pharisees to wash cups, pots, brazen vessels, and couches; for every body did this, and every body does it yet. Surely Jesus did not reproach them for keeping clean their drinking and cooking vessels and their couches. But it was immersing them when they needed no washing, immersing them for an imaginary religious purification, for which he condemned them. Such is the meaning of the word (βαπτίσμους), and such the significance of the practice. It is objected to this, that couches (incorrectly rendered tables in the text) could not have been immersed. Even Alford affirms that "these βαπτίσμοι, as applied to couches, were certainly not immersions, but sprinklings or affusions of water." No reason is given to support this assertion, and the only one implied is the assumption that couches could not be immersed; but this is not true. They certainly could be immersed, and when the text declares that they were, this should be an end of controversy. Nothing but the modern practice of sprinkling for baptism, a practice which Alford himself admits was not known to the apostles, could have suggested the thought of sprinkling in this case.
5-13. Then the Pharisees and scribes.—The traditionary practices just mentioned, and the fact that the disciples were seen to eat with unwashed hands, gave rise to the discussion which now follows.
The points of argument are the same as reported by Matthew and already discussed (Matt. 15:1-9), but they are differently arranged and more piquantly expressed. One of the few examples of irony in the Savior's addresses is found here in the expression (verse 9), "Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition."
Christ's Law of Uncleanness, 14-23.
(Matt. 15:10-20)
The subject of this paragraph it sufficiently discussed under the parallel place in Matthew.
Argument of Section 6
The testimony for Jesus furnished by the preceding section, is based chiefly on the opinions which men formed concerning him. The disciples, though slow and hard of heart to realize his true nature, were constrained by the continued demonstration to acknowledge his inherent divine power. The masses of the people who had witnessed his miracles were wild with excitement wherever he went, and they brought to him their sick from every quarter, a practice which could not possibly have been kept up had not his cures been real and unfailing. His enemies, though they differed in opinion as to the source of his miraculous power, with one consent acknowledged its reality, and none of them counted him less than a prophet. The strange conceit that he was John the Baptist, or that he was one of the old prophets raised to life again, attests the struggle of unbelieving minds in trying to solve the problem of his power and of his being. Even the Nazarenes, who, of all his enemies, knew him most intimately and rejected him most scornfully, were constrained to wonder whence he obtained his wisdom and his mighty works. There was only one solution of the problem which was satisfying to the mind, and those alone were satisfied with their own conclusion and rested in it, who believed him to be the Christ and the Son of God. And to this day the men who have rejected this conclusion and have tried to account for the career of Jesus in some other way, have been driven to conceits as baseless and as unreasonable as any of those adopted by the Jews.
Tour to Tyre and Sidon, 7:24-8:12
Cure of the Gentile Woman's Daughter, 24-30.
(Matt. 15:21-28)
24. borders of Tyre.—On the locality, see note on Matt. 15:21 would have no man know it.—This remark shows that Jesus had not gone into this Gentile region for the purpose of preaching and working miracles. He was doubtless aiming to give a large amount of private instruction to the twelve. We will see that this desire for privacy characterized the remainder of his stay in Galilee, although in some other places, as in this, it was found that "he could not be hid."
25, 26. a Greek, a Syrophenician.—The term "Greek" is here used, as it was frequently by the Jews, in the sense of Gentile. (Comp. 1 Cor. 1:24.) After Alexander's conquests, when all the world was in subjection to the Greeks, the Jews divided the world politically into Jews and Greeks. "Syrophenician" is compounded of Syrian and Phenician, and means a Syrian of Phenicia, Phenicia being at that time a part of the province of Syria. She was also a Canaanite. (See note, Matt. 15:25.)
30. laid upon the bed.—Demons, when expelled from persons, sometimes threw them into convulsions and left them in an extremely prostrate condition. (Comp. 1:26; 9:26.) Such was the case with this girl, who had probably been lifted from the floor and placed on the bed before her mother came in.
For further remarks on the paragraph, see the notes, Matt. 15:21-28.
A Deaf Stammerer Healed, 31-37.
(Matt. 15:29-31)
31. through Sidon.—If the corrected reading of this verse is adopted, it will appear that from the vicinity of Tyre, Jesus went farther north, so as to pass through Sidon, and then, by a detour to the east and south, reached Decapolis, southeast of the lake of Galilee, and passed through this district to the lakeshore; tor "toe came unto the sea of Galilee through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis."
32. deaf, and had an impediment.—The translation is too diffuse. The Greek words (κωφὸν μογιλάλον) rendered "one that was deaf, and had an impediment in his speech," mean simply "a deaf stammerer." He was not entirely without hearing, or he would have been dumb.
33. took him aside.—Jesus was still aiming to preserve a good degree of privacy; hence his withdrawal from the multitude when about to heal this man, and his subsequent charge to the man's friends, "that they should tell no man." (Mark 7:36; comp. Mark 7:24.)
put his fingers.—The process adopted in this case was peculiar. He first put his fingers in the man's ears, one finger in each ear. Then he spit: we are not told where, but the natural inference is that he spit on the ground. The object of the spitting we can not state; no conjecture that we have seen appears even plausible. He then touched the man's tongue—no doubt with his thumbs, one finger of each hand being in his ear—looked up to heaven, heaved a sigh, and exclaimed, "Be opened," and "the string of his tongue was loosed, and he spoke plain." The entire procedure indicates the deepest solemnity on the part of Jesus, and was calculated to strike the bystanders with awe.
35. string of his tongue.—"String" is too specific. It was ὁ δεσμὸς, the bond or hinderance, that prevented him from speaking freely.
36. the more they published it.—By a singular, but very common freak of human nature, the more he charged them to keep the cure a secret, "the more a great deal they published it." His very anxiety to avoid publicity made him the more wonderful in their eyes, and inspired them with a greater desire to sound his praise abroad.
37. He hath done all things well.—A great change had come over these people since the legion of demons was cast out. They had then feared him greatly, and desired him to leave their coasts; but now they exclaim, with reference both to that miracle and this, "He hath done all things well."
In this paragraph, and the parallel in Matthew, a characteristic difference between the two writers is seen. Matthew says that "great multitudes came to him, having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and cast them down at Jesus' feet, and he healed them" (Matt. 15:30); but he gives no particular description of any single case. Mark, on the other hand, selects a single one of these cures, perhaps the first of all, and describes minutely both it and its effect on the people.
The New Testament Commentary: Vol. I - Matthew and Mark.
