Verse 1-2
Mark 7:1-2. Then came the
Pharisees and scribes from
Jerusalem — They probably came
on purpose to find occasion
against him. For some of them
followed him from place to
place, looking on every thing he
did, even on his most innocent,
yea, and most benevolent and
holy actions, with an evil and
censuring eye. Accordingly, here
they ventured to attack him for
allowing his disciples to eat
with unwashed hands, thereby
transgressing, they said, the
tradition of the elders, which
they thought to be a very
heinous offence. When they saw
his disciples eat bread with
defiled, that is, with unwashen,
hands — The Greek word here
rendered defiled, literally
signifies common. It was quite
in the Jewish idiom to oppose
common and holy; the most usual
signification of the latter
word, in the Old Testament,
being, separated from common and
devoted to sacred use. As we
learn from antiquity that this
evangelist wrote his gospel in a
pagan country, and for the use
of Gentile converts, it was
proper to add the explanation,
that is, unwashen, to the
epithet common, or defiled,
which might have otherwise been
misunderstood. They found fault
— The law of Moses, it must be
observed, required external
cleanness as a part of religion;
not, however, for its own sake,
but to signify with what
carefulness God’s servants
should purify their minds from
moral pollutions. Accordingly,
these duties were prescribed by
Moses in such moderation as was
fitted to promote the end of
them. But in process of time
they came to be multiplied
prodigiously: for the ancient
doctors, to secure the
observation of those precepts
which were really of divine
institution, added many
commandments of their own as
fences unto the former. And the
people, to show their zeal,
obeyed them. For example:
Because the law, Leviticus
15:11, saith, Whomsoever he
toucheth, that hath the issue,
he shall wash his clothes, and
bathe himself in water, &c., the
people were ordered to wash
their hands immediately on their
return from places of public
concourse, and before they sat
down to meat, lest, by touching
some unclean person in the
crowd, they might have defiled
themselves. The Pharisees,
therefore, being very zealous in
these trifles, would not eat at
any time unless they washed
their hands with the greatest
care. From this source came that
endless variety of purifications
not prescribed in the law, but
ordained by the elders. These
ordinances, though they were of
human invention, came at length
to be looked upon as essential
in religion; they were exalted
to such a pitch, that, in
comparison of them, the law of
God was suffered to lie
neglected and forgotten, as is
here signified.
Verses 3-5
Mark 7:3-5. For the Pharisees,
&c., except they wash their
hands oft — Greek, εαν μη πυγμη
νιψωνται τας χειρας, except they
wash their hands with their
fist: or, as some render it, to
the wrist. Theophylact
translates it, unless they wash
up to their elbows; affirming
that πυγμη denotes the whole of
the arm, from the bending to the
ends of the fingers. But this
sense of the word is altogether
unusual. For πυγμη, properly, is
the hand, with the fingers
contracted into the palm, and
made round. “Theophylact’s
translation, however,” says
Macknight, “exhibits the
evangelist’s meaning. For the
Jews, when they washed, held up
their hands, and, contracting
their fingers, received the
water that was poured on them by
their servants, (who had it for
a part of their office, 2 Kings
3:11,) till it ran down their
arms, which they washed up to
their elbows. To wash with the
fist, therefore, is to wash with
great care.” A MS. termed Codex
Bezę, instead of πυγμη, the
fist, or wrist, has πυκνη,
frequently. And when they come
from the market, except they
wash — Greek, βαπτισωνται, bathe
themselves, as the word probably
ought here to be rendered, (see
Leviticus 15:11,) they eat not —
Having the highest opinion of
the importance of these
institutions. Indeed, some of
their rabbis carried this to
such a ridiculous height, that
one of them determined the
neglect of washing to be a
greater sin than whoredom; and
another declared, it would be
much better to die than to omit
it. See many instances of this
kind in Hammond and Whitby on
the place. The Pharisees,
therefore, viewing these
washings in this important
light, did not doubt but our
Lord, by authorizing his
disciples to neglect them, would
expose himself to universal
censure, as one who despised the
most sacred services of
religion; services to which a
sanction was given by the
approbation and practice of the
whole nation. Accordingly, they
asked him, Why walk not thy
disciples according to the
tradition of the elders? — Hast
thou taught them to despise
these institutions? But while
they pretended nothing but a
sorrowful concern for the
contempt which the disciples
cast on institutions so sacred,
their real intention was to make
Jesus himself to be detested by
the people as a deceiver. But
the charge of impiety which they
thus brought against him and his
disciples, he easily retorted
upon them with ten-fold
strength. For he shows clearly,
that notwithstanding their
pretended regard for the duties
of godliness, they were
themselves guilty of the
grossest violations of the
divine law. And as they thus
transgressed, not through
ignorance, but knowingly, they
were the worst of sinners, mere
hypocrites, who deserved to be
abhorred by all good men; and
the rather, as God had long ago
testified his displeasure
against them, in the prophecy
which Isaiah had uttered
concerning them. He answered,
Well hath Esaias prophesied, &c.
— See note on Matthew 15:7-9.
Verses 9-13
Mark 7:9-13. And he said, Full
well — καλως, fairly, wholly; ye
reject, &c. — Or, reading the
word separately, Finely done!
How praiseworthy is your
conduct! A strong irony. Ye
reject the commandment of God
that ye may keep your own
tradition — The words, your own,
are emphatical, distinguishing
the commandments of men, the
corrupt traditions of the
Pharisees, from the commandments
of God. For Moses said, Honour
thy father and thy mother —
“Lest the charge, which our Lord
brought against the Pharisees,
should be thought without
foundation, because it contained
an imputation of such gross
profaneness, he supported it by
an instance of an atrocious
kind. God, saith he, has
commanded children to honour
their parents, that is, among
other things, to maintain them
when reduced to poverty, as the
word honour signifies, 1 Timothy
5:17, promising life to such as
do so, and threatening death
against those that do otherwise.
Nevertheless, ye Pharisees,
presumptuously making light of
the divine commandment, affirm
that it is a more sacred duty to
enrich the temple than to
nourish one’s parents, though
they be in the utmost necessity;
pretending that what is offered
to the great Parent is better
bestowed than that which is
given for the support of our
parents on earth; as if the
interest of God were different
from that of his creatures. Nay,
ye impiously teach that a man
may lawfully suffer his parents
to starve, if he can say to
them, It is corban, (a gifts)
&c., by whatsoever thou mightest
be profited by me — That is,
that which should have succoured
you, is given to the temple.
Thus ye hypocrites have, by your
frivolous traditions, made void
the commandment of God, though
of immutable and eternal
obligation; and disguised with
the cloak of piety the most
horrid and unnatural action that
a man can easily be guilty of.”
— See Macknight, and the note on
Matthew 15:4-6.
Verses 14-16
Mark 7:14-16. When he had called
all the people unto him — See
note on Matthew 15:10-11. He
said, Hearken unto me, every one
of you — As if he had said, Hear
how absurd the precepts are
which the scribes inculcate upon
you, and understand the true
differences of things. These
hypocrites, anxious about
trifles, neglect the great
duties of godliness and
righteousness, which are of
unchangeable obligation. They
shudder with horror at hands
unwashed, but are perfectly easy
under the guilt of impure minds,
although not that which goeth
into the mouth defileth a man,
in the sight of God, but that
which cometh out of the mouth;
because, in the sight of God,
cleanness and uncleanness are
qualities, not of the body, but
of the mind, which can be
polluted by nothing but sin. Our
Lord did not at all mean to
overthrow the distinction which
the law had established between
things clean and unclean, in the
matter of man’s food. That
distinction, like all the other
emblematical institutions of
Moses, was wisely appointed;
being designed to teach the
Israelites how carefully the
familiar company and
conversation of the wicked is to
be avoided. He only affirmed,
that in itself no kind of meat
can defile the mind, which is
the man, though by accident it
may: as when a man eats what is
pernicious to his health, or
takes an improper quantity of
food or liquor. And a Jew might
have done it by presumptuously
eating what was forbidden by the
Mosaic law, which still
continued in force: yet in all
these instances, the pollution
would arise from the wickedness
of the heart, and be just
proportionable to it, which is
what our Lord here asserts.
Verses 17-23
Mark 7:17-23. When he was
entered into the house — And was
apart from the people; his
disciples asked him — Namely,
Peter, in the name of the rest,
(Matthew 15:15,) concerning the
parable — So they term the
declaration which our Lord had
just uttered, because it
appeared to them to be
mysterious and needing
explanation, which, that it
should, seems very strange. And
he saith, Are ye so without
understanding — So dull of
apprehension, so ignorant of the
nature of true holiness? see
note on Matthew 15:15-20, where
most of the particulars
contained in this paragraph are
explained. From within proceed
evil thoughts, &c. — The things
here mentioned as coming from
the heart, and defiling the man,
are all either sins committed
against the second table of the
law, as they are reckoned up by
St. Paul, Romans 13:9; or the
dispositions which incline men
to them. Covetousness — Gr.
πλεονεξιαι, covetousness, or
irregular and inordinate
desires; wickedness, πονηριαι,
ill-nature, cruelty, inhumanity,
and all malevolent affections;
an evil eye — An envious,
grudging disposition; pride —
υπερηφανια, that pride which
makes us contemn and overlook
others, as unworthy of our
regard, and highly to resent the
least affront, or seeming
injury; foolishness — αφροσυνη,
foolish, ungovernable passion;
the word stands directly opposed
to σωφροσυνη, or sobriety of
thought and discourse; and
therefore particularly signifies
all kinds of wild imaginations
and extravagant passions. “It is
remarkable, that three of the
crimes here mentioned, as
pollutions of the mind, namely,
murder, false witness, and
blasphemy, were, on this very
occasion, committed by the
persons who charged our Lord
with impiety because he
neglected such ceremonial
precepts of religion as were of
human invention. For, while they
reigned the highest reverence
for the divine law, they were
making void its most essential
precepts. At the very time that
they condemned the disciples for
so small an offence as eating
with unwashed hands, contrary
only to the traditions of the
elders, the scribes and
Pharisees were murdering Jesus
by their calumnies and false
witnessings, notwithstanding it
was the only study of his life
to do them all the good
possible!” All these evil things
come from within — The Lord
Jesus “represents these evil
things as proceeding out of the
mouth, (Matthew 15:18,) not so
much by way of contrast to
meats, which enter by the mouth
into a man, as because some of
them are committed with the
faculty of speech, such as false
witness and blasphemy; and
others of them are helped
forward by its assistance,
namely, adultery, deceit, &c. —
Thus our Lord defended his
disciples by a beautiful chain
of reasoning, wherein he has
shown the true nature of
actions, and loaded with
perpetual infamy the Jewish
teachers and their brood, who in
every age and country may be
known by features exactly
resembling their parents, the
main strokes of which are, that
by their frivolous superstitions
they weaken, and sometimes
destroy, the eternal and
immutable rules of
righteousness.” — Macknight.
Verses 24-26
Mark 7:24-26. From thence he
arose, and went into the borders
— εις τα μεθορια, into the parts
which bordered upon, or rather
lay between, Tyre and Sidon; and
entered into a house, and would
have no man know it — Namely,
that he was there, or, know him.
Jesus, knowing that the
Pharisees were highly offended
at the liberty which he had
taken in the preceding
discourse, in plucking off from
them the mask of pretended
piety, wherewith they had
covered their malevolent spirit
and conduct, and not ignorant of
the plots which they were
forming against his reputation
and life, he judged it proper to
retire with his disciples into
this remote region, with a view
to conceal himself a while from
them. We learn from Joshua
19:28-29, that Tyre and Sidon
were cities in the lot of Asher;
which tribe having never been
able wholly to drive out the
natives, their posterity
remained even in our Lord’s
time. Hence he did not preach
the doctrine of the kingdom in
this country, because it was
mostly inhabited by heathen, to
whom he was not sent. See on
Matthew 10:5. Neither did he
work miracles here with that
readiness which he showed
everywhere else, because, by
concealing himself, he proposed
to shun the Pharisees. But he
could not be hid — It seems he
was personally known to many of
the heathen in this country,
who, no doubt, had often heard
and seen him in Galilee. And, as
for the rest, they were
sufficiently acquainted with him
by his fame, which had spread
itself very early through all
Syria, Matthew 4:24. For a
certain woman, whose young
daughter had an unclean spirit,
heard of him — This person was a
descendant of the ancient
inhabitants, and probably by
religion a heathen. She “is
called, Matthew 15:21, a woman
of Canaan; here, a
Syro-Phenician, and a Greek.
There is in these denominations
no inconsistency. By birth, she
was of Syro-Phenicia, so the
country about Tyre and Sidon was
denominated; by descent, of
Canaan; as most of the Tyrians
and Sidonians originally were;
and by religion, a Greek,
according to the Jewish manner
of distinguishing between
themselves and idolaters. Ever
since the Macedonian conquest,
Greek became a common name for
idolater, or, at least, one
uncircumcised, and was
equivalent to Gentile. Of this
we have many examples in Paul’s
epistles, and in the Acts. Jews
and Greeks, ελληνες, are the
same with Jews and Gentiles.” —
Campbell. Nevertheless, though a
heathen, this woman had
conceived a very great,
honourable, and just notion, not
only of our Lord’s power and
goodness, but even of his
character as Messiah; the notion
of which she had probably
learned by conversing with the
Jews. For when she heard of his
arrival, she came in quest of
him, and meeting him, it seems,
as he passed along the street,
she fell at his feet, addressing
him by the title of son of
David, and besought him to cast
the evil spirit out of her
daughter. See the story related
more at large, and explained,
Matthew 15:22-28.
Verses 31-36
Mark 7:31-36. He came unto the
sea of Galilee, &c. — See note
on Matthew 15:29-31. They bring
unto him one that was deaf and
had an impediment, &c. — Greek,
΄ογιλαλον: “He was not
absolutely dumb, but stammered
to such a degree, that few
understood his speech, Mark
7:35. However, the circumstance
of his being able to speak in
any manner, shows that his
deafness was not natural, but
accidental. He had heard
formerly, and had learned to
speak, but was now deprived of
hearing, perhaps, through some
fault of his own, which might be
the reason that Jesus sighed for
grief when he cured him. And
they beseech him to put his hand
upon him — His friends
interceded for him, because he
was not able to speak for
himself, so as that any one
could understand him. His desire
of a cure, however, may have
prompted him to do his utmost in
speaking, whereby all present
were made sensible of the
greatness of the infirmity under
which he laboured. Our Lord’s
exuberant goodness easily
prompted him to give this person
the relief which his friends
begged for him. Yet he would not
do it publicly, lest the
admiration of the spectators
should have been raised so high
as to produce bad effects; for
the whole country was now
following him, in expectation
that he would soon set up his
kingdom. Or, as Gadara, where
his miracle upon the demoniacs
had been so ill received, was
part of this region, (see on
Luke 8:26,) he might shun
performing the miracle publicly,
because it would have no effect
upon so stupid a people.
Whatever was the reason, he took
the man with his relations aside
from the crowd; and, because the
deaf are supposed to have their
ears shut, and the dumb their
tongues so tied, or fastened to
the under part of their mouth,
as not to be able to move it,
(see Mark 7:35,) he put his
fingers into the man’s ears, and
then touched or moistened his
tongue with his spittle, to make
him understand that he intended
to open his ears, and loose his
tongue.” — Macknight. This,
perhaps, was the only reason for
these symbolical actions, or our
Lord might have other reasons
for doing them, of which we are
ignorant. “If any should ask,”
says Dr. Doddridge, “why our
Lord used these actions, when a
word alone would have been
sufficient; and such means (if
they may be called means) could
in themselves do nothing at all
to answer the end, I frankly
confess I cannot tell, nor am I
at all concerned to know. Yet I
am ready to imagine it might be
intended to intimate, in a very
lively manner, that we are not
to pretend to enter into the
reasons of all his actions; and
that where we are sure that any
observance whatever is appointed
by him, we are humbly to submit
to it, though we cannot see why
it was preferred to others,
which our imagination might
suggest. Had Christ’s patients,
like Naaman, (2 Kings 5:11-12,)
been too nice in their
exceptions on these occasions, I
fear they would have lost their
cure; and the indulgence of a
curious or a petulant mind would
have been but a poor equivalent
for such a loss.” And looking up
to heaven — That the deaf man
whom he could not instruct by
words might consider from whence
all benefits proceed; he sighed
— Probably the circumstances
above mentioned, or some others,
to us unknown, made this dumb
person a peculiar object of
pity. Or by this example of
bodily deafness and dumbness,
our Lord might be led to reflect
on the spiritual deafness and
dumbness of men. But whatever
was the cause, Christ’s sighing
on this occasion evidently
displayed the tender love he
bore to our kind. For certainly
it could be nothing less which
moved him to condole our
miseries, whether general or
particular, in so affectionate a
manner. And saith unto him,
Ephphatha — This was a word of
SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY, not an
address to God for power to
heal. Such an address was
needless, for Christ had a
perpetual fund of power residing
in himself, to work all miracles
whenever he pleased, even to the
raising of the dead, John 5:21;
John 5:26. And straightway his
ears were opened — The word had
an immediate effect, and all
obstructions to his hearing
distinctly, and speaking
articulately and plainly, were
instantly removed. And, as those
bodily impediments vanished
before the word of Christ’s
power, the impediments of the
mind to spiritual acts and
duties are removed by the Spirit
of Christ. He opens the internal
ear, the heart, as he did
Lydia’s, to understand and
receive the word of God; and
opens the mouth in prayer and
praise. And he charged them that
they should tell no man — When
Jesus formerly cured the
demoniac in this country, he
ordered him to return to his own
house, and show, namely, to his
relations and friends, how great
things God had done for him.
But, at this miracle, the deaf
and dumb man’s relations seem to
have been present. Wherefore, as
they had no need to be informed
of the miracle, he required it
to be concealed, probably for
the reasons assigned in the note
on Mark 5:43. Neither the man,
however, nor his friends, obeyed
Jesus in this; but the more he
charged them — To conceal it; so
much the more they published it
— So greatly were they struck
with the miracle, and so charmed
with the modesty and humility
which Christ manifested,
especially the man, who, having
the use of his speech given him,
was very forward to exercise it
in praise of so great a
benefactor.
Verse 37
Mark 7:37. And were beyond
measure astonished — Both at
what was done, and at the
amiable spirit of him who did
it. And said, He hath done all
things well — Performed the most
extraordinary cures in the most
humble and graceful manner. He
maketh both the deaf to hear,
and the dumb to speak — And
that, not only in this, but in
many other instances. Whereas
there were many that hated and
persecuted him, as an evil doer;
these are ready to witness for
him, not only that he has done
no evil, but that he has done a
great deal of good, and has done
it well, modestly, humbly,
devoutly, and all perfectly
gratis, without money and
without price; circumstances
which greatly added to the
lustre of his good works. “Happy
would it be if all his
followers, and especially his
ministers, would learn of him,
who was thus meek and lowly;
neither acting as in their own
strength, when they attempt a
spiritual cure, nor proclaiming
their own praise when they have
effected it. Then would they
likewise do all things well; and
there would be that beauty in
the manner, which no wise man
would entirely neglect, even in
those actions which are in
themselves most excellent and
great.” — Doddridge. |