COMMENTARY ON MARK
LESSON NUMBER 74
“ Mark 7:1 Then came together unto Him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. 2 And when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables.” (Mark 7:1-4; Matthew 15:1-2)
THE DISCIPLES ARE OBSERVED
INTRODUCTION
The ministry of the Lord Jesus, when He “dwelt among us” (John 1:14), and “went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil” (Acts 10:38), introduced men more thoroughly to the Divine nature. It exposed fallen man to Divine manners and responses. Although men were not aware of what was happening, they were being confronted with God’s response to inquiring multitudes, earnest seekers, casual followers, the curious, and the undiscerning. They were visibly and audibly faced with the Living God within the framework of daily life. Prior to Jesus, men were only exposed to the Lord of all at “sundry times and in divers manners.” Actual public exposure to the Divine nature was rare – such as at Mount Sinai, and even then, it was in extremely limited measures. However, in the life of Jesus Christ, the “only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14), the glory of the Lord, though veiled, was seen in the Temple, in the synagogue, in the streets, and in the houses. They saw Divine reactions, initiatives, and observations at wedding feasts, special dinners, and the ordained feasts of the Jews, as well as the normalities of life. It is possible to look at the Gospel records simply as events, forgetting that in those events the nature of the Living God was being revealed. Christ’s ministry among men placed before them what it meant for Him to be “touched with the feeling of our infirmities” (Heb 4:15). It was also a commentary on what was involved in pleasing and displeasing the God of heaven.
COMING TO JESUS WITHOUT GENUINE INTEREST IN HIM
“ Mk 7:1 Then came together unto Him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.”
The real Jesus draws the interest of all kinds of people – even religious leaders who have remained undisturbed at the helm of religion. The Pharisees and scribes were religious authorities, purposed experts in the Law of Moses. They could define proper conduct and good manners – at least that is how they presented themselves.
The scribes and Pharisees were noted for their righteousness. Jesus referred to it as “the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees,” declaring that if men’s righteousness did not exceed it, they would “in no case enter into kingdom of heaven” (Matt 5:20). Jesus acknowledged their expertise in the letter of the Law saying, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not” (Matt 23:2-3).
Yet, these men were spiritual hindrances, blocking up the entrance to the kingdom of God, Jesus said to them, “ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in” (Matt 23:13). Although the people had apparently not seen it, Jesus said to them, “ye devour widows houses,” and have “omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith” (Matt 23:14,23).
From one point of view, you would think that Jesus would repel such men – men He described as being “full of hypocrisy and iniquity” within (Matt 23:28). He hurled these words at them: “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” (Matt 23:33). Why would men like this come to Jesus at all? Why would they listen to Him, or travel from a distance to be exposed to Him and His teaching? Yet, the Scriptures say they “came to Jesus” (Matt 15:1), and “came together unto Him” (Mk 7:1). They “watched” Him (Lk 6:7), “asked” Him questions (Mk 7:5), and once brought a woman who was caught in the act of adultery to Him (John 8:3). Why did they not simply ignore Jesus?
There is a compelling quality in the Divine nature, even when it is veiled with a body of flesh and blood. Men cannot easily ignore the Lord – even when they are not perceptive of who He really is. And why is this so? It is because there is a vast chasm between the human nature and the Divine nature – between sinful men and the righteous Lord. An unspeakably large moral gulf exists between fallen men and He who “came down from heaven” (John 6:51). In Jesus men were confronted with the sharp contrast between God and men.
Isaiah spoke of the remarkable difference between the God of heaven and man, who was originally in His image and likeness. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa 55:8-9). In fact, God upbraided men when they began to think He was like them. “But unto the wicked God saith . . . These things hast thou done, and I kept silence; thou thoughtest that I was altogether such an one as thyself:” (Psa 50:16-21). The more common professed teachers make the Lord to appear to men, the greater the practical distance that forms between them and the God of heaven. When men depict the Living God as fitting in comfortably with society, and willing to become involved in all of the ambitions of men, they are grossly misrepresenting Him and making Him inaccessible to the people.
When the Lord Jesus was among men, they did receive this impression of difference. His teaching was vastly different from that of other teachers (Matt 7:29). Men had never seen works like the ones He did (Mk 2:12). It was this uniqueness that drew men to Him – even His enemies. The Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus out of Jerusalem because of the abrasive difference in His teaching and works. It is true that they came as critics – but they came.
This is a penetrating aspect of the Lord having no respect of persons. As it is written of Him, “which regardeth not persons” (Deut 10:17), “neither doth God respect any person” (2 Sam 14:14), and “God is no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34). While this is true of the Lord’s approach to men, in that He grants no special favors to people because of their natural status, or give advantages because of rewards men imagine themselves to be giving to Him (Deut 10:17b), it also applies to His remarkable drawing power. Of their own volition all kinds of people came to Jesus. Publicans and sinners (Matt 9:10), rich people (Lk 18:18-23; 19:2), mothers (Lk 18:15; Matt 15:22), rulers (Matt 9:18), lawyers (Matt 22:35), common people (Mk 12:37) Sadducees (Matt 22:23), chief rulers of the synagogues (John 12:42), immoral people (Lk 7:38-39), and those who were looking for the Messiah (John 1:45).
The point is that the real Jesus shatters every religious and social barrier known to men. His presence disrupts the normality of life, and breaks down social and religious distinctions. In this text, even the “Pharisees and the scribes” were disrupted by the presence of Jesus. Even though driven by ignoble motives, they could not ignore Him. Any other kind of Jesus is wholly spurious, and is to be given no heed. Such is just “another Jesus” (2 Cor 11:4).
THEY FOUND FAULT WITH THE DISCIPLES
“ 2 And when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.”
There are some foolish sayings promoted in the Christian community. Among them is an expression something like this: “Don’t look at me, look to the Lord.” It all sounds innocent enough, and perhaps even a little humble. But it does not reflect the manner of the Kingdom of God. Jesus observed that people would, in fact, arrive at a proper conclusion about His disciples by observing them: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35). Paul urged his readers, “Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me” (1 Cor 4:16). And again, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). And again, “be followers together of me” (Phil 3:17). The Thessalonians were commended for becoming followers of Paul and his co-laborers (1 Thess 1:6).
The Divine mandate to “Let your light so shine before men” (Matt 5:16) postulates that men are watching us. Now, we see this being lived out as the Pharisees and scribes observe the disciples of Christ.
THEY SAW SOME OF HIS DISCIPLES. The disciples were not doing anything unusual – just eating bread, or consuming some food. How much more ordinary can anything be than eating food? Yet, the Pharisees and scribes beheld HOW they were eating their food. It is possible that a person may imagine that what they do is not the business of anyone else. But men will not honor such an imagination. When human conduct conflicts with what a person thinks is right, they will not only observe it, but form some tentative opinion about it. No person lives “unto” himself (Rom 14:7-8).
EATING WITH DEFILED HANDS. This is not speaking of sanitary defilement, but of ceremonial defilement – “unwashen hands.” It is of interest that they did not observe how Jesus ate, but how His disciples ate. Earlier, certain of the Pharisees had observed Jesus’ disciples plucking and the heads from grain, eating them on the Sabbath day. They said it was against the law of Moses to do such a thing (Matt 12:1-2). Now they will criticize the disciples from another perspective.
THEY FOUND FAULT. Other versions read, “they complained.” TNT That is, they were critical of what they did, persuaded that they were in error, making a mistake, or flawed in their conduct. We know from the objection they will site that they were watching the disciples with a mind to find something wrong – some point on they could register a complaint against Jesus Himself.
It is true that the ungodly watch the godly with a mind to finding something wrong with what they do. This is a trait that the devil develops and cultures in those who are subject to his devices. You may recall that Daniel’s opponents “sought to find an occasion against” him (Dan 6:4-5). Jeremiah said of his critics, “All my familiars watched for my halting, saying, Peradventure he will be enticed, and we shall prevail against him, and we shall take our revenge on him” (Jer 20:10). They watched him, hoping to find some flaw in his conduct that would diminish the weight of his words, and cause them to feel more comfortable in their wicked ways. During his trial Job lamented, “Yea, young children despised me; I arose, and they spake against me. All my inward friends abhorred me: and they whom I loved are turned against me” (Job 19:18-19). David confessed that “false witnesses” rose up against him (Psa 27:12), and laid wait for his soul (Psa 71:10). It is still true, “The wicked watcheth the righteous, and seeketh to slay him” (Psa 37:32). Thus, even with the Lord Himself present among them, the Pharisees and scribes looked critically upon His disciples, seeking to find an occasion against them.
Paul admonished Titus to show himself a “pattern of good works,” also employing “sound speech” in order that those were contradicting him “may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you” (Tit 2:7-8). We are also exhorted to conduct our lives “without murmurings and disputings: that ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world” (Phil 2:14-15). All of this presumes that we are being observed by the world, even though they may not bother to tell us so. This observation is driven by an inward awareness that life in Christ does, in fact, work a change in men. Men look for flaws in the godly because it makes them feel more comfortable in their sin, offering them an occasion to say the godly are not really superior in their manners at all. Thus, they imagine, salvation is a mere delusion.
Self-centeredness and iniquity dulls a person to this circumstance, moving one to cause God and His word to be blasphemed. Thus we read of thoughtless conduct among the believers causing the Word of God to be “blasphemed” (Tit 2:5), and giving occasion to the adversary to “speak reproachfully” (1Tim 5:14). Our text, however, will confirm that all criticism from the adversaries is not justified, and that we are not to shape our conduct merely to remove the possibility of their unjust criticism.
THE ENSLAVING NATURE OF RELIGIOUS TRADITION
“ 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables.”
HOLDING THE TRADITION OF THE ELDERS. The objection raised against the disciples was that, by not washing their hands before they ate, they had “transgressed the tradition of the elders” (Matt 15:2). To them, “unwashed hands” equaled “defiled hands.” Now Mark makes this remarkable statement: “The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders” NIV (Mark 7:2-3).
“The elders” were among Israel from the very beginning. They were leaders among the people. Before Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt, and in accordance with the word of the Lord, he “called for the elders of Israel,” outlining what was to be done (Ex 3:16; 12:21). When Moses went up to the mount from which the Law was given, he was directed to take representatives from “the elders of Israel” (Ex 17:5-6; 18:12). When Joshua gathered the tribes of Israel together, he had the “elders of Israel” present themselves before God (Josh 24:1). During the time of Samuel, “the elders of Israel” came together to him to request a king (1 Sam 8:4). Solomon also assembled “the elders of Israel” for holy work (1 Kgs 8:1). During the time of Ezekiel the prophet, “the elders of Israel” came to him, and God directed him to speak certain convicting words to them (Ezek 14:1). When Peter was being tried by the Jewish council, he addressed the “rulers of the people, and the elders of Israel” (Acts 4:8).
The point is that this was, in fact, a legitimate office from the very beginning of Israel. It was not so with the office of Pharisee or Sadducee. They came into being later, at the behest of men, not God. But it was not so with “the elders of Israel.” That office had Divine legitimacy. And yet, those men were not free to create new rules for the people. That is what Peter referred to as being “lords over God’s heritage” (1 Pet 5:2).
The “elders” were ranking officers in the Sanhedrin, and were considered spiritual rulers among the people. They joined with the “chief priests and scribes” in persecuting Jesus and plotting His death (Matt 16:21). This body of people challenged the authority of Jesus, namely because He contradicted their own teaching (Matt 21:23). Jesus taught His disciples that He would be “rejected by the elders” (Mk 8:31).
THE TRADITION OF THE ELDERS. The “tradition” of reference was the teaching, rituals, and ordinances of the elders. It was not the actual word of the Lord, but what they conceived the Word of the Lord to mean. More precisely, it was the implications of the Law according to their own interpretation. Mark provides us some details about this particular tradition. “And when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they cleanse themselves; and there are many other things which they have received in order to observe, such as the washing of cups and pitchers and copper pots” NASB (Mark 7:4). Thus, they were of the opinion that being in public places, where Gentiles and sinners congregated, brought a certain external defilement to the people. Therefore, they would not eat unless they first washed their hands.
According to historical authorities, the actual tradition reads, “they wash hands for common food, but for the tithe, and for the first offering, and for that which is holy, they dip them, and for the sin offering; for if the hands are defiled; the body is defiled.” JOHN GILL
Under the Law, the high priests and priests were required to wash their hands at the laver of washing before entering the tabernacle (Ex 30:19-21). A priest who had touched anything unclean had to wash his hands before eating “of the holy things,” provided exclusively to the priests (Lev 22:6). This was clear enough for all to understand.
The “elders,” however, took these texts and constructed an additional requirement for all of the people. Whenever any Jew went to the market, it was now required that they wash before they ate anything. Now, in our text, the Pharisees and scribes find “fault” with the disciples of Christ because they did not honor this tradition – this purely human application of Scripture.
There remains this dreadful tendency of thinking that a legitimate function in the body of Christ authorizes a person in that office to make and impose rules upon the saints – “traditions.” The office is thus thought to carry with it the authority to impose personal opinion upon men. Therefore from popes to elders, and preachers to professors, men are still imposing “traditions” upon the household of faith. Therefore we are warned, “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col 2:8). It may take the form of “forty days of purpose,” or a methodology employed to recover from sin, or what you say when a person is baptized. Whatever it may be, a “tradition” of this sort cannot be supported with a specific word from God. Like the tradition of washing hands, it represents a purely human view of Scripture. Such views cannot be equated with the Scriptures themselves, and cannot be bound upon men.