COMMENTARY ON MARK
LESSON NUMBER 78
“ Mark 7:17 And when He was entered into the house from the people, His disciples asked Him concerning the parable. 18 And He saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?”
(Mark 7:17-19; Matthew 15:16-17; Col 2:21-22)
WHAT DEFILES A MAN, #2
INTRODUCTION
Jesus is turning His attention away from the questioning and critical Pharisees and scribes, to his disciples, who have a heart for the truth. He will not spend long in fruitless discussions, for that is detrimental to the hearers. Paul warned that there were teachings and discourses that raised questions rather than resulting in edification. “Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do” (1 Tim 1:4). There were others, he wrote, who were known for “doting about questions and strifes of words” (1 Tim 6:4). There were also “foolish and unlearned questions” that caused “strife” (2 Tim 2:23). Jesus lived out the proper response to such things. He not only told people the stultifying effects of fruitless discussions and the imposed traditions of men, He conducted His ministry within an acute awareness of those facts. It is one thing to talk about what men should or should not do, it is quite another to conduct your life in strict accord with such things. That is precisely what Jesus did. He lived on a spiritual plain – by faith and with the purpose of God clear in His mind. He refused to be diverted to distracting and pointless issues. When faced with them, He would shine the light of truth upon them, thereby exposing their folly. He did not allow the unfavorable impact of His teaching upon His critics to trouble Him. His concern was for the understanding of His disciples, and that is where He directed the bulk of His teaching.
HIS DISCIPLES ASKED HIM CONCERNING THE PARABLE
“ Mk 7:17 And when He was entered into the house from the people, His disciples asked Him concerning the parable.”
Matthew tells us that after Christ’s words to the Pharisees, Scribes, and multitudes, His disciples came to Him and said, “Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?” (Matt 15:12). After all, these were the clergy, theologians, and religious experts of the day. Jesus reveals to them that He is not at all concerned about whether or not they are offended by what He says. They are nothing more than “blind” leaders who are marked for removal. “Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” There are teachers and preachers whom God has not sent (Rom 10:15). There are “ministers” whom God has not “given” to the people (1 Cor 3:5). All of them – trained and untrained – will be removed from God’s field: plucked up by the roots! They are imposters, regardless of their disposition and seeming scholarship. Jesus therefore tells His disciples, “Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt 15:13-14).
Other versions read, “Leave them,” NIV “ignore them,” NLT and “Let them alone and disregard them.” AMPLIFIED The phrase “Let them alone” is literally translated “send off, abandon, leave behind, reject, set aside, neglect.” THAYER In today’s jargon, this would mean, “Don’t listen to their teaching, don’t read their books, don’t think about what they say, don’t exposes yourself to their influence!” And why take such drastic measures? Because those permitting themselves to be led by such men will fall into the ditch of Divine rejection with them! In calling them “blind guides,” Jesus is saying these men did not know what they were talking about. They were nothing more than scholarly babblers! Paul said of such, “Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm” (1 Tim 1:7). Legion is the name of such teachers in our day. Our response to them all must be “Leave them alone!”
FROM THE PEOPLE. Mark says Jesus left the multitudes and entered “into the house.” The house is not specified, but is obviously the one in which He was staying. If this was in Capernaum, it may have been the house of Peter and Andrew (Lk 4:31,38), or perhaps even His own house (Matt 4:13). At any rate, He was sequestered “from the people.” It is as though the Savior could only go so long without speaking clearly about things of spiritual substance. If anyone really wanted to be taught by Jesus, they generally had to follow Him away from the multitudes. It is still this way.
HIS DISCIPLES ASKED HIM. Mark says the disciples “asked” Jesus. Matthew tells us, “Peter said unto Him.” That is, he spoke for the rest of the disciples, all of them having the same question. Peter often spoke for all or some of the disciples (Lk 9:33; 12:41; 18:28; John 13:36).
The point to be seen here is that there are some things we will never know unless we ask, or press closer to the Lord in order to obtain an understanding. Some knowledge and understanding are only appropriated by earnestly asking, “give me understanding” (Psa 119:34,73,125,144,169). Even enlightenment concerning the “common salvation” requires that we “take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place” (2 Pet 1:19). If we expect to profit from the words of the Lord Jesus we must “give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip” (Heb 2:1). Casual disciples will inevitably be ignorant ones, and will only believe “for a while.” They will not be able to endure the tests and stresses that are brought upon all disciples, – both rooted and not rooted (Lk 8:13).
You see from this text that the disciples were not content to remain in the dark concerning what Jesus said. They pressed to know the truth of which He spoke, and therefore they will be rewarded with an answer to their question. It ought to be noted that all of this is forfeited when professing “Christians” demand brevity, infrequent and shallow exposure to the truth, and activities that do not require both heart and mind.
CONCERNING THE PARABLE. When they were away from the multitude, the disciples “questioned Him concerning the parable.” NASB Matthew says, “Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable,” or “Explain the parable to us” NIV (Mat 15:15). This refers to the saying He delivered to the people: “There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man” (Mark 7:15).
Notice that the disciples did not speculate about the meaning of this parable – this likeness of spiritual realities to life in this world. The meaning was not obvious to them, and they made no effort to discover it by discussion among themselves. Some would not refer to this saying as a “parable.” However, as is the case with all truth, when we throw the mantle of the seen over the truth of God, it becomes obscure. The temporal order cannot expound truth, it can only point to it. The closer a person is to the earth, however, the more truth will be garbed with the temporal, and thus become obscure. Jesus said He spoke to the multitudes in parables because it was not “given” to them to “know the mysteries of the kingdom” (Matt 13:10). The multitudes did not really want to know the truth. The disciples, however, did, and thus they asked for understanding.
ARE YOU WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING?
“ 18 And He saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him.”
Just how tolerant is Jesus of a lack of understanding and insight among His disciples? How does the Divine nature react to continued ignorance among those who have been exposed to the truth of God? Men may develop all kinds of views of this matter. Here, however, the Lord leaves no doubt about it. We do well to take heed to His words.
ARE YOU SO WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING? Other versions read, “without understanding also,” NKJV “lacking in understanding also,” NASB “Are you so dull,” NIV “do you also fail to understand?” NRSV “Are you, like them, without wisdom?” BBE “Are you still so dull?” NIB and “are you also unintelligent and dull and without understanding?” AMPLIFIED Matthew reads, “Are ye also yet without understanding?” (Matt 15:16).
It is as though Jesus asked them, “After being with Me so long, do you have no more understanding than the multitudes? Have you made no more progress than those who are only briefly exposed to My teaching? After I have favored you with all manners of explanation, exposition, and insight, do you have no more understanding than others?”
This was not the first or last time Jesus spoke in such a manner to His disciples. “Know ye not this parable?” (Mk 4:13). “How is it that ye do not understand?” (Matt 16:11). “O fools, and slow of heart to believe” (Lk 24:25). “Where is your faith?” (Lk 8:25). “How is it that ye have no faith?” (Mk 4:40). “How is it that ye do not understand?” (Mk 8:21).
It ought to be noted that those who are exposed to the love, consideration, and teaching of Jesus are expected to advance in their understanding. If this was true before Jesus took away the sins of the world, before the remission of sins, before the new birth, and before the gift of the Holy Spirit, how much more is it true now that all of these things are being experienced? Paul was alarmed at the lack of understanding among Jewish believers. “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers . . .” (Heb 5:12). Their situation as so serious, that he warned them of surely falling away if they did not “go on to perfection,” or spiritual maturity (Heb 5:12-6:1). I do not believe the requirement of spiritual understanding is being communicated to the modern church. If it is, it is not an effective communication.
DO YE NOT PERCEIVE? Other versions read, “Don’t you see?” NIV “Do you not realize?” NAB “Can’t you see?” NJB and “Do you not discern and see?” AMPLIFIED The disciples saw what Jesus said like the blind man saw men as “trees walking” (Mk 8:24). Christ’s saying was not clear to them, and Jesus did not excuse that lack of clarity with some casual saying.
I have frequently been in the presence of people who have heard a lot of things concerning Scripture, yet fumble with the truth like an infant does with a large and complex toy. I have rarely spoken to any “minister” who was concerned about this situation. Such an attitude does not reflect “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor 2:16).
We are now being exposed to the Divine view of ignorance, a lack of understanding, and the absence of spiritual perception. There is no acceptable reason for remaining obtuse and slow of heart when the truth has been heard, and understanding is available from heaven. The Lord is very tender and gracious dealing with such souls – particularly when they seek understanding. However, He does not fail to convict them of their condition.
DEFILEMENT DOES NOT COME FROM WITHOUT. “ . . . whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him.” NKJV Matthew reads, “whatsoever entereth in at the mouth” (Mat 15:17). Those who attempt to associate matters of bodily diet with spiritual life have seriously erred. A religion of “Touch not; taste not; handle not” is false to the core. It makes no difference how sound the reasons presented may appear, they are not right!
There were teachers who attempted to corrupt the brethren at Colossae with such a doctrine. Paul challenged the thinking of the brethren by writing, “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not)” (Col 2:21). Paul told Timothy that such an emphasis was a characteristic of a departure from the faith. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy . . . commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth” (1 Tim 4:1-3). The only possible justification for such a commandment is that, in some way, “meat” that was eaten defiled the individual. Jesus affirms that such a thing is not possible. “whatever goes into a man from the outside cannot make him unhallowed or unclean” AMPLIFIED That condition is also buttressed by the declaration that “the kingdom of God is not meat and drink” (Rom 14:17).
Whatever may be said about bodily health, or however men may choose to associate the consumption of food with one’s spiritual condition, it is still true that it is not possible for something that enters the mouth to defile the soul, character, or personhood of the individual. Spirituality is found in another dimension, and Jesus will no allow men to change that fact.
BECAUSE IT ENTERS NOT INTO THE HEART
“ 19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?”
IT DOES NOT ENTER INTO HIS HEART. Here is why something that goes into the mouth cannot defile, contaminate, or render unholy, the individual. It is because it does not enter into the heart – the central part of our person. The truth of the matter is that if the heart is not defiled, no other part can be, for as a man “thinks in his heart, so is he” NKJV (Prov 23:8). This is the part of man upon which the Lord looks. As it is written, “the Lord looketh on the heart” (1 Sam 16:7).
It may be objected that there are, in fact, things that, entering in through the mouth, defile and contaminate the person. For example, meat offered to idols, the flesh of things “strangled,” blood, and strong drink (Acts 15:20,29; 21:25; Lev 10:9; Prov 20:1). None of these enter into the heart. What, therefore, can possibly be wrong in taking them in through the mouth?
In the case of things offered to idols, blood, and things strangled, it is wrong to take them into the mouth for the same reason the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil could not be eaten: God forbids it. The defilement, in those instances, does not come because of the thing that was eaten, but because of a disobedient heart. The person was corrupted by disobedience and rebellion, not by the substance taken into the mouth. In the case of “strong drink,” it is the enslaving nature of it, and the way that it can distort the thinking of the individual, that makes it dangerous. It is because relief, escape, and enjoyment are sought by this means, rather than at the hand of the Lord. Even if “wine” (which is not synonymous with “strong drink,” Lev 10:9; Num 6:3; Prov 31:4) is taken, it is to be in “little,” or small measures (1 Tim 5:23). This is because it tends to produce circumstances in which sin is the more easily committed (Gen 9:21-25).
The things mentioned above, therefore, correlate directly with the heart, where defilement is realized. The sin does not, in that case, come because of what went into the mouth, but because of the condition of the heart that either precipitated or followed their entrance into the mouth.
IT ENTERS INTO THE BELLY. Food and drink do not go into the heart or the mind, but into the “belly,” or “stomach.” NKJV There is where the food and drink are processed, the appropriate nutrients extracted, and disseminated throughout the body by means of the blood. If a person makes his stomach the primary focus of life, he becomes defiled – not because of what went into it, but because their “God is their belly” (Phil 3:19).
Jesus is not giving a biological lesson. Rather, he is showing that both purity and defilement originate and are dispensed from the inward man – “the heart.” It is true that the body is not inconsequential, for our “bodies are the members of Christ” (1 Cor 6:15). The improper use of them is not found in eating and drinking, but in employing them for self-gratification rather than “instruments of righteousness unto God” (Rom 6:13).
IT GOETH OUT UPON THE DRAUGHT. Other versions read, “and is eliminated,” NKJV “and then out of his body,” NIV “goes out into the sewer,” NRSV and “goes out with the waste.” BBE The word “draught” means “a place where human discharges are dumped.” THAYER Without being too crude, the Lord is saying that are bodies are made to naturally discharge unuseable and contaminating residues. Thus when bad food is eaten, the body naturally causes it to be discharged. In the case of good foods, the body removes what is required for bodily maintenance, and passes the residue out of the body. We will find that moral contamination is not on this manner. The defilement of the inward man is not naturally expelled.
JESUS PURGED ALL MEATS. This was an epochal, or momentous, saying. By it the Lord was “purifying all foods,” NKJV or declaring “all foods clean.” NIV Those who teach that the “clean” and “unclean” distinctions of the Law were required because of the unacceptable nature of foods designated “unclean” could not possibly be more wrong. The fact that the Law forbade the eating of “pork,” for example, does not infer it is an inferior meat that conflicts with good health. If that was really the case, Jesus would have contradicted Divine reasoning by purifying all foods, making them suitable for consumption. When it comes to eating, “everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with gratitude” NASB (1 Tim 4:4), for “there is nothing unclean of itself” (Rom 14:14).
It is written, “Meats for the belly and the belly for meats,” or “Food is for the stomach and the stomach for food” NASB (1 Cor 6:13) – and the King Himself has lifted the prohibition on “all foods.” As already pointed out, the Lord has provided exceptions, just as He did in Eden – but they do not have to do with the nature of the food itself. The only stipulation is that whatever we eat be “received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim 4:14). It is interesting to note that Jesus did not say all meats were now “clean.” Instead, He stated the matter so that only understanding could take hold of it. If, therefore, something that is done does not defile the inward man, it cannot be sin. If, on the other hand, it does bring inner defilement, it cannot be right.