Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 7:20
And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
And he said,…. Continued to say in his discourse; though this is left but in the Syriac version;
that which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man; meaning, not his excrements, which were unclean by the law, De 23:13 but what comes out of his heart, by his mouth; or is expressed in action, as appears by what follows; [See comments on Mt 15:18].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
1) “And He said, That which cometh out of the man,” (elegen de hoti to ek eou anthropou ekporeumenou) “Then He said that the thing coming forth out of a man,” showing what he is morally by what he says and what he does and what his attitude is toward the Word of God,
2) “That defileth the man.” (ekeino koinoi ton anthropon) “That (is what) defiles a man, “when it adds to or takes from or does not harmonize with the Word of the Lord, as written or spoken, when interpreted in its contextual setting, Isa 29:13; Mar 7:6-13; Mat 15:3; Mat 15:18; Mat 20:23; Joh 18:28, describe how certain Jews went not into the judgment hall lest they be defiled and miss the passover, while condemning Jesus to death.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
‘And he said, “That which comes out from a man, that defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, covetings, wickednesses, deceit, debauchery, an evil eye, blasphemies, pride, foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.” ’
Jesus then expanded on His words. What He was speaking of were the sins that came from men’s hearts and ruined their lives. These were what came ‘out of the man’, revealing him to be sinful. And He emphasised that central to all are evil thoughts. As a man thinks in his heart, that is what he is like (Pro 23:7). We may not all be adulterers and murderers, He is pointing out, but we have all considered it at one time or another. This argument is expanded on in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5). ‘Evil thoughts’ is distinguished in the Greek, denoting that it includes all that follows.
Examples are then listed covering a wide range of human sin. Many are referring directly to the ten commandments, but expanded to include thoughts as well as acts (although ‘you shall not covet’ had already done that). Sexual misbehaviour, theft, murder, coveting (wrongly desiring what others have), deceit (or guile) all refer to direct commandments. ‘Wickednesses’ cover any evil behaviour that causes harm – the Devil is ‘the wicked’ one. Debauchery refers to uncontrolled living, especially drunkenness and its consequences, but ranges wider. Such a person shows little restraint. The ‘evil eye’ in a Jewish context means an eye that sees sinfully (see Luk 11:34; Mat 20:15), and thus is envious, or full of hate, or mean and miserly. Blasphemies and slanders (the carelessness and wickedness of the tongue especially with regard to God), pride (‘showing oneself above others’) and foolishness (especially religious insensibility – it is the fool who says in his heart, ‘there is no God’ and shows it by how he lives- Psa 14:1; Psa 53:1) are all sins regularly condemned in Scripture. But note that even the thought of these is sin (‘evil thoughts’ – compare Jesus teaching in Mat 5:28). All the words but one are found in the LXX demonstrating that the list is typically from a Jewish background.
Mark drops the matter there because the main point has been made, and we are left to ponder the main point that Jesus was making. But the emphasis of the whole chapter is on the need to see all things from a new point of view that gets to the heart of what sin really is, and that that is what the preaching on the new Kingly Rule of God had to do.
Excursus On The Impact of Jesus Which Would Replace Unnecessary Ritual.
There can be no doubt that Jesus’ argument here went further than just what was being determined in the context. It went to the root of the whole question of ritual law. It makes us rightly ask what the intention of ritual is and when it can be seen as irrelevant and superseded. And it contributed to releasing the Christian church from certain aspects of the Law which had gradually become superseded.
Humanly speaking this was the genius of Jesus. Time and again He brushes aside extraneous matters and gets to the heart of questions which have puzzled men in all ages. It is not a question of whether anyone had ever had such ideas before, it is the sheer breadth of His coverage and the depth of His understanding that amazes us. And His teachings are full of examples of this very thing. By a simple story He dealt with racial and religious prejudice at a stroke leaving no excuse for anyone to be racist (Luk 10:25-37). He defined moral goodness in terms of doing to others what we would that they would do to us (Mat 7:12), something which simply brings home moral truth to everyone without having to go into greater detail. We all know what in our inner hearts we want for ourselves. He summarised true religious attitude in a simple prayer (Mat 6:9-13). He told stories which left men in no doubt of the direction in which they should go. And here He deals with the question of how ritual is to be seen at a stroke. And in every case we have to agree with Him. We have no choice. He knew what all men wish to know.
And these are but a few examples of His genius. He gave out a moral teaching that has been acknowledged in all ages as being supreme, both with regard to its coverage and with regard to what He omitted. Those who doubt it do but make fools of themselves. If we calculated its extent we would discover how little we have of it, but when we study it we are amazed at the vastness of the ground He covered.
Some foolish men have tried to deny that He ever existed. But how then to explain this incredible range of moral teaching given in so small a scope which suddenly arrived in the 1st century AD and has changed the history of the world? To suggest that it came from the early church is ridiculous. Had they not remembered it word for word they would soon have destroyed it. To suggest that the Gospel writers invented it is to produce four geniuses instead of one. For the truth is that none had the ability or the understanding. In truth if we refuse to acknowledge the existence of Jesus, we must postulate an unknown genius who lived in Palestine at the same time and did exactly what Jesus did. And then acknowledge that He was called Jesus.
That Jesus was a Jew comes out clearly in all His teaching. His deep knowledge of the Old Testament and of Judaism comes out in almost every word He uttered. But His importance morally speaking is that He transcended both. While He lived faithfully as a Jew, here was someone Who was unique in history, and could see through the failures of Judaism. And once He had existed nothing could ever be the same again. But the great problem that He posed for mankind was that He would not stop there. Had He done so He would have been buried and finally have been revered by all good men as an outstanding Jew, and as easily ignored. But unlike other moral geniuses such as Confucius, Buddha, Marcus Aurelius and so on He did not leave it like that, He put right at the heart of His teaching claims about Himself that revealed His claim to be that He was more than a man.
There is no trace of madness or megalomania in His words, but He clearly believed and taught that He had a unique relationship with God that was like that of an only Son with His Father, and that by their response to Him all men will be judged. Without any arrogance He pointed all men to Himself and His unique status. In all humility He constantly set Himself above the most revered names of history (e.g. Mat 5:21-22 and following; Mar 11:11; Mar 12:38-42; Joh 8:56-58). With an ordinary man this could have been dismissed as eccentricity, but with a man of the stature of Jesus it could not be dismissed at all. And then He made clear that He had come in order to die. We cannot avoid the idea. It lies imbedded in His teaching. And He made clear that His death, unlike the deaths of other men, was not to be His end, but would in some way change the world. All this is really indisputable to anyone who fairly considers what He taught, even if they make certain exclusions. For nothing of this can be eradicated from His teaching without almost eradicating all.
Furthermore the reason that the message about Him did reach out to the world was certainly because of belief in His resurrection. It was because they believed that Jesus had risen again and was carrying on His kingly rule. And they did not do so on the basis of some mindless ‘faith’, they did so because they believed in an empty tomb which had been witnessed by others, and the testimony of trustworthy people Who had seen Him alive, and not singly but in groups, one of which was over five hundred strong (1Co 15:3-8; Mat 28:9-20; Mar 16:9-20; Luk 24:13-53; Joh 20:11 to Joh 21:22). And a large number of these were eventually put to death because of their testimony, rejoicing because they knew that it was so.
And this teaching on religious ritual was an example of what we are talking about. For good reason Old Testament law had required certain ritual behaviour in order to teach a new born nation how to live and what to believe, to lift it from the morass in which it found itself, and from unwholesome living. This ritual was provided and laid a solid foundation for the future which resulted in this nation becoming a moral example to the world, not so much by its general behaviour but because of its holy books and their general conformation with their teaching. The laws of cleanliness pointed in the direction of what was wholesome and good. There is no question but that they contributed to good hygiene, but even more important than that was the fact that (until they were given undue emphasis) they had a wholesome influence on life, which made men almost unconsciously aim at a higher good. They helped to keep men from the degradations of life, and to fix their minds on God and His ways.
But by the time of Jesus that influence had been marred by over application. The ritual no longer lifted men up, it burdened them down. And it had been given a prominence that excluded more important matters. Nothing was more clear to Jesus than this fact. He had grown up with it, and He had submitted to it, and He had watched its impact all around Him. And now He had begun His mission which would among other things free men from the chains with which ovdr-zealousness had bound them.
Thus His teaching here concerning what really mattered in men’s lives was the beginning of a move which would lift these restrictions from men while continuing to stress the need for true wholesomeness. To the end of His life He would observe the requirements of the Pharisees, for none knew better than He that replacement of them by something better was important before they were removed. It was not something to be achieved at a stroke. To lose them would have left many not knowing where to look. But by gently shaking their foundations He ensured that one day it would be so. It could, however, only be achieved when there were those who had a strong willingness to follow after wholesomeness even when the ritual was removed.
Thus when the early church became largely Gentile, although retaining a large Jewish base, it became recognised that they need no longer be bound by this ritual, firstly because they were unacquainted with its significance, secondly because it had been replaced by something better, and thirdly because it was now unnecessary to distinguish a certain nation from all others. It could thus be laid aside without destroying their moral roots. For what it pointed to was now far better exemplified in Jesus Christ, Who had indeed largely fulfilled the significance of Old Testament rituals. The new had come and therefore the old could be replaced.
This process outwardly began here, and it was given a great forward impulse when Peter had his vision from God before preaching to Cornelius and his men (Act 10:9-16). There he learned that what was approved of by God could not be described as unclean. And it finally resulted in the decision of the Jewish-Christian Council that Gentile Christians were to look to Christ and not be restricted by Old Testament ritual (Act 15:13-21). And it was confirmed by Paul in his letters where he specifically links it with the Kingly Rule of God (Romans 14, see the whole but especially Mar 7:17). Under the Kingly Rule of God lesser restrictions were unnecessary. But its logic lay in what Jesus had taught here. This is why, although we should be careful what we eat, we are not restricted by the restrictions found in Leviticus, although doing well to take heed to their principles (see our commentary on Leviticus). And that is because it is not the outward which can defile us, but what lies deep within our hearts.
And it should be noted that such a view of much of this ritual of the Pharisees is not only acknowledged by Christians, but by the vast majority of Jews as well, for they no longer consider it necessary to follow these regulations of the Pharisees.
End of Excursus.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
Ver. 20. That defileth the man ] Far worse than any out-house. Sin is the devil’s excrement.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mar 7:20 . : the use of this phrase here favours the view that , etc., is an interpolated remark of the evangelist (Field).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
And He said, &c. Note the Figure of speech Epimone. App-6.
cometh = issueth,
out of. Greek. ek. App-101.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Mar 7:15, Psa 41:6, Heb 7:6, Mic 2:1, Mat 12:34-37, Jam 1:14, Jam 1:15, Jam 3:6, Jam 4:1
Reciprocal: Lev 15:2 – when any man Lev 15:25 – General Job 4:17 – shall a man
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
EVIL FROM WITHIN
And He said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
Mar 7:20; Mar 7:23
It is a notable characteristic of our Lords teaching that He fixes our attention not on outward results, but on inward motives.
I. The nature of the evil.What are the evil thoughts which we must guard against? Out of the terrible list which our Lord gives us in our text we may select three types.
(a) Pride, foolishness. How easy it is, especially in our leisure moments, to dwell with self-complacency on our own excellencies. At the worst the pride and foolishness which proceed from the heart may so exalt the miserable idol of self as to expel God from His rightful throne; in any case they destroy the most characteristic virtue of the Christian hearthumility.
(b) Thoughts of bitterness, ill-temper, and jealousy. The gossip of some idle tongue is accepted and believed; suspicion passes into ill-tempered resentment, and resentment turns into dislike verging upon hatred. There is no end to the mischief which arises from bad-tempered thoughts and perverse imaginations. Out of the heart proceed murders.
(c) Lasciviousness. It is not always easy for a man to keep his mind clean. But you can hardly exaggerate the disaster of a habit of unclean thinking, and a pure heart is worth any effort to those who remember what is promised to its possessor.
II. The remedy for the evil.What is the remedy for the evil?
(a) It is necessary to recognise the mischief, and to call things by their right names. There is still a great deal of unconscious Pharisaism in the world; not, indeed, the Pharisaism which makes a show of religious profession (that is no longer the fashion), but the Pharisaism which is almost blatantly satisfied with a miserably poor moral standard.
(b) Let us learn the necessity of a disciplined will, and recognise that it is possible, by vigilant determination, to keep the rein on our thoughts and imaginations. After all, we are members of Christ, and the Spirit of God dwells within us.
(c) Let us remember that in the spiritual as well as the material world, nature abhors a vacuum. The best way to keep out what is evil and unwholesome is to occupy the mind with good and wholesome subjects. A man who gives a few minutes every morning to meditation on some feature of the character of our Lord, or some incident in that wonderful life, is not likely to be a victim of bitter, or self-conceited, or gross imaginations.
III. The conclusion of the whole matter.Happy is that man who by consistent watchfulness against the first beginnings of evil, and willingness to dwell on what is best and healthiest, prepares himselfor lets Christ prepare himto be a worthy temple of the Holy Ghost. There is no limit to the possibilities of Christian character, and of lasting usefulness for those whose minds are free to hear Gods call.
Rev. Canon Kempthorne.
Illustration
There was an outbreak of typhoid fever in a country village. The inhabitants, in their panic, made every sort of effort to arrest the mischief. They examined their drains, they scrutinised their supplies of food and drink, they deluged their houses and yards with disinfectants. The fever still went on. At last they called in an expert, who commended the efforts that they had made, but asked some questions which were new to them. Where did their water come from? Was it polluted somewhere up stream? Had they traced it to the source! He answered these questions for himself, and found the cause of pollution near the source of the stream which supplied the village. The mischief was removed, and health returned. When our moral health is suffering, let us look to the source of the mischief.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
0
The mere fact of its coming out is not what defiles a man. The idea is that such things as will soon be named are what makes a man defiled, and the issuing forth of them reveals what the defilements are.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jesus repeated and became more specific so the disciples would understand Him. The list of sins proceeds from six actions to six attitudes (cf. Rom 1:29-31; Gal 5:19-23). Matthew’s record included only six sins. Evil thoughts are the ground out of which the evil actions and attitudes grow. The order in the text is true to life. Sin proceeds from the heart (human nature) to the thoughts (human mind) to actions (human deeds).
This controversy with the Pharisees and the scribes was a factor that led Jesus to withdraw from Galilee a third time (cf. Mar 4:35-36; Mar 6:31-32).