Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
See also Mar 7:17-23.
Then answered Peter, and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable – See the notes at Mat 13:3. The word parable sometimes means a dark or obscure saying, Psa 78:2. Peter meant, Explain to us more fully this obscure and novel doctrine. To us, now, it is plain; to the disciples, just coming out of Judaism, the doctrine of Jesus was obscure. Mark says that the disciples asked him. There is no contradiction. The question was put by Peter in the name of the disciples; or several of them put the question, though Matthew has mentioned only one. An omission is not a contradiction.
Mat 15:16
Are ye also yet without understanding? – Jesus appeals, in explaining this, to their common sense; and he wonders that they had not yet learned to judge the foolish traditions of the Jews by the decisions of common sense and by his own instructions.
Mat 15:17
Do ye not understand … – The meaning of this may be thus expressed: The food which is eaten does not affect the mind, and therefore cannot pollute it.
The doctrine of the Pharisees, that neglect of washing and of similar observances defiles a man, cannot be true. Those things pertain to the body as much as food does, and they cannot affect the soul. That must be purified by something else than external washing, and it is polluted by other things than a neglect of mere outward ceremonies. The seat of corruption is within – it is the heart itself; and if people would be made pure, this must be cleansed. If that is corrupt, the whole man is corrupt.
Mat 15:18-20
Christ proceeds to state what does defile the man, or render him a sinner:
1. Evil thoughts These are the first things – these are the fountains of all others. Thought precedes action. Thought, or purpose, or motive, gives its character to conduct. All evil thoughts are here intended. Though we labor to suppress them, yet they defile us. They leave pollution behind them.
2. Murders. Taking the life of others with malice. The malice has its seat in the heart, and the murder therefore proceeds from the heart, 1Jo 3:15.
3. Adulteries, fornication. See Mat 5:28.
4. Thefts. Theft is the taking and carrying away the goods of others without their knowledge or consent. Thefts are caused by coveting the property of others. They proceed, therefore, from the heart, and violate at the same time two commandments – the tenth commandment in thought and the eighth commandment in act.
5. False witness. Giving wrong testimony. Concealing the truth, or stating what we know to be false – a violation of the ninth commandment. It proceeds from a desire to injure others, to take away their character or property, or to do them injustice. It proceeds thus from the heart.
6. Blasphemies. See the notes at Mat 9:3. Blasphemy proceeds from opposition to God, hatred of his character Rom 8:7, and from a desire that there should be no God. It proceeds from the heart. See Psa 14:1. Mark adds several things to those enumerated by Matthew:
(a) Covetousness. The unlawful desire of what others possess, this always proceeds from the heart.
(b) Wickedness. The original here means malice, or a desire of injuring others, Rom 1:29.
(c) Deceit, i. e., fraud, concealment, cheating in trade. This proceeds from a desire to benefit ourselves by doing injustice to others, and this proceeds from the heart.
(d) Lasciviousness. Lust, obscenity, unbridled passion – a strong, evil desire of the heart.
(e) An evil eye. That is, an eye that is sour, malignant, proud; or an eye of lust and passion. See Mat 5:28; Mat 20:15; 2Pe 2:14, Having eyes full of adultery, that cannot cease from sin.
(f) Pride. An improper estimate of our own importance; thinking that we are of much more consequence than we really are. This is always the work of an evil heart.
(g) Foolishness. Not a lack of intellect – man is not to blame for that – but a moral folly, consisting in choosing evil ends and the bad means of gaining them; or, in other words, sin and wickedness. All sin is folly. It is foolish for a man to disobey God, and foolish for anyone to go to hell.
Mat 15:20
These are the things which defile a man – These are the true sources of pollution in man.
These are what corrupt and degrade. It is not the neglect of washing the body which defiles; it is the deep, inward corruption of the heart. And what a fountain of pollution is the human soul! What an array of crimes to proceed from the heart of man! What a proof of guilt! What strictness is there in the law of God! How universal is depravity!
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 15. Declare unto us this parable.] Is it not strange to hear the disciples asking for the explanation of such a parable as this! The true knowledge of the spirit of the Gospel is a thing more uncommon than we imagine, among the generality of Christians, and even of the learned.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Mark saith, his disciples asked him concerning the parable. Peter probably began, the rest followed. Or Peter speaks in the name of the rest, for our Saviour in his answer doth not say, Art thou, but,
Are ye. They did well in that they desired to be instructed what the meaning was of the parable, that is, the dark saying, which he used (for the Hebrews called all dark sayings parables); possibly they might also stumble at what our Saviour said, as tending to the destruction of the ceremonial law, about the difference of meats. But that they were no better instructed than not to understand a thing so plain and obvious, this was their fault, and argued their small improvement of our Saviours company. God expects a proficiency in knowledge from us proportionate unto the means he giveth us.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15. Then answered Peter and saidunto him, Declare unto us this parable“when He wasentered into the house from the people,” says Mark (Mr7:17).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Then answered Peter,…. Mark says, “his disciples asked him concerning the parable”; which might be by the mouth of Peter; who, probably, being the eldest man, and very forward to speak, was generally their spokesman: and who, at this time, might be requested, by the rest, to ask the meaning of the parable, which had given offence to the Pharisees, and was not clearly understood by them; which he accordingly did:
and said unto him, declare unto us this parable; that not what goes into the mouth, but what comes out of it, defiles the man; which, though expressed in very plain words, and easy to be understood, yet did not appear clear to their understandings; and seemed to be contrary, not only to the traditions of the elders, but to the laws of God, respecting the difference of clean and unclean meats; and therefore call it a “parable”, and desire an explanation of it.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Declare unto us the parable ( ). Explain the parable (pithy saying) in verse 11, not in verse 14. As a matter of fact, the disciples had been upset by Christ’s powerful exposure of the “Corban” duplicity and the words about “defilement” in verse 11.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Mat 15:15
. And Peter answering said. As the disciples betray excessive ignorance, Christ justly reproves and upbraids them for being still void of understanding, and yet does not fail to act as their teacher. What Matthew ascribes in a peculiar manner to Peter is related by Mark, in the same sense, as a question put by them all; and this is evident from Christ’s reply, in which he reproves the ignorance, not of Peter only, but of all of them alike. The general meaning is, that men are not polluted by food, but that they have within themselves the pollution of sins, which afterwards shows itself in the outward actions. Is it objected that intemperance in eating is defilement? The solution is easy. Christ speaks only of the proper and lawful use of those things which God has put in our power. To eat and drink are things in their own nature free and indifferent: if any corruption be added, it proceeds from the man himself, and therefore must be regarded not as external, but internal. (410)
(410) “ Et pourtant le vice est tousiours interieur, et ne vient point d’ailleurs;” — “and therefore sin is always internal, and does not come from without.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(15) Declare unto us this parable.The answer shows that Peters question referred not to the proverb that immediately preceded, but to what seemed to him the strange, startling utterance of Mat. 15:11. It was significant that he could not as yet take in the thought that it was a truth to be received literally. To him it seemed a dark enigmatic saying, which required an explanation, like that which had been given of the parable of the Sower, to make its meaning clear.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
15. Declare Explain or make clear. Parable Or simile, by which the nature of moral impurity is illustrated.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And Peter answered and said to him, “Declare to us the parable.” ’
That the disciples were wrestling with this problem was understandable. For years they had grown up believing that in general the Pharisees’ way was the right way, even if they had nor fully followed it. They had grown up recognising the importance of ritual for their lives as being of prime importance. It was therefore difficult for them to thrust all that aside and see everything from a new perspective. And if they were to do so they must ensure that they had got it right. So Peter, on their behalf, bravely speaks up again, asks for an explanation of Jesus’ words, and has to take the gentle rebuke addressed to them all. Here ‘parable’ simply means ‘a saying’, although a saying with an inner meaning. The problem was, what did Jesus really mean?
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jesus explains the parable:
v. 15. Then answered Peter and said unto Him, Declare unto us this parable.
v. 16. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?
v. 17. Do not ye yet understand that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
v. 18. But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth, from the heart, and they defile the man.
v. 19. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.
v. 20. These are the things which defile a man; but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. Peter, in his impulsive way, although he might have acted as spokesman for the Twelve, wants the saying explained, which has enough of the symbolical in it to cause some difficulty. But the occasion itself furnished a clue, and Peter’s plea for a clearing up of the dark saying is reproved by the Lord: Can it be that even ye are yet so dense in spiritual matters? after two years of instruction? He wants His disciples to use their enlightened intellect properly, and not make a mystery of a plain matter. It is a matter of common knowledge that the food which the body uses influences only the physical and mental life directly, and does not concern the heart and spirit. By the throwing out of the useless, the indigestible and undigested matter, the body is continually purged. This physical process does not defile a person, just as this result will not follow his eating with unwashed hands. But the opposite is true of the things, words, and deeds, which, coming out of the heart, pass from the body by way of the mouth. “The Savior implies that evil works first pass through the channel of an evil mouth, thus disclosing the evil state of the heart. ” The words representing the thoughts and desires directed toward such sins, they are morally defiling, they reveal the pollution existing in the heart. The evil thoughts, the evil conversations and discussions of the heart, are made manifest in all kinds of actual sins, envyings, and murders, the breaking of the marriage tie and the unauthorized assuming of relations permissible within holy wedlock only, the acquiring of the neighbor’s property by wrong means, the defaming of the neighbor’s good name, the speaking evil of God and man, those are the things which cause defilement and are stains on heart and character, not the omission of a mere ceremonial custom. “He that wishes to wash his hands, let him wash them; he that does not want to wash his hands, let him desist therefrom: those matters have nothing to do with righteousness and with sin; I do not want sin or righteousness to consist in them. Therefore you must separate righteousness and sin from such precepts of men. I do not object to any one’s washing himself; but I do object to it that someone for that reason should consider himself just and holy before God.”
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mat 15:15. Declare unto us this parable The disciples, not understanding their Master’s doctrine concerning meats, desired him, when they came home, to explain it. See Mar 7:17. He complied, and shewed them that meats, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God; in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat: whereas that which proceedeth out of the man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes the mind. See Mat 15:18. The verb , rendered, declare, signifies properly, make known or explain, Comp. ch. Mat 13:36.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 15:15 . ] differs, though not materially, from Mar 7:17 .
] in this instance , a saying embodied in some figurative representation, an apophthegm. Etym. M.: , , , , . Comp. note on Mat 13:3 ; , as in Mat 13:36 .
] It was the saying of Mat 15:11 that was present to Peter’s mind as having giving occasion to the words that had just fallen from Jesus. It is just that same which, according to Mat 15:12 , had given offence to the Pharisees. But the explanation of it which is now furnished by Jesus is of such a nature as to be by no means self-evident.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
Ver. 15. Declare unto us this parable ] It was no parable, but a plain discourse, and easy to be understood, had not they been dull of hearing, and somewhat soured with the pharisaical leaven of the necessity of washing hands before meat: though for that time, by a singular providence of God, they neglected; which both gave occasion to the Pharisees’ quarrel, and to this question, whereto our Saviour maketh a most plain and plenary answer.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15. ] The saying in Mat 15:11 , which is clearly the subject of the question, was not strictly a , but a plain declaration; so that either Peter took it for a parable, or . must be taken in its wider sense of ‘an hard saying.’ Stier thinks that their questioning as to the meaning of parables in ch. 13 had habituated them to asking for explanations in this form.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 15:15-20 . Interpretation of saying in Mat 15:11 .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mat 15:15 . , spokesman as usual ( , Chrys., Hom. li.). , here at least, whatever may be the case in Mk., can mean only a dark saying, (Theophy. in Mk.), “oratio obscura” (Suicer). The saying, Mat 15:11 , was above the understanding of the disciples, or rather in advance of their religious attainments; for men often deem thoughts difficult when, though easy to understand, they are hard to receive . The Twelve had been a little scandalised by the saying as well as the Pharisees, though they did not like to say so ( , Chrys.).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 15:15-20
15Peter said to Him, “Explain the parable to us.” 16Jesus said, “Are you still lacking in understanding also? 17Do you not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated? 18But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. 19For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witnesses, slanders. 20These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile the man.”
Mat 15:15-20 This speaks of the need for spiritual balance between freedom in Christ and self-limiting responsibility out of love for Christ and others (cf. Rom 14:1 to Rom 15:13; 1 Corinthians 8; 1Co 10:23-33; 1Ti 4:4; Tit 1:15).
Mat 15:16 “Are you still lacking in understanding also” This is a rare, emphatic Greek idiom. Even the disciples did not understand until after the resurrection (cf. Luk 24:45, see also Luk 24:16; Luk 24:31; Act 16:14; 1Jn 5:20).
Mat 15:18 What food one may or may not eat is not the issue but the person’s heart (cf. Mat 12:34; Mar 7:20). By these statements Jesus negated the food laws of Leviticus 11! Jesus is usually said to have rejected the oral tradition of the rabbis, but affirmed the OT. However, in this instance and His treatment of divorce (cf. Mat 5:31-32; Mat 19:8-9) He changes OT Law. It is best to affirm Jesus’ right and inspiration to reinterpret both the OT and rabbinical tradition without turning this into a hermeneutical principle. Modern interpreters are not inspired but illumined. We affirm Jesus’ teachings, but dare not follow His hermeneutic technique!
“heart” See Special Topic at Mat 5:8.
Mat 15:19 “fornications” The English word ” pornography” shares the same root word as this Greek term. It meant any inappropriate sexual activity: premarital sex, extramarital sex, homosexuality, bestiality, and even a refusal of levirate responsibilities (a brother failing to sexually relate to the widow of a deceased brother in order to provide heirs).
In the OT there was a distinction between marital infidelity (adultery) and pre-marital promiscuity (fornication).
“thefts” The English word “kleptomania” is derived from the same Greek root.
“slanders” This whole list referred to the Ten Commandments. Blasphemy was to speak against God.
SPECIAL TOPIC: HUMAN SPEECH
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Peter. See note on “scribes”, &c, Mat 15:1.
Declare = Expound. See note on Mat 13:36.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
15.] The saying in Mat 15:11, which is clearly the subject of the question, was not strictly a , but a plain declaration; so that either Peter took it for a parable,-or . must be taken in its wider sense of an hard saying. Stier thinks that their questioning as to the meaning of parables in ch. 13 had habituated them to asking for explanations in this form.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 15:15. , answering) The candour of sacred historians in recording the errors of holy men is remarkable in all the books of the Bible.- , this parable) Our Lords language becomes parabolic in Mat 15:13, but was plain and literal in Mat 15:10-11. Peter therefore, as a disciple, speaks incorrectly. Our Lord, however, does not expressly find fault with this. So that they held fast the matter, [He excuses the manner.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Declare: Mat 13:36, Mar 4:34, Mar 7:17, Joh 16:29
Reciprocal: Mar 4:13 – Know Mar 9:28 – asked Luk 8:9 – What Act 8:34 – of whom
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5:15
Peter called the teaching of Jesus about washing and eating a parable. However, it was not a parable of the kingdom (chapter 13:11), hence Jesus had called the multitudes to him to give that lesson. But it was somewhat indirect or figurative and the apostles did not understand it.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 15:15. Peter. He again acts as the spokesman, hence unto us.
Declare, i.e., expound
The parable. That of Mat 15:11 (comp. Mar 7:17). The declaration in Mat 15:11, was a hard saying to those who were born Jews, and hence Peter might have called it a parable, especially as our Lord had so often taught the deeper truths in that form. Or the disciples, with their Jewish education, might have thought: this saying to which the Pharisees so much object is not to be taken literally, it must be a parable. The censure of the next verse favors this explanation.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The disciples desiring the interpretation of the foregoing parable, our Saviour gives it them; but with all expostulates with them, that they did not understand a thing so obvious and plain: Are ye yet without understanding? As if he had said, “Have ye sat thus long under my ministerial teaching, and enjoyed the benefit of my company and conversation, and are yet no farther proficients in knowledge?”
Whence learn, that our Lord expects a proficiency in knowledge from us, answerable to the opportunities and means of knowledge enjoyed by us.
Next, he gives them the sense and signification of the parable; telling them, that it is out of a sinful heart that all sin proceeds; the heart is the cage or nest, which is full of these unclean birds, and from whence they take their flight. Though the occasions of sin are from without, yet the source and origin of sin is from within.
Learn, that the heart of man is the sink and seed-plat of all sin, and the fountain of all pollution; the life could not be so bad, if the heart were not worse; all the irregularity of our lives flows from the impurity of our hearts and natures.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 15:15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned Mat 15:11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a mans mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Peter again took the leadership among the disciples (cf. Mat 14:28). Jesus’ answer to Peter’s request for an explanation of the parable (Mat 15:17-20) identifies the parable as what Jesus had said about defilement in Mat 15:11. Jesus again rebuked the disciples for failing to understand what he meant (cf. Mat 14:31). The unbelieving multitudes were understandably ignorant, but Jesus’ believing disciples should have known better. Jesus had taught them the priority of reality over ritual before (Mat 3:9; Mat 12:1-21). Jesus’ rebuke was probably also a pedagogical device. It would have made the disciples try their best to understand what He was teaching in the future so they would avoid further rebukes.