Mark 7
DorrisMark 7:1-13
- JESUS BY THE
AND SCRIBES
1 And there are gathered together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, who had come from Jerusalem,–Mark gives a glimpse of the organized opposition against Jesus. Between the events of this and the preceding chapter were Christ’s discourse at Capernaum (John 6:22-71), and the third Passover of his public ministry, which he did not attend (John 6:4; John 7:1). Disappointed in not seeing Jesus at the Passover (John 6:4; John 7:1), they probably came to Galilee to watch his movements and to conspire against him. These Pharisees and scribes were sent, doubtless by the authorities in Jerusalem, to counteract the widespread influence of Jesus in Galilee. No doubt the shrewdest and most able were sent. Sent from the seat of learning and authority, able and shrewd, and they were considered better prepared to meet Jesus than the ones who resided in Galilee.
2 and had seen that some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled, that is, unwashen, hands.–These Pharisees and scribes, watching for an opportunity to attack Jesus, found it in the fact “that some of his disciples ate their bread with defiled hands.” Mark explains that “defiled” hands are “unwashen” hands.
3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands diligently,–That is, frequently–often–carefully and up to the elbow.
eat not, holding the tradition–What had been handed down, not what was delivered by writing in the law of Moses, but what had been communicated from father to son, as being proper and binding.
of the elders;–The ancients, not the old men then living, but those who had lived formerly. This parenthetic clause is an explanation of the practices of “the Pharisees, and all the Jews,” in regard to the customs mentioned, in this and next verse. “All the Jews” is a comparative expression, meaning not literally every one of them, but the most of them; for a few were Sadducees, who rejected the tradition. The Jews claim there are two laws–the written law of Moses written in the Bible and the oral law, tradition handed down, they claim, from Moses through Aaron and his sons, the elders of that time, Joshua, and the prophets–from generation to generation successively. They claim that when God gave Moses the written law, he gave him also the tradition, or oral law, as an explanation of the written law. This explanation of the written law is “the tradition of the elders” handed down. They attached more importance to the tradition than to the law itself, or, human nature-like, to their interpretations of the scriptures than to the scriptures themselves. A digest of the tradition is called the “Mishua”;comments upon and explanations of the Mishua is the “Talmud.” Thus the Mishua explains the law and the Talmud explains the Mishua.
4 and when they come from the marketplace,–Where provisions are sold. A broad place or square in the city of public resort, with the market on one side and colonnades on the other. To this place people resorted for different purposes. Here children met to play (Matthew 11:16-17); laborers to seek work (Matthew 20:1-7);the sick, to be healed (Mark 6:56);and philosophers, to discuss grave and great questions. In the marketplace in Athens, Paul discussed the resurrection with the Epicureans and Stoic philosophers. (Acts 17:17-18.) The Pharisees loved the “salutations in the marketplaces.” (Mark 12:38.) There at Philippi, Paul and Silas were dragged before the magistrates. (Acts 16:19.)
except they bathe themselves, they eat not;–Except they immerse themselves. The word “bathe” is from the Greek “baptizo.” Hence the idea of dipping or immersing themselves, thus taking a bath before eating. While in the marketplace, the whole body was in danger of being defiled by coming in contact with all classes, hence the necessity of immersing the whole body in water.
and many other things there are, which they have received to hold,–Many other like usages which the Pharisees had “received” by tradition “to hold,” to adhere to and practice.
washings of cups,–In the original the baptisms of cups. Drinking vessels–those used at their meals.
and pots,–Vessels made of wood, used to hold liquids, etc., had to be washed–immersed.
and brasen vessels.–Vessels made of brass, used in cooking or otherwise, if much polluted, were commonly passed through the fire; if only slightly polluted, they were washed. The religious practices of the Jews in question are named. The law of uncleanness is plainly stated in the law of Moses, but these practices of the Jews were not parts of that law; they were traditions, extensions of the law by human wisdom and authority, “doctrines” and “the precepts of men.” (Matthew 15:9.) Washing the hands, different vessels, and tables in order to cleanse them of dirt was not peculiar to the Jews. Others did that then and do it now. And this was not the practice Jesus condemned. He condemns all kinds of filthiness.
However free from dirt their hands, vessels, tables, and they themselves ceremonially unclean, they performed these acts, nevertheless; they performed them as religious service, or ceremonies, or rites. This was the thing Jesus condemned. The law required the unclean to bathe themselves (Leviticus 14:9-15; Leviticus 16:24-28; Leviticus 17:15; Numbers 19:7-8; Numbers 19:19), but the Pharisees by their theories had added to the word of God and were punctilious in performing ceremonies which the law did not require. Let us beware “of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” (Luke 12:1.) By our own theories, “logical deductions.” and traditions, it is possible for us to become pharisaical.
5 And the Pharisees and the scribes ask him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders,–They do not directly charge Jesus, but his disciples. They relied upon the authority of their tradition for the charge. Not to live according to it was to “transgress” it. (Matthew 15:2.)
but eat their bread with defiled hands?–Without washing their hands before eating. The traditionary practices just mentioned, and the fact that the disciples were seen to eat with unwashed hands, gave rise to the discussion which now follows.
6 And he said unto them, Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites,–Jesus selects as a proof text Isaiah 29:13. He gave the sense, not the exact language. He applies the text to them. Their false doctrine and practice were foretold by the prophet, but they did not seem to realize it. This is the first time Jesus addressed them openly as hypocrites.
as it is written, This people honoreth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.–In motive and purpose. The motive and purpose, as well as the words, must be pure. Their hearts were not right.
7 But in vain do they worship me,–Emptiness is all you give me in your worship. He gives the reason in the next clause.
teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men.–The precepts of men were the doctrine they taught. “Doctrines” refer to those things taught as binding upon the conscience, as obligatory. Jesus applies it to the Pharisees and scribes as religious teachers.
8 Ye leave the commandment of God,–Set the pure word of God on the sidetrack–neglecting and disregarding the commandment of God.
and hold fast the tradition of men.–They neglected the commandment of God and clung to the traditions of men. In this they preferred man to God. They set God aside –they dethroned him and gave man his seat. A severe charge indeed.
9 And he said unto them, Full well do ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your tradition.–They could not do both, so in order to keep their tradition they rejected the commandment of God. Note that Jesus did not deny the charge they brought against his disciples but virtually acknowledged its truth. He came down from heaven, not to do his own will, but the will of God who sent him (John 6:38), and not, therefore, “the tradition of the elders.” “The precepts of men” are no part of the will of God. Jesus did not keep them, because they were not commandments of God. In reply to this accusation, Jesus attacked tradition itself and charged his accusers with three things: (1) hypocrisy, because they pretended to honor God with their lips when their hearts were far from him; (2) worshiping God in vain, because they taught “as their doctrines the precepts of men”; (3) rejecting the commandments of God in order to keep their tradition. He applied the declaration of Isaiah (29:13) to them: “And their fear of me is a commandment of men which bath been taught them.”
10 For–Jesus introduces an example where the scribes and Pharisees set aside God’s law for their tradition to prove his charge against them.
Moses said,–In Exodus 20:12. Jesus here gives his sanction of the decalogue as of divine origin and Moses as an inspired teacher and lawgiver. God gave the law through Moses.
Honor thy father and thy mother;–In every way–in word, deed and thought and by providing for them in old age or during distress.
and, He that speaketh evil of father or mother, let him die the death:–“Or, surely die.” Let him end with death. A severe penalty indeed and shows the importance of honoring father and mother.
11 but ye say,–By your tradition and your practice in opposition to what Moses says. He arrays Moses against themselves.
If a man shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is Corban, that is to say, Given to God;–A gift–something brought near, or devoted to God, as a gift, offering or sacrifice. It was applied to all offerings whether with or without blood, and especially in fulfillment of a vow. (Leviticus 1:2; Leviticus 1:10; Leviticus 1:14; Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:4; Leviticus 7:13 Numbers 31:50.) According to the Mosaic law, persons could devote certain things to God with certain limitations. (Leviticus 27:2-33; Numbers 30:2-15; Deuteronomy 23:21-22; Judges 13:7.) To these regulations were added those of tradition by the scribes and Pharisees. And so far was it carried that even the pronouncing of the word “Corban” over one’s property absolved him from the obligation of caring for his parents. And even if this was done in the excitement of anger, it was held to be binding.
12 ye no longer suffer him to do aught for his father or his mother;–This was the result of setting aside the commandment of God and doing the tradition of men. God said to care for father and mother, but tradition would not allow it. You allow the children to do as they desire. Such an exposure as this should have made them ashamed of so wicked a practice.
13 making void the word of God by your tradition, which ye have delivered:–The tradition had been handed down and by their practice had annulled the word of God. Jesus returns in his argument to the charge made in verse 8, which he had sustained. Jesus shows the Pharisees and scribes by an example that they had rejected the commandment of God for their tradition. The example does not touch the uncleanness, but is against tradition, and is the stronger because it proves that tradition is not only without authority, but sets aside the command and authority of God. To honor father and mother is to give them the attention, care, and support necessary in their old age or affliction. God teaches that children who have widowed mothers and grandmothers should “learn first to show piety towards their own family, and to requite their parents”; that this service is acceptable in his sight; and that all who refuse to render it deny the faith and are worse than unbelievers. (1 Timothy 5:4-8.) One of the most general and popular evils of the day is neglect of the old, disregard for parents, and throwing off home duties and restraints.
This is not taught at home, in school, or from the pulpit as it should be. Another popular evil of the day, and one that is growing more prevalent, is the neglect of the aged by both church and the business part of the world.
The old preachers and the aged laborers who bore the heat and burden of the day in building up the churches and business enterprises are “laid on the shelf” without any means of support and their places given to the young. No nation can hope to prosper as long as it suffers such injustice to its aged. God emphasizes the duty of learning this kind of piety first. To honor father and mother is “the first commandment with promise,” and the promise is great–“that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.” (Ephesians 6:1-3.) Nothing can take the place of this, and it cannot be set aside for anything else. To pretend to be Christians while neglecting these home duties is to be pharisaical and worse than infidels. There is such a thing as being worse than an infidel, and this is it. There is too much self-denial, hard work, and homekeeping in Christianity to suit the Pharisees of the present or any other age.
and many such like things ye do.–After giving the above example, Jesus here made the application. Not only this one, but “many others” on the same order are practiced by you.
Mark 7:14-23
- NOT WHAT ONE EATS THAT DEFILES HIM,
BUT THE OF HIS OWN HEART
14 And he called to him the multitude again,–This indicates that the preceding incident was to some degree private but not fully. Some think it was an examination of Jesus in the synagogue by the scribes and Pharisees from Jerusalem, while Christ was separated from the people. This may be true but not necessarily so.
and said unto them, Hear me all of you,–He had something of much importance he wished to give to each of them. Hence, he demanded the closest attention.
and understand:–Give diligent attention to the meaning of my words so that you may understand. The Pharisees and scribes teach you about an imaginary and traditional defilement, and yet have heard of a ceremonial defilement (Leviticus 11:8; Leviticus 11:26), but now hear and understand whence real defilement comes and in what it consists.
15 there is nothing from without the man, that going into him can defile him;–Nothing that goes into his mouth and stomach in the way of nourishment makes him common or unclean morally.
but the things which proceed out of the man are those that defile the man.–The things that come from the heart and out of the mouth–his words. What one eats does not render him defiled before God, but what he says. (Verses 18-23; Matthew 12:24.) The impure words that indicate an impure heart. What one eats cannot make him morally unclean, impure. It cannot affect his character. Jesus does not say that it was unimportant to keep the Mosaic law distinguishing between clean and unclean meats. The meat cannot affect his character, but disobedience can.
Nor does he refer at all to the fact that one may take disease into his system through eating and drinking; and that disobedience to the laws of health is a moral wrong, and deteriorates the character. Jesus lays down the principle that what is taken into the body does not affect the character. It is the moral act, and not what is eaten, that defiles the man. That which comes out of the man defiles him, because they come from the heart, and affect the character and the moral nature. They defile the soul, which is the man.
17 And when he was entered into the house from the multitude,–Jesus withdraws from the multitude and enters into the house. We take it that the teaching of the multitude was done out in the open air.
his disciples asked of him the parable.–The obscure and difficult remarks which he had made in verse 15. The word “parable,” here, means obscure and difficult saying.
18 And he saith unto them,–Jesus now starts out to explain more fully his speech.
Are ye so without understanding also?–Are you, my disciples, who have been so highly favored with my teaching, so thus void of understanding?
Perceive ye not,–Do you not see and understand?
that whatsoever from without goeth into the man, it cannot defile him;–Cannot render his soul polluted; cannot make him a sinner, so as to need this purifying as a religious service;cannot make him morally unclean, or unholy.
19 because–He is now ready to give the reason why food cannot defile the man.
it goeth not into his heart, but into his belly,–Does not reach or affect the mind, the soul, and therefore cannot pollute it. Even if it should affect the body, yet it cannot the soul. The theories of the Pharisees, therefore, are not founded in reason, but are mere superstition. The heart is the seat of the emotions and the center of the inner man, the soul, and it cannot be reached through the stomach. Food in the digestive organs cannot affect the morals of men.
and goeth out into the draught? This he said, making all meats clean.–The process of digestion is a cleansing one. Whatever is impure is separated from the food and carried off, leaving whatever is nutritious to enter into the blood and become part of the body. What is thrown out of the body is the innutritious part of the food taken into the stomach, and leaving only that which is proper for the support of life, and cannot, therefore, defile the soul. All food is taken into the body to support life. The meaning is that the economy or process by which life is supported purifies or renders nutritious all kinds of food. The unwholesome parts are separated, and the wholesome only are taken into the system.
20 And he said, That which proceedeth out of the man,–Having stated what does not defile a man, Jesus now states what does defile him. It is that which comes out in a moral sense, from the mouth (Matthew 15:18), and from the heart or soul (verses 19, 21), such as he mentions in the two following verses.
that defileth the man.–“That” is what defiles the man, not food, which never enters into the soul. His words from an evil heart are really polluted, or offensive in the sight of God. They render the soul corrupt and abominable in the sight of God.
21 For from within,–The reason of the statement is given. Opposite “from without” of verse 15.
out of the heart of men,–The mind, the inner man–the seat of all moral intentions and actions.
evil thoughts proceed,–The spiritual heart, which includes the mind, thinks evil thoughts as well as good ones. It has both evil and good designs.
fornications,–Violations of chastity by unmarried people. thefts,–Of all sorts and degrees.
murders,–Taking of human life. Cruelty and hard dealings toward others.
adulteries,–Violations of the marriage vow.
22 covetings,–Desiring and wishing to have more–greediness of gain which leads to fraud and extortion. Craving that possessed by others.
wickednesses,–Evil dispositions, wicked counsels, and acts. deceit,–Fraud–concealed dishonesty. lasciviousness,–unbridled lust, lewdness.
an evil eye,–An envious, grudging, malicious spirit, which reveals the temper and evil within, and grieves at the happiness of others.
railing,–Reviling; abusive language against God or man. pride,–Arrogance, self-exaltation. foolishness:–Senselessness, folly.
23 all these evil things proceed from within,–Originate in, and come from the heart. They are evil things.
and defile the man.–The moral, the inner, the spiritual part of man. The best way to check the process of sin in the life is to mortify it in the heart, to crucify all inordinate motions, lusts, and corruptions in their root; for the heart is the first seat and subject of sin, whence it flows forth into the life and conversation. It is out of a wicked and sinful heart that all sin and wickedness proceed. Though the occasions of sin are from without, yet the source and origin of it are from within. The heart of man is as a cage full of unclean birds; hence proceed evil thoughts, either against God or our neighbor. Our Savior instructs the disciples in a very necessary and useful doctrine, touching the true and original cause of all spiritual pollution and uncleanness; namely, the filthiness and impurity of man’s heart.
And that it is not the meat eaten with the mouth, but the wickedness of heart vented by the mouth, which pollutes a person in God’s account, and which defileth the inward man. The heart of man is the sink and seed plot of all sin, the source and fountain of all pollution. All the impurity of the life proceeds from the impurity and filthiness of the heart.
It is not the coming out of the mouth that defiles, but the kind of things which come out. The uttering them not only shows what is in the heart, but also intensifies the evil qualities themselves. Every vile word a man speaks, every base, low story he tells for the joke he sees in it, every angry word, every oath one utters, and all the list Jesus mentions, these show the kind of soul a man has, and uttering them stirs up the dregs like the dregs in the bottom of a swamp.
The disciples had probably imbibed many of the popular notions of the Pharisees and they could not understand why a man was not defiled by external things. The saying of Jesus was dark to his disciples. They, therefore, styled it a parable, regarding it as containing or illustrating some truth which they did not fully comprehend. This question gives us a view of the spiritual dullness of the disciples and of the low attainments in spiritual knowledge. At this point, Matthew (Matthew 15:12-14) relates that the disciples inform Jesus that the Phari-sees had taken offense at what he had said to them, and the reply of Jesus to his disciples. This conversation, which is omitted by Mark, may have taken place as he was entering the house, or just after. Peter acted as spokesman of the disciples. (Matthew 15:15.)
Mark 7:24-30
SECTION SEVEN
TOUR TO TYRE AND SIDON
Mark 7:24 to 8:13
- THE WOMAN’S
CURED
24 And from thence he arose, and went away into the borders of Tyre and Sidon.–The frontier region, or according to Matthew (Matthew 15:21), into the parts of region of Tyre and Sidon. Tyre and Sidon were the two principal cities of Phoenicia, on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. Tyre was about twenty miles south of Sidon, and about one hundred miles northwest of Jerusalem. In the days of David and Solomon, Tyre was the leading seaport of the world. It was afterwards taken by the Babylonians, the Persians, and Alexander, but up to the time of Christ it remained a great commercial city. Since then its harbor has been filled with sand, and there remains only a wretched shadow of its former greatness.
Both were Gentile cities in a Gentile country. This is the only instance in the Lord’s ministry when he went beyond the bounds of Palestine.
And he entered into a house, and would have no man know it;–Probably he intended to give private instruction to the apostles. He desired privacy for a short time.
and he could not be hid.–He was unable to be hidden. No doubt he used every precaution so that no one might know who or where he was.
25 But straightway a woman, whose little daughter had an unclean spirit, having heard of him,–Of his miracles, arrival, and where he was abiding.
came and fell down at his feet.–It seems that she knew where he was and had no trouble in finding him. This was an act denoting reverence and earnest entreaty. Her faith in his power is thus at once manifested. His concealment was the first means in its development. Faith led her to Jesus. Matthew (Matthew 15:22) adds, “0 Lord, thou son of David.” It is remarkable that two of the brightest examples of faith seen in the ministry of Christ were exhibited by Gentiles, that of the centurion (Matthew 8:8-9) and of this woman. The fact that she addressed Jesus as the “son of David” shows that she knew of the prophecies concerning the Christ and that he would be the Son of David.
26 Now the woman was a Greek,–Mark describes the woman as a Gentile. The Jews called all persons Greeks who were not of their nation. (Romans 1:14.) The whole world was considered as divided into Jews and Greeks. All who were not Jews were also considered Gentiles. The term “Greek” is here used, as it was frequently by the Jews, in the sense of Gentile. (1 Corinthians 1:24.) After Alexander’s conquests, when all the world was in subjection to the Greeks, the Jews divided the world into Jews and Greeks.
a Syrophoenician by race.–“Syrophoenician” is compounded of Syrian and Phoenician, and means a Syrian of Phoenicia, Phoenicia being at that time a part of the province of Syria. She was also a Canaanite. (Matthew 15:22.)
And she besought him that he would cast forth the demon out of her daughter.–Matthew (Matthew 15:23) says: “He answered her not a word.” He neither repelled her nor made favorable answer. There were reasons for hesitations. (Matthew 15:24.) No doubt he intended to have mercy. He delayed to bring out a great lesson. His disciples intervened for her, but he said: “I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24.) That is, to the Jews. His personal mission was to the Jews.
27 And he said unto her, Let the children first be filled:–That is, suffer the children, the Jews, first to be satisfied. The Jews were first to have the gospel and its blessings offered to them. It was not yet time for the Gentiles. The request of the woman was unseasonable. There was, however, hope for her in the future.
for it is not meet to take the children’s bread–It is not good, proper and right. The Jews considered themselves as the peculiar children of God. To all other nations they were accustomed to apply terms of contempt, of which “dogs” was the most common. “Children’s bread” was that which Jesus came to offer to the Jews.
and cast it to the dogs.–Throw it to the Gentiles. Gentiles were styled dogs by the Jews. The woman knew that, in comparing the Jews to the children of God’s family, and the Gentiles to the dogs without, Jesus simply used customary language of a Jew. He would bring out fully the greatness of her faith. The gospel was offered first to the Jews and then to all. He was putting her faith to a severe test.
Many a woman, at such a speech, would have risen in despair, and gone away in anger, but she kept calm. Jesus means to say that he was sent to the Jews. The woman was a Gentile. He meant that it did not comport with the design of his personal ministry to apply benefits intended for the Jews to others. Jesus did not intend to justify or sanction the use of such terms. He meant to try her faith.
28 But she answered and saith unto him, Yea, Lord;–Yea, I admit all you say; it is not proper and right to take away the children’s bread and cast it to the dogs. I am indeed one of the dogs–a Gentile–and am willing to take my place as one. It is not fit for the dogs to be fed before the children.
even the dogs under the table eat of the children’s crumbs.–I am willing to accept the crumbs–that which is left after all the children are filled. (Verse 27.) Let the children have the best food. Let the Jews have the chief benefit of thy ministry. But the dogs, beneath the table, eat the crumbs. So let me be regarded as a dog. A Gentile, as unworthy of everything. Yet grant one exertion of that almighty power displayed among the Jews, and heal the despised daughter of a despised heathen mother. Grant the dogs this much. The answer of the woman is a wonderful illustration of faith, turning the most untoward circumstances to a good account. We know not which to admire more–the readiness of her wit, or the depth of her humility.
29 And he said unto her, For this saying go thy way;–Her speech showed a strong faith in Jesus. Matthew (Matthew 15:28) says: “0 woman, great is thy faith.” We can see how greatness of faith is manifested: (1) she came to Christ under difficulties, (2) she persevered when her prayer seemed to be denied, (3) she still pleaded when obstacles were presented, (4) she waited at the feet of Jesus until he had mercy. Such faith always prevails.
the demon is gone out of thy daughter.–Her request is granted. The same hour Jesus said: “Be it done unto thee even as thou wilt.” (Matthew 15:28.) The demon left the daughter.
30 And she went away unto her house,–She returned home in full confidence that her child had been or would be blessed. and found the child laid upon the bed, and the demon gone out.–The mother found the Master’s declaration verified, and her faith realized. The daughter is no longer raving, or in convulsions, but lying quietly on the bed, healed in consequence of her mother’s faith and prayers. Doubtless her mother’s heart was full of joy.
Mark 7:31-37
- JESUS HEALS A DEAF
(Matt. 16:29-31).
31 And again he went out from the borders of Tyre,–How long Jesus remained in Tyre and Sidon is not stated. Having completed his work there he now starts on his way to another field of operation.
and came through Sidon unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the borders of Decapolis.–He starts from Tyre and passes through Sidon. He travels northward. From Sidon he passed over into the borders of Decapolis, on the east of the Jordan, thus approaching the northeastern shore of the Sea of Galilee. Decapolis was a region of “ten cities,” lying east of the Jordan. Only Mark gives an account of the following miracle.
32 And they–Friends of the deaf. Those interested in him. The demoniac of Gadara, after his healing, went through this region declaring what great things Jesus had done for him. (Mark 5:20.) Thus his fame was spread abroad in that region.
bring unto him one that was deaf,–His friends conduct him to Jesus. He was merely diseased and not possessed of a demon.
and had an impediment in his speech;–He was “a deaf stammerer.” He was not entirely without hearing, but spoke indistinctly or with difficulty.
and they beseech him to lay his hand upon him.–That is, to cure him. Blessings were commonly imparted by laying on the hands.
33 And he took him aside from the multitude privately,–From the crowd in the presence of only a few witnesses. Why? Many reasons may be given and none be correct. (1) His friends had suggested their way of healing (to put his hands upon him) (verse 32); they needed to be taught that they should leave the way to Jesus. (2) The people may have gathered to see a great miracle. But Jesus would make no display; nor satisfy mere curiosity. (Matthew 12:15-21.) (3) He would withdraw from observation; and produce as little excitement as possible. (Mark 6:31-32; Mark 8:22-23.) (4) While he would strengthen their faith, he would not feed their superstition. (5) For the good of the man himself; that he might have a proper view of Christ’s healing power. Jesus showed that he was not limited to any one way of exercising his miraculous power.
and put his fingers into his ears, and he spat, and touched his tongue;–The diseased organ. Jesus spat on the eyes of the blind man at Bethsaida (Mark 8:23), and “on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and anointed” the eyes of the blind man at Jerusalem (John 9:6). Why Jesus used the spittle in either case can only be an opinion on our part. But surely not on account of any healing power in it. This may be one way that Jesus teaches us that we are not to enter into the reasons of all his actions;and that when he has appointed any observance, we are humbly to submit, though we may not be able to see why it might not be different.
34 and looking up to heaven,–Heaven is upward. To lift up the eyes to heaven is an act imploring aid from God, and denotes an attitude of prayer. (Psalms 121:1-2; Mark 6:41; John 11:41.) By looking up to heaven, as representing the abode of God, he gave God recognition in the miracle.
he sighed,–Groaned, pitying the suffering man who stood before him. The expression of his compassion in his sigh heavenward would naturally impress all present with the necessity of looking to God for help.
and saith unto him, Ephphatha, that is, Be opened.–A word in common language in Judea at that time.
35 And his ears were opened,–Every obstruction was removed, and a perfect action of the organs enjoyed.
and the bond of his tongue was loosed,–The difficulty in speaking was removed. There is nothing for, but rather everything against, the supposition of some, that the cure was gradual.
and he spake plain.–His stammering was all gone. A perfect cure. He spoke without difficulty–all could understand his speech. The process adopted in this case was peculiar. Jesus first put his fingers in the man’s ears, then spat. He then touched the man’s tongue, looked up to heaven, heaved a sigh, and exclaimed, “Be opened,” and the man was healed.
36 And he charged them that they should tell no man:–Why, he does not state, but we may be assured he had good reasons. It was, however, an impressive way of showing that he did not seek the praise of men.
deal they published it.–Forbidding them publishing it seems to have created a great desire to spread the news. A very common freak of human nature is seen here, the more he charged them to keep the cure a secret, “the more a great deal they published it.”
37 And they were beyond measure astonished,–Exceedingly –very much. In the Greek, “very abundantly.”
saying, He hath done all things well;–All things in a remarkable manner; or he has perfectly effected the cure of the deaf and the dumb. It is an exclamation of the highest approval and satisfaction. All God’s creation was very good.
he maketh even the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak.–Mark refers to this case and probably to others. Matthew (Matthew 15:30-31) states that many miracles were performed, among which were the dumb speaking. In this, and the parallel in Matthew, the characteristic difference between the two writers is seen. Matthew says that “there came unto him great multitudes, having with them the lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and they cast them down at his feet; and he healed them”; but he gives no particular description of any single case. Mark, on the other hand, selects a single one of these cures, and describes minutely both it and its effect on the people.