Mark 7:5–23

Those wretched opponents had no share in the joy of the people who were healed. Our Lord's healing power had no interest for them, because the disciples had not kept the tradition of the elders! So the bright sky had to be clouded over. In their eyes the tradition of the elders mattered above everything. His teaching condemned these men who clung to tradition, so they seize the chance to attack Him by charging His disciples with neglecting the traditions. "Your disciples," they said, wanting to draw Him into an argument about eating with unwashed hands. Any excuse is good enough if it can stop or hinder the working of God in grace.

There was plainly nothing moral in this. Nothing here could touch the soul or affect a man's relationship with God. But it went against their traditions, and so they found fault. It is easy to imagine that this tradition may have begun with a godly motive. These leaders may have wanted to keep the importance of personal purity before the people. Washing the hands would be a very natural sign that God looks for holiness in the works of His people, and insists on it.

The chapter opens with the religious leaders of the nation coming to Jesus. They come with no sense of their need and no sense of His grace. Sadly, they come to oppose Christ by finding fault with His disciples for eating bread with unwashed hands. The religion of these men was honouring the tradition of their ancestors by carrying out certain outward forms and ceremonies. Anyone can do such things. They build a reputation in front of others, but leave the heart far from God.

"Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders?" First, then, they did not. Next, washing their hands before they ate bread was a thing of no moral weight in itself — yet its meaning was excellent, for what is more important than moral purity, or more widely agreed as a picture of it? The simple answer was this: it destroyed the wholeness and the weight of the commands of God. If I may add something, and a person must then do it, the completeness of God's revealed will comes into question. Mixing other things in with it, as though they were binding, cancels the distinct claim that the will of God has on the soul.

The washing of people falls into the same class as the washing of cups and pots. And they do many other things like these. What a religion! "And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, 'Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?'" The way the Lord answers them is remarkable. He does not discuss where the tradition came from, or show how pointless it is. He goes straight to its whole character, and to its moral effect on the obedience owed to God. This is surely an excellent pattern for every Christian.

In His reply to these men, the Lord shows how empty their religion is. It consists of nothing but outward forms. First, it leaves men as mere hypocrites, and Scripture proves it, for Isaiah said of such people, "This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me." Hypocrisy is pretending to be what we are not. By their religious acts they claimed great piety before men. By their words they claimed to reverence God. But in reality their hearts were far from God. (Isaiah 29:13; Ezekiel 33:31.)

"This people draws near to me with their mouth ... and honors me with their lips; BUT their heart is far from me." They were not sinners in the ordinary sense of the word — that is, irreligious, with no profession or thought about God. Quite the opposite: the thing said of them here is, "This people draws near to me." … All this religion and religiousness is dismissed at once. There is a worship which is worshipping God in vain.

So in Isaiah's day the people of Judah kept up an outward regard for the law of Moses and for the worship of God. But they had no inward reverence for the LORD Himself. In the Lord's day it was so again with the people. Their house was swept of idols and decorated with "pious" deeds, but it was an empty shrine. Though God was on their tongues, He was not in their thoughts.

The Lord did not reply to the Pharisees on His own authority. He condemned the objectors with a quotation from the prophecy of Isaiah. He did not discuss with them whether this particular tradition was lawful. Instead He brought the written word of God to bear on their spiritual state. They were showing undeniable zeal, but it was not according to God. They worked hard to set up their own righteousness by works that lay outside the ritual God gave through Moses. They were deceiving both themselves and others.

Two evils are marked out for condemnation in this quotation — (1) Insincerity before God — honouring Him with the lips, but paying Him no regard in the heart. (2) Putting human authority in the place of God's — seeking to worship Him by the commandments of men instead of by His own will.

The Lord exposes the hypocrisy that would cover up evil by outward forms. You can trace the downward steps away from God taken by the religiousness of the flesh that pretends to draw near to Him. They teach as doctrines the commandments of men (v. 7). Laying aside the commandment of God, they hold the tradition of men (v. 8). Next they reject the commandment of God to keep their own tradition (v. 9). And finally they make the word of God of no effect through it (v. 13).

There is the process: give up what is of God, and then you will fall into the hands of man. There is great importance in the principle. It is not a comparison of things as to whether this is better than that. The evil is laying aside the commandment of God, and preferring man's tradition to it.

The Lord judges all this human religion — outward, Pharisaical, priestly — once and for all time. God demands a pure heart and true obedience.

The Lord shows that such religion is "in vain". It may win its followers a reputation for piety before people, but it is worthless in God's sight.

The washing of hands might look like something in line with God, for the Lord Himself uses water as the picture of purity. But it served their own purposes, and the Lord says that, whatever it was, it was a commandment of men — that was all. And it was in vain. There is a worship which is worshipping of God in vain.

It is worth noticing that a rare Greek word stands in the New Testament for commandments that come from man. The usual word is entole, but entalma occurs only three times: in Mark 7:7, in the matching passage Matt. 15:9, and in Col. 2:22. In each case it forms part of the phrase translated "the commandments of men." The word also appears three times in the Greek Old Testament, and one of those places, Isaiah 29:13, is what our Lord quoted here. In all these passages the word seems to point to the moral sayings and rules of conduct which men tried to lay as heavy burdens on the shoulders of others, but which the Lord showed had no authority.

So the people generally kept the outward rules of their ancient law. But sadly, in the eye of Jehovah this was only a form of piety without the power. The prophet said that a spirit of deep sleep was on them, on their rulers and on their prophets.

It adds weight to this passage to remember who these Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem were. They were the religious leaders of the remnant, the people delivered from Babylon… They were no longer idolaters. Outwardly they were very pious before men, and with their lips they made a fair profession before God. But we learn that all this is possible while the heart is far from God, and while the traditions of men set aside the word of God.

A Muslim likes Muslim tradition. A state-church member likes the tradition of the state church. A Roman Catholic likes Roman Catholic tradition. A Greek likes Greek tradition. It is his own, and it has that value to him. Nothing is so dear to a man as the cover of his corruption. Nothing is so full of Satan's power as false religion… If I add anything, then God is imperfect in what He gave as a guide… And if God has been imperfect in one detail, I can count on Him in none of the rest.

There is the process: give up what is of God, and then you will fall into the hands of man. It is not a question of whether one thing is better than another. The evil is laying aside the commandment of God, and preferring man's tradition to it. The only thing that has a claim upon the Christian heart is what comes from God.

Let us not flatter ourselves that we are exempt from wrong worship. I remember an old and honoured man speaking in a meeting. He said that when we come together to remember the Lord's death, we should break the bread and drink the cup within half an hour of the start. This is an example of "teaching as doctrines the commandments of men," and such worship is empty and in vain. Those who worship the Father must worship Him in spirit and truth.

It drew men into disobedience, and made excuse for sin, or rather denied it... He does not call it a wicked tradition; it was "of men," and it is not to be held... There is the process: give up what is of God, and then you will fall into the hands of man. It is not a comparison of things as to whether this is better than that. The evil is laying aside the commandment of God, and preferring man's tradition to it. The only thing that has claim upon the Christian heart is what comes from God.

These four terms, used about this one sin, seem to show an ascending scale of error. At the point of departure, the commandment is (1) left on one side or ignored. It is then (2) rejected and its claims refused. Next, it is (3) crossed and violated. Last of all, it is (4) made useless and void, because a human rule takes its place.

Theirs was not a sudden, violent rebellion against the authority of God. It was a quiet and gradual decline from their faithfulness. They turned aside, almost without noticing it at first, and wandered out of the way of God's commandments. They let their regard and reverence for the expressed will of God grow weak. They strayed from the green pastures and the still waters, and forgot His precepts.

The Lord calls all tradition "your tradition." That includes the tradition of the elders, which Scripture names so, and which man calls by that name too, because it has authority with him. Man's religion glorifies man; it is his... A Muslim likes Muslim tradition. A Roman Catholic likes Rome's tradition. A Greek likes the tradition of the Greeks. It is his own, and it has that value to him. Nothing is so dear to a man as the cover of his corruption, or so full of Satan's power as false religion.

They set aside a commandment so that they might keep their tradition. But they did more than that: by doing this they made null and rejected the authority of the whole word of God... When I set up another authority, I displace the whole word of God and make it void, and that word claims all authority... Even if it is only about washing my hands, someone else can step in and claim obedience. Then the word of God is not the only rule with authority.

The Lord not only said this; He proved it. He gave an example of the way they set aside the fifth commandment by their rules about "Corban," that is, things devoted to the service of God. Under cover of "Corban" many a Jew rid himself of all his rightful duties towards his poor old parents. And he did it with an air of holiness, for did it not look more godly to devote things to God rather than to one's parents?

It is always easier to follow tradition than the written word of God. When we follow it, our conscience is not put to work. We also avoid the difficulty — sometimes a serious one — of giving reasons for what we do... What has been handed down from father to son may not be bad in itself. It may have been good, at least for the time. But a false standard and a human authority take their place in the soul. Even if this does not deny the authority of the word of God, it will surely put that word second.

These four terms about this one sin seem to show a rising scale of error. At the starting point, the commandment is (1) left on one side or ignored. Then it is (2) rejected and its claims refused. Next it is (3) crossed and violated. Lastly it is (4) made ineffective and void, as a human rule takes its place.

Further, these boastful zealots had rejected the commandment of God. In the original, the verb seems to mean slighting or disregarding the claims the law had on them. They acted as if those claims were not worth noticing (compare Hebrews 10:28, Greek). The Lord used the same word when He spoke to the seventy He sent out to preach: "The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me" (Luke 10:16).

There is the process: give up what is of God, and then you will fall into the hands of man. It is not a comparison of things as to whether this is better than that. The evil is laying aside the commandment of God, and preferring man's tradition to it. The only thing that has a claim upon the Christian heart is what comes from God.

The word of God gives plain directions for children to honour their parents. But they had a tradition by which they could claim to set aside their property for the use of God. They said "It is Corban," meaning a gift devoted to God, so it could not go to help a needy parent. So, by their tradition, they set aside the word of God. They avoided their duty to needy relatives and served their own greed.

Many a Jew used "Corban" as a cover, and so dropped all his rightful duties towards his poor old parents. And he did it with an air of holiness, for did it not seem more pious to devote things to God rather than to one's parents?

They did not only set aside one commandment so that they might keep their tradition. By doing this they also made null and rejected the authority of the whole word of God. If I break one, I am guilty of all; but in setting up another authority, I displace and make void and null the whole word of God, which claims all authority. If another can direct, I am not sole master, and the man is not my servant. This not only misleads the servant; it sets the master aside.

To hear men of God, to get help from servants of God, to value an explanation of the truth — all this is good. But it is very different from an authoritative rule or creed that men impose as binding on the conscience. It is never right to accept in that way what comes from man. God alone and His word bind the conscience. His servants may teach, but if they teach rightly, it is the truth of God.

We must not think that the Lord in any way played down the purely divine origin of the law. On the contrary, it is clear that Moses was at the same time presented as the mediator between God and His people. This we may see by comparing this passage with its parallel in Matthew. There the words of Jesus are reported as, "God said, Honor your father and your mother." Both records are, of course, true. The Lord's full statement was that (1) God spoke, and (2) He spoke through His servant Moses. Each writer kept the part of the Lord's words that best fitted the purpose of his own account. Matthew shows that the tradition of the elders clashed with the words of God. Mark stresses that it clashed with the words of the nation's lawgiver.

First, then, the Lord brings forward the law of Moses, the word of God: "Honor your father and your mother." This command clearly made it a duty for the Jews to provide for their parents when needed. (See Proverbs 3:9 for a similar use of the word "honour.") But they wanted to escape this responsibility, so they invented a holy-sounding excuse.

The word of God promised long and prosperous days in the land to the obedient, but a criminal's death to the disobedient (compare Lev. 20:9; Deut. 27:16; Prov. 20:20; Prov. 30:11). And the solemn charge spoken from Mount Ebal was, "Cursed be anyone who dishonors his father or his mother" (Deut. 27:16).

To honour parents is right and of God; to make light of them unfits a man to live, in God's estimate.

Under cover of "Corban" many a Jew stripped himself of all his rightful duties towards his poor old parents. And he did the thing with an air of sanctity, for did it not appear more pious to devote things to God rather than to one's parents?

This was simply a matter of the tradition treating the son's cold-hearted selfishness as holy... It was not merely a tradition added to the Word (which is bad enough), but a tradition opposing God's Word. The Lord adds, "and many such things you do." This was only one example. Once men despise the Word of God in the smallest matter, it is not long before their cunning deceit undermines anything and everything it pleases.

God's word is a living reality, and a complete standard of truth and practice. Everything that man adds as a supplement is a deformity; it is that which, as it does not flow from God, is inconsistent with the light. Man is incompetent to regulate what belongs to God.

This is the Greek word korban, standing for the Hebrew word qorban, "an offering." It means anything brought near or devoted to God. The Jews allowed, and perhaps encouraged, sons to devote their property to God. The sons could then refuse to help their parents, saying that their goods were "corban," or devoted. The Lord blames the rulers for this. It was one of their traditions, and by it they made the word of God of no effect.

A man sees his father and mother in need. He has the earthly goods that would relieve them. But the makers of tradition have invented a plan to benefit so-called religion at the cost of a child's duty. If a man said "Corban," the duty changed completely: what the parent should have had now went to the priest. However great the need of father and mother, that word "Corban" stopped all action of heart or conscience. The leaders had devised the scheme to secure property for religious purposes, and to keep people from any trouble of conscience about the word of God.

Saying the vow-word "Corban" did not always dedicate a thing to the Temple, even though the word means a "gift" or "given to God." Usually it meant only that the thing was to be treated like Corban. For the person named, it counted as if it lay on the altar, put completely out of their reach. Though both carried the same name, there were really two kinds of vows: vows that set something apart for God, and vows of personal obligation. The second kind was the more common.

The things that came under "Corban" were not things God demanded. If they had been, His demand would have come first. A person could dedicate such things if he wished. But the duty to support parents was a clear command. The Pharisees' tradition let a man use an optional arrangement to avoid obeying a clear command.

By their tradition they set aside the word of God, evaded their responsibility to their needy relatives, and fed their own covetousness.

Man's religion glorifies man; it is his… A man, such as he is, can wash his hands, and say "Corban."… First, it is "tradition of men," then "your tradition."… Nothing is so dear to a man as the cover of his corruption.

It is no doubt good to do all the good we can; but let us look carefully at the way we do it. Let us not fool ourselves with the vain idea that God will ever accept service built on outright disobedience to His Word. "It is a gift," said the elders, as they walked boldly over the plain commandment of God. They acted as if He would be pleased with a gift offered on such a ground. There is a close connection between the ancient "corban" and the modern "expediency."

Suppose a man said to his father or mother, "What you might have had from me is Corban" — that is, given to God. By this formula his goods counted as set apart for the service of God. From then on, according to the tradition of the elders, no one could turn them to the relief of his parents. The scribes, it is said, held that once a man spoke this word over any of his possessions, he was free from every natural duty. That held true even if he kept the goods back for a time from the service of the temple. This agrees with our Lord's word, "You no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother."

Just consider what an issue this was. A man sees his father and mother in need. He has received the goods that would relieve them. But the tradition-makers have invented a plan to benefit so-called religion at the cost of a son's duty. If anyone said "Corban," the duty changed completely, and what the parent should have received must now go to the priest. No matter what the need of father and mother, that word "Corban" stopped every movement of heart or conscience.

The things that came under "Corban" were not things God demanded. Had they been, His demand would have had to prevail. A person could dedicate certain things if he wished. But the duty to support parents was a definite command. Pharisaic tradition let a man use a permission to avoid obeying a definite command.

The word of God gives plain directions for children to honour their parents. But they had a tradition by which they could claim to set their property aside for the use of God, so that it could not help a needy parent. In this way their tradition set aside the word of God, dodged their responsibility to needy relatives, and served their own covetousness.

The Lord treats this tradition of saying "Corban" not only as a wrong done to the parents, but as an act of rebellion against the express commandment of God.

They did not just set aside one commandment to keep their tradition. By doing so they cancelled and rejected the authority of the whole word of God. If I break one, I am guilty of all. But when I set up another authority, I push aside and cancel the whole word of God, which claims all authority.

"Corban" applied to the service of our Lord in the fullest sense of the word, for He gave Himself in sacrifice on the altar. Yet He committed His mother to the care of the beloved disciple. That proves He did not fail to provide for her future, even on the cross.

May we all bear in mind how deeply we need to watch against the spirit of tradition. Wherever we impose with absolute authority a thing that does not come from God Himself, it is a tradition. It matters more than anything that we strengthen each other in this: nothing but the word of God has the right to govern the conscience.

They did not just set aside one commandment so that they could keep their tradition. By doing this they also cancelled and rejected the authority of the whole word of God. If I break one command, I am guilty of all. But if I set up another authority, I push aside and cancel the whole word of God, which claims all authority. If someone else can direct me, I am not the only master, and the man is not my servant. That misleads the servant, and it sets the master aside too. Anyone who adds even the smallest stroke sets aside God's authority, and His revealed will as authority, altogether. Even if the rule is only to wash my hands, someone else can step in and claim obedience. Then the word of God is not the only rule with authority.

A man sees his father and mother in need. He owns enough to relieve them. But the dealers in tradition have invented a plan that benefits so-called religion at the cost of a son's duty. Say "Corban," and the duty changed completely: what the parent should have received now had to go to the priest. However great the need of father and mother, that word "Corban" stopped all action of heart or conscience. The leaders had invented the scheme to secure property for religious use, and to stop people feeling any trouble of conscience about the word of God.

Here the tradition simply gave a holy name to the cold-hearted selfishness of the son. Such pretence is contemptible, of course, but the Pharisees encouraged it, and so made the Word of God of no effect. It was not merely a tradition added to the Word (which is bad enough), but a tradition opposing God's Word. The Lord adds, "And many such things you do." This was only one example. Once men despise the Word of God in the smallest matter, it is not long before their cunning deceit undermines anything and everything it pleases.

The Lord calls all tradition "your tradition." Scripture names it the tradition of the elders, and man calls it that too, because it carries authority with him. Man's religion glorifies man; it is his... A Muslim likes Muslim tradition. A member of the state church likes the tradition of the state church. A Roman Catholic likes the tradition of Rome, and a Greek that of the Greeks. It is his own, and it has that value to him. Nothing is so dear to a man as the cover of his corruption, or so full of Satan's power as false religion.

He went on to call God's own sayings "the word of God" (see also John 10:35; Rom. 9:6), and charged them with cancelling it, or making it void, by their tradition. This change of name for the law matters. It carries us back to the Author of the Scriptures, which tell us His mind and will about men... The phrase points not so much to the letter of the law as to its inmost meaning — its spirit. So the Lord showed that their tradition did more than break God's commandment. It made void the very mind and meaning of what He had said to them.

Think again about our Lord's words to the Pharisees. It is startling to learn that small man can make the word of the living God ineffective. We know that word is eternal and unchanging, "settled in the heavens." It stands more firmly than heaven and earth. The picture of the living, imperishable seed shows its inward power. That is its true and unique character. And yet the truth holds a seeming paradox, which one well known parable of our Lord's sets out: birds of the air can carry it away, the sun can wither it, and thorns can spring up and choke it.

Now we turn to another subject — the condition of man. We are first shown that religion without Christ is only hypocrisy, and that man's interference in divine things ends in setting God's word aside to keep his own tradition. The next thing we see is what man really is, religious or not. … The Lord here brings to light the broad principle which by itself would account for His sentence on all tradition. Does it come from man? That is enough.

So the Lord called the crowds together again. He gave them the truth on this subject in simple, short words such as they might "hear and understand." He spoke to the crowds directly, with no one in between. So these simple country people of Galilee could drink from the well-spring of truth itself. He called everyone to pay attention to Him and to take hold of His words.

He calls up the "crowd" — no matter who or what they might be… and He addresses Himself directly and fully to what is within. He passes by everything that Satan had known how to use to blind the conscience. He goes straight to the root of the matter, to this fact — "You know that what comes out of the heart is not of God, and that is you." … If their conscience had been before God, they could not have hidden this truth from themselves. They did not need Pharisees for that; they did not need scribes for that; their own hearts could answer it.

suniemi (from sun and iemi) is "to bring or set together"… It becomes the expression of the soul's inborn capacity to do so. It connects the outward object with the inward sense. It is to weigh a thing, consider it carefully, and so grasp its meaning.

He established truth as well as exposed error. In His teaching the Great Servant-Prophet of Jehovah tore down every evil form and corrupt tendency. He also built up what was good and of God… He swept away the false idea that material means could cleanse spiritual defilement. He announced the deep-seated cause of man's moral uncleanness. Inside a person, He taught, is an overflowing spring of pollution. Men fooled themselves by paying attention only to outward ways of cleansing.

Washing hands and cups and pots only deals with defilement from outside. But the source of moral defilement is the inward evil of the heart. This cuts at the root of all worldly religion of the flesh, which only deals with outward things and leaves the heart untouched. God works from within and deals with the conscience and heart. The real source of defilement is not a man's environment but himself. It is true that man is a fallen creature. If he goes into scenes of evil and temptation, his surroundings will stir up his lusts within. But even so, the source of the evil is from within. An angel can pass through Sodom and not be defiled, but not so Lot. There was no evil heart in the angel to answer to sin; there was in Lot.

The saying was weighty. Only the sons of faith, now as well as then, receive this truth. It condemns men down to the very core of their being. There must be the "ear to hear."

The Lord's subject in this saying is not the means of cleansing, but the cause of defilement. He is not speaking here about how useless ceremonial washing is, or about using water to remove the stains of immorality. He had already told the Pharisees about that. Now He teaches those who were never taught the law where defilement really comes from. Cleansing assumes there is something unclean. How then does man become unclean? Does it happen when polluting things from outside enter his body? The Lord declared that the cause of his uncleanness lies within: in the motives from which his words and actions spring.

Nothing from outside, entering into a man, can defile him. Spiritual defilement does not come that way. Of course a man may eat food that harms his body. He may even take poison. But that in itself does not defile him spiritually. But the things that come out of a man (not physically of course) are those that defile him.

The real source of defilement is not a man's environment but himself. It is true that man is a fallen creature. If he goes into scenes of evil and temptation, his surroundings will stir up the lusts inside him. But even so the source of the evil is from within. An angel can pass through Sodom and not be defiled, but not so Lot. There was no evil heart in the angel to answer to sin; there was in Lot.

The Lord here brings to light the broad principle which of itself would account for His sentence on all tradition. Does it come from man? That is enough… Apply that principle in full, and it shows what tradition really is. Tradition comes out from man. It is not a word spoken to man with the authority of God. It is a human word, and shabby pride would gladly dress it in purple and gold to cover its nakedness.

The saying was weighty. Now, as then, only the sons of faith receive this truth, which condemns men down to the very core of their being. There must be the "ear to hear."

What stronger proof could we have that it is not reformation men need, but a new creation! What proof, too, that outward practices can never be enough on their own, because they cannot reach what is within! If men only saw their own inborn corruption, as the Lord Jesus sets it out, they would trifle no more with priests and their doings. They would hurry straight to the Saviour's feet. There, and nowhere else, they find blessing for eternity.

In a word, the doctrine is plainly laid down here. Man — that is, man in his present state — is only the source of what is evil. I need another absolutely perfect One, outside me, to be my life, and such a One I have in Christ. If I am a Christian at all, Christ is my life. From then on my business is to live on that good which I have found in Christ, and to live according to it. So the happy man is the one who is always thinking of Christ and delighting himself in Him.

Perfect Man! He turned away from popularity, though the natural man finds it so pleasing. That fits with how often we read of His being in a house. How interesting and instructive are these notices of the life and ways of Him who is both our life and our example!

Peter was now the spokesman for the rest, and all the disciples were asking through him, as Mark tells us (Mark 7:17). None of them had grasped what the Lord's saying meant. But they were different in spirit from the Pharisees: they did not know, yet they wanted to know. So they came asking, believing the Lord would make the matter plain to them... Like multitudes since, they had much to unlearn before they could learn.

Nothing in the heart of man blocks his understanding as much as the influence of religious tradition... On this point the disciples were slow to understand, yet there was not one unclear word in what Christ said.

The disciples do not understand, and they ask for an explanation. The tradition of the elders had blinded their natural intelligence. The way of reasoning they had picked up from the elders had spoiled their understanding. And indeed, do we not find many who believe that what enters a man's mouth defiles him? And yet they are sincere souls... Here we see the Lord judging many things that keep many souls in bondage — even sincere souls, like those of the disciples.

There seems to be some reproach in this question. The Pharisees had not understood; the crowd did not understand (Isa. 6:9; Mark 4:12); but how was it that the Lord's own company did not understand Him? He said to the people, Hear and understand (v. 14), but the apostles also failed to understand. And by asking this, the Lord implies that they were to blame for having to admit such ignorance.

Man is corrupt in his nature. What comes from his very heart defiles him. Out of his heart proceed evil thoughts which develop into every kind of evil action. This is the most tremendous indictment of human nature ever uttered.

What stronger proof could we have that it is not reformation men need, but a new creation! It also proves that outward rituals can never be enough by themselves, because they cannot reach what is inside! Suppose men really saw their own inborn corruption, as the Lord Jesus sets it out here in answer to Peter's question. They would trifle no longer with priests and their doings. They would hurry at once to the Saviour's feet, the only place where blessing can be found for eternity.

The disciples do not understand, and they ask Him to explain it. The tradition of the elders had blinded their natural intelligence. The way of reasoning they had picked up from the elders' authority had spoiled their understanding. And indeed, do we not find many who believe that what enters a man's mouth defiles him? And yet they are sincere souls. Not only that: they also believe that eating a certain food on one day defiles, and on another day it does not. And this because of the tradition of the elders. This is in substance what the disciples were doing. So the Lord reproves them: "Then are you also without understanding?" Here we see the Lord's judgment against many things that keep many souls in bondage — even sincere souls, like those of the disciples.

There seems to be some reproach in this question. The Pharisees had not understood; the crowd did not understand (Isa. 6:9; Mark 4:12); but how was it that the Lord's own company did not understand Him? He said to the people, listen and understand (v. 14), but the apostles also failed to understand. And by His question the Lord implies that it was blameworthy on their part to confess such ignorance.

Whatever physical food one eats does not have any spiritual effect. It affects the stomach, and so the physical condition of the person, but not the heart. Here the heart stands for the spiritual inner being of the person. God had made provision for physical purging in the disposal of waste. But there was a far more serious issue involved in spiritual defilement.

This deliverance is an important doctrine for the Lord's followers to hold today as ever. The Son has made us free, and Scripture urges us: "stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Gal. 5:1). The rules "do not handle, do not taste, do not touch" follow the precepts and commandments of men. The death of Christ has delivered us from them (Col. 2:20-23).

The real source of defilement is not a man's environment but himself. It is true that man is what he is — a fallen creature. If he goes into scenes of evil and temptation, his surroundings will stir up the lusts within him. But even so the source of the evil is from within. An angel can pass through Sodom and not be defiled, but not so Lot. There was no evil heart in the angel to answer to sin; there was in Lot.

In a word, the doctrine is laid down here in the plainest way: man — that is, man in his present state — is only the source of what is evil. I need another, absolutely perfect One, outside myself, to be my life, and such a One I have in Christ. If I am a Christian at all, Christ is my life. From then on my business is to live on that good which I have found in Christ, and to live according to it. So the happy man is the one who is always thinking of Christ and delighting in Him. The man who tries to find some good in himself falls into the same error as the disciples, before they learned better.

Whatever physical food one eats does not have any spiritual effect. It affects the stomach, and so the body's condition, but not the heart. Here the heart stands for the inner, spiritual part of the person. God provided for physical cleansing in the way the body disposes of waste. But spiritual defilement is a far more serious matter.

The soul was separate from man's body, and greater than it. What went into a man fed and maintained his body — the house of the soul and spirit. The things which mattered most were those which proceeded from a man. His schemes, his motives, his desires, his character, his moral colour — these made a man a centre of power, radiating influences either for good or for evil.

We learn from this passage how the Lord put an end to the whole taboo of the Sabbath, as, in Mark 7:19, He did to that of meats.

It is true that the law forbade certain meats to Israelites (Lev. 11), but not because eating them was sinful in itself. It was a picture-lesson to the Jews, teaching them to keep clearly separate from the Gentile nations... Acts 10 shows this clearly. God gave Peter a vision of a container let down from heaven holding every kind of animal, and told him, "Rise, Peter; kill and eat." When Peter objected, God said, "What God has made clean, do not call common."

This freedom is an important teaching for the Lord's followers to hold today as much as ever. The Son has made us free, and we are urged to "stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery" (Gal. 5:1). Rules like "Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch" come from human teaching and human commands, and the death of Christ has set us free from them (Col. 2:20-23).

There is nothing in the heart of man that so hinders his intelligence as the influence of religious tradition. Not only that: tradition darkens a disciple wherever it works, and one effect that always goes with it is a refusal to bow to the humbling truth that there is no good thing in man.

The real source of defilement is not a man's environment but himself. It is true that man is a fallen creature. If he walks into scenes of evil and temptation, his surroundings will stir up the desires already inside him. Even so, the evil comes from within. An angel could pass through Sodom without being defiled, but Lot could not. The angel had no evil heart to respond to sin; Lot did.

What stronger proof could we have that it is not reformation men need, but a new creation! What proof, too, that outward practices can never be enough on their own, because they cannot reach what is inside!

I need another One, perfect in every way, outside of me, to be my life — and I have such a One in Christ.

In the verses that follow (vv. 20–23) we have a second statement of our Lord. The narrative introduces it with the words, "And he said." The statement before it has the slightly different phrase, "And he says unto them" (v. 18). The first deals with this truth: food and drink cannot spiritually defile a man. The second adds the truth that completes it: the evil thoughts, words, and deeds that come out of the heart within do defile him.

The Pharisees cleaned the outside of the cup and dish, but that did not cleanse the inside. It is what comes from within that defiles the man. The stream was bitter because the fountain was bitter; and the fruit was bad because the tree was bad. The fountain of a man's defilement lies in his own heart. Attending a religious ritual could be of no value at all. That alone only made men hypocrites.

As to the things that defile, they come out of the man. They always spring from within, from the corrupt will of man. For instance, suppose the law carries out the death sentence on a criminal. That is not murder. It is the vindication of God's authority in the earth. It is not a question of evil feeling against the guilty man, and there is nothing defiling in it. But if you were so much as to injure a man in deed, word, or thought, there you have what defiles. Something that is part of your self-will, without God, comes out of you, and you yield to it. At that moment there is the taint of defilement.

The Lord does not only tear away the veil of hypocrisy, He also uncovers what the heart produces. This is what God does; He searches our hearts and shows them to us, and then reveals His own. This uncovers not only the hearts of the Pharisees, but the hearts of all people. What goes out of the mouth defiles the man, because it comes from the heart.

The great general snare is denying the evil of men. Satan's constant deception now is the idea that man is not so bad, and that moral training can improve him. There are societies for every good cause, and for the improvement of man. People look for the faults in circumstances and surroundings instead of in man himself.

This is what both your heart and mine contains, dear reader. If the worst of these evils have not broken out, that is due to the mercy of God in the setting where He has been pleased to place us. But the evils are certainly within us. They wait only for the opportunity to show themselves in all their ugliness. What stronger proof could we have that what men need is not reformation but a new creation! And what proof, too, that outward observances can never be enough on their own! They cannot reach what is within.

In a word, the teaching here is plain: man — that is, man in his present state — is only the source of what is evil. I need another absolutely perfect One, who is outside me, to be my life, and such a One I have in Christ. If I am a Christian at all, Christ is my life. From then on my business is to live on the good I have found in Christ, and to live according to it. Therefore the happy man is the one who is always thinking of Christ and delighting himself in Christ.

When they questioned Him in the house, the Lord told His disciples two things: (1) what the root of evil in men was, and (2) what its fruits were. The root was the evil thought of the heart. The fruits were the specific acts of wickedness, some of which He named. So the evil thought already holds the evil deed in seed form.

Evil thoughts. These are the inward reasonings and debates of man's mind. Inside himself he weighs things up, he calculates, he plans his schemes of sinful indulgence or deliberate rebellion. "Things come into his mind, and he devises an evil scheme" (Ezek. 38:10; Micah 2:1-2)... His thoughts are hidden inside his heart. So he falls into one of man's strange delusions: he thinks they are hidden from God, who knows all things.

Out of what heart? Is it the heart of some horribly depraved and disgusting wretch, completely unfit to appear in decent society? No; it is out of the human heart — the heart of the writer and of the reader of these lines.

This is what both your heart and mine contains, beloved reader. If the worst of these evils have not broken out, that is due to the mercy of God in the surroundings He has been pleased to place us in. But the evils are certainly within us. They are only waiting for an opportunity to show themselves in all their ugliness. What stronger proof could we have that what men need is not reformation but a new creation! What proof, too, that mere outward observances can never be enough in themselves, because they cannot reach what is inside.

Jeremiah had told Israel long before, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick" (Jer. 17:9). Man may blame every outward circumstance for his own sin, but it comes from within himself. How could this be cleansed? Let us at least learn to judge ourselves fully, instead of blaming our wrongs on others or on circumstances. Actual cleansing needs more than this, of course — the great sacrificial death of the Lord of glory. But they had to learn the condition of their heart before they would be ready to receive the remedy.

But God must also show His own heart. Jesus judged the heart of man with the eye of God. He showed His ways and His faithfulness to Israel. Yet through it all He displayed what God was to those who felt their need of Him and came to Him in faith, owning and resting on His pure goodness.

In reply to the questions put to Him in the house, the Lord declared to His disciples (1) what was the root, and (2) what were the fruits of evil in men. The root was the evil thought of the heart, and the fruits were the specific acts of wickedness, some of which He named. In the evil thought, therefore, the evil deed is contained in embryo.

These six offences are named by Mark only: covetousness, deceit, sensuality, an evil eye, pride, foolishness. They are closely tied to the inward workings of man's heart. If the others named before may be described as the lusts of the flesh, these are the desires of the mind (Eph. 2:3). If those showed the filthiness of the flesh, these show the filthiness of the spirit (2 Cor. 7:1).

This is the selfish greed within a man's heart. It wants to take hold of things other than those God has given him, and only what God has given him is his rightful possession… Scripture calls the covetous man an idolater (Eph. 5:5; Col. 3:5), for he sets up another god within himself whom he serves with his whole heart.

The eye is a main road to and from the heart. In the Scriptures, the evil eye is often seen as a close companion of covetousness, selfishness and envious jealousy. It ignores the sufferings of others when there is personal gain in doing so. The LORD warned the people of Israel against having an evil eye toward a poor brother in need and withholding the help owed to him (Deut. 15:7-9; Deut. 28:54-55).

The word used here conveys the sense of a spirit of self-exaltation in a man, joined with the belittling of others. The Pharisees are glaring examples. They trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others (Luke 18:9)… This arrogance shows itself in boastful words and vain deeds. But its origin is within the heart, as that line from Mary's song shows: "He has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts" (Luke 1:51).

Foolishness seems to be that gross form of stupidity which shuts God out of the running of a life. In the words of the Psalmist, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God'" (Ps. 14:1)… Foolishness comes last in the list, says one writer, because it makes all the others incurable.

This is what both your heart and mine contains, dear reader. If the worst of these evils have not broken out, that is because of the mercy of God in the setting where He has been pleased to place us. But the evils are certainly within us. They are only waiting for an opportunity to show themselves in all their ugliness. What stronger proof could we have that what men need is not reformation but a new creation!

In a word, the teaching plainly laid down here is that man — that is, man in his present state — is only the source of what is evil. I need another, absolutely perfect One, outside myself, to be my life. I have such a One in Christ… The happy man is the one who is always thinking of Christ and delighting himself in Him.

The evil that fills the earth is not forced on man from outside. It is something he produces from within.

Man may blame every outward circumstance for his own sin, but it comes from within himself. How could this be cleansed? Let us learn to at least judge ourselves thoroughly, rather than blame our wrongs on others or on circumstances.

The root was the evil thought of the heart. The fruits were the specific acts of wickedness, some of which He named. So the evil thought already holds the evil deed in seed form.

Some say that deliverance from sin is a matter of personal effort. They say evil habits can and should be beaten by one's own firm resolve and perseverance. But this advice misses something. Willpower alone may stop the wicked deed, yet the sinful desire has already filled the heart... The evil thought defiles the whole man, as well as the evil word and the evil act.

Sins named by Mark only. These six offences — covetousness, deceit, sensuality, envy, pride, foolishness — are closely tied to the inward workings of man's heart. If the others already named may be called the lusts of the flesh, these are the desires of the mind (Ephesians 2:3). If those showed the filthiness of the flesh, these show the filthiness of the spirit (2 Corinthians 7:1).

Out of what heart? Is it the heart of some deeply corrupt and disgusting person, unfit to appear in decent society? No; it comes out of the human heart — the heart of the writer and the reader of these lines.

If the worst of these evils have not broken out, that is due to God's mercy in the surroundings He has chosen for us. But the evils are certainly within us, only waiting for a chance to show themselves in all their ugliness. What stronger proof could we have that what men need is not reformation, but a new creation!

Having a low estimate of sin, such a system offers just as low a remedy. It does not, and cannot, touch the heart within. Pharisaism washed the hands. The whole spring of moral action, the heart, is corrupt before God. What man is taints what he does. So while the human method is to cut off this and that, God's method is first of all to make the tree good.

The teaching is laid down here most plainly. Man — that is, man as he is now — is only the source of what is evil. I need another absolutely perfect One, outside myself, to be my life, and I have such a One in Christ.