Chapter 7
Verses 1-4.
Now[a] the Pharisees[b] and some of the experts in the law[c] who came from Jerusalem gathered around him. 2 And they saw that some of Jesus’ disciples[d] ate their bread with unclean hands, that is, unwashed. 3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they perform a ritual washing,[e] holding fast to the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the marketplace,[f] they do not eat unless they wash. They hold fast to many other traditions: the washing of cups, pots, kettles, and dining couches.
Swaggart. In contrast to the great outpouring of warmth from the crowds, the religious leaders came with a hostile attitude. They did not care about people being healed, lives being transformed, the gospel being preached, or hope restored in people’s lives. They were concerned only with their traditions and came to find fault with Jesus.
Smith. I mean, all of the rules concerning ceremonial washing for cleanliness. Now, this is not hygienic; this is ceremonial. And according to the ceremonial washing, and, of course, sometime after this the Mishna was compiled in which all of these rules and regulations were put concerning the washing; it's interesting that all of the rules that they had concerning the washing of hands, this particular type of washing, it wasn't that you just go over and wash your hands off. You had to wash your hands a particular way in order to be ceremonial clean. Because you see, if your hands were ceremonial dirty by touching something that someone else had touched who wasn't clean...say, if I was a Gentile and I had touched a coin and you touched that coin, I was a Gentile unclean, therefore, if you touched the coin that I touched, you would be unclean too, because I'm an unclean Gentile. So, you go to the marketplace, and you get your change, and who knows who's been touching those coins. And so, when you get home and you want to eat, you can't just go wash your hands hygienically and eat. You've got to wash them ceremonially. And to do that, you had to, first of all, get someone to help you out because you had to have what they called a half a log of oil, which is about two eggshells full in the first washing. And what you'd do is, you'd, with your fingers extended upward, you would take your fist and rub it in the one hand as the water was poured over. Rub your fingers together, and then your fist within the hand, and then the other side. And you would hold your hands out this way, because anything that touches you would be unclean. So, the water that you're washing with becomes unclean because it has touched you. And your hands were unclean, you see, ceremonially. So, you hold them out like this so that the water drips off the wrist, because you don't want that water to drip on you. Because any part it would hit, that would be unclean too and you'd have to go through another bath. So, you hold it out like this and let the water drip on down. Then, because the water that was used is now unclean, and that which is dripping off is unclean, then you would have to hold your hands downward and out from you, and they would pour another half log of water over your hands as you're holding them down and let it run off the fingers. And this is the way that if you didn't wash that way, and you would eat without going through this, they would do it several times during a meal. You know, go through this whole ceremonial bit of washing their hands.
TPT notes. This ceremonial sprinkling amounted to nothing more than religious rules and customs, but none of them were commanded in the writings of Moses – they were the oral traditions of men.
Womack. Jesus’ statements reflect His divinity. Man (and the Pharisees) look on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). Jesus looked on people’s hearts. The Old Testament laws concerning washing served a secondary purpose of hygiene; their real purpose was to shadow or illustrate spiritual truth (Colossians 2:16-17; Hebrews 9:1, and 9-10). Defiled food may hurt our bodies, but it cannot reach our spirits (John 3:6). The scribes and Pharisees had missed the spiritual purity that the Old Testament ordinances taught and had become obsessed with the strict adherence to their rituals. While they relentlessly enforced the laws dealing with the physical realm, they had become completely corrupt and unknowing in the spiritual realm. In Matthew 23, Jesus revealed the thoughts and intents (Hebrews 4:12) of their hearts.
Matthew wrote to the Jews to portray Jesus as the Messiah, while Mark addressed Gentiles as well as Jews. Contrast Matthew’s and Mark’s accounts of this incident. Matthew gave no explanation of this Jewish custom of washings, while Mark did. The Jewish readers of Matthew’s Gospel were familiar with this custom, while the Gentile readers of Mark’s Gospel needed more detail.
This washing of the hands before eating was a tradition of the elders and not a commandment of the Law. Washings were commanded under the Old Testament Law, but they were for ceremonial cleansings of the priests as they ministered and for those priests who had been defiled by an unclean person or thing (Leviticus 22:1-6). God never commanded the washing of the hands before eating except for the priests when eating of the holy food in the tabernacle.
We now know that the washing of produce, plates, and utensils, as well as our hands is a good thing. It cuts down on disease. But Jesus’ response and teaching here makes it very clear that we have to make a distinction between what is good and what is God. It isn’t sin not to follow commonsense rules of cleanliness. We can argue for cleanliness on the basis of health benefits, but it’s wrong to tell people they are in sin or God is displeased with them because they don’t do something that is for their good.
This same mistake is made by modern-day Pharisees. There are many moral issues that are good but not necessarily God. We have to distinguish between beneficial things and moral absolutes.
Verse 5-8.
5 The Pharisees and the experts in the law asked him, “Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat[a] with unwashed hands?” 6 He said to them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart[b] is far from me.
7 They worship me in vain,
teaching as doctrine the commandments of men.’[c]
8 Having no regard[d] for the command of God, you hold fast to human tradition.”[e]
Swaggart. The Greek emphasizes “continual asking” by the scribes. They questioned Jesus endlessly about why he/disciples did not follow “the tradition of the elders.” Hypocrite comes from the Greek word “hupocrites” which is made up of two words: “hupo” which means “under. Then “krino” which means to judge. The original idea of hypocrite was one who judges from under a mask.” People acting on a stage wore masks pretending to be somebody they weren’t. The Pharisees were religious actors pretending to be one thing on the outside while being completely different on the inside. Jesus was stern.
Womack. The scribes and Pharisees held tradition to be equal to Scripture. Some traditions may be good, but they are not in the same category as God’s infallible Word.
Jesus called them hypocrites. It’s one of the most offensive things Jesus could have said to these self-righteous religious leaders.
Most people, especially preachers, are too worried about offending others to speak like this. But it’s the Truth that sets people free (John 8:32). We should tell people the Truth and give them the choice of whether or not they will accept it. If we water down the Truth because we are afraid of offending someone, we have rejected the Truth for them. We don’t have that right.
This is the Bible definition of a hypocrite. This is someone whose words and heart (actions) don’t agree. Hypocrites may act the part of a Christian or possibly talk like Christ, but they won’t do both. When both confession and action from the heart are consistent with God’s Word, it equals salvation (Romans 10:9-10).
It’s not enough to worship God. Jesus said we can worship Him in vain. We have to worship Him in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). Anything we do or teach that is contrary to God’s Word is in vain. It is incapable of producing godly results.
The commandments of God and the traditions of man are not the same and must be distinguished. To place them on the same level results in making the Word of God of no effect (Mark 7:13). You have to “lay aside” the commandment of God to keep the traditions of men, or you have to “lay aside” the traditions of man to keep the commandments of God (Exodus 20:3). Church liturgy is tradition, as well as many of the dos and don’ts taught by churches today.
Verses 9-13.
9 He also said to them, “You neatly reject the commandment of God in order to set up[a] your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’[b] and, ‘Whoever insults his father or mother must be put to death.’[c] 11 But you say that if anyone tells his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you would have received from me is corban’[d] (that is, a gift for God), 12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify[e] the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like this.”
Verse 10. Exod 20:12; Deut 5:16.
Mark 7:10 sn A quotation from Exod 21:17; Lev 20:9.
TPT. V. 11. Corban is an Aramaic word that implies that a person is pure, sincere, and pious when he makes an offering to God. In this case, people would simply speak the word corban over the money they were obligated to use in the support of their aged parents, and that would exempt them from their duty to give it. Jesus disapproved of this practice, as it nullified God’s commands. Words themselves don’t count with God; he seeks justice and obedience from the heart.
Smith. Now, if you would curse your father and mother under the Jewish law, you'd be stoned. You're to honor your father and mother. "And whosoever should curse his father and mother should be put to death." But they developed this tradition. You say, "Now, Dad, this is Corban. I'm going to give you a gift. You are a dirty rotten louse, and I hate you and I've always hated you. Now, this is for your good, Dad. This is a gift for you." As long as you preface it, "This is a gift; this is corban, that you might be benefited by this," then you can go ahead and say whatever you wanted. That was their tradition by which they circumvented the law of God. You were actually to provide for your parents. But you say, "Well, it's Corban. I've given that to God; you can't have that." And you could actually wipe out any obligation you had to a person by saying, "Anything I owe you is Corban. That is, it's dedicated to God, and therefore you can't have it." And by these traditions, they were actually negating the law of God.
Womack. Not much has changed in the last 2,000 years. Religious people are more committed to their traditions than they are to God’s Word. Our culture rejects Biblical moral standards for perverted standards. Our leaders call good evil and evil good (Isaiah 5:20). They are hypocrites as the Pharisees were.
This is a combination of the fifth commandment (Exodus 20:12) and the Lord instructions in Exodus 21:17. It is repeated in Leviticus 20:9.
Many Old Testament scriptures direct us to honor one’s father and mother (Exodus 20:12). If children cursed their parents, it was the death penalty (Exodus 21:17 and Leviticus 20:9). Honoring one’s father and mother include taking care of them financially. But the covertness Pharisees said if children gave the Lord the money that would have taken care of their parents, it was not sin. This was said, no doubt, because the Pharisees got rich off the money given to the Lord (1 Timothy 6:10).
Likewise, many today say that they support love, but they redefine love as being between two men or two women. Anyone who adopts that standard is making the Word of God of no effect (Mark 7:13). Their human traditions and doctrines are totally opposed to God’s absolute moral standards as revealed in His Word.
The religious system of Jesus’ day allowed people to void responsibilities to their parents by taking the money they would have used to care for their parents and put it into the offering. This was very convenient for those who hated their parents and those who received offerings. But this tradition voided the intent of God’s commands (Exodus 20:12).
Formerly, I interpreted this verse as pertaining to religious traditions that negated God’s Word. But it’s not limited to religious traditions. Our secular culture also imposes “norms” on us that are contrary to God’s Word. Any tradition or norm that contradicts God’s Word will void its power in our lives if we esteem those norms and traditions as equal to or greater than God’s word.
Man’s traditions can neutralize the positive power of God’s Word toward us. God’s Word is true (Romans 3:3-4) and will not return to Him void (Isaiah 55:11), but it may produce the negative results of judgment instead of the positive results of salvation (John 12:48). The Jews who left Egypt didn’t receive the positive results of God’s Promised Land, because they didn’t mix faith with the word they heard (Hebrews 4:2).
Verse 14-16.
14 Then[a] he called the crowd again and said to them, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand. 15 There is nothing outside of a person that can defile him by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles him.”
Womack. Jesus was publicly exposing the scribes and Pharisees’ hypocrisy (Mark 7:1-5 and Matthew 23).
This looks to be in opposition to Leviticus 11:40, 22:8; Deuteronomy 14:7-8, 12-19, 21, and other Old Testament passages. However, Colossians 2:16-17 reveals that Old Testament dietary laws were shadows (or pictures) of spiritual truths that would become realities in the New Covenant. The Pharisees (and many Christians today) missed the spiritual significance of the laws and saw only the outward act. The spiritual meaning is that we are to be wholly (separated) unto God, even what we eat. See 1 Corinthians 10:31: “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” Under the Old Testament Law, it was forbidden to eat or to touch certain animals (Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14:3-21), not because there was anything wrong with the animals but to illustrate the point of being separated unto God and to serve as a constant reminder of this separation. Under the New Testament, we see that no animal is, or ever was, unclean of itself (Romans 14:14 and 1 Timothy 4:1-5). The Old Testament designation of certain animals as unclean was purely symbolic, and this is why Jesus made that statement. Jesus’ statements refer to more than the Old Testament clean and unclean beasts, however. Nothing that enters us through our mouths can defile us. However, this statement cannot be interpreted as condoning any type of abuse we would like to give our bodies, such as gluttony, drug abuse, etc. Rather, Jesus was simply explaining that the condition of our hearts should be given preeminence over our physical bodies. Our hearts control our bodies (Proverbs 23:7), not the other way around. Sin doesn’t make our hearts corrupt, but our corrupt hearts make us sin. God looks on our hearts (1 Samuel 16:7), and our cleanliness or defilement in His sight is dependent solely on whether or not we have been made clean in our spirits by the blood of the Lamb.
The truths Jesus spoke were to be received by revelation. In other words, people have to open their hearts to the Lord and hear and see with their hearts. Everyone in the crowd had physical ears and heard the words Jesus spoke, but only those who would open their hearts to the Lord would truly hear and see what He was saying. The same is so true today. You can’t argue anyone into the truth. It has to come by revelation.
Verses 17-23.
17 Now[a] when Jesus[b] had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 He said to them, “Are you so foolish? Don’t you understand that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him? 19 For it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and then goes out into the sewer.”[c] (This means all foods are clean.)[d] 20 He said, “What comes out of a person defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the human heart, come evil ideas, sexual immorality, theft, murder, 22 adultery, greed, evil, deceit, debauchery, envy, slander, pride, and folly. 23 All these evils come from within and defile a person.”
TPT notes. Sexual immorality. This is the Greek word “Porneia”. The literal meaning is “to sell off oneself into sexual impurity.
Smith. He's talking to the crowd now. He's been talking to the Pharisees, telling them about how they've disannulled the law of God by their traditions and now he's calling the crowd to hearken to Him. And this radical statement.
And now He says probably one of the most radical things He has said up to this point. Now, Jesus said an awful lot of radical things in His life. But up to this point, this is probably the most radical thing that He said. And you have to understand the background in which it was said, that is, of the people. Under the Mosaic law, there were certain meats that they were forbidden to eat, one of those being swine, or pig. Under the law it was forbidden. It was considered unclean; it was forbidden. Now, during the time of Antiochus Zepiphanes, that Syrian king who had conquered Israel and sought to just profane and blaspheme these people, he ordered that they, all of them, eat pork. It was a commandment of Antiochus Zepiphanes, and if they would not eat pork, they would be put to death. And hundreds of Jews died rather than to eat pork, thousands of them, during the time of the Maccabean. Thousands of them died rather than to violate the law and eat pork. Now Jesus is going to say something extremely radical with this kind of a background.
Hearken unto me (Mar 7:14)
He's talking to the crowd now. He's been talking to the Pharisees, telling them about how they've disannulled the law of God by their traditions and now he's calling the crowd to hearken to Him. And this radical statement,
There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man. If any man has ears to hear, let him hear (Mar 7:15-16).
It's not what goes into a man's mouth that defiles him; pork, whatever. Now, this was a radical departure from their traditions. In fact, when He came into the house away from the people, His disciples said, "Lord, explain that one to us."
And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him; Because it entereth not into his heart, but [only] into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats? (Mar 7:18-19)
Now, the meats are all purged out of your body; they don't defile you in a spiritual sense. And of course, we're talking about ceremonial washing. The meat that you eat doesn't defile you. Now, it can make you sick or it can do things, but spiritually it doesn't defile you. There's no spiritual defilement in it, because it passes through your body.
And he said That which cometh out of the man, that [is what] defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man (Mar 7:20-23).
So, it's not what goes in, but what comes out. And that reveals what is in the man's heart. And there's where the true spiritual defilement or purity exists in the heart. "Blessed are the pure in heart; they shall see God." That's where real spiritual defilement is; not in what you are eating, but what you are, the inward part of your life, what's in your heart. Not what's in your belly that counts.
And from thence he arose (Mar 7:24),
Now He's at the area around Genesarret, there at the Sea of Galilee.
Womack. The disciples were the elite. They were handpicked by the Lord and had seen and heard more of Jesus’ ministry than anyone else because they traveled with Him. Yet they were constantly asking what He meant.
This illustrates 1 Corinthians 2:14. We can’t understand the things of God with our “peanut-sized” brains. We have to have the quickening power of the Holy Spirit to enlighten us. This instance was prior to the Holy Spirit coming to live within these disciples (John 14:16-17 and Acts 1:5-8). The same day they received the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), their revelation knowledge went through the roof. Peter preached a sermon on the Day of Pentecost that demonstrated an understanding of God’s plan that he hadn’t had before. One of the greatest pieces of evidence of the working of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers is their ability to comprehend and understand spiritual things.
What enters our heart is more important than what enters our belly. God created our bodies with digestive systems that extract nutrients from food and discharge the unused part. But our brains are the filtering system for our hearts. If we choose to let ungodliness into our hearts, the only way we can rectify the situation is to repent, i.e., change our minds. As go our hearts, so go our lives (Proverbs 4:23-26 and 23:7).
Carnal people are more concerned and occupied with external, physical things than inner, spiritual things (1 Samuel 16:7 and Romans 8:6). This is reflected in people’s preoccupation with what they eat, how they exercise, and the way they look while the same people neglect their spiritual condition. Attitudes of the heart can’t be seen with the eye, but they can be discerned by the words people say (Matthew 12:34-35). God looks at hearts the way carnal people look on physical appearance. As believers, we should be more concerned with the way we look to God than the way people see us.
These verses (Mark 7:21-23) establish that our hearts include more than our spirits. Christians struggle with things like pride and foolishness, which Jesus said come out of our hearts (Mark 7:22). It’s certain that our born-again spirits are not the source of these sins; therefore, our hearts encompass more than our spirits.
This is quite a list of evil things that come out of the heart. Some of these things are considered evil by our society today, but other things have become acceptable.
Covetousness is accepted and embraced. Many of our advertisements promote covetousness, which the Bible says is idolatry (Colossians 3:5). Wickedness has become politically correct. Adultery, homosexuality, transgenderism, abortion, and a host of other things are now promoted as God-given rights.
Deceit is a common practice. Lasciviousness is lust, or lewdness. That has become the norm. Proverbs 28:22 says that a person who hastens to be rich has an evil eye. This is actively promoted today. Pride is rampant. It’s flaunted on television shows and the covers of most magazines and tabloids.
The Amplified Bible, Classic Edition defines “foolishness” as “folly, lack of sense, recklessness, thoughtlessness.” That exists in epidemic proportions today. All of these things indicate the conditions of people’s hearts.
Carnal man tries, by physical restraints, to overcome the evil acts Jesus listed in the previous verses. If they see these things in others, they want to pass laws or enforce rules and regulations. If the problem is in themselves, they want to take a pill or attend a class or blame someone else. But the answer can only be found in a heart change. Any other approach is only behavior modification and not real change. People cannot consistently act differently than who they are in their hearts (Proverbs 4:23-26 and 23:7).
The Message Bible summarizes the list of these evils from verses 21-22 by saying, “all these are vomit from the heart.” That pretty much says it.
Verse 24-27.
24 After Jesus[a] left there, he went to the region of Tyre.[b] When he went into a house, he did not want anyone to know, but[c] he was not able to escape notice. 25 Instead, a woman whose young daughter had an unclean spirit[d] immediately heard about him and came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, of Syrophoenician origin. She[e] asked him to cast the demon out of her daughter. 27 He said to her, “Let the children be satisfied first, for it is not right to take the children’s bread and to throw it to the dogs.”
TPT notes. #1. Tyre along with Sidon is located on the Mediterranean coast in Lebanon. #2. The mother was not Jewish, but a foreigner. The Jews considered the word Greek to mean anyone who was not a Jew, not necessarily a person of Greek descent. #3. Says that the women came from a part of Syria known as Phoenicia. #4. The “children’s bread” is being able to cast out demons, and probably more.
Smith. Tyre and Sidon, of course, are over on the coast. You've been reading about them quite a bit of late. Tyre is about thirty-five miles from Capernaum in the northeasterly direction. And of course, about twenty-five miles further up the road is Sidon. And Jesus left the area of the Galilee now and is going over actually into the Gentile territory.
Now, at this point, many people are offended with Jesus. Here is a woman, a mother, who is in real trouble. She's got a daughter that's got big problems; her daughter is possessed by an unclean spirit. And this mother, out of desperation, is coming to Jesus for help. But because she is a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician, Jesus refers to her as a dog. The Greek word for dog here is that little household pet that's always under the table, that little pet of the family. And most of the Jewish homes had their little pet dogs, which were domesticated and lovable little animals under the table. And when Jesus said, "It isn't right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs," He used this Greek word that could be translated, "It isn't right to take the children's bread and to throw it to the little puppies, these cute little dogs under that table."
Now, in those days they did not have knives and forks and spoons. They did not have eating utensils. They didn't even use chopsticks. They used the utensils that God first created for man to eat with. They used their hands. And the eating was an interesting process. Always bread. And usually you would break your bread, pull it off and then dip it in the soup or in the sauces or in whatever. And you'd use your bread oftentimes as sort of a spoon. And when we're over there, we usually go out for what they call an oriental meal, but it's more of an Arabic type of a meal, where they serve you the pita bread and all of these sauces. And you break the thing, and you do your dipping and all, and you have all these exotic kinds of salsas and everything else to eat with your pita bread. But they use their hands; they use their fingers. Now, of course, by the time you're through eating, you've got the grease and everything else all over your hands. So, the final piece of bread, you would take it and use it to wipe off as a napkin. You'd use it to wipe off your hands. And then, you'd toss it under the table to the little dog down there waiting, standing up and "woof, woof." You stand up and you drop him this final piece of bread that had all these delicious juices on it. And the dogs would eat these crumbs or these pieces of bread that would be used to wipe off the hands from the master's table.
So, to understand it from its cultural background, it's not nearly as severe as it would just appear on the surface to us. Here's this woman, she's a Greek, and she's outside of the covenant. Jesus said, "I'm not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." But here's this woman from outside of the covenant race, and she's coming to Jesus and she's saying, "Lord, help me! My daughter is at home, and she's vexed with an unclean spirit." Jesus said, "It's not right to take the children's bread and to cast it to the little puppies." That is, the bread that they're supposed to be eating. "No, that's true, Lord. But those little puppies, they get the crumbs at the end, those that fall from the master's table." And Jesus said, "Ah, for this saying..." and another gospel said, "Oh, woman, great is thy faith."
Womack. Everyone needs some solitude and time to rest. That was true of Jesus too. In Matthew’s account of this incident (Matthew 15:21-28), Jesus told this woman He was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel. So, He clearly wasn’t there for ministry. He was seeking time away from the demands of ministering to others. But Jesus had become so popular and sought after that He could not be hid, not even in another nation. All of this happened without a PR director or advertising budget. The Holy Spirit used His miracles and messages to draw the crowds.
Phoenicia was an area on the Mediterranean coast that is now occupied by modern Lebanon. In Jesus’ time, its affairs were administrated by Syria–thus “Syrophenicia.” The region near Tyre and Sidon was about forty to fifty miles northeast of the Sea of Galilee, which would have been a two- to three-day journey for Jesus and His disciples from the land of Gennesaret.
This instance is also recorded in Matthew 15:22-28.
This is referring to this woman being a non-Jew. Jesus was saying that the Jews were like the children and non-Jews were the dogs. It would be wrong to take what belonged to the Jews (children) and give it to non-Jews (dogs). What an insult! In Matthew’s account of this very instance, Jesus told the woman that He wasn’t sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24).
Jesus didn’t despise this woman, but she had called upon him as the Son of David (Matthew 15:22). She had no right to Jesus as the Son of David. She wasn’t a Jew. Jesus’ seemingly rough answer to her was to make her aware that she didn’t have any more right to deliverance through the Jews’ covenant than a dog has to the children’s food.
Wisely, this woman humbled herself and pleaded for mercy instead of trying to demand her rights (Mark 7:28). She didn’t have any rights. Jesus had mercy on her.
Jesus said that healing was the “children’s bread.” God would no more withhold healing from us than a father would withhold bread from his child. Compare with Luke 11:11-13.
A prideful person would have taken great offense at Jesus’ previous statement. But this woman agreed with Him. She admitted she was a dog in comparison to a Jew! But she still pled for the crumbs that came from the table.
Verse 28-30.
28 She answered, “Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.” 29 Then[a] he said to her, “Because you said this, you may go. The demon has left your daughter.” 30 She went home and found the child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.
Womack. One of the obvious characteristics of this woman’s faith was humility. She had been insulted and yet persisted in her faith. Jesus told this woman she had great faith (Matthew 15:28). “How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh from God only?” (John 5:44).
Those who “wear a chip on their shoulder” and are hurt by the slightest reference to something they consider offensive do not have the type of faith this woman had that gets results (John 5:44).
Jesus never touched this girl and never spoke in the hearing of the demon. He simply told the mother that the deliverance had come, and it was so. That is power and authority. We do not have to be present with the person to cast out a demon.
Verse 31-34.
Decapolis. “Deca” means ten and “polis” means “cities” in Greek. The ten cities formed a league in BC 63 (the number of cities/towns probably expanded over time) and were mainly Greek in population, or at least in culture. As I understand the matter today, the confederated cities probably initially were in Syria only with expansion bringing in cities/town to the west into Jordon. There was one Decapolis city/town in Northern Galilee - a town to the east of Jordon, just south of the lake.
Tyre and Sidon were not part of Decapolis, so far as I can tell. Both were in Modern day Jordon, about 20 miles apart on the coast with Sidon being further north and the more important of the two.) Tyre was about 100 miles north of Jerusalem and 12 miles north of the current Israeli/Jordanian border.
Note. This makes the KJV, especially, unclear as to geography. Perhaps TPT has it right. “All the cities of Decapolis (others say excepting one city) were located in Syria and Jordon, Damascus included. If Jesus had been in Tyre and passed through to Sidon, he walked 20 miles north, then southeast to Lake Galilee. It was many miles and would have taken him several days.
31 Then[a] Jesus[b] went out again from the region of Tyre and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee in the region of the Decapolis.[c] 32 They brought to him a deaf man who had difficulty speaking, and they asked him to place his hands on him. 33 After Jesus[d] took him aside privately, away from the crowd, he put his fingers in the man’s[e] ears, and after spitting, he touched his tongue.[f] 34 Then[g] he looked up to heaven and said with a sigh, “Ephphatha” (that is, “Be opened”).
Smith. God doesn’t work in methodologies.
Womack. See Mt. 15: 29-31. This man didn’t come to Jesus on his own. That doesn’t mean he didn’t have faith; rather, it means that he had help from others. Often people need help to receive from the Lord.
In Mark 8:22-25, Jesus took the blind man away from the people’s unbelief which could have hindered the manifestation of his healing (Mark 6:5-6). It is probable that Jesus took this man aside for the same reason. This sighing could be groaning in the Spirit.
(Source?) What would happen if we spat on a person’s tongue today? It does need to be remembered that Jesus had taken this man apart privately, so there was no public shame associated with this. Since the man couldn’t hear Jesus curse his deafness and dumbness, it’s possible that by spitting on this man’s tongue, He communicated His curse on this condition symbolically in a way that the man would comprehend. However, Jesus also spit on a man’s eyes (Mark 8:23), when the man could understand Jesus perfectly.
Jesus had His fingers in this man’s ears. So, He didn’t spit on His finger and then touch the man’s tongue. It appears He spit directly on this man’s tongue. And if the man didn’t want this to happen, all he would have had to do was keep his mouth shut. It appears this man had his tongue out, asking for this.
Verse 35-37.
35 And immediately the man’s[a] ears were opened, his tongue loosened, and he spoke plainly. 36 Jesus ordered them not to tell anyone. But as much as he ordered them not to do this, they proclaimed it all the more.[b] 37 People were completely astounded and said, “He has done everything well. He even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak.”
TPT. “Everything He does is wonderful” or “beautiful, perfect, admirable, or marvelous.” This verse can also be translated “He has made everything beautiful” or “He has made everything ideally.”
Womack. There are three other instances recorded in Scripture when Jesus healed dumbness (Matthew 9:32-33, 12:22; Mark 9:25; and Luke 11:14 [same instance as Matthew 9:32-33]). There is only one other instance of deafness and dumbness being healed at the same time (Mark 9:25). In these three examples, demons were cast out to effect the cure. In this case, it is not clear that a demon was present. The Greek word “DESMON,” used for “string” in this verse, might imply demonic activity, as in the other examples.
Just a few verses prior, Jesus is at Tyre and Sidon to seek solitude (Mark 7:24), but He could not escape the people’s needs. He may have told these people not to publicize the miracle because the crowds were becoming too great for Him to handle.
Today members of Christ’s church proclaim that He doesn’t do these things anymore. But Jesus is still the same (Hebrews 13:8). He still does all things well (Acts 10:38), and this includes making the deaf to hear and the dumb to speak.