Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Mark 7:17 - 7:23
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mar_7:17-23. See on Mat_15:12-20; the conversation, which is recorded in this latter Mar_7:12-14, is by him inserted from the Logia here as in an appropriate place.
εἰς οἶκον ] peculiar to Mark in this place: into a house. Jesus is still in the land of Gennesareth (Mar_6:53), where He is wandering about.
ἐπηρώτων κ . τ . λ .] According to Mat_15:15, Peter was the spokesman, the non-mention of whose name in the passage before us is alleged by Hilgenfeld to betoken the Petrinism of Mark, who prefers to divert the reproach upon all the disciples in general; but it in truth betokens the older representation of the scene.
Mar_7:18. οὕτω ] siccine, accordingly, since you must ask this question. Comp. on 1Co_6:5.
καὶ ὑμεῖς ] like persons, who have not the benefit of my guidance ( οἱ ἔξω , Mar_4:11).
Mar_7:19.[106] οὐκ εἰσπορ . αὐτοῦ τ . καρδ .] it enters not into his heart.
The word ἀφεδρών does not occur among the Greeks, but ἌΦΟΔΟς .
The reading ΚΑΘΑΡΊΖΟΝ (see the critical remarks) would have to be explained: which (i.e. which ἐκπορεύεσθαι εἰς τὸν ἀφεδρῶνα ) makes pure the whole of the food (that is eaten), inasmuch, namely, as thereby every impurity passes away from it (by means of the excrements). Thus καθαρίζον would be an appositional addition, which contains the judgment upon the ΕἸς ΤῸΝ ἈΦΕΔΡῶΝΑ ἘΚΠΟΡΕΎΕΤΑΙ . See Kühner, II. p. 146; Winer, p. 549 [E. T. 778]; Fritzsche in loc. But the latter arbitrarily changes καθαρίζον into the meaning: “puros esse declarat,” in so far, namely, as all food, clean and unclean, would come digested into the ἀφεδρών . With the reading ΚΑΘΑΡΊΖΩΝ we must explain: which (the draught) makes pure the whole of the food, inasmuch as it is the place destined for the purpose of receiving the impurities therefrom (the excretions). Thus καθαρίζων refers to ΤῸΝ ἈΦΕΔΡῶΝΑ , and is put not in the accusative, but in the nominative, as though ΚΑῚ Ὁ ἈΦΕΔΡῺΝ ΔΈΧΕΤΑΙ or something similar had been said previously, so that the ἈΦΕΔΡΏΝ appears as the logical subject. Comp. the similar application of the anacoluthic nominative participle among the Greeks (Richter, de anacol. I. p. 7; Bernhardy, p. 53; Krüger, § 56. 9. 4), according to which it is not necessary, as with Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 68 [E. T. 78], to assume the abbreviation of a relative clause. Comp. also Stallb. ad Plat. Phaed. p. 81 A. Moreover, the connection of the course of the matter presented from ὅτι onward requires that ΚΑῚ ΕἸς Τ . ἈΦΕΔΡῶΝΑ ἘΚΠΟΡ . should still be dependent on ὍΤΙ (in opposition to Fritzsche).
Mar_7:21 f. ΔΙΑΛΟΓΙΣΜΟῚ ΟἹ ΚΑΚΟΊ ] is specialized by all that follows, which therefore is to be taken as the thoughts actually presenting themselves, as the prava consilia realized.
The following catalogue betrays later enrichment when compared with that of Matthew, and there is not manifest any principium dividendi beyond the fact that (with the exception of ἀσέλγεια , excess, especially unchaste excess; see on Rom_13:13; Gal_5:19) matters approximately homogeneous are placed together.
πονηρίαι ] malignities, ill-wills, Rom_1:29; Eph_4:31; Col_3:8.
ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρ .] an envious eye, as at Mat_20:15.
ἈΦΡΟΣΎΝΗ ] unreason, morally irrational conduct, Wis_12:23. Foolishness of moral practice. Comp. on Eph_5:17; Beck, Seelenl. p. 63 (its opposite is σωφροσύνη ), not merely in loquendo, to which, moreover, ὑπερηφανία (arrogance) is arbitrarily limited (in opposition to Luther’s gloss; Fritzsche also, and de Wette, and many others).
Mar_7:23. As of all good, so also of all evil, the heart is the inmost lifeseat. See Delitzsch, Psych, p. 250.
[106] The contents of ver. 19, very appropriate as they are for popular argument in the way of naive sensuous representation, are unfairly criticised by Baur, krit. Unters. p. 554, and Markusev. p. 55, as awkward and unsuitable; and in this view Köstlin, p. 326, agrees with him.