Mark 7:19 (ESV)
"Since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.)
Seventh-day Adventists Arguments:
1.) From SDA Bible Commentary:
15. Nothing from without. Commentators generally miss the point of vs. 15–23 by applying them to the problem of clean and unclean flesh foods as differentiated in Lev. 11. The context makes emphatically clear that Jesus was not calling into question in any way the precept of the OT, but rather was denying the validity of oral tradition (see on Mark 7:3), and here specifically the tradition that declared food eaten with hands improperly washed (in a ritualistic sense) became the cause of defilement (see on v. 2). [1]
2.) From SDAs Andrews Study Bible:
What Jesus is attacking is the belief that if pious Jews simply observed the ritual purity laws, they would thereby be morally clean. On the contrary, no food in and of itself can defile a person’s character. What ethically defiles are the evil thoughts (which are realized in outward actions), which originate inside of a person."[2]
3.) From SDA 28 Fundamental Beliefs book:
"Mark's statement that Jesus "declared all foods clean" (Mark 7:19, RSV) does not mean that He abolished the distinction between clean and unclean foods. The discussion between Jesus and the Pharisees and scribes had nothing to do with the kind of food, but with the manner in which the disciples ate. The issue was whether or not the ritual washing of hands before meals was necessary (Mark 7:2-5). In effect, Jesus said what defiles a person is not the food eaten with unwashed hands but the wicked things from the heart (Mark 7:20-23), because the food "does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated." Thus Jesus declared that all foods eaten with unwashed hands are "clean" (Mark 7:19). 'The Greek word for "food" (bromata) used here is the general term for food that refers to all kinds of foods or human consumption; it does not designate just flesh foods." [3]
4.) SDAs The Clear Word Bible:
Mark 7:8-20 (The Clear Word) "He said to them, “You mean that you don’t understand what I just said to the people? Can’t you see that whatever goes into a man from the outside, like dirt from his unwashed hands, cannot make him morally unclean? It doesn’t affect his relationship with God, because it goes into his stomach, passes through his intestines, then out of his body. It’s what comes from his heart and out of his mouth that morally affects a man."[4]
Answer:
Mark 7:18-20 is one of the verses often misunderstood by SDAs, who disregard the simple message Jesus conveyed to Christians living under the New Covenant. This simple message is revealed in Mark's brief but Spirit-inspired parenthetical note in Mark 7:19: "Thus he declared all foods clean." However, SDA apologists quickly divert attention from Mark's crucial note and shift the focus to what they claim is the context of Mark 7. They assert that this context emphatically clarifies that Jesus was not questioning the dietary laws of the Old Testament (Lev. 11 and Deut. 14) but was rather denying the validity of the oral tradition that the ritual washing of hands before meals was necessary.
The Key to the Correct Interpretation
To avoid being misled by the SDAs, who redirect attention from the statement "Thus he declared all foods clean" to their misinterpretation that Jesus was not challenging the Old Testament precepts but rather rejecting the validity of the oral tradition regarding food being defiled by unwashed hands, it is important to first understand the true meaning of "Thus he declared all foods clean." When they succeed in convincing you to adopt their incorrect interpretation, the discussion often ends up focusing on the act of eating bread with unwashed hands instead of "Thus he declared all foods clean." As a result, their interpretation takes precedence over the accurate conclusion from the Bible.
"Thus he declared all foods clean" is a conclusion made by the author of the Gospel of Mark based on his understanding of Jesus' teachings to his disciples after Jesus' encounter with the Pharisees regarding what truly defiles a person. This is supported by the SDA Bible Commentary: "The Greek, however, makes it clear that these are not the words of Christ, but rather those of Mark, and that they constitute his comment on Christ’s meaning."[5] Therefore, there is no doubt that this is truly Mark's interpretation, inspired by the Holy Spirit, of Jesus' words when he wrote this conclusion. Now, our question is: from which of Jesus' statements did Mark derive this conclusion? We have three possible candidates to consider:
1.) From Jesus' encounter with the Pharisees about eating bread with unwashed hands? (Mark 7:1-13)
2.) From the crowd of people listening to Jesus teaching about what really defiles a person? (Mark 7:14-15)
3.) From his own disciples in a private house, clarifying what he taught to the crowd? (Mark 1:14-18)
The immediate context or the closest antecedent of the conclusion, "Thus he declared all foods clean," is not from Jesus' encounter with the Pharisees regarding eating bread with unwashed hands (Mark 7:1-13), but rather from Jesus' interaction with his own disciples in a private house, where he clarified what he taught to the crowd (Mark 1:17-19). Mark 7:1–23 centers on the issue of purity. Jesus used this specific issue of eating bread with unwashed hands to teach what truly defiles a person, first addressing the Pharisees, then the crowd, and finally, his disciples. So even here, we can see that the SDAs are using deception to avoid the broader issue beyond eating bread with unwashed or defiled hands. Eating bread with unwashed hands does not align with the conclusion "Thus he declared all foods clean" because the issue of unwashed hands pertains to external cleanliness before the bread even enters the person's body. The immediate context of "Thus he declared all foods clean" concerns what goes inside the body or stomach, not external matters like unwashed hands.
Let's read again the closest context to Mark 7:19 found in verses 14-18:
Mark 7:14-18 (ESV) 14 "And he called the people to him again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand: 15 There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” 17 And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him."
According to Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, the Greek word for "nothing" in verse 15 is oudeis, meaning "no one, none, nothing." This implies that nothing entering a person's stomach, whether clean or unclean food or washed or unwashed hands, can defile them. Jesus expanded his explanation of ritual purity, shifting from the issue of external defilement—such as not washing hands before eating bread, as discussed with the Pharisees—to the broader issue of internal defilement. He reiterated this point in verse 18, where, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he used different words to emphasize the same point made in verse 15: nothing that enters a person's stomach can defile them, regardless of whether the food is clean or unclean or whether it comes from washed or unwashed hands. Let's read verse 18:
Mark 7:18 (ESV) "And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him."
This time, the Greek word used to translate "whatever" is pas, which, according to Basics of Biblical Greek, means "singular: each, every; plural: all." Jesus' statements were revolutionary, especially when made publicly with many people listening. We can be sure that many were shocked by this new teaching from Jesus, as it was unfamiliar to most who heard it. Even Jesus' disciples noted this, as reported in Matthew 15:10-12, which also recounts the same event:
Matthew 15:10-12 (ESV) 10 "And he called the people to him and said to them, “Hear and understand: 11 it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth; this defiles a person.” 12 Then the disciples came and said to him, “Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?”
Therefore, we see that the closest context of "Thus he declared all foods clean" (v. 19) is found in Mark 7:14-18, not in Jesus' encounter with the Pharisees regarding his disciples not washing their hands before eating bread. If the SDAs insist that this discussion is about bread, which is already considered clean food by the Jews, Mark's parenthetical note about his interpretation of Jesus' words in verses 17 and 18 would be redundant, as if saying, "Thus he declared all clean foods clean!" The bread is already considered clean by the Jews, so why would Christ need to declare it clean again?
Therefore, the foods Jesus declared clean were those regarded by the Jews at that time under the clean and unclean food laws written in the Law of Moses in the Old Testament, nothing else! The SDAs are mistaken in insisting that the issue here was about Jesus' disciples eating bread without washing their hands. Don't they realize that the bread eaten by the Jews was already considered clean? If the bread was already clean, why would Jesus need to declare it clean again? If the SDAs claim that Jesus needed to declare the bread clean because his disciples ate it without washing their hands, this still doesn't match the conclusion "Thus he declared all foods clean," which does not refer solely to the specific bread eaten by Jesus' disciples during that encounter. The original Greek phrase καθαρίζων πάντα τὰ βρώματα (katharizon panta ta bromata) literally means, "(Thus he declared) all foods clean." SDAs should take note that this conclusion does not refer solely to bread but encompasses all kinds of foods, as indicated by its plural form in Greek. The Greek word for food is bromata, which according to the SDAs' own definition, "does not designate just flesh foods" but refers "to all kinds of foods or human consumption."
'The Greek word for "food" (bromata) used here is the general term for food that refers to all kinds of foods or human consumption; it does not designate just flesh foods."[6]
Therefore, according to the SDAs themselves, bromata does not only refer to bread but also to flesh foods! Additionally, those who heard Jesus' revolutionary teaching, which he later clarified privately with his disciples, were already familiar with the concept of defilement by what a person eats. As Jews, their minds would immediately recall the Mosaic laws regulating clean and unclean foods in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. These are the only passages in the Torah that clearly command what defiles the Jews when consumed. All Jewish people can easily recall this because it was given to them many hundreds of years ago, starting at Mt. Sinai, and was written by Moses in the Book of the Law. In contrast, the Pharisees' tradition of washing hands before eating did not originate from the Old Testament Scriptures but from their oral traditions. Jesus called this a man-made tradition of the Pharisees (washing of hands before eating clean foods), highlighting this point to rebuke them for nullifying God's commandments with their man-made traditions.
Mark 7:1-2, 5-8 (ESV) 1 "Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, 2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 5 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?” 6 And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘These people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; 7 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ 8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”
This was his response to the Pharisees' tradition of human-made rules. Jesus rebuked them by quoting the prophet Isaiah, exposing their hypocrisy, and that concluded the encounter. After this, he preached to the people who witnessed his confrontation with their religious leaders. During this teaching, he did not rebuke the people but instead explained what truly defiles a person. He did not mention man-made traditions on this occasion, but Jesus clarified to his audience the familiarity with the Mosaic law in Leviticus 11, which refers to unclean animals. According to this law, if a Jew consumes such an animal and it enters his mouth and reaches his stomach, it defiles him.
Leviticus 11:43-44 (ESV) 43 "You shall not make yourselves detestable with any swarming thing that swarms, and you shall not defile yourselves with them, and become unclean through them. 44 For I am the LORD your God. Consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. You shall not defile yourselves with any swarming thing that crawls on the ground.
Take not on the words "You shall not defile yourselves with them" and "You shall not defile yourselves" and compare it with Jesus statement in Mark 7:15 and18:
Mark 7:15 (ESV) "There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.”
Mark 7:18 (ESV) "And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him."
Therefore, Jesus' words in Mark 7:15 and 18 reference Leviticus 11, which is why those who heard Jesus' revolutionary teaching were so surprised. They truly understood his meaning, so much so that even his own disciples approached him privately about it. I anticipate that many SDAs reading this will also be shocked for the first time!
Mark's two witnesses: Peter's Vision in Acts 10 & the New Testament Teachings
Another strong evidence that the clean foods in Mark 7:19 do not just refer to eating bread with unwashed hands but also include animals considered unclean in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 is the testimony of two important witnesses in Mark's conclusion: the Apostle Peter and, the New Testament teachings. Early Church fathers concur that Mark was an associate of Peter. When Mark wrote his gospel, Peter narrated to him the events he witnessed and the teachings he heard about Jesus. According to The Apostolic Fathers Vol. II in the Loeb Classical Library, on page 103, it is documented that in 140 AD, Bishop Papias of Hierapolis, Asia Minor, reported the following:
"And this is what the elder used to say, 'When Mark was the interpreter [Or: translator] of Peter, he wrote down accurately everything that he re called of the Lord's words and deeds—but not in order. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied him; but later, as I indicated, he accompanied Peter, who used to adapt his teachings for the needs at hand, not arranging, as it were, an orderly composition of the Lord's sayings."[7]
Therefore, the statement, "Thus he declared all food clean" in Mark 7:19 essentially comes from Peter, who relayed it to Mark. This provides clear evidence that if questioned, Peter himself, drawing from his comprehension and vision as detailed in Acts 10:9-16, is addressing food and not people, which effectively refutes the argument of Seventh-day Adventists! If the passage above refers only to clean and unclean animals, then, why does Peter interpret it as referring to people when he speaks to Cornelius in verse 28? In Peter's vision, God did not declare, "I made the Gentiles clean do not call them common"? Acts 10:28 states:
Acts 10:28 (ESV) "And he said to them, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean."
The reason for this is that Peter is now aware of the consequences of doing away with the dietary law. It suggests that not only has God already abolished the ceremonial division between clean and unclean animals, but that they are also allowed to associate with Gentiles, especially the believers. The SDAs might not be aware that the Torah never states that the Gentile people are "unclean." This is a fact that the Mosaic law did not express anywhere in the Torah.
According to Word Studies in the New Testament:
"The Jews professed to ground this prohibition on the law of Moses, but there is no direct command in the Mosaic law forbidding Jews to associate with those of other nations. But Peter’s statement is general, referring to the general practice of the Jews to separate themselves in common life from uncircumcised persons." [8]
Peter's use of the word "unlawful" in Acts 10:28 is not from the Greek "nomos", referring to the Mosaic law but instead, he used the word "athemitos" a "violation of tradition or common recognition of what is seemly or proper."[9] Hence, the Old Testament does not contain any regulation that prohibits social contact with Gentiles; however, the rabbis introduced such rules, making them obligatory through custom. If that's the case, Gentiles weren't actually considered unclean by God, so they shouldn't be regarded as such. It was the Jewish Rabbis who made this rule, which the SDAs then accepted and unfortunately, believed. If Gentile people are not considered unclean by God, then what is the "unclean" that God refers to in Acts 10:15 when He says, "What God has made clean, do not call common"? God is obvious in His words in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 when He uses the categories "clean" and "unclean" only for animals, not for Gentile human beings.
Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that the parenthetical note in Mark, "Thus he declared all foods clean," may have stemmed directly from Peter's own testimony that he heard firsthand. Considering Peter's experience with his vision about clean and unclean animals in Acts 10, where he believed God had declared them clean, we can be assured that this aligns with the spirit of Mark's comment in the latter part of Mark 7:19!
New Testament Teachings
Finally, our strongest evidence that the clean and unclean food laws of the Old Testament Law of Moses in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 were abolished by Christ is based on the statement in Mark 7:19. After Jesus declared that it is not what enters a person's body that defiles them, but rather the evil things that come out from their heart, as Mark records in these words, he declared all foods clean. Furthermore, Jesus confirmed this through his vision given to Peter concerning the cleanliness of previously unclean animals in Acts 10, what can we expect as a result of this for believers in the New Testament, especially Gentiles who have believed in the Lord Jesus and been saved? Will the writers of the New Testament continue to teach that there should be a distinction between clean and unclean animals? Did the New Testament writers reiterate the regulations of Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14?
Let us read the teachings of the New Testament writers to witness what their beliefs are now in matters of food for Christians under the New Covenant:
Romans 14:14 (ESV) "I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."
Romans 14:17 (ESV) "For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit."
Romans 14:20 (ESV) "Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats."
1 Corinthians 8:8 (ESV) "Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do."
1 Corinthians 10:25-27 (ESV) 25 "Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 26 For “the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” 27 If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go, eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience."
Colossians 2:16 (ESV) "Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath."
1 Timothy 4:1-5 (ESV) "1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2 through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, 3 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer."
Hebrews 9:9-10 (ESV) 9"According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, 10 but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
Based on the New Testament teachings mentioned above, are there any passages indicating that the New Testament writers still teach the necessity of following the clean and unclean foods of the Old Testament? Did any of the passages above mention that unclean foods should still be considered? According to the passages mentioned above, is the prohibition of certain foods in Christian times a teaching of God or a teaching of demons?
Conclusion:
Upon careful examination of the message in Mark 7, we have seen that it does not favor the interpretation of the Seventh-day Adventists. We discovered from their own publications that they attempt to alter the content and spirit of Mark 7 to conform to their established beliefs, even though it is clear that they are fundamentally mistaken based on the context and meaning of the words. We have demonstrated once again that the Seventh-day Adventist church needs our fervent prayers because of their masterful twisting of the Scriptures. We blame their leaders, theologians even their Bible scholars for distorting the truth at the expense of their sincere members who trusted them as a channel of "truth" but in reality are blind guides leading their innocent members to hell. For example, even when they see that their teachings conflict, they continue to choose to remain blind to the truth. They know that dietary laws are only part of purification rituals or ceremonial laws, yet they still follow them even though they also know and are always taught that the old law that passed away is the ceremonial law, while the moral law, which is supposedly the Ten Commandments, will still remain. If so, why do they insist that it is still forbidden to eat animals prohibited in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14? I thought only the Ten Commandments remained and the ceremonial law, which includes the law on clean and unclean animals, had passed away? Another mistake of the SDAs is that they blindly accept the truth that clean and unclean foods are not a health issue but a ritual or ceremonial purification. On what passage of the Bible do they base the claim that clean and unclean foods are a health issue when the reason for Leviticus 11 is holiness rather than healthiness?
Leviticus 11:44 (ESV) "For I am the LORD your God. Consecrate yourselves, therefore, and be holy, for I am holy. You shall not defile yourselves with any swarming thing that crawls on the ground."
What is the basis of the Lord according to the verse as to why He prohibits the eating of unclean animals? Is it because the Lord says, "Be healthy, for I am healthy. You shall not defile yourselves" or "be holy, for I am holy. You shall not defile yourselves"? I know that you know the answer, but how long will you remain asleep to the truth? Today is the day of salvation waiting for you (2 Cor. 6:2), it is time to repent of your sins and humbly accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior!
Footnote:
[1] Nichol, Francis D., editor. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1980, p. 624.
[2] Dybdahl, Jon L., editor. Andrews Study Bible Notes. Andrews University Press, 2010, p. 1307.
[3] Ministerial Association General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Seventh-day Adventist Believe: A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines. 2005 Second Edition, USA, Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2006. 326-327.
[4] Blanco, Jack. The Clear Word. Review and Herald Pub Assoc, 2007
[5] Nichol, Francis D., editor. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1980, p. 625.
[6] Ministerial Association General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Seventh-day Adventist Believe: A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines. 2005 Second Edition, USA, Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2006. 326-327.
[7] Loeb Classical Library, The Apostolic Fathers Vol. II, Edited and Translated by Bart Ehrman p. 103
[8] Marvin Richardson Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887), 1:501.
[9] (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd. ed. (BDAG))
No comments:
Post a Comment