[Propertalk] Sermon quotes for August 30 - Mark 7 - Part 2

[Joe Parrish]

When the core commitments of divine law (mercy, justice, and even care for parents) are eclipsed by human teachings and practices, it means that we have chosen to determine for our own selves what makes us righteous (self-righteousness), so washing the fruit we buy becomes more important than giving fruit to the hungry. 

http://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?lect_date=8/30/2009&tab=4

Henry Langknecht, 2009
- - - - -

Verses 6-7: The quotation is from the Septuagint translation of Isaiah 29:1

http://montreal.anglican.org/comments/archive/bpr22l.shtml

Chris Haslam, Anglican Diocese of Montreal
- - - - -

21 It is the kosher laws of purity that are here at stake: Jesus' disciples eat bread with "unclean" or "impure" or "profane" hands. The Greek word here translated thus is ???????, basically meaning "common" -- not distinctive, and the sense here is not ritually cleansed and distanced from what is profane or common.

http://artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/Mark/mk6notes.html#anchor298497

Carl W. Conrad
- - - - -

v2: Handwashing is not known from the OT. However, the Mishnah (c. 200 CE) does have rules for handwashing associated with purity. 
<>

v6-8: Jesus is quoting the Greek Septaugint Isa 29:13. Isa 29 is part of the background of the gospel. It is highly implausible that Jesus disputed with the Pharisees by buttressing his arguments with a Greek text of the Hebrew, especially as the Greek text differs from the Hebrew text at this point (Wells 1999, p179). Loader (1998) argues, however, that:

"The use of Isa 29:13 LXX need not, in itself rule out the possibility of earlier traditional use, since the difference of the LXX from the MT text may well reflect a variant Hebrew text which read whtw ("void/in vain") instead of yhtw ("and is") of MT. The same might apply to Mark's additional word: "teaching .. as teaching", though this is less likely" (p17) 

<>
      v15: similar to Romans 14:14 and 14:20.


           14: 14: As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.(NIV)

            14:20: Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. (NIV)
           

      v. 16 this is considered spurious although several ancient manuscripts have it. It reads "Anyone who has ears ought to hear" (Donahue and Harrington 2002, p224). <>

      v.20-23 Similar lists exist in 1 Cor 6:9-10, Rom 1:29-31, and Gal 5:19-21
     
http://www.michaelturton.com/Mark/GMark07.html#7.p.1.23

Michael A. Turton
- - - - -

Mark is wanting to show that such biblical provisions must be set aside because he knows they have created enormous tensions between Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles. Already Paul in Galatians 2 tells of such disputes. According to Mark such biblical injunctions must be exposed as invalid (not just abolished, as though they once made sense) in the interests of being inclusive of all people. Food laws and laws of clean and unclean must not be used to discriminate against Gentiles. The laws are nonsense anyway. This is all part of Mark's theme in these chapters, where he is showing the bread of salvation offered equally to the Jews, 5000 of them in Jewish land, as to the Gentiles, 4000 of them in Gentile land.

http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~loader/MkPentecost13.htm

William Loader, Murdoch University, Uniting Church in Australia

- - - - -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stsams.org/pipermail/propertalk_stsams.org/attachments/20090829/f672f96f/attachment.htm>