Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | There is no "Thus he declared". | Mark 7:19 | kalos | 166112 | ||
"Thus He declared all foods clean", 'even if the participants at the meal have not washed their hands. But Yeshua (Jesus) did NOT, as many suppose, abrogate the laws of kashrut (the Jewish system of dietary laws) and thus declare ham kosher! Since the beginning of the chapter the subject has been ritual purity as taught by the Oral Torah in relation to n'tilat-yadayim (vv. 2-4 and note) and not kashrut at all! There is not the slightest hint anywhere that foods in this verse can be anything other than what the Bible allows Jews to eat, in other words, kosher foods. Neither is kashrut abolished in Ac 10:9-28 or Ga 2:11-16; see notes there. '...The Greek text at this point is a dangling participial clause, literally, "cleansing all the foods." There is no "Thus he declared".' ____________________ Jewish New Testament Commentary, David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., 1992 (Emphasis added.) |
||||||
2 | There is no "Thus he declared". | Mark 7:19 | mark d seyler | 166115 | ||
Hi Kalos, This has just gotten interesting! I am not declaring an opinion on this at the moment, but I thought to include a couple of quotes. Here is a quote from Vincent's Word Studies: Mar 7:19 - Draught Liddell and Scott give only one definition - a privy, cloaca; seat, breech, fundament. Compare English stool. The word does not refer to a part of the body. Purging all meats According to the A. V. these words are in apposition with draught: the draught which makes pure the whole of the food, since it is the place designed for receiving the impure excrements. Christ was enforcing the truth that all defilement comes from within. This was in the face of the Rabbinic distinctions between clean and unclean meats. Christ asserts that Levitical uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with moral uncleanness. Peter, still under the influence of the old ideas, cannot understand the saying and asks an explanation (Mat 15:15), which Christ gives in Mar 7:18-23. The words purging all meats (Rev., making all meats clean) are not Christ's, but the Evangelist's, explaining the bearing of Christ's words; and therefore the Rev. properly renders, this he said (italics), making all meats clean. This was the interpretation of Chrysostom, who says in his homily on Matthew: “But Mark says that he said these things making all meats pure.” Canon Farrar refers to a passage cited from Gregory Thaumaturgus: “And the Saviour, who purifies all meats, says.” This rendering is significant in the light of Peter's vision of the great sheet, and of the words, “What God hath cleansed”, in which Peter probably realized for the first time the import of the Lord's words on this occasion. Canon Farrar remarks: “It is doubtless due to the fact that St. Peter, the informant of St. Mark, in writing his Gospel, and as the sole ultimate authority for this vision in the Acts, is the source of both narratives, - that we owe the hitherto unnoticed circumstance that the two verbs, cleanse and profane (or defile), both in a peculiarly pregnant sense, are the two most prominent words in the narrative of both events” (“Life and Work of Paul,” i., 276-7). Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
3 | There is no "Thus he declared". | Mark 7:19 | mark d seyler | 166116 | ||
Here is a quote from Robertson's Word Pictures: Mar 7:19 - Making all meats clean This anacoluthon can be understood by repeating he says (legei) from Mar 7:18. The masculine participle agrees with Jesus, the speaker. The words do not come from Jesus, but are added by Mark. Peter reports this item to Mark, probably with a vivid recollection of his own experience on the housetop in Joppa when in the vision Peter declined three times the Lord’s invitation to kill and eat unclean animals (Act 10:14-16). It was a riddle to Peter as late as that day. “Christ asserts that Levitical uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with moral uncleanness” (Vincent). The two chief words in both incidents, here and in Acts, are defile and cleanse . “What God cleansed do not thou treat as defiled” (Act 10:15). It was a revolutionary declaration by Jesus and Peter was slow to understand it even after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. |
||||||
4 | There is no "Thus he declared". | Mark 7:19 | mark d seyler | 166118 | ||
Act 10 13 And a voice came to him, Rise up, Peter, slay and eat. 14 But Peter said, Not at all, Lord, because I never did eat anything common or unclean. Is this the voice of God that Peter heard? The text does not say, but Peter answers, addressing the Lord, so by impliction, it is. Would God tell Peter to kill and eat that which was unlawful? Mark |
||||||
5 | There is no "Thus he declared". | Mark 7:19 | Face | 176164 | ||
Ask yourself this: Abraham was also told to offer up his son Isacc as a sacrifice. Does Yahweh tell us to do this, or was it a test? Was this vision a declaration of clean vs unclean animals of being food, or a declaration of the gentiles also being able to join the fold? Read Acts 11 to see what the apostles came up with. Also consider Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. it was unlawful by oral tradition, but not unlawful by Torah to keep company or eat with gentiles. Is not this what this vision was about? Again, straightening out the oral law that made Torah of none effect. |
||||||