Marcos 7
William Barclay · Citado em PreceptAustin
Marcos 7
Barclay wrote “Although it may not seem so now, this passage, when it was first spoken, was well-nigh the most revolutionary passage in the New Testament.” Akin - The fruit of sin has its root in every human heart! Every human heart has the root of every human sin in it! You see, it is entirely possible to look nice on the outside while being dead on the inside. The most deadly contamination is not what I touch. The most deadly contamination is what I think! Proverbs 23:7: “As a man thinks in his heart so is he!”
Marcos 7
Barclay adds that "In Greek, there are two words for a robber—kleptēs and lēstēs. Lēstēs is a brigand; Barabbas was a lēstēs (John 18:40), and a brigand may be a very brave man although an outlaw. Kleptēs is a thief; Judas was a kleptēs when he pilfered from the box (John 12:6). A kleptēs is a mean, deceitful, dishonourable pilferer, without even the redeeming quality of a certain audacious gallantry that a brigand must have."
Marcos 7
Barclay on pleonexia - It has been defined as the accursed love of having. It has been defined as ‘the spirit which snatches at that which it is not right to take’, ‘the baneful appetite for that which belongs to others’. It is the spirit which snatches at things, not to hoard them like a miser, but to spend them in lust and luxury. It has been defined as ‘Rapacious appetite for gain, not for its own sake, but for the pleasure of refunding it immediately through all the channels of pride and luxury.’ It is not the desire for money and things; it includes the desire for power, the insatiable lust of the flesh. Plato said, ‘The desire of man is like a sieve or pierced vessel which he ever tries to, and can never fill.’ Pleonexia is that lust for having which is in the heart of the person who sees happiness in things instead of in God.
Marcos 7
Barclay on dolos - It is used for instance of a mousetrap. When the Greeks were besieging Troy and could not gain entry, they sent the Trojans the present of a great wooden horse, as if it was a token of goodwill. The Trojans opened their gates and took it in. But the horse was filled with Greeks who in the night broke out and dealt death and devastation to Troy. That exactly is dolos. It is crafty, cunning, deceitful, clever treachery. Sensuality means one has no moral restraints, and is tragically a good description of much of the American culture today, especially the entertainment culture. I am 74 and remember when a curse word would get a television showed censored. I don't even hear the word "censor" any more, unless it is to censor Christians from their "hate speech" in which they simply quote God's Word regarding certain perverted sexual practices! It is becoming very difficult to find a television show or movie that is not replete with godless, foul language. Now almost everything NETFLIX produces is "MA" or for "mature audiences," and reflects blatant, in your face sinful words and behavior. America's moral compass is broke! Revive us according to Thy Word (Ps 119:25). Sensuality (766)(aselgeia from aselges = licentious <> a = negates next word + selges = continent) originally referred to any excess or lack of restraint but came to convey the idea of shameless excess and the absence of restraint, especially with sexual excess. It is unrestrained, unbridled, shameless living. Thus like koite, aselgeia was used almost exclusively of especially lewd sexual immorality, of uninhibited and unabashed lasciviousness. It refers to the kind of sexual debauchery and abandonment that characterizes much of modern society and that is often flaunted almost as a badge of distinction! Aselgeia refers to uninhibited sexual indulgence without shame and without concern for what others think or how they may be affected (or infected). The Greeks defined aselgeia as “a disposition of soul that resents all discipline,” as “a spirit that acknowledges no restraints, dares whatsoever its caprice and wanton insolence may suggest.” Barclay - The Greeks defined aselgeia as ‘a disposition of soul that resents all discipline’, as ‘a spirit that acknowledges no restraints, dares whatsoever its caprice and wanton insolence may suggest’. The great characteristic of people who are guilty of aselgeia is that they are lost to decency and to shame. Evil men and women may hide their sin, but those who have aselgeia sin without a qualm and never hesitate to shock other people. Jezebel was the classic instance of aselgeia when she built a pagan shrine in Jerusalem the holy city.
Marcos 7
Barclay - Envy is literally the evil eye, the eye that looks on the success and happiness of another in such a way that it would cast an evil spell upon it if it could. Slander could be against God or man. Spurgeon on "an evil eye" - What can it mean? May the very use of the eye become a sin worthy to be ranked with theft and murder? Yes, when that evil eye means envy, it proceeds to a high degree of wickedness and borders upon the worst of wrongs. When we look upon another man and regard him with malignity, when his prosperity makes us grieve, when in his very sorrows we take an inhuman delight, and gloat over his misery, his sin, his degradation, we then sin most heinously, and are prepared for any horror. This sin of envy, and that other of blasphemy, would appear to be a wanton superfluity of evil, ministering no appearance of benefit to men. Some sins have a winning witchery with them, but there are old hags of sins which ought to attract no man in his senses, and yet they hold men enslaved. Among these sins I rank envy, blasphemy, and pride. Slander (988)(blasphemia from blapto = injure, hurt + pheme = report, rumor, fame from phemí = to speak; cf blasphemeo) refers to verbal abuse against someone which denotes the very worst type of slander. It is speech which seeks to wound someone's reputation by evil reports, evil speaking. Abusive speech against someone by telling lies or otherwise offending them. In Classical Greek blasphemia/blasphemeo represented the strongest expression of personal defamation. Blasphemia means literally to speak to harm and in general therefore means to bring into ill repute and so to slander, to defame. "The word does not necessarily speak of blasphemy against God. It is used of reviling, calumny, evil-speaking in general, malicious misrepresentation."
Marcos 7
Barclay - It describes the attitude of people ‘who have a certain contempt for everyone except themselves’. The interesting thing about this word, as the Greeks used it, is that it describes an attitude that may never become public. It may be that in their heart of hearts these people are always secretly comparing themselves with others. They might even ape humility and yet in their hearts be proud. Sometimes, of course, the pride is evident. The Greeks had a legend of this pride. They said that the Giants, the sons of Tartarus and Gē, in their pride sought to storm heaven and were cast down by Hercules. That is huperēphania. It is setting oneself up against God; it is ‘invading God’s prerogatives’. That is why it has been called ‘the peak of all the vices’, and why ‘God opposes the proud’ (James 4:6).
Marcos 7
Barclay comments that "In Greek, diminutives are characteristically affectionate. Jesus took the sting out of the word.” Chuck Smith on dogs - wild scavenger dogs that were hated by everybody. They would run in packs; they would attack sheep, they would attack children. And they were ferocious, vicious, hated animals. And it was very common for the Jews to call the Gentile Gentile dogs. And the word is equivalent to our English word bitch where it is a derogatory term. And so, they would use it, the word dog like a person would use the other word today, in a very derisive, derogatory way....There is another Greek word for dog, which is the word that Jesus used. It 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. Henry Morris The "dogs" under the table (Mark 7:28) were understood to be small household pets. On the reasons for the seeming harshness of Jesus' reply to this Gentile woman, note that the Lord Jesus had come into the world to die for the sin of the whole world, but He had also come as Israel's promised Messiah. His seeming harshness to the Canaanite woman is best understood as not only a test of her faith in the God of Israel, but also as a means to show His disciples that Gentiles also were included in God's plan, and that they too could have saving faith. Believer's Study Bible - Jesus was neither indifferent nor insensitive in His reply to the Syro-Phoenician woman. His approach is designed to test her faith and to demonstrate the extent of her faith to the disciples. The "little dogs" refer to small dogs which were kept as house pets. The parallel passage in Matt. 15:21-28 indicates that Jesus meant that His ministry was first taken to Israel and then subsequently to the Gentiles (cf. Acts 13:46; Rom. 1:16). This woman, while recognizing this, demonstrated great faith. As a result, Jesus honored her request. Believers today can rejoice because in the church there are no racial distinctions (cf. Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:11-22; Col. 3:11). Hard Sayings of the Bible - F F Bruce - The Children First? This was Jesus’ response to the plea of a Gentile woman that he cure her demon-possessed daughter. The woman was a Syrophoenician according to Mark, a Canaanite according to Matthew, who also records the incident (Mt 15:21–28). The incident took place during a brief visit paid by Jesus to the territory of Tyre and Sidon, north of Galilee. The saying was a hard one in the first instance to the woman, yet not so hard that it put her off: if Jesus’ healing ministry was for Jewish children and not for Gentile dogs, yet she reminded him that the dogs commonly get what the children leave over, and that was what she was asking him to give her and her daughter. To the modern reader it is hard because it seems so inconsistent with the character of Jesus. Its hardness is put in blunt terms by one writer: “Long familiarity with this story, together with the traditional picture of the gentleness of Jesus, tends to obscure the shocking intolerance of the saying.” Jesus’ Palestinian ministry was directed to the Jewish people; Matthew, in his account of the present incident, represents him as saying to the woman, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt 15:24 RSV). There are suggestions here and there in the record of the ministry that, as a sequel to it, blessing would be available for Gentiles too, but very few instances of direct blessing to Gentiles appear within the context of the ministry itself. Why did the woman not take offense at such an unpromising response? One obvious reason was that she was determined to get what she wanted for her daughter. In addition, what if there was a twinkle in his eye as he spoke, as much as to say, “You know what we Jews are supposed to think of you Gentiles; do you think it is right for you to come and ask for a share in the healing which I have come to impart to Jews?” The written record can preserve the spoken words; it cannot convey the tone of voice in which they were said. Maybe the tone of voice encouraged the woman to persevere. Again, what are we to say of the term “dogs”? That is a term of abuse, if ever there was one. The pariah dog was not an estimable animal in Near Eastern culture then, any more than he is today. But it is not the pariah dogs that are intended here, like those at the door of the rich man in the parable, whose attentions added to Lazarus’s afflictions. It is the dogs beneath the table. That in itself might suggest that they are household pets, the children’s playmates; and this is confirmed by the fact that the word for “dogs” used by both Jesus and the woman is a diminutive. Since the woman is said by Mark to have been a Greek (that is, one who spoke Greek), the Greek diminutive used by Mark may have been the word actually used in the conversation. The woman was quick-witted enough to deduce from Jesus’ words the kind of reply that would win the granting of her request: “Sir, even the little dogs under the table eat the children’s leftovers!” The word faith is not mentioned in Mark’s account of the incident (as it is mentioned in Mt 15:28), but the woman’s reply expresses just the kind of faith that Jesus so greatly appreciated and that never failed to receive what it asked from him. Her daughter was healed immediately, and healed, as in the other instance of Gentile faith in the Synoptic Gospels (that of the Capernaum centurion and his sick servant), not by direct contact but at a distance. Question - Why did Jesus call the Canaanite woman a dog? Answer: In Matthew 15:21–28, Jesus encounters a Canaanite (Syrophoenician) woman who begs Him to cure her daughter. Jesus initially refuses her request by saying, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs” (Matthew 15:26). Taken out of context, and especially in English, it’s easy to mistake this for an insult. In the flow of the story, however, it’s clear Jesus is creating a metaphor meant to explain the priorities of His ministry. He is also teaching an important lesson to His disciples. Jews in Jesus’ day sometimes referred to Gentiles as “dogs.” In Greek, this word is kuon, meaning “wild cur” (Matthew 7:6; Luke 16:21; Philippians 3:2). Non-Jews were considered so unspiritual that even being in their presence could make a person ceremonially unclean (John 18:28). Much of Jesus’ ministry, however, involved turning expectations and prejudices on their heads (Matthew 11:19; John 4:9–10). According to Matthew’s narrative, Jesus left Israel and went into Tyre and Sidon, which was Gentile territory (Matthew 15:21). When the Canaanite woman approached and repeatedly asked for healing, the disciples were annoyed and asked Jesus to send her away (Matthew 15:23). At this point, Jesus explained His current ministry in a way that both the woman and the watching disciples could understand. At that time, His duty was to the people of Israel, not to the Gentiles (Matthew 15:24). Recklessly taking His attention from Israel, in violation of His mission, would be like a father taking food from his children in order to throw it to their pets (Matthews 15:26). The exact word Jesus used here, in Greek, was kunarion, meaning “small dog” or “pet dog.” This is a completely different word from the term kuon, used to refer to unspiritual people or to an “unclean” animal. Jesus frequently tested people to prove their intentions, often through response questions or challenges (see John 4:16–18; and 4:50–53). His response to the Canaanite woman is similar. In testing her, Jesus declined her request and explained that she had no legitimate expectation of His help. The woman, however, lived out the principle Jesus Himself taught in the parable of the persistent widow (Luke 18:1–8). Her response proved that she understood fully what Jesus was saying, yet had enough conviction to ask anyway (Matthew 15:27). Jesus acknowledged her faith—calling it “great”—and granted her request (Matthew 15:28). So, according to both the context and language involved, Jesus wasn’t referring to the Canaanite woman as a “dog,” either directly or indirectly. He wasn’t using an epithet or racial slur but making a point about the priorities He’d been given by God. He was also testing the faith of the woman and teaching an important lesson to His disciples. (Source: GotQuestions.org) Related Resource: Did Jesus come only for the Jews and not the Gentiles? Mark 7:28 But she answered and said to Him, "Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table feed on the children's crumbs." Wuest But she answered and says to Him. Yes, lord, yet the little dogs under the table are constantly eating from the little morsels of the little children. NET Mark 7:28 She answered, "Yes, Lord, but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." NLT Mark 7:28 She replied, "That's true, Lord, but even the dogs under the table are allowed to eat the scraps from the children's plates." ESV Mark 7:28 But she answered him, "Yes, Lord; yet even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." NIV Mark 7:28 "Yes, Lord," she replied, "but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." GNT Mark 7:28 ἡ δὲ ἀπεκρίθη καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, καὶ τὰ κυνάρια ὑποκάτω τῆς τραπέζης ἐσθίουσιν ἀπὸ τῶν ψιχίων τῶν παιδίων. KJV Mark 7:28 And she answered and said unto him, Yes, Lord: yet the dogs under the table eat of the children's crumbs. ASV Mark 7:28 But she answered and saith unto him, Yea, Lord; even the dogs under the table eat of the children's crumbs. CSB Mark 7:28 But she replied to Him, "Lord, even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." NKJ Mark 7:28 And she answered and said to Him, "Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs under the table eat from the children's crumbs." NRS Mark 7:28 But she answered him, "Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." YLT Mark 7:28 And she answered and saith to him, 'Yes, sir; for the little dogs also under the table do eat of the children's crumbs.' yet: Ps 145:16 Isa 45:22 49:6 Mt 5:45 Lu 7:6-8 15:30-32 Ac 11:17,18 Ro 3:29 10:12 15:8,9 Eph 2:12-14 3:8 Mark 7 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries THE WOMAN'S BURST OF BOLDNESS Related Passages: Matthew 15:27+ But she said, “Yes, Lord; but even the dogs feed on the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” But she answered and said to Him - It might have been tempting to give up and go away. This woman boldly persisted in her plea. Yes, Lord - She doesn’t dispute that Gentiles were to Israel as dogs but says, Yes, Lord. She agrees with Jesus and again refers to Him as Lord. See referred to Jesus as Son of David and twice as Lord neither modes of addressing Jesus by most of the Jews until His final entry into Jerusalem (Mt 21:9), but within days their cry changed to "Crucify Him!" The following song by Darrell Evans was the nameless woman's song... Yes Lord I'm trading my sorrow I'm trading my shame I'm laying it down for the joy of the Lord I'm trading my sickness I'm trading my pain I'm laying it down for the joy of the Lord And we say yes Lord yes Lord yes yes Lord Yes Lord yes Lord yes yes Lord Yes Lord yes Lord yes yes Lord Amen I'm pressed but not crushed persecuted not abandoned Struck down but not destroyed I'm blessed beyond the curse for his promise will endure And his joy's gonna be my strength Though the sorrow may last for the night His joy comes with the morning Brian Bell - But she wasn’t coming to him on the goodness of her cause, but on the Goodness of His heart. Not on how she presented her plea, but instead on the excellence of His power. It is our task to simply be empty…so He can fill us. It is our task to confess our filthiness…so He can wash us. It is our task to be less than nothing…so He can be more than everything to us You’re a dog – Yes Lord, but I will wag my tail, fetch, sit up, even beg for my Master. 4. You’re a sheep – Yes, Lord, but sheep need a shepherd. Guelich writes ""This "title" of "Lord" that consistently comes on the lips of "believers" in Matthew occurs only this one time with confession overtones in Mark and sets the stage for Jesus" concluding remark and his offer of help to the woman." (WBC)