SEE (head)
As the self-appointed guardians of Israel's religion, the Pharisees confront Jesus over his disciples' failure to keep the tradition of ceremonial washing before meals. In return, Jesus cuts to the heart of the matter by blasting the Pharisees for being so intent on following the manmade rules surrounding the Law while neglecting the Law itself. Jesus then explains to his disciples why the Pharisees' zeal for ceremonial cleanliness is so deficient: it can never cleanse the heart, which is the source of true defilement.  

Pharisees ... teachers of religious law (v. 1). The pharisees were "a religious and political party in Palestine in New Testament times. The Pharisees were known for insisting that the law of God be observed as the scribes interpreted it and for their special commitment to keeping the laws of tithing and ritual purity." [ref] Known as the "teachers of the law" and the "experts in the law," scribes are mentioned several times in the gospels and are "often associated with the Pharisees (Matthew 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; 23:2, 13; Mark 7:5; Luke 5:21, 30; 6:7; 11:53; 15:2; John 8:3). But they are also mentioned alone and were not necessarily Pharisees. The Pharisees were a religious party, while the scribes held an office. ... [T]he majority of the scribes belonged to the Pharisee party, which recognized the legal interpretations of the scribes." [ref] Thus "[i]t is proper to speak of the profession of the scribes, and the sect of the Pharisees." [ref] 

Ritual ... tradition (vv. 2, 5). A committee comprised of representatives from these two groups came down from Jerusalem ("the headquarters of Jewish 'orthodoxy'" [ref]), no doubt at the direction of the Sanhedrin, and complained to Jesus because his disciples did not follow "the tradition of the elders" (NASB) regarding hand-washing. [ref] This tradition "refers to the oral law that grew up alongside the written Law and served as a protective 'fence' around it." [ref] As John Calvin put it: "All the traditions that then existed among the Jews had come out of their workshop; and this was the reason why they displayed more than ordinary zeal and bitterness in defending them." [ref] The oral law "interprets, supplements, and sometimes corrects the written Torah." [ref] "According to one tradition ... [at Mount Sinai] God supposedly gave to Moses oral instruction in addition to the tablets of the law, and that instruction was passed on by word of mouth through the generations." [ref] (A similar claim appeared in connection with the apostles.) Ritual cleansing was an indispensable part of the oral law; it was considered non-negotiable by every loyal Jew. [ref] Ritual purity was of vital importance to the Pharisees, and they "longed for the time when all of Israel would live in such a state of holiness. They believed that Israel's identity and blessed future depended on it." [ref] 

Unable to disprove Jesus directly, the religious leaders once again tried an indirect attack via his disciples (see Mark 2:18, 24). [ref] It was obvious their true target was Jesus since, after all, they were his disciples. [ref] [ref] [ref] As one source puts it, it is almost as if the religious leaders were saying to themselves: "We won't attack you personally, but since your disciples aren't washing, you obviously haven't taught them what's important. Maybe you don't even know this law. That makes you no better than a common sinner, certainly not a rabbi whom all these people should be following!" [ref] The scribes and Pharisees were very well aware of the fact that in setting aside one of the oral traditions, the way was open for a rejection of them all. [ref] As usual, Jesus got to the heart of the matter, this time by addressing the underlying issues of religious authority and defilement. [ref] 

From the religious leaders' perspective, to be ceremonially impure/unclean was to be unfit for the service and worship of God. [ref]  [ref] The fact is that they would never be able to serve God rightly so long as they believed that with their traditions "they were in possession of something more perfect than the word of the Lord." [ref] In fact, they had thoroughly corrupted the worship of God, "of which the first and leading principle is obedience." [ref] 

Hand washing (vv. 2, 5). Bible commentator William Barclay explains exactly what was involved in the ritual of ceremonial hand-washing: 

There were definite and rigid rules for the washing of hands. Note that this hand-washing was not in the interests of hygienic purity; it was ceremonial cleanness which was at stake. Before every meal, and between each of the courses, the hands had to be washed, and they had to be washed in a certain way. The hands, to begin with, had to be free of any coating of sand or mortar or gravel or any such substance. The water for washing had to be kept in special large stone jars, so that it itself was clean in the ceremonial sense and so that it might be certain that it had been used for no other purpose, and that nothing had fallen into it or had been mixed with it. First, the hands were held with finger tips pointing upwards; water was poured over them and had to run at least down to the wrist; the minimum amount of water was one quarter of a log, which is equal to one and a half egg-shells full of water. While the hands were still wet each hand had to be cleansed with the fist of the other. That is what the phrase about using the fist means; the fist of one hand was rubbed into the palm and against the surface of the other. This meant that at this stage the hands were wet with water; but that water was now unclean because it had touched unclean hands. So, next, the hands had to be held with finger tips pointing downwards and water had to be poured over them in such a way that it began at the wrists and ran off at the finger tips. After all that had been done the hands were clean.  

To fail to do this was in Jewish eyes, not to be guilty of bad manners, not to be dirty in the health sense, but to be unclean in the sight of God. The man who ate with unclean hands was subject to the attacks of a demon called Shibta. To omit so to wash the hands was to become liable to poverty and destruction. Bread eaten with unclean hands was not better than excrement. A Rabbi who once omitted the ceremony was buried in excommunication. Another Rabbi, imprisoned by the Romans, used the water given to him for handwashing rather than for drinking and in the end nearly perished of thirst, because he was determined to observe the rules of cleanliness rather than satisfy his thirst.  

That to the Pharisaic and Scribal Jew was religion. It was ritual, ceremonial, and regulations like that which they considered to be essence of the service of God. Ethical religion was buried under a mass of taboos and rules. [ref] (quoted verbatim)

As one source points out: "Whatever the status and nature of handwashing practice at the time, the only scriptural requirement for this kind of ritual purity concerned the priests prior to offering sacrifice (Exodus 30:18–21; 40:30–32), or an Israelite having a discharge (Leviticus 15:11), or the elders after the special sacrifice of the heifer (Deuteronomy 21:6). ... [T]he washing of hands for secular food is not from the Torah, the Pharisees' implicit demand is based merely on human tradition." [ref]    

It is worth noting that there is nothing inherently wrong with tradition. There is, however, something very wrong with placing human tradition on par with God's commands. As one source insightfully notes: "Many traditions are good. Some religious traditions can add richness and meaning to life. But we must not assume that certain traditions are sacred because they have been practiced for years. God's principles never change, and his law doesn't need additions. Traditions should help us understand God's laws better, not become laws themselves." [ref]  The religious leaders not only added to God's Word, but they actually went so far as to replace God's Word with their own traditions. The end result was a zeal not for God's law, but for their traditions. "They may have been able to keep both their traditions and God's law, but they had become so zealous for the traditions that they had lost their perspective and had altered and missed the point of God's law entirely. Jesus also charged that they were doing this on purpose (7:9), for they had tried to win praise from people for their displays of piety as they kept all the rituals. … They didn't even bother to teach the law; instead, they focused on all their rules and their own piety in keeping their traditions and rules." [ref] Their zeal was defective and dangerous: "As soon as men allow themselves to wander beyond the limits of the Word of God, the more labor and anxiety they display in worshipping him, the heavier is the condemnation which they draw down upon themselves." [ref]   

Hypocrites (v. 6). Jesus called his accusers "hypocrites" (Greek hupokrites), meaning "one who pretends to be other than he really is." [ref] As one source puts it: "The hypocrite is the man who hides or tries to hide his real intentions under (hypo) a mask of simulated virtue." [ref] It is worth noting, however, that: "The Pharisees were by no means the only ones to be so addressed. The epithet applies to anyone who rejects the truth about God in Jesus. Through his teaching and actions Jesus revealed to men the unhappy state of their delusion and sought to open their eyes to their true situation before God. Hypocrisy is not simply a conscious act of dissimulation [dissimulate: "to hide under a false appearance" [ref]], but a perverse blindness." [ref] 

As with the hypocrites of Isaiah's day, the honor and worship of the religious leaders was a mere pretense. And it is a fundamental truth that God refuses to "accept worship when the worshipers themselves are actively disregarding him." [ref] As one source notes: "When people claim to honor God while their hearts are far from him, their worship means nothing. It is not enough to act religious. A person's actions and attitudes must be sincere." [ref] The religious leaders had been pretending for so long and to such an extent that they truly believed their bogus honor and worship were the real thing. They had lost the ability to distinguish between a counterfeit and the genuine article. "The worst form of hypocrisy is that which carries its self-deception to the point where it thinks that it really is what it actually only pretends to be. Such were the Pharisees and the scribes. The more their hypocrisy came in contact with the holy integrity of Jesus, the more it appeared as what it really was. The most vicious enemies of Jesus were these hypocrites." [ref] For the religious leaders, "their attempts at heightened holiness were a sign of commitment, but for Jesus, their polemical intent and the ultimately marginalizing impact of their traditions both on the common people, whom they were meant to shepherd, and himself, Israel's holy (e.g., 1:11, 24; 3:29) and true shepherd, rendered such 'worship' utterly vain." [ref]   

Jesus indicted the religious leaders for substituting their own tradition for God's law, in effect sidestepping God's law in order to hold on to their own tradition (see Mark 7:8-9) - "they constantly nullify the divine in order permanently to retain the human." [ref] Good intentions notwithstanding, the tradition of the elders remains a prime example of our fallen human tendency to replace God's will with our own. The religious leaders' sin was compounded in that they were deceiving not only themselves but also the common people who were "taught to revere and to follow" them. [ref] In effect, Jesus denounced the tradition as "a miserable human religious product that could gain adherence only by crowding out the divine behest of God. Jesus is smashing not only the tradition about washing the hands, he is shattering the entire traditional system of the elders as it was held by the Pharisees and scribes. Anything that can be maintained only by ridding us of some Word of God is by that fact marked as damnable and deadly in the sight of God." [ref]   

We should remember, however, that Jesus was not condemning a sincere effort to apply God's law to every detail of life. Nor was he advocating radical revolt against all tradition (see Matthew 5:17-18; 23:1-3). [ref] Rather, Jesus was denouncing the religious leaders' practice of: 1) making fallible human interpretation superior to God's infallible Law, [ref] and 2) pretending to obey the Law while actually bending and twisting it to suit their own selfish ends. As Mark recorded, Jesus blasted the religious leaders for "neglecting/abandoning ... setting aside/ignore ... [and] invalidating/making void" (vv. 8, 9, 13 NASB/ [ref]) God's word. [ref] In citing Isaiah and Moses, Jesus was calling both "the law and the prophets" as witnesses against the hypocritical religious leaders. [ref]   

Vowed (v. 11). The specific example Jesus used (vv. 9-12) is the practice of Corban, meaning "that which has been set aside as a gift to be given later to God, but which is still at the disposal of the owner." [ref] Corban was a well-known tradition "taken very seriously by the Jewish people." [ref] Jesus cited the OT law (Exodus 20:12; 21:17 [ref] [ref] [ref]) regarding grown children's responsibility toward their parents. To "honor" one's parents implies "to love, to regard highly, to show the spirit of respect and consideration," [ref] and of course would completely rule out speaking ill of, or cursing, one's parents. "Significantly granting equal status to father and mother, the honor due them goes beyond mere obedience or polite respect to loving them and honoring their role as Yahweh's proxies in giving their children life. Primarily directed at adults - who else could enter into the terms of the covenant? - this is the only commandment that comes with a specific promise: 'that you might live long in the land.' ... Though not an explicit curse of one's parents, [corban] did, for Jesus, amount to the same thing because both things effectively repudiated the parent-child relationship." [ref] 

Corban provided a "religiously acceptable" [ref] way for a son to shirk his responsibility: the money that should/would have gone to his parents was declared unalterably "dedicated/consecrated to God." [ref] This did not mean that the gift then had to go to the temple or that the son could not use it for himself; it simply meant that it was now forbidden to his parents. [ref] [ref] [ref] [ref] [ref] ("The matter of vowing things away was greatly abused by the Jews. Thus when a creditor came to collect, and the debtor was reluctant about paying, the creditor cried: 'A gift!' and thus compelled the debtor to pay to the priests." [ref]) This is but one of many examples (Jesus: " ... you [keep on] do[ing] many things such as that." [Mark 7:13]) in which the "fence" of oral tradition originally intended to protect the Law actually became a barrier to keeping it. [ref] 

Understand (v. 18). Jesus rebuked [ref] his disciples for their lack of understanding (7:18a): "'Are you so lacking in understanding also?'" (NASB). "'Are you so foolish?'" (NET). "'Are you being willfully stupid?'" (The Message). As one Bible scholar of yesteryear put it: "Jesus charges the disciples with intellectual dulness [sic] and spiritual stupidity." [ref] But while the rebuke was sharp, we might also take note of the fact that it came only after Jesus was alone with his disciples and thus was intended to correct privately and not humiliate publicly.  

Defiles/ defiled/ defile (vv. 15, 18, 20, 23). "The rabbis had attacked the disciples about not washing their hands before eating. Jesus now turned the tables on them completely and laid bare their hollow pretentious hypocrisy to the people." [ref] In the process, "Christ asserts that Levitical uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with moral uncleanness." [ref] It was/is the difference between ritual purity and ethical purity. [ref] Jesus taught that defilement comes "not by ritual impurity, but by personal sin." [ref] "While the scribes and Pharisees may have been well-intentioned in their observance of Jewish rituals and traditions and in their attempts to honor God, Jesus attacked their true heart condition." [ref] Scrupulous avoidance of ceremonial defilement allowed the religious leaders to convince both themselves and others that they were pious and holy - even as their hearts were filled with sinful thoughts and desires. Until they addressed the true, inward source of sin, all the ceremonial washings in the world would be for naught.   

Heart ... within (vv. 19, 21, 23). Jesus listed several specific sins that proceed from a person's heart. "The general meaning [of Christ's reply] is, that men are not polluted by food, but that they have within themselves the pollution of sins, which afterwards shows itself in the outward actions. ... [A]ll sins proceed from the wicked and corrupt affections of the heart. ... [I]n order to show more clearly that the heart of man is the abode of all evils he says that the proofs and results appear in the sins themselves." [ref] Jesus' list begins with "evil thoughts" (Greek kakos + dialogismos: "pertaining to being bad, with the implication of harmful and damaging" +  "to think or reason with thoroughness and completeness" [ref]) because such is in fact "the root of" the dirty dozen "evils which follow. Evil thoughts generated in a heart unite with one's will to produce evil words and actions." [ref] [ref]   

Jesus' list includes both attitudes and actions. "Notice that the evil attitudes, whether acted upon or not, are still considered sin." [ref] The list:

• sexual immorality: "to engage in sexual immorality of any kind, often with the implication of prostitution"  
• theft: "to take secretly and without permission the property of someone else"
• murder: "to deprive a person of life by illegal, intentional killing"
• adultery: "sexual intercourse of a man with a married woman other than his own spouse"
• greed: "a strong desire to acquire more and more material possessions or to possess more things than other people have, all irrespective of need"
• wickedness: "deeds which are wicked and evil"
• deceit: "to deceive by using trickery and falsehood"
• lustful desires: "behavior completely lacking in moral restraint, usually with the implication of sexual licentiousness"
• envy: "(an idiom, literally ‘evil eye') a feeling of jealousy and resentment because of what someone else has or does"
• slander: "to speak against someone in such a way as to harm or injure his or her reputation"
• pride: "a state of ostentatious pride or arrogance bordering on insolence"
• foolishness: "the state of not using one's capacity for understanding" [ref] (all quoted verbatim)

"In the teaching of Christ and the apostles, defilement is uniformly ethical or spiritual." [ref] This is reflected in the NT's many and various vice lists. For example: Romans 1:28-32; 13:13; 1 Corinthians 5:9-11; 6:9-10; 2 Corinthians 12:20-21; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:3-5; Colossians 3:5-9; 1 Timothy 1:9-10; 2 Timothy 3:2-5; Titus 3:3, 1 Peter 4:3; Revelation 21:8; 22:15. [ref]

HEAR (heart)
A Closet Drinker

The story is told of a deacon who was zealous for the cause of temperance, constantly railing against the evils of alcohol. 

One day the deacon decided to have some improvements done to his living room. As the carpenter was surveying the project, he happened across a well concealed closet. Much to his surprise, within the closet he found a bottle of whiskey and some glasses. He immediately made the deacon aware of his discovery. 

The deacon seemed truly shocked, and he quickly surmised that the previous owner must have left it behind when he moved out thirty years earlier. 

"'Ah, perhaps he did,' answered the carpenter, 'but say, deacon, that ice in the pitcher must have been well frozen to have remained solid all this time.'" [ref] (paraphrased)

Like the Pharisees, the deacon waged a major campaign against sin - while finding a way to practice it in secret.  

How can we guard against hypocrisy? We guard against hypocrisy by:

• Being more concerned with character than with reputation.
• Pursuing a personal relationship with God rather than practicing a religion.
• Focusing on our own sins and other people's virtues, rather than vice versa.
• Remembering that purity is internal, not external, and occurs as our minds are renewed by Christ and we are transformed into his image. [ref]  (paraphrased) 

DO (hands)
Pharisees exist today

"Many Bible-believing Christians also struggle with change and tradition. The Pharisees had established codes of conduct that they made equal with Scripture. Don't we still do the same? In trying to maintain our faith against competitors and challenges, don't we resent those who don't conform and who disregard the history of why we do what we do? What human-made rules, policies, and doctrines have we given the same authority as God's Word? Do we reject someone's thought because we don't like his or her background, training, or personal style? Pharisees exist today. Ask God for insight so as not to be one of them." [ref] quoted verbatim

??? When are we most tempted to to place human teaching and/or tradition above Scripture? What is the true source of the sin in our life, and what does that imply regarding how to eliminate it (see ROMANS 12:1-2; PHILIPPIANS 4:8)?

SEE (head)
Seeking rest from his wearisome opponents, Jesus heads into Gentile territory. There he is immediately greeted by a Gentile woman whose daughter is possessed by a demon. Refusing to take No for an answer, the woman's faith is rewarded.  

Region of Tyre (v. 24). Here we find the very human Jesus seeking rest by retreating to a "distinctly heathen land. ... There was too much excitement among the people, too much bitterness among the Pharisees, too much suspicion on the part of Herod Antipas, too much dulness [sic] on the part of the disciples for Jesus to remain in Galilee." [ref] This passage is often viewed with embarrassment, for it appears that Jesus is being "harsh and unsympathetic," [ref], refers to Gentiles as dogs, and is contradicted by a pagan woman. [ref] (Once a minister in a liberal denomination was preaching on this passage and actually went so far as to conjecture that Jesus must have been having a bad day!) There is, however, much more to the story than first meets the eye. 

A woman (v. 25). One commentator describes the woman who approached Jesus as: "A Greek in religion, a Syrian in tongue, a Phoenician in race." [ref] In a parallel account, Matthew reports that the woman twice addressed Jesus by a Messianic title ("Lord" and "Son of David"), thus demonstrating her faith in him as the Messiah (Matthew 15:22). (Along these lines, it may be significant that the language used to describe the woman's asking [Greek erotao] frequently suggests familiar or equal footing between the petitioner and the one being petitioned. [ref]) The woman's faith was both sincere and determined. She "fell at [Jesus'] feet" (v. 25) - a simple yet poignant act which indicated "her humility, reverence, submissiveness, and anxiety" [ref] - and "begged" (v. 26, "kept asking" NASB) him to heal her demon-possessed daughter. "The woman by her persistent plea demonstrated her faith in the person of Christ. She a Gentile (dog), asked for what the children (Israel) cast aside. Because of that faith, her request was granted; her daughter was healed immediately." [ref] 

As renowned Bible teacher Warren Wiersbe points out, this Gentile woman had many obstacles to overcome, including:

• her nationality - Normally Jews did not associate with Gentiles.
• her sex - Jewish men looked down on women, and a Jewish man would have very little dealings with a strange woman.
• Satan - One of the Devil's demons had taken control of the woman's daughter.
• the disciples - They wanted Jesus to send the woman away (see MATTHEW 15:23).
• Jesus - He appeared reluctant to help. [ref] (paraphrased)

It is helpful to keep several points in mind when examining the exchange that took place between Jesus and the Gentile woman, including:

• With the cross looming ever larger, and with many of his followers having defected (see John 6), [ref] Jesus had begun spending less time with the crowds and more time with his disciples in order to better train and prepare them. [ref]  
• Jesus' first priority was "'the lost sheep of the house of Israel'" (see Matthew 15:24, NASB).
• Jesus never turned away a Gentile who came to him for help (see Gentile (v. 26) below).
• "[A]t no time, certainly, did God shut up his grace among the Jews in such a manner as not to bestow a small taste of them on the Gentiles." [ref]
• The woman was seeking a crumb of kindness at the same time Jesus was feeding his disciples. [ref]  

Dogs (vv. 27-28). "He said, 'Stand in line and take your turn. The children get fed first. If there's any left over, the dogs get it.' She said, 'Of course, Master. But don't dogs under the table get scraps dropped by the children?' Jesus was impressed. 'You're right! On your way! Your daughter is no longer disturbed. The demonic affliction is gone'" (The Message). The "dogs" referred to by both Jesus and the woman were "'lap dogs, house dogs,' as opposed to dogs on the street." [ref] [ref] Hence it "does not refer to wild dogs (scavenging animals roaming around the countryside) in this context, but to small dogs taken in as house pets. It is thus not a derogatory term per se, but is instead intended by Jesus to indicate the privileged position of the Jews (especially his disciples) as the initial recipients of Jesus' ministry. The woman's response of faith and her willingness to accept whatever Jesus would offer pleased him to such an extent that he granted her request." [ref]

While "[wild, scavenger] dogs" was indeed used by some Jews as a pejorative for Gentiles, such is not the case here. [ref] As one source explains: "In the Orient dogs have no owners but run wild and serve as scavengers for all garbage and offal. Such 'dogs' the Jews called all Gentiles - ownerless, in every way unclean, always to be driven off. It is an entirely different conception when Jesus speaks of 'the little pet dogs' in referring to the Gentiles. These have owners who keep them even in the house and feed them by throwing them bits from the table. No Oriental street dogs were allowed in a house, to say nothing of a dining-room or at dining tables." [ref] Rather than "resenting Christ's words about giving the children's bread to the dogs (Gentiles)," the woman "instantly turned it to the advantage of her plea for her little daughter." [ref] Jesus' resistance in helping the woman was not meant "to extinguish the woman's faith, but rather to whet her zeal and inflame her ardor." [ref] In effect, Jesus was inviting "this woman to express the faith that would eventually come to be expected of the Gentiles." [ref]  

Gentile (v. 26). Regarding the relationship between the pre-crucified-and-resurrected Jesus and the Gentiles, we can note the following. Despite Judaism's generally negative attitude toward Gentiles, it welcomed with open arms "a true proselyte who would forsake paganism and become a Jew, both spiritually and nationally." What's more, it was believed "that there would be a massive conversion of Gentiles on the Last Day," although "this conversion is frequently portrayed in terms of Gentiles flocking to Zion at the last day, not in terms of Jewish missionaries reaching out to Gentiles (cf. Isaiah 19:23; Zechariah 8:21; Jeremiah 3:17)." While in Jesus' day "Gentile" was synonymous with "sinner," Jesus refused to adopt the popular mindset that longed for the day when judgment and vengeance would be visited on the Gentiles.  While Jesus did not engage in a full-blown mission to the Gentiles, nonetheless he "attracted great numbers of Gentiles (Mark 3:7–12; Matthew 15:29–31). ... he ministered to them and preached the Gospel to them (Mark 5:1–20; 7:24–30; Matthew 8:5–13 par. Luke 7:1–10; John 4:1–42; 12:20–22). ... He castigates sinners (both Gentiles and Jews) and invites all to repent, whether Jew or Gentile." With the exception of the (half-Jewish) Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus neither initiated contact with Gentiles nor failed to minister to those who came to him. To summarize: Jesus "focused his efforts on the Jewish nation and its obligation to receive the Messiah of the final days. His emphasis on the Jews, however, did not exclude Gentile participation in the kingdom during his ministry. However, Gentile participation was nonetheless an exception and not the rule." (Interestingly enough, within Mark the fist open confession of Jesus as the "Son of God" ["or a son of God or son of a god" NASB margin] is made by a Gentile: a Roman centurion present at Jesus' crucifixion [Mark 15:39].) [ref] (mixture of paraphrase and verbatim quotes)

HEAR (heart)
Tasting is Believing

The story is told of a well-educated skeptic who enjoyed giving public lectures on the foolishness of religious faith in general and the Christian faith in particular. He would normally end his tirades by asking if anyone in the audience had any questions. 

On one such occasion the speaker's audience included the man who had been the town drunkard until he was converted to Christ. This man politely raised his hand and said that he had a question. He then walked to the front of the audience, pulled an orange out of his coat pocket, peeled it, and ate the entire thing - all without a word. 

Then the former-drunkard-turned-Christian asked the speaker if the orange that had just been eaten was sweet or sour. 

By now very angry, the speaker called the man an idiot and asked how he (the speaker) could possibly know when he had not tasted it. 

To which the born-again Christian replied, "'And how can you know anything about Christ if you have not tried Him?'" [ref] (paraphrased)

"Gentile dogs," said the Jews, "can know nothing of God." By her persistent faith, however, the Gentile woman who came to Christ proved them wrong. In response to her faith, she experienced what the Pharisees did not know because they refused to taste it for themselves: the love, grace and mercy of God in Christ.

DO (hands)
??? What does it mean to "persist"? What can this woman's example teach us about how to persist in our faith?

SEE (head)
Still traveling in predominantly Gentile territory, Jesus is met by a man who is deaf and whose speech is severely impeded. Calling him aside, Jesus touches first the man's ears and then his tongue. After looking up to heaven, Jesus commands the stopped organs to be opened, and the man is healed. The crowds were exuberant and continued spreading the news concerning Jesus. 

Sidon ... the Ten Towns (v. 31). "Jesus left Phoenicia, but did not go back into Galilee. He rather went east and came down east of the Sea of Galilee into the region of the Greek cities of Decapolis. He thus kept out of the territory of Herod Antipas. He had been in this region when he healed the Gadarene demoniac and was asked to leave." [ref] [ref] 

Deaf ... speech impediment (v. 32). Matthew lets us know that "[a] vast crowd brought to [Jesus] people who were lame, blind, crippled, those who couldn't speak, and many others. They laid them before Jesus, and he healed them all" (Matthew 15:29-30 NLT). Mark chooses to key in on the man Jesus healed who was deaf and "almost mute" (Greek mogilalos), [ref] such that "when he spoke, people could hardly understand" him. [ref] The word used to describe this man's speech problem is used only here in the NT and, what's more, is the same word used in the LXX version of Isaiah 35: "Then ... the ears of the deaf will be unstopped. Then ... the tongue of the mute will shout for joy. ... " (Isaiah 35:5-6, NASB). [ref] This fact, along with Mark's many direct quotes from the book of Isaiah, tells us that "Mark saw the fulfillment of Isaiah's words in the healing ministry of Jesus." [ref] 

Jesus touched the man's ears and his tongue, indicating to him that Jesus was going to do something for those areas. [ref] As one source puts it: "In healing this man, Jesus used sign language and symbolic acts (which Mark did not explain) that uniquely suited the man's needs and caused him to exercise faith." [ref] [ref] 

When Mark wrote that the crowd ignored Jesus' command not to tell anyone about the miracle, his point seems to be "that although Jesus sought no publicity or sensationalism, his ministry was so powerful, so stunning in its results that people everywhere proclaimed it." [ref] 

To heal him (v. 32). This healing is an apt illustration of what it means to follow Jesus:

• "Jesus ... went ... to ... the region of the Ten Towns" (v. 31). Jesus will meet us where we are and give us what is not needed in our particular situation. [ref]

• "Jesus led him away from the crowd so they could be alone" (v. 33). We must be willing to leave the crowd behind and spend time alone with Jesus. "Silence that does not give rise to speech is dumbness. Speech that does not grow out of silence is chatter." [ref]

• "He put his fingers into the man's ears. Then, spitting on his own fingers, he touched the man's tongue. ... he ... said, 'Ephphatha,' which means, 'Be opened!'" (vv. 33-34). We must trust Jesus and cooperate with his efforts to heal our ears and tongue - that is, change the way we perceive reality (what we hear) and the way we communicate that reality to others (what we say). "Jesus wants to open the ears and eyes of all who are deaf and blind so that they may receive the light of life." [ref]

• "Looking up to heaven ... " (v. 34). We know that Jesus is from God and will work to bring about God's best for us. [ref]

• " ... he sighed ... " (v. 34). Jesus personally identifies with our pain and suffering. [ref]

• "They were completely amazed and said again and again, 'Everything he does is wonderful. He even makes the deaf to hear and gives speech to those who cannot speak'" (v. 37). We should be constantly amazed at what God has done and is doing in our lives. Moreover, our amazement should result in "a vociferous ["marked by or given to vehement insistent outcry" [ref]] championship of Jesus in this pagan land." [ref]

HEAR (heart)
High in the King's Estimate

The story is told of a poor but devout Frenchman living in medieval Europe who often wrestled with doubt as he sought to live the Christian life. He assumed that God was displeased with him because of his struggles. Confused and disheartened, he sought the counsel of his spiritual advisor. 

The clergyman answered with an illustration of two commanders, both of whom served the King of France. The first commander's duty station was a castle situated far inland and thus remote from danger. The other, however, commanded a castle that was located on the coast and was thus the object of constant attack and harassment. The clergyman then asked his young friend which of the two commanders the King valued most. 

"'Doubtless,' said the poor man, 'the King values him the most who has the hardest task, and braves the greatest dangers.' 

"'You are right,' replied his advisor, 'And now apply this matter to your case and mine.'" [ref] (paraphrased)

Some Christians seem to have it made. They are the ones with good health, a loving family, and few financial worries. For other believers, however, life seems to be a constant series of severe struggles: bad health, no family to speak of, and no money to make things a little easier. If we fall into the latter category, we do well to remind ourselves that hardships do not mean God has stopped loving us. In fact, the exact opposite is true: because God loves us so much, he will give us the strength to endure any hardship - so long as we determine to make his glory our highest priority. We can rest assured that every hardship will be accompanied by enough of God's grace to endure it, and that God can and will use our hardships to make us better able to hear, understand, and obey him.

DO (hands)
??? What can this passage teach us about hearing and speaking the things of God?