Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai hoi Pharisaioi kai tines tōn grammateōn elthontes apo Hierosolymōn synagontai pros auton
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
The Tradition of the Elders
Mark 7:1–13 — The Tradition of the Elders. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai hoi Pharisaioi kai tines tōn grammateōn elthontes apo Hierosolymōn synagontai pros auton
and they saw some of His disciples eating with hands that were defiled—that is, unwashed.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai idontes hoti tinas tōn autou mathētōn esthiousin tous artous chersin koinais tout’ estin aniptois
Now in holding to the tradition of the elders, the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat until they wash their hands ceremonially.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
gar kratountes tēn paradosin tōn presbyterōn Hoi Pharisaioi kai pantes hoi Ioudaioi ouk esthiousin ean mē nipsōntai tas cheiras pygmē
And on returning from the market, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions for them to observe, including the washing of cups, pitchers, kettles, and couches for dining.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai ap’ agoras ouk esthiousin ean mē baptisōntai kai estin polla alla parelabon ha kratein baptismous potēriōn kai xestōn kai chalkiōn kai klinōn
So the Pharisees and scribes questioned Jesus: “Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders? Instead, they eat with defiled hands.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai hoi Pharisaioi kai hoi grammateis eperōtōsin auton Dia ti sou hoi mathētai ou peripatousin kata tēn paradosin tōn presbyterōn alla esthiousin ton arton koinais chersin
Jesus answered them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho eipen autois Ēsaias eprophēteusen Kalōs peri hymōn tōn hypokritōn hōs gegraptai hoti Houtos ho laos tima me tois cheilesin de autōn Hē kardia apechei porrō ap’ emou
They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de sebontai me Matēn Didaskontes didaskalias entalmata anthrōpōn
You have disregarded the commandment of God to keep the tradition of men.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Aphentes tēn entolēn tou Theou krateite tēn paradosin tōn anthrōpōn
He went on to say, “You neatly set aside the command of God to maintain your own tradition.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai elegen autois Kalōs atheteite tēn entolēn tou Theou hina tērēsēte hymōn tēn paradosin
For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
gar Mōusēs eipen Tima sou ton patera kai sou tēn mētera kai Ho kakologōn patera ē mētera thanatō teleutatō
But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever you would have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God),
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de hymeis legete Ean anthrōpos eipē tō patri ē tē mētri Ho ean ōphelēthēs ex emou Korban ho estin Dōron
he is no longer permitted to do anything for his father or mother.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
auton ouketi aphiete poiēsai ouden tō patri ē tē mētri
Thus you nullify the word of God by the tradition you have handed down. And you do so in many such matters.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
akyrountes ton logon tou Theou tē hymōn paradosei hē paredōkate kai poieite toiauta polla paromoia
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
Mark opens with movement and no speech. The Pharisees and certain scribes, ἐλθόντες ἀπὸ Ἱεροσολύμων, having come from Jerusalem, συνάγονται, are gathered to him: a historic present that films the convergence as it happens. Gill judges these men came from the capital, either of themselves or sent by the sanhedrim; Cambridge reads the joint appearance of Judaean and Galilean Pharisees as a combination already concerted; Pulpit says flatly that they were doubtless sent as spies. Benson supplies the motive from long observation: they came on purpose to find occasion against him. ⚙ What the deputation sees is not filth. The offence word is κοιναῖς, common, and Ellicott insists on the literal sense: common, which only through usage such as Acts 10:14 came to mean unclean. Benson notes the Jewish idiom that opposes common to holy, holy meaning what is separated off for sacred use. Cambridge is blunt that the disciples doubtless washed their hands; what they omitted was the ceremonial form. So the charge is not that these hands are dirty but that they are undifferentiated, ordinary, indistinguishable from anyone's. Mark, who twice stops to translate for readers who would not know the category (ἀνίπτοις here, Korban at verse 11), then reports the whole apparatus: washing πυγμῇ, with the fist, a word so contested that Barnes derives “diligently” from the rubbing motion, Benson reports and doubts Theophylact's “up to the elbow,” and Pulpit leans on the Syriac for “diligently.” Then the market bath, then cups, sextarius measures, copper vessels, dining couches. Ellicott names the engine driving the list: not cleanliness or health but arrogant exclusiveness, since a Gentile's touch in the crowd was reckoned as defiling as a corpse's. Gill documents from later rabbinic sources that a Pharisee touched even in his garments by the common people needed immersion. The question, when it finally comes at verse 5, uses the verb περιπατοῦσιν, walk, and Geneva catches the idiom: among them the way is taken for the manner of life. They are not asking about a meal. They are asking whose path these men are on.
Jesus answers a question about hands with a prophecy about hearts, and he begins with Καλῶς. Cambridge says the word is spoken in irony and notes that it returns at verse 9; Pulpit renders it “excellently.” The citation is Isaiah 29:13, as Cambridge states, and Jesus introduces it with γέγραπται, a perfect: it stands written. Against a tradition whose whole claim was oral transmission through the elders (Cambridge on the Unwritten Law, Pulpit on the Sinai claim), he sets what remains in writing. ⚙ The quoted lines set two body parts against each other, χείλεσιν and καρδία, and the decisive verb is ἀπέχει, which the lexicon gives as to have out, to hold off. The heart is not passively distant; it is actively holding itself away while the lips are moving. Gill, reading the fuller Matthean form, calls it lip labour with no lifting of the heart. Pulpit finds the punishment fitted to the crime: men who gave God the words only were left with the words only, the shell and the letter, the kernel withdrawn. Verse 7 supplies the verdict word Μάτην, a rare adverb the Verifier finds in only two New Testament verses, and it measures worship by result rather than by sincerity, for the verb it judges is σέβονταί, which Ellicott shows is not the ordinary word for outward homage but one expressing inward devotion, as at Acts 18:13. That is the sharpest thing in the paragraph: the inwardness is granted and the worship is still empty. Ellicott then distinguishes the two words English flattens into one, ἐντάλματα, many detailed precepts, against ἐντολήν in verse 8, the commandment which is exceeding broad. Verse 8 states the exchange in two verbs: Ἀφέντες, having let go, and κρατεῖτε, you hold fast, the second being the very verb Mark used of them at verse 3. Gill notes the sting in calling the revered elders simply “men” over against God. Geneva presses further than mere failure: these deeds do not only fall short of God's law, they take it away.
The irony returns, Καλῶς again, and Benson reads it as an exclamation: finely done, how praiseworthy is your conduct, a strong irony. Ellicott notes the adverb is peculiar to Mark here and carries the ring of a scathing and indignant irony, and that the verb ἀθετεῖτε is more formal than “reject”: it is rescinding, repealing, as at Galatians 3:15 and Hebrews 7:18. Barnes offers the alternatives honestly, reading it either as a question, or as “skilfully, cunningly,” or as irony. ⚙ Then comes the proof. Moses said, and Cambridge identifies the two quotations as Exodus 20:12 and Exodus 21:17. Both are voided by a single word. Gill and Pulpit agree that “honour” in the fifth commandment includes material support, so that a rule releasing a son from supporting his parents strikes the commandment itself; Henry states the a fortiori that governs the passage, that if children who curse their parents deserve to die, much more those who starve them. Cambridge explains the mechanism: a person had only to pronounce Korban over a possession and it was irrevocably dedicated, and he records a second and harsher reading of the formula, as an imprecation, which he judges gives greater force to the charge. Gill is careful that this is not a dedication to the temple's use at all: the man may keep the goods himself, having only sworn that his parents shall not have them. Gill then cites the rabbinic canon that a vow contrary to a command was still binding unless a wise man dissolved it, which he reads as the establishment of a magisterial authority in the place of God's. Ellicott adds the lexical history: Korban is a Hebrew word peculiar to Mark in the Gospels, frequent in Leviticus and Numbers, and applied later to the temple treasure, as at Matthew 27:6. The unit closes with ἀκυροῦντες, which Ellicott calls technical, the cancelling word of Galatians 3:17, and with a pairing English cannot show: παραδόσει and παρεδώκατε, the tradition and the handing down, one word twice. The thing they received (verse 4) they have now handed on, and what it cancels is not a rubric but τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, the word of God.
⚙ Offered as this tool's own fallible reading, to be tested against the text. Read the unit by its verbs of the hand, since the dispute began there. At verse 3 they hold fast the tradition; at verse 4 they received it to hold fast; at verse 8 they have let go the commandment of God and hold fast the tradition of men; at verse 12 they will not let go a man to his father and mother, using at verse 12 the very verb (ἀφίημι) that verse 8 used of what they dropped. The hands that would not touch a common loaf turn out to be holding the wrong thing and releasing the wrong thing. That is why Isaiah's oracle is the right answer to a question about washing: a hand is only the end of an arm, and what the arm obeys is the καρδία that, on the Greek of verse 6, is not merely distant but holding itself off while the lips draw near. The Korban case is then not a stray abuse but the mechanism's proof. It shows that a system of added fences will not merely sit beside the law; Geneva says it takes the law away, and the grammar agrees, since ἀκυρόω is a legal word for cancelling an instrument. Note also what the passage does not say. It does not condemn tradition as such: παράδοσις is a neutral noun that Paul will use approvingly, and everything turns on the genitive after it, of the elders or of men or of God. And it does not condemn devotion: the worship in verse 7 is inward devotion (Ellicott), and it is still called empty. So the unit refuses the two comfortable exits, that sincerity sanctifies the form and that the form is harmless if the heart is right. A rule that makes it pious to let a parent go hungry has been tested and found to be a rule about God. The safest thing a reader can carry out of this paragraph is a question, not a party: which of the things I hold fast can be named, out loud, as having been handed to me by men, and what has it quietly released?
A fence built high enough around the law becomes a roof over it. (Not a verse: this is the tool's own fallible line.)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
Matthew 15:1-20 narrates the same confrontation, and the Verifier's word-level comparison is dense: the tradition noun παράδοσις at Matthew 15:2, 15:3 and 15:6; the honour verb τιμάω at 15:4 and 15:6; the Isaiah citation at 15:8-9 sharing λαός, καρδία, πόρρω, σέβομαι, διδάσκω and the rare μάτην; and the rare ἄνιπτος at 15:20. Ellicott, Barnes and JFB all simply refer the reader to their notes on Matthew 15. ⚙ Mark is the one who translates for outsiders (common, unwashed, Korban, sextarius), and Mark alone carries the πυγμῇ detail and the second ironic Καλῶς of verse 9.
Matthew 15:2 · Matthew 15:6 · Matthew 15:8 · Matthew 15:9 · Matthew 15:20
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes across the parallel, including the rare G3155 μάτην (in 2 vv) and G449 ἄνιπτος (in 2 vv), plus G3862 παράδοσις (in 13 vv), G4576 σέβομαι (in 10 vv), G5091 τιμάω (in 16 vv) and G4206 πόῤῥω (in 4 vv). Greek to Greek, both New Testament, so a genuine verbal link
Κορβᾶν (G2878) occurs in only two verses of the New Testament: here, where it releases a son from his parents, and Matthew 27:6, where the chief priests decide that thirty pieces of silver may not be put into the korbanas because it is the price of blood. Ellicott records the same lexical history, that the word came to be applied specifically to the sacred treasure of the Temple, citing Matthew 27:6 and Josephus. Gill distinguishes the vow formula here from an oath by the treasury. ⚙ The juxtaposition is the Verifier's, not a commentator's: the same treasury vocabulary that would not receive tainted money had been used to withhold bread from the aged.
Matthew 27:6
basis: Verifier: shared G2878 κορβᾶν (in 2 vv), the rarest possible shared lexeme, both occurrences in the New Testament Greek. No quotation is claimed; the link is lexical
Colossians 2:22 pairs the same two rare nouns this unit pairs: ἐντάλματα (G1778, found in only three verses) and διδασκαλίας (G1319), in a passage about handling, tasting and touching. Ellicott's note here, that ἔνταλμα points to many detailed precepts while ἐντολή names the broad commandment, is exactly the distinction Colossians exploits. ⚙ Both texts appear to be reaching for the same Isaianic tag, which would make this a shared quotation rather than an accidental overlap; we record the lexical fact and leave the dependence as a probability.
Colossians 2:22
basis: Verifier: shared G1778 ἔνταλμα (in 3 vv, rare) and G1319 διδασκαλία (in 21 vv). Greek to Greek within the New Testament. The further claim that both quote Isaiah 29:13 is our inference and is not part of the recorded basis
The participle that closes the unit, ἀκυροῦντες (G208), occurs in only three verses. Ellicott says the Greek is technical, making null and void, cancelling, and points to Galatians 3:17, where Paul argues that the law given four hundred and thirty years later cannot annul a covenant previously confirmed by God. ⚙ The two texts run in opposite directions with one verb: Paul says a later law cannot cancel God's prior word; Mark says a later tradition has been used to do exactly that. The irony is in the shared vocabulary, not in any claim that one text cites the other.
Galatians 3:17
basis: Verifier: shared G208 ἀκυρόω (in 3 vv), a rare legal term, Greek to Greek within the New Testament. No citation of one text by the other is claimed
βαπτισμούς (G909) is found in only four verses, and Hebrews 6:2 uses the same masculine noun, which Ellicott takes there to mean ablutions generally rather than the sacramental rite. The long annotation printed in our source under the JFB tag at verse 1 makes the same connection independently, naming the divers washings of Hebrews 9:10 among carnal ordinances imposed until the time of reformation. ⚙ Hebrews supplies the category the Pharisees' list lacks: these are outward regulations with an expiry date, and the letter says why they could not perfect the conscience.
Hebrews 6:2 · Hebrews 9:10
basis: Verifier: shared G909 βαπτισμός (in 4 vv, rare) with Hebrews 6:2, Greek to Greek within the New Testament. The Hebrews 9:10 reference is supplied by the commentary printed under the JFB tag at Mark 7:1, not by the Verifier
The noun Jesus indicts, παράδοσις (G3862), is the noun Paul commends: stand firm and hold the traditions taught by word or letter (2 Thessalonians 2:15), keep away from those not walking according to the tradition received from us (2 Thessalonians 3:6), hold the traditions as delivered (1 Corinthians 11:2). The same noun names what he repudiated of his own past, zeal for the traditions of his fathers (Galatians 1:14), and what he warns against, philosophy according to the tradition of men (Colossians 2:8). ⚙ The word is neutral; the genitive decides. That is a structural observation about usage, and no text here quotes another.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 · 2 Thessalonians 3:6 · 1 Corinthians 11:2 · Galatians 1:14 · Colossians 2:8
basis: Verifier: shared G3862 παράδοσις (in 13 vv) across all five refs, with G2902 κρατέω (in 46 vv) also shared at 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and G3880 παραλαμβάνω (in 49 vv) and G4043 περιπατέω (in 88 vv) at 2 Thessalonians 3:6. Real verbal contact, but the link is a shared motif of transmission, not a quotation, so we tier it structural
Cambridge states that the quoted words are found in Isaiah 29:13, and Gill cites the same verse and notes that Paul draws on the same chapter (Isaiah 29:10) at Romans 11:8. Pulpit is careful about how the prophecy reaches this audience: Isaiah did not have these men in mind, but the Spirit within him described accurately those who seven centuries later would do the same things as their forefathers. ⚙ The Greek of Mark follows the Old Greek form of the oracle, whose final clause about teaching the precepts of men is what makes the citation land on the tradition of the elders.
Isaiah 29:13 · Romans 11:8
basis: An explicit New Testament quotation of the Old Testament, named by Cambridge and Gill. Because the link crosses from Greek to Hebrew, no shared Strong's numbers can be computed and it cannot be tiered verbal; it is recorded structurally on the commentators' identification
Cambridge identifies the two quotations of verse 10 as coming partly from Exodus 20:12 and partly from Exodus 21:17; Gill names the same pair and adds that the command was spoken by God and written on the tables, so that “Moses said” means God said through Moses. The fifth commandment stands also at Deuteronomy 5:16, and the death sanction for reviling a parent also at Leviticus 20:9. Gill and Pulpit both insist that honouring includes maintaining, so that a rule voiding support voids the commandment. ⚙ The Korban device did not deny either text; it made a third rule under which neither could be obeyed.
Exodus 20:12 · Exodus 21:17 · Deuteronomy 5:16 · Leviticus 20:9
basis: Explicit New Testament quotations of the Old Testament, identified by Cambridge (Exodus 20:12 and Exodus 21:17) and Gill. Cross-Testament, Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's lexemes exist and the verbal tier is unavailable; Deuteronomy 5:16 and Leviticus 20:9 are the parallel statutes and are named by us, not by a voice in the brief
Ellicott traces the Hebrew word: it occurs frequently in Leviticus and Numbers, generally translated “offering” and sometimes “oblation,” and elsewhere in the Old Testament only at Ezekiel 20:28 and 40:43. ⚙ The vocabulary of the vow law stands behind the abuse. The device works only because a genuine category existed for goods irrevocably devoted, which is why Cambridge can say a person had merely to pronounce the word for the dedication to bind.
Leviticus 2:1 · Numbers 7:3 · Ezekiel 20:28
basis: Cross-Testament and Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's numbers are computable. The basis is Ellicott's own list of Old Testament occurrences of the word Mark transliterates as Κορβᾶν (G2878)
⚙ The Korban abuse presupposes a law under which a vow, once uttered, binds the one who uttered it. Gill reports the rabbinic canon (citing Maimonides on the laws of vows) that a man who vowed against a command was obliged to keep the vow and break the command, and could be released only by a wise man. The obvious biblical ground for that canon is the vow law of Numbers 30:2 and Deuteronomy 23:21-23. We flag this rather than assert it: no commentator in our sources makes the connection to those texts, and the rabbinic rules Gill cites are centuries later than Mark.
Numbers 30:2 · Deuteronomy 23:21
basis: No voice in the brief names these texts, and no shared Strong's lexemes are computable across the Testaments. The connection is our own reconstruction of the legal background from Gill's citation of later rabbinic vow law, and it needs verification
Benson grounds the practice in Leviticus 15:11, where one touched by a man with an issue must wash his clothes and bathe, and says the people were accordingly ordered to wash on returning from crowded places lest they had touched an unclean person; Cambridge cites Leviticus 15:12 for the rule that earthen vessels were broken while metal and wood were scoured and rinsed, which is exactly the distinction Gill and Barnes report in the rabbinic sources. ⚙ So the elders' fence was built on a real foundation, which is what makes the passage difficult: Jesus is not attacking an invention with no scriptural root but an extension that grew until, in Benson's words, the law of God was left to lie neglected in comparison with it.
Leviticus 15:11 · Leviticus 15:12
basis: Cross-Testament, Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's numbers are computable. The basis is the explicit citation of Leviticus 15:11 by Benson and Leviticus 15:12 by Cambridge as the statutory root of the washing customs Mark describes
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
One verb, τιμάω (G5091), carries both halves of this unit: at verse 6 the people honour God with their lips while the heart holds off, and at verse 10 the commandment is Honour your father and your mother, which the Korban rule cancels. The Verifier finds the same lexeme joining the Matthean parallel at 15:4 and 15:6. ⚙ The unit therefore charges a double failure of honour, upward and downward, in the same word. The redemptive-historical answer is not an improved rule but a person in whom the honour word holds in both directions: the Son who says he does always the things that please the Father, and who at the cross provides for his mother. Henry states the frame in which the ancient commentators read the whole paragraph, that one great design of Christ's coming was to set aside the ceremonial law and, to make way for that, to reject the ceremonies men had added; Pulpit says Christ came to put an end to the old ceremonial law and to direct all the care of his disciples to making the heart clean. Be clear about what is whose: that frame is the ancient and widely-held reading, attested here by Henry and Pulpit, while the observation that one honour verb joins verse 6 to verse 10 is the Verifier's lexical fact read by us, and its application to the Son's own honouring of His Father is our inference from John, not a claim made by any voice in our sources.
Mark 7:6 · Mark 7:10 · John 8:29 · John 19:26-27
Isaiah's verdict leaves no remedy inside the system it condemns: the lips are near, the heart ἀπέχει, holds itself off, and the worship, granted by Ellicott to be inward devotion, is still μάτην, empty. ⚙ If the diagnosis is a heart that holds away, then no quantity of βαπτισμοί reaches the disease, since every washing in verses 3 and 4 is in the middle voice, something the worshipper does to himself. Henry puts the answer in the same grammar, that the clean hands and pure heart Christ requires of his disciples are what he first bestows on them, and that they differ in kind from the outward forms of Pharisees of every age. This is the classical reading of the passage and it is why the ceremonial washings are treated in Hebrews as ordinances imposed until a time of reformation.
Mark 7:6 · Hebrews 9:10 · Hebrews 10:22
⚙ Offered as a figural reading, and marked as ours. The Korban formula worked by declaring a thing Δῶρον, a gift, in order that it should reach no one: Gill is explicit that the man need not give it to the temple at all, only swear that his parents shall not have it. It is devotion used as a wall. The single other New Testament appearance of the word (Matthew 27:6, the only other verse with G2878) is the temple treasury refusing the price of blood. Set beside them the offering the Gospel actually announces, a Son who did not treat what he had as a thing to be withheld but gave himself. The contrast between a gift declared in order to withhold and a gift given in order to reach is, so far as our sources go, no commentator's reading of this verse; it is the tool's own, and it is offered to be tested, not relied on.
Mark 7:11 · Matthew 27:6 · Philippians 2:6-8
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. Text. Three real textual questions sit inside these thirteen verses, and every one of them is named by a voice in our sources rather than by us. At verse 2, Pulpit reports that the verb rendered “they found fault” in the older English does not stand in the best authorities and looks interpolated to ease the construction. At verse 3, πυγμῇ (with the fist) competes with a reading pyknē or pyknōs (“oft”), which Pulpit judges conjectural and Benson attributes to Codex Bezae; our translation's “ceremonially” takes a side without saying so. At verse 4, Pulpit reports that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus read “sprinkle themselves” for “immerse themselves,” and that the words for dining couches lack sufficient authority to be retained; at verse 8, Ellicott notes that many of the better manuscripts omit the closing clause about washing pots and cups, while arguing on internal grounds that it is probably original. Meaning still open. What πυγμῇ physically describes is genuinely unsettled: Barnes (rubbing with the fist, hence diligently), Benson reporting Theophylact (up to the elbow, a sense Benson calls unusual for the word), Cambridge citing Lightfoot (to the jointing of the arm), Pulpit following the Syriac (diligently). We have not resolved it. Cambridge likewise records two constructions of the Korban formula, a simple declaration of dedication and a stronger imprecation, and prefers the second as giving greater force to the charge; we report both. Sources. Gill's abundant rabbinic citations (Mishnah Kelim and Chagigah, the Talmuds, Maimonides, the Zohar) and Cambridge's Akiba anecdote from Buxtorf via Farrar are all later than Mark and are used here as illustration of how the rules functioned, never as proof of first-century practice. The long annotation printed in our source under the [JFB] tag at Mark 7:1 is almost certainly Matthew Poole's, since it argues in his idiom and repeatedly refers the reader to Poole on Matthew 15; we cite the tag we were given and flag the discrepancy in the voice note there, and every [Poole] entry in this unit is a bare cross-reference with no text of its own. Barnes's excursus at verse 4 on the mode of baptism is a nineteenth-century controversy imported into Mark's parenthesis, and we have marked it as his argument. Cross-references. Every Greek to Greek badge rests on the Verifier's computed shared lexemes with their frequencies. The Isaiah, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and Ezekiel links cross from Greek to Hebrew, so no shared Strong's numbers can be computed for them and none of them is tiered verbal, however explicit the quotation; they rest on the commentators' identifications, and where no commentator names the text (Numbers 30:2 and Deuteronomy 23:21) the thread is flagged for verification.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)