Once again Jesus called the crowd to Him and said, “All of you, listen to Me and understand:
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai palin proskalesamenos ton ochlon elegen autois pantes Akousate mou kai synete
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
What Defiles a Man
Mark 7:14–23 — What Defiles a Man. 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.
Once again Jesus called the crowd to Him and said, “All of you, listen to Me and understand:
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai palin proskalesamenos ton ochlon elegen autois pantes Akousate mou kai synete
Nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him; but the things that come out of a man, these are what defile him.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
ouden eisporeuomenon eis tou anthrōpou estin auton exōthen ho dynatai koinōsai auton alla ta ekporeuomena ek tou anthrōpou estin ta koinounta ton anthrōpon
⚙ The critical text omits the original-language words of this verse (a textual variant); the BSB prints it. No word cards are shown — a stated gap, not invented text.
After Jesus had left the crowd and gone into the house, His disciples inquired about the parable.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai hote eisēlthen apo tou ochlou eis oikon autou hoi mathētai epērōtōn auton tēn parabolēn
“Are you still so dull?” He asked. “Do you not understand? Nothing that enters a man from the outside can defile him,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
este hymeis kai Houtōs asynetoi Kai legei autois ou noeite hoti pan to eisporeuomenon eis ton anthrōpon exōthen ou dynatai koinōsai auton
because it does not enter his heart, but it goes into the stomach and then is eliminated.” (Thus all foods are clean.)
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
hoti ouk eisporeuetai eis autou tēn kardian all’ eis tēn koilian kai ekporeuetai eis ton aphedrōna panta ta brōmata katharizōn
He continued: “What comes out of a man, that is what defiles him.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Elegen hoti To ekporeuomenon ek tou anthrōpou ekeino koinoi ton anthrōpon
For from within the hearts of men come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
gar ek esōthen tēs kardias tōn anthrōpōn ekporeuontai hoi kakoi hoi dialogismoi porneiai klopai phonoi moicheiai
greed, wickedness, deceit, debauchery, envy, slander, arrogance, and foolishness.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
pleonexiai ponēriai dolos aselgeia ophthalmos ponēros blasphēmia hyperēphania aphrosynē
All these evils come from within, and these are what defile a man.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
panta tauta ta ponēra ekporeuetai esōthen kai koinoi ton anthrōpon
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 stages the saying before he reports it. Pulpit reads the restored πάλιν as evidence that Jesus had waved the crowd back while the scribes from Jerusalem pressed their complaint, and now calls them in again, "that all might hear that which concerned all alike." Gill hears the same gesture socially: the people "stood at some distance, because of these venerable doctors," and are called nearer. Poole reads the double imperative as a marker of weight, a sign that what follows "was a point of great moment." The Greek supports all three without needing them: προσκαλεσάμενος is middle, a calling to himself; Ἀκούσατέ μου puts the speaker in the genitive as the source to be heard; and σύνετε, aorist imperative of syniēmi, commands not a mood but an operation, a putting together. Everything in the pericope after this is measured against that command, since the disciples will be called ἀσύνετοι, un-put-together, in v. 18. Benson takes the address as a rebuke of the scribes by proxy, hypocrites "anxious about trifles"; that is Benson's expansion, not Mark's wording, and is marked as such at the voice.
⚙ The saying itself is a matched pair of participles on one stem: εἰσπορευόμενον going in, ἐκπορευόμενά coming out, with the verdict κοινῶσαι denied to the first and granted to the second. The verb is cultic. Gill states its force better than any modern gloss: the words "may be rendered, there is nothing from without a man, can make him common; that is, as a plebeian, a vulgar common man." To be defiled, in this vocabulary, is to be declassified out of the holy. Poole guards the statement carefully, limiting it to defilement "in the sight of God (for of such defilement he alone speaketh)," and Benson goes further, insisting that our Lord "did not at all mean to overthrow the distinction which the law had established between things clean and unclean." Pulpit agrees that no disparagement of the Levitical law is intended and reads the object as clearing that teaching of scribal obscurity. Whether those guards survive Mark's own aside in v. 19 is the question the next movement has to face. Verse 16 is not in the BSB text at all: Ellicott says the whole verse "is omitted in many of the best MSS.," and Pulpit notes the Revisers of 1881 put it in the margin. In the house, the disciples call the saying a παραβολή. Barnes is fair to them, noting that the Law really did teach ceremonial pollution by contact, so the denial sounded like a contradiction of Moses; Poole is harder, blaming habit, "custom is a great tyrant." Cambridge and Pulpit both note from Matthew 15:15 that the questioner was Peter, and both infer that Mark, writing under Peter's eye, has suppressed the name.
⚙ One letter carries the weight of the verse. καθαρίζων is masculine nominative singular and therefore cannot agree with the neuter subject of "goes out." Pulpit calls the masculine "undoubtedly" the most approved reading and concludes that "the only possible rendering" makes the clause the evangelist's own comment, supplying "This he said, making all meats clean"; he then records that Chrysostom had read it so already. Ellicott reaches the same construction by grammar and sense, taking cleansing with the subject of He saith in v. 18, and calls the alternative, in which the latrine cleanses the food, hard to defend. Gill, working from the neuter reading, gives exactly that alternative: "that which it leaves behind, is pure and nourishing," and Geneva's marginal gloss (h) says the same. Barnes explains the digestion at length in the science of 1834. So the commentators do not agree, and the honest report is that the manuscripts differ and the reading decides the theology. If the masculine stands, Mark has written the most consequential parenthesis in the Gospels: the one who spoke this sentence, by speaking it, cleansed all food. Ellicott, having argued for it, still adds that the clause may itself have begun as a marginal note like the one at v. 16. That hesitation is his and is recorded here rather than smoothed away.
⚙ The catalogue is not a miscellany. Cambridge counts "thirteen forms of evil" and marks the structure: the first seven plural, "predominant actions," the latter six singular, "dispositions." It is headed by διαλογισμοὶ, reasonings, the inner debate, which is why Poole can say the outward acts of tongue, eye and hand "are but the imperate actions of the will." It ends with ἀφροσύνη, a word Ellicott notes is rare and which he defines by Proverbs as "the folly which consists in the absence of the fear of God"; Benson reads it instead as ungovernable passion opposed to sobriety. Pulpit hears the final position as diagnosis, all evil terminating "in the loss of all moral and intellectual illumination," and Cambridge cites Bengel to the same effect. Two items are wholly Semitic and survive into Greek untranslated: ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρός, the evil eye, which Ellicott (from Matthew 20:15) reads as envy looking askance at another's good and Cambridge classes as concealed enmity beside open blasphemy. Benson records an observation worth weighing: three of the sins listed here, murder, false witness and blasphemy, were being committed on that very occasion by the men who had charged the disciples with eating unwashed. He attributes the point to Macknight. Henry's image stands over the whole movement, the corrupt fountain sending forth corrupt streams, and he alone names the remedy, seeking "the grace of the Holy Spirit, to keep down the evil thoughts and affections that work within."
⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested by Scripture and by better readers. The pericope is usually filed as a ruling about food, but the grammar files it as a ruling about location. Mark builds a frame out of two rare adverbs, ἔξωθεν (twelve verses) and ἔσωθεν (twelve verses), and hangs one verb between them, κοινόω, seven times in nine verses: denied to what comes in, assigned to what goes out. The traffic through the body is traced to its end, as far as the ἀφεδρών, precisely to show that it never once passes the heart. What is at stake is therefore not diet but jurisdiction: where does the line between holy and common actually run, and who is competent to say. The scribes ran it at the hands. Jesus runs it at the heart, and then, if the masculine participle of v. 19 is genuine (Pulpit, Ellicott and Chrysostom say it is; Gill and Geneva read the neuter), Mark records that he moved the line himself. That is a claim to legislate where Moses legislated. Our reading, held loosely, is that Benson and Pulpit are right that no Levitical distinction is being called foolish, and still not sufficient: the distinction is not mocked, it is fulfilled and therefore closed, exactly as Peter would be told on the roof, what God has cleansed, do not call common. There is also a hard mercy in the second half. The word for defile means to make common, and the common people were what the Pharisees meant when they said sinners. By the end of v. 23 everyone is in that class, since the source named is the heart of men, singular, one organ predicated of the race. No washing reaches it. Gill is right that the fountain must be dealt with rather than the streams, and Henry is right that the only remedy named anywhere in Scripture for a fountain is a new one. The line below is the tool's own summary sentence, not Scripture and not a quotation from any commentator.
The stomach can be emptied; the heart has to be replaced.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
⚙ Matthew 15:1 to 20 reports this discourse, and JFB treats the two as one passage, referring the whole of Mark 7:1 to 23 to the notes on Matthew. The Verifier's bases are lexical and strong: the catalogue shares κλοπή (G2829), a noun found in only two verses in the whole New Testament, here and at Matthew 15:19, together with διαλογισμός (G1261, fourteen verses) and καρδία (G2588); the saying shares κοινόω (G2840, eleven verses) and εἰσπορεύομαι (G1531, eighteen verses) with Matthew 15:11, 17 and 18, and νοέω (G3539, fourteen verses) with Matthew 15:17. Cambridge notes that the preferable order of the vices differs, and Gill that Mark omits false witness and adds six items Matthew lacks. This is a Greek to Greek link inside one Testament and is tiered on the shared rare lexeme, not on a citation claim: neither evangelist quotes the other.
Matthew 15:11 · Matthew 15:17 · Matthew 15:18 · Matthew 15:19 · Matthew 15:20
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G2829 κλοπή (in 2 vv, its only other occurrence), G1261 διαλογισμός (in 14 vv), G2840 κοινόω (in 11 vv), G1531 εἰσπορεύομαι (in 18 vv), G3539 νοέω (in 14 vv), G2588 καρδία (in 149 vv). Rare shared lexeme justifies a verbal tier; no quotation of one Gospel by the other is claimed.
⚙ The two words Mark sets against each other in vv. 15 to 19, κοινόω (make common) and καθαρίζω (cleanse), are the same two words that carry the voice in Peter's vision at Acts 10:15 and its retelling at Acts 11:9. Pulpit says the v. 19 explanation "agrees finely" with Acts 10:15, and Ellicott says the words "anticipate, in almost the same terms," that verse. The link is therefore both lexical and, in the commentators' judgment, deliberate on Luke's part. It is worth noting against over-reading it that Acts 21:28 uses κοινόω in the opposite direction, of Paul accused of profaning the temple, so the word itself settles nothing; the pairing with καθαρίζω is what ties these texts.
Acts 10:15 · Acts 11:9 · Acts 21:28
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G2840 κοινόω (in 11 vv) at both ends and G2511 καθαρίζω (in 30 vv); Acts 21:28 shares G2840 alone. A rare-lexeme verbal link within the Greek New Testament, not a citation: Acts does not quote Mark.
⚙ The hinge of this unit is a pair of rare adverbs, ἔξωθεν (G1855, twelve verses) and ἔσωθεν (G2081, twelve verses). The same pair, with καθαρίζω, carries the woe on the cup cleansed outside and the tombs whitewashed outside at Matthew 23:25 to 28 and Luke 11:39 to 40. The link is a shared vocabulary serving one recurring argument of Jesus against the Pharisees, that purity is being measured at the wrong surface. It is tiered structural rather than verbal because the adverbs are ordinary directional words and no saying is being quoted; the motif, not the wording, is what carries.
Matthew 23:25 · Matthew 23:27 · Matthew 23:28 · Luke 11:39 · Luke 11:40
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G1855 ἔξωθεν (in 12 vv), G2081 ἔσωθεν (in 12 vv), G2511 καθαρίζω (in 30 vv), G3779 οὕτω (in 203 vv). Real verbal overlap inside a shared inside/outside motif; downgraded from verbal because the shared words are common directional adverbs and no quotation is involved.
⚙ Three of Mark's vices cluster again in Romans 1:29: φόνος (G5408, nine verses), πονηρία (G4189, seven verses) and δόλος (G1388, eleven verses), all rare, all in one verse of Paul, in a passage whose conclusion is that God gave men over to an ἀδόκιμος mind and which lists ἀσύνετος (Romans 1:31) among the results, the very word Jesus uses of the disciples in Mark 7:18. Benson notes independently that the sins Mark lists are those of the second table of the law "as they are reckoned up by St. Paul, Romans 13:9." The shared lexemes are real and rare; what is not claimed is that Paul is citing Mark.
Romans 1:29
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G5408 φόνος (in 9 vv), G4189 πονηρία (in 7 vv), G1388 δόλος (in 11 vv), three rare lexemes in a single verse of Paul. Deliberately downgraded from verbal: vice catalogues in this period draw on a common stock of Hellenistic Jewish vocabulary, so the overlap is better explained by shared genre than by literary dependence in either direction.
⚙ The BSB text of this unit quotes no Old Testament verse. It does not need to: the entire dispute presupposes the food law of Leviticus 11 and its restatement in Deuteronomy 14, and Mark's aside in v. 19 declares that law's distinction fulfilled and therefore closed. Benson and Pulpit both resist putting it so strongly, Benson holding that the Mosaic distinction "still continued in force" for a Jew and Pulpit that our Lord did not intend to disparage the Levitical law but to clear it of scribal accretion. Their caution is recorded because it is a real reading, not a timid one. This is a cross-Testament link between a Greek text and a Hebrew one, so no shared Strong's number is possible and no verbal tier could be honest; it is tiered typological because the relation claimed is fulfilment of a figure, and the figure (separation enacted at the table) is read as answered by separation enacted at the heart.
Leviticus 11:1 · Leviticus 11:47 · Deuteronomy 14:3
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers are impossible, so no verbal tier is available. Basis is the pericope's explicit subject matter (clean and unclean food) plus Mark's own editorial clause at 7:19; the fulfilment reading is ancient and widely held, and Benson and Pulpit's dissent from its strong form is recorded in the body.
⚙ Mark 7:21 puts διαλογισμοὶ κακοί, evil reasonings, at the head of the list and the heart at its source. That diagnosis is Hebrew before it is Greek: Genesis 6:5 and 8:21 on every intention of the thoughts of the heart, Jeremiah 17:9 on the heart as deceitful above all things, Proverbs 4:23 on keeping the heart because out of it are the issues of life, and Proverbs 6:16 to 19 with its own catalogue of what the Lord hates, which likewise names a proud look, a lying tongue and hands that shed innocent blood. Pulpit closes its comment on v. 20 by quoting Proverbs 4:23 directly, so at least one of these connections is made by a named commentator and not only by this tool. Gill grounds the same diagnosis in Psalm 5:9, Job 14:4 and Psalm 51:5. Cross-Testament, so structural and not verbal.
Genesis 6:5 · Genesis 8:21 · Jeremiah 17:9 · Proverbs 4:23 · Proverbs 6:18 · Psalm 51:10
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is possible, so a verbal tier is excluded. Basis is a shared motif of the heart as the source of evil, evidenced inside the sources themselves: Pulpit cites Proverbs 4:23 at Mark 7:20, Gill cites Psalm 5:9 and Job 14:4 at Mark 7:21 and Psalm 51:5 at Mark 7:23.
⚙ Hebrews 9:13 uses κοινόω in its perfect passive participle of those who have been defiled, and grants that the ashes of a heifer sanctify "to the purifying of the flesh," before arguing that the blood of Christ goes where that sprinkling could not, to the conscience. The lexical overlap with Mark is real (the same rare verb) but the arguments are different: Mark denies the defiling power of food, Hebrews concedes the cleansing power of the rite and then measures its reach. Tiered structural rather than verbal for that reason, even though the shared lexeme is rare enough to permit the higher tier.
Hebrews 9:13
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G2840 κοινόω (in 11 vv). Deliberately downgraded from verbal: the shared word serves two different arguments (defilement denied to food in Mark; the limited reach of ritual purification in Hebrews), so the honest claim is a structural link, not a quotation or an echo.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
⚙ If καθαρίζων in v. 19 is masculine, as the better manuscripts have it, then its subject is the speaker of v. 18, and Mark's aside says that Jesus, by pronouncing this sentence, made all foods clean. Pulpit states the construction and reports that Chrysostom had already read it so, giving the Greek: "But Mark affirms that he said these things, making the meats clean." Ellicott reaches the same result on grammatical grounds and calls it the better sense. That is a christological claim of the first order, made in a subordinate clause: a man speaks, and a category of the Torah changes. The Acts material shows the early church working out the same thing under the same two words, κοινόω and καθαρίζω, and Hebrews 9:13 to 14 states the principle at large, that the blood of Christ reaches the conscience where the ashes of a heifer reached only the flesh. The reading is old and widely held; the honest qualification is that Gill and the Geneva gloss take the neuter reading, under which the verse says nothing christological at all.
Mark 7:19 · Acts 10:15 · Acts 11:9 · Hebrews 9:13
⚙ The catalogue of vv. 21 and 22 is not moral scolding; it is diagnosis, and it ends in a verdict that no external remedy can reach the site of the disease. Henry puts the pastoral consequence exactly: a spiritual understanding of the law and a sense of the evil of sin "will cause a man to seek for the grace of the Holy Spirit, to keep down the evil thoughts and affections that work within." Gill drives to the same place through Job 14:4, who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean, and answers that no one has, "but the man Christ Jesus." Scripture's own remedy for a defiled heart is never a washing but a replacement: a clean heart created in Psalm 51:10, a heart of flesh for a heart of stone in Ezekiel 36:26, the law written on the heart in Jeremiah 31:33, hearts sprinkled clean in Hebrews 10:22. Mark 7 supplies the diagnosis those texts answer, and does not itself state the cure, which is why this reading is offered as a canonical inference and not as an exegesis of the pericope.
Psalm 51:10 · Ezekiel 36:26 · Jeremiah 31:33 · Hebrews 10:22
⚙ Mark has already shown Jesus claiming authority to forgive (2:10) and lordship over the Sabbath (2:28). Here the claim extends to the clean and the unclean. The commentators in this brief will not put it that way: Benson holds that the Mosaic distinction "still continued in force" and that our Lord only denied that food in itself can defile the mind; Pulpit says his object was to clear the Levitical teaching of scribal obscurity, not to disparage it. Their restraint is honest and is part of the record. What this tool adds, fallibly, is that the restraint is difficult to hold together with Mark's own editorial clause: a clause which says that all foods were made clean is not a clarification of Leviticus 11 but a verdict upon it, and the verdict is issued by the speaker, not by a council. The reading that Jesus here speaks as the Law's own Lord is widely held in the later tradition; the reading that he speaks only against scribal accretion is the one held by the named voices in this unit, and both are left standing.
Mark 2:28 · Mark 7:19 · Matthew 15:20
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. (1) Mark 7:16 has no BSB text: the verse ("If any man have ears to hear, let him hear") is absent from the best manuscripts. Ellicott says it "may have been originally a marginal note written by some early transcriber"; Pulpit reports the Revisers of 1881 placed it in the margin. It is retained here as a verse entry carrying only those two textual voices. (2) Mark 7:19 turns on a variant. The commentators in this brief divide: Pulpit and Ellicott take the masculine καθαρίζων and make the clause Mark's comment that Jesus cleansed all foods; Gill and the Geneva margin take the neuter and make the latrine the thing that purges. Both readings are printed in the voices for that verse, and the synthesis does not pretend the question is closed. Ellicott further conjectures that the clause may itself have entered from a margin, and that conjecture is recorded rather than suppressed. (3) The interlinear in this brief assigns ἔξωθεν (G1855) as a preposition at 7:15 and as an adverb at 7:18 on the identical form; that inconsistency is the source's and is left as received. (4) Barnes' note at 7:19 argues from the digestive physiology of 1834 (chyme, chyle, the thoracic duct); it is quoted because the exegetical point stands independently of the science, and the dating is flagged at the voice. (5) The claim that Mark wrote under Peter's supervision, which Cambridge and Pulpit use to explain the suppression of Peter's name at 7:17, is early church tradition, not a statement of the text. (6) Every thread pairing this Gospel text with an Old Testament passage (Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Genesis, Jeremiah, Proverbs, Psalms) is tiered structural or typological, never verbal, because a Greek text and a Hebrew text cannot share a Strong's number and this unit contains no formal Old Testament quotation. (7) The vice-list threads rest on shared rare lexemes computed by the Verifier; what is claimed is lexical overlap, not literary dependence in either direction. (8) The sola reading and the pullquote are this tool's own fallible synthesis, marked ⚙, and carry no authority beyond the reader's testing of them against Scripture.
✦ = 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)