BACKGROUND

In a discussion recently with a couple of close friends the question of the current applicability of the Biblical Dietary Laws came up. One of the participants–an extremely astute student of the Bible–asserted that Mark 7:18-19 clearly states that Jesus had declared all foods clean.

Mark 7:18 And He said to them, "Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him;

19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?" (Thus He declared all foods clean.) [NASB]

At first glance, this passage seems to state that the Biblical Dietary Laws declaring certain foods CLEAN and others UNCLEAN, and thus practiced by the Hebrew people for almost 1,300 years at the time of Jesus, had been abolished, or at least declared by Yeshua (Jesus) unnecessary any longer.

Since I had studied this subject in-depth before our discussion–including the two other New Testament passages used by many to justify the understanding that the Kosher Food laws have been annulled (i.e., Acts 10:9-28 and Galatians 2:11-16)–I knew that they definitely had not been abolished.

But, how does one convey this understanding to ones who have been instructed all of their lives (as I had also) that indeed the Kosher Food laws (clean/unclean) have been abolished by what Jesus accomplished on the Cross, that Christians need not be concerned about them?

What I stated in our discussion was totally different than what they expected. What I said was not believed; therefore, not accepted by the others in the discussion. I am sure my credibility as a bible student was severely questioned, although in their politeness they didn’t overtly state that.

Why should I expect them to accept it? The passage itself seems so clear, until one becomes a Berean and checks these things out to see if they are so (Acts 17:11).

Time precluded us studying various source materials that day to determine from a hermeneutics process what was correct. Therefore, this paper has been prepared for those in the discussion, those interested in the process, and those who want to get a better understanding of the continuing biblical position re Kashrut (Kosher Food).

DISCUSSION.

Several translations of Mark 7:19 have this sentence as the concluding portion of the verse: (Thus He declared all foods clean.) This includes NASB, NKJ, NIV, (You will note these are not quoting that Jesus said they were clean; it is a parenthetical remark, presumably by Mark.)

The New Century Version (NCV) has: (When Jesus said this, he meant that no longer was any food unclean for people to eat.) [Carl’s Comment: This version really runs wild with the translation, particularly when compared with The Interlinear Bible, KJV, and Stern’s notes below.]

A look at other translations closer to the original Greek documents has a very different result:

The Interlinear Bible: (MK 7:19) This is because it does not enter into his heart, but into the belly, and goes out into the wastebowl, purging all the foods.

KJV and Darby’s New Translation (DNT): (Mk 7:19) Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

YLT (Young’s Literal Translation): (Mk 7:19) because it doth not enter into his heart, but into the belly, and into the drain it doth go out, purifying all the meats.'

NONE of these latter translations has a parenthetical commentary by either Mark or Jesus that would state that all foods have thereby been declared clean. Instead, they have this "purging" or "purifying" as a part of what Jesus said.

It now becomes very clear that what Jesus said merely described the eating and elimination process, thereby purging the body of digested foods, the waste. That is basically what He was describing in this verse. (See below for the impact and further meaning.)

Since The Interlinear Bible does not have any inclusion of the parenthetical statement, why is it found in the NASB, NIV, NKJ, NCV, and some others? (This parenthetical is found in some manuscripts of lesser repute, not the more reliable ones.) It is my opinion this is one of many dishonest translation entries based on a particular bias, not on what the majority of the discovered documents included. The King James translators got it right on this one.

Interestingly, Dr. David Stern in his Complete Jewish Bible and the Jewish New Testament Commentary includes the parenthetical comment in Mark 7:19. However, he does so in order to address in detail the whole issue. (See Appendix A for a complete quote.) His translation and commentary are from a Hebraic perspective and are highly recommended for study.

Stern concludes that the only thing Jesus is even addressing is whether or not the food is ritually acceptable because the disciples had not washed their hands before eating their food. He points out that by definition only kosher (clean) food is considered food in the first place. Therefore, the food in this passage was considered biblically clean or His disciples would not have been eating it at all.

The only question being addressed was whether their failure to wash their hands made it not kosher. Jesus states that the food they were eating was not made unkosher because they had not washed their hands. Jesus does not state that ALL foods are kosher (clean); only that food which they were eating at the time with unwashed hands.

Yeshua (Jesus) has not thereby done away with the Kashrut Laws (clean/unclean foods) and instructions of the Torah. To conclude this is simply not paying attention to either the context or a more proper translation from the source documents.

So, what is the point? Why have most Christian denominations concluded that the Kosher Food Laws are no longer applicable based on this travesty of translation and interpretation?

Where does that leave us, particularly those who are trying their best to live a life pleasing to the Lord? We know we all have to account to Him one of these days; what will be the basis for determining how we did? If Kosher is still kosher, how should we then live? Is that included, too?

There are several books published by Messianic believers that address this issue. One of the best and most balanced is God’s Appointed Customs, A Messianic Jewish Guide to the Biblical Lifecycle and Lifestyle, Barney Kasdan, Lederer Messianic Publishers, P. 97-110.

There is not space in this paper to go into all the ramifications, so I refer you to the book.

CONCLUSION.

The Lord’s teachings in Mark 7, etc., reconfirms that certain foods are clean (kosher) and certain foods are not (unclean). Although it is certainly what comes out of the heart that defiles us, the willful, deliberate, habitual violation of His biblical instructions on what is proper/improper food is important. It deserves greater study by all of us. Since Yahweh has not changed His mind, we need to take it more seriously. Jesus most certainly did not nullify the biblical dietary food laws (kashrut)!

APPENDIX A

A. Partial quote from the Holman Bible Dictionary re Hermeneutics.

The science of interpreting the Bible (or any piece of literature) is called hermeneutics. If we want to interpret a piece of literature, we must ask at least five questions: 1) Who was the writer and to whom was he writing? 2) What was the cultural-historical setting of the writer? 3) What was the meaning of the words in the writer’s day? 4) What was the intended meaning of the author and why was he saying it? 5) What should this mean to me in my situation today? These basic questions lead into other questions that must be explored in a serious attempt to understand the message of the Bible. The reader today must somehow try to enter the world of the biblical writer and seek to understand what the writer was saying. Then he must bring that ancient message into today’s world where the reader lives.

B. Quote concerning Mark 7:2-23 from the Jewish New Testament Commentary, Dr. David Stern, P. 92-94

[NOTE: In this commentary, Tanakh = Old Testament; Oral Torah (Law) = Mishna; P’rushim = Pharisees; Halakhah/halakhic = way to walk, Jewish law (Messianic halakhah = Messianic way to walk)]

Verses 2-4 Mark’s explanation of n’tilat-yadayim, ritual handwashing, in these verses corresponds to the details set forth in Mishna tractate Yadayim. In the marketplace one may touch ceremonially impure things; the impurity is removed by rinsing up to the wrist. Orthodox Jews today observe n’tilat-yadayim before meals. The rationale for it has nothing to do with hygiene but is based on the idea that "a man’s home is his Temple," with the dining table his altar, the food his sacrifice and himself the Cohen (priest). Since the Tanakh requires cohanim to be ceremonially pure before offering sacrifices on the Temple altar, the Oral Torah requires the same before eating a meal.

Verses 5-13 Yeshua could not be opposing tradition as such because the New Covenant itself speaks favorably of its own traditions (1C 11:2&N, 2 Th 2:15&N). And at Yn (Jn) 7:37&N we have an example of Yeshua honoring a tradition spoken of in the Mishna but nowhere in the Tanakh. [I.e., the living water ceremony & Yeshua.]

In fact, traditions are necessary in life. A state cannot be run by a constitution without legislation. Likewise the Jewish nation could not be run by the Written Torah alone, without the orderly application of it and addition to it implied in the concept of tradition. But just as a country’s legislation cannot contradict or supplant its constitution, so too tradition (Jewish, Messianic, Christian, or whatever) cannot violate or alter God’s word (see Mt 12:2–11&NN, Mt 18:18–20&N). The Oral Torah comes very close to implying that it can (Bava Metzia 59a, quoted at Ac 9:4N); but according to the present passage this position is inconsistent with Messianic Judaism.

Verse 19 Thus he declared all foods ritually clean, even if the participants at the meal have not washed their hands. But Yeshua did not, as many suppose, abrogate the laws of kashrut and thus declare ham kosher! Since the beginning of the chapter the subject has been ritual purity as taught by the Oral Torah in relation to n’tilat-yadayim (vv. 2–4&N) and not kashrut at all! There is not the slightest hint anywhere that foods in this verse can be anything other than what the Bible allows Jews to eat, in other words, kosher foods. Neither is kashrut abolished in Ac 10:9–28 or Gal 2:11–16; see notes there [see below].

Rather, Yeshua is continuing his discussion of spiritual prioritizing (v. 11&N). He teaches that tohar (purity) is not primarily ritual or physical, but spiritual (vv. 14–23). On this ground he does not entirely overrule the Pharisaic/rabbinic elaborations of the laws of purity, but he does demote them to subsidiary importance. See Yn 7:22–23&N on the halakhic process of assigning ranks to potentially conflicting laws. Yeshua here is making Messianic halakhah ?(way to walk, Jewish law).

The Greek text at this point is a dangling participial clause, literally, "cleansing all the foods." There is no "Thus he declared"; I have added these words for the sake of clarifying the one meaning I believe this passage can have, namely, that it is Mark’s halakhic summary of Yeshua’s remarks (see Section V of the Introduction to the JNT, paragraph on "The Translator and His Interpretations"). However, some believe this phrase is not a comment by Mark but part of what Yeshua himself said and render it: "a process which cleanses all food." According to this understanding, Yeshua is explaining that the body’s ordinary digestive process makes all foods clean enough to be eaten, so that handwashing is of minor importance and the P’rushim [Pharisees] shouldn’t be giving it so much attention. Conclusively against such a rendering is that it suddenly puts the focus on hygiene instead of ritual purity, which is the topic of the rest of the passage. It does not answer the halakhic sh’eilah ("question"; see Mt 22:23N) about ritual purity posed by the P’rushim, because food can have in it not a single germ and yet be ritually unclean.

Moreover, the nominative masculine form of the Greek participle "katharizon" ("cleansing") agrees grammatically with "legei" ("he replied," literally, "he says") in v. 18, so that on the basis of the linguistic evidence it makes better sense to suppose that "cleansing all the foods," like "he replied," is a comment by Mark and not part of what Yeshua said.