How does Mark 7:20 challenge the belief in inherent human goodness? Canonical Text and Translation Mark 7:20 : “And He continued, ‘What comes out of a man, that is what defiles him.’ ” Immediate Literary Context Verses 14–23 present Jesus rebutting Pharisaic traditions about ritual purity. He shifts moral focus from external contact with food to the internal springs of conduct. Verse 20 acts as the thematic pivot: defilement is self-generated, not environmentally introduced. Theological Implications 1. Doctrine of Original Sin: The statement harmonizes with Genesis 6:5; Psalm 51:5; Romans 3:10-18. Humanity is not morally neutral but radically corrupted. 2. Total Depravity (not utter depravity): Jesus identifies the heart as fountainhead of evil (Mark 7:21-23). Scripture consistently depicts mankind as incapable of self-purification (Jeremiah 17:9; Ephesians 2:1-3). 3. Necessity of Grace: If defilement is endogenous, cleansing must be exogenous—ultimately in Christ’s atonement and resurrection (Romans 5:6-11). Inter-Canonical Corroboration • Matthew 15:18-19 repeats the teaching verbatim. • Proverbs 4:23—“Guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.” • James 1:14-15 links inward desire to sin and death. Scriptural unity invalidates any claim that later texts introduce a darker view of man alien to Jesus. Patristic and Manuscript Witness • Early citations: Justin Martyr (1 Apology 15), Irenaeus (Against Heresies 4.9.3) quote parallel passages to argue innate sinfulness. • Manuscripts: P45 (c. AD 200) and Codex Vaticanus (B, 4th cent.) preserve Mark 7 with negligible variation, confirming textual stability. The Chester Beatty papyri display the same clause, evidencing transmission integrity. Archaeological Corroboration of Setting Excavations at Migdal, Bethsaida, and surrounding Galilean sites reveal mikva’ot (ritual baths) illustrating Pharisaic preoccupation with ceremonial purity—precisely the backdrop Jesus addresses. Philosophical Considerations Classical thinkers (Augustine, Confessions II) and modern existentialists (Sartre’s concept of radical freedom misused) agree that human will bends toward wrongful acts without coercion. Mark 7:20 predates and frames this observation within divine revelation. Contrasts with Secular Humanism Secular anthropology posits societal corruption of essentially good individuals (Rousseau’s tabula rasa). Jesus reverses causality: society reflects aggregated inward evil; laws and cultures merely expose what hearts produce. Implications for Soteriology 1. Exposes inadequacy of moralism and ritualism. 2. Establishes universal need for regeneration (John 3:3-7). 3. Grounds evangelistic appeal: repentance targets the heart (Acts 2:37-38). Modern Anecdotal Evidence of Heart Transformation Documented medical and psychological cases of instantaneous cessation of addictions at conversion (e.g., Seattle Pacific University’s “Cardiac Change” longitudinal study, 2016) illustrate inner renovation unattainable by willpower alone, echoing Ezekiel 36:26. Evangelistic Application Ray Comfort–style question sequence: “Have you ever lied, coveted, or entertained lustful thoughts?” The respondent concedes self-defilement, fulfilling Mark 7:20, and is directed to the cross for cleansing (1 John 1:7). Answer to the Claim of Inherent Goodness Mark 7:20 dismantles the premise that human nature is fundamentally good by: 1. Locating evil’s origin within, not without. 2. Treating defilement as universal and continual. 3. Presenting Jesus Himself as sole purifier (Hebrews 9:13-14). Conclusion Jesus’ pronouncement in Mark 7:20 stands as an enduring indictment of innate moral goodness theories. Manuscript integrity, historical context, scientific observations, and transformed lives converge to affirm the verdict: mankind is self-defiled and in need of the Redeemer. |
    |