>>/200/
> Words have several meanings. Metaphorical use tends to grow from literal use. If you had a wet dream you were levitically unclean and you removed that uncleanness by washing (and maybe something else I don't remember now). Levitically there are several cases of physical contamination resulting in ritual uncleanness, those are very closely tied. 
> Now the situation the apostles were in while they were eating was that their hands were dirty. You can get that meaning from understanding the culture at that time, however it's not what's literally being said and more importantly it's not the significance. Even Mark 7:2 has to point out that the hand are koinos since they're unwashed. Why this was important to the Pharisees? Because their tradition held it as ritual uncleanness. Let's go to Mark 7:15, when Jesus explains what 'defiles' man he uses words coming from the root word koinos. Do you really think he talks about physical dirt? Hear ye, hear ye, Jesus says the dirt that's outside man cannot make dirty and it is only mans bodily excretions that can make him dirty! You can eat feces and smear them all over yourself and as long as it's not your feces you're clean as a whistle, let us rejoice! 
> MATE. Seriously, mate. I parabolised it as strikingly as I could cause I don't think anything tamer will do when you're so out there. 
> I'm feeling like we're not both talking English to one another here. 
> Common is literal, original meaning of the word. Defilement is the significance here, by further context - accusations from religious leaders - you arrive at defilement being ritual or moral. Physical dirtiness is the situation and reason for defilement and an information you can gain from cultural context. Because defilement is caused by physical dirt it is ritual not moral defilement. Later Jesus turns this around and explains that moral defilement, which is caused by evil proceeding from man, is what's of concern to God. 
Mate, I simply said that "defilement" via it being shared is what the word meant. I never denied that the concept is both metaphorical and literal. You're blabbering on about nothing relevant to my argument here.
> But you say God wants men to live under Levitical Law and God does not change. Hmm. 
Okay, let me explain this for dummies. After the creation, man (in the image of God) was given dominion over the earth, and there was only one commandment, and that was not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge. Adam and Eve transgressed that commandment, and that's the original sin we all inherit today.
Fast forward until Abraham, the Covenant of Grace was made with him and his descendants, and later on, the Sinai Covenant was made with Moses. This is what gave the 10 commandments and the 603 other commandments, i.e. the Moral Law and the Ceremonial Law. Then there was the Royal Covenant with David, but that didn't introduce any new commandment.