COMMENTARY ON MARK


LESSON NUMBER 76


Mark 7:9 And He said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. 10 For Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” (Mark 7:9-13; Matthew 15:3-6)

 

ELABORATING ON “TRADITION”


INTRODUCTION

               How serious is it when a person’s religion is bounded and driven by the “traditions of men?” – when religious customs and manners are treated as though they were given by God, and the approval of men is determined by them? Are there any consequences to such an approach to religion? Jesus will affirm that any religious conduct (application of Scripture or interpretation of God’s commands) that is determined by human wisdom or opinion, carries with it most serious consequences. This has all been occasioned by a question by the Pharisees and scribes: “Why walk not Thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?” (7:5). Some might have simply dismissed the question, saying that each person has a right to his own opinion, and that the disciples really saw things differently. However, that is not the approach of Christ. When any man attempts to bind on another religious conduct that reflects purely human opinion, a most serious offence has been committed. Our “application,” or interpretation of Scripture must not be in fundamental disagreement with the nature of God and the focus of His Word. Nor, indeed, are men allowed the luxury of attempting to make the Word of God support their carnal prejudice. Such an approach, Jesus affirms, removes all power from the commandment for that person.


WHAT ONE MUST DO TO KEEP THEIR OWN TRADITION

                Mk 7:9 And He said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.”


               FULL WELL. Other versions read, “All too well,” NKJV “nicely set aside,” NASB “have a fine way,” NIV “How ingeniously.” NJB The word translated “Full well” has an interesting lexical meaning: “distinguished in form, excellence, goodness, usefulness, as to be pleasing . . . affecting the mind agreeably, comforting and confirming.” THAYER The idea is that the elders, Pharisees and scribes had worked hard to develop their traditions. Their aim was to justify their own conduct, which contradicted the Divine commandment, and they appeared to have done a good job. At least they now felt good about their deviate conduct. Their religion now justified the way they thought and acted, even though it was totally unacceptable to God.


               It is no wonder that believers are warned about human philosophy and tradition: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ” (Col 2:8). From man’s point of view, traditions are well thought out, and appear to fully justify the conduct or persuasion they promote.


               YE REJECT THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD. Other versions read “set aside,” NASB “make void,” DOUAY “get around,” NJB “cast aside,” PNT and “put away.” YLT Their religion required that they “handle” the commandments of God. Yet, their hearts were not in accord with those commands. They were now cast upon the horns of a dilemma. They insisted on being known as the chosen people – the people of God. Yet, they were a “disobedient and gainsaying people” (Rom 10:21). The God they professed to worship and serve required things with which they could not agree. They could not afford to come right out and deny the validity of the commandment. That would expose them for what they really were. Therefore, they, like the Gentiles, would “change the truth of God into a lie” (Rom 1:25). The Gentiles changed the truth by suggesting nature was calling attention to itself rather than to God. So they worshiped what was made instead of the Maker. It all allowed them to remain religious, salving their conscience and justifying how they lived and what they did. In order to do this, however, they had to “reject” the testimony of nature, which really declared the “power and Godhead” of it’s Creator Rom 1:20).


               Likewise, the elders, Pharisees, and scribes, had “rejected the commandment of God.” They had willingly pushed it away from themselves, refusing to consider it, understand it, or shape their thinking and manner of life by it.


               THAT YE MAY KEEP. Now the Jewish leaders had done the very thing with the Law that the Gentiles did with nature. They had to reject what it was saying, in order that they might adopt a more palatable and agreeable approach to religion. Therefore, rather than receiving the Law as a means of defining sin and unveiling the impotence of humanity (Rom 3:20; 7:7-9), they willingly perceived it as a mere code of conduct. They then set out to use that perceived “code” as a means of justifying their own moral and spiritual depravity.


               The whole reason for their forthright rejection of the commandment was that they might “observe” their “own tradition.” NIV To them, their own ways were more cherished than the commandments of the Lord. Their attitude was precisely the opposite as that of David who said, “O how love I Thy law! it is my meditation all the day” (Psa 119:97). Rather than changing the Law to agree with his ways, David changed his ways to agree with the Law: “I thought on my ways, and turned my feet unto Thy testimonies” (Psa 119:59).


               Allow me to be clear about the difference here. David loved God’s word, the Jewish leaders did not. David kept the Word, the Jewish leaders rejected it. They did not agree with it, and therefore established their own spiritual boundaries with a disdain for the Word. Nothing about their conduct was either honest or sincere. It was driven by deep corruption.


               TRANSGRESSING THE COMMANDMENT. Matthew’s account has Jesus saying, “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” (Matt 15:3). Other versions read, “break the commandment,” NIV “go against,” BBE and “violate.” NLT It is possible for a person to think of transgression as simply doing what God forbids – like stealing, or committing murder or adultery. Here, however, Jesus states that God’s commandment was “transgressed” by holding to religious tradition.


               The “sweet Psalmist of Israel”(2 Sam 23:1) declared an aspect of “transgression” that is essential for us to grasp. “The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes” (Psa 36:1). One versions reads, “Transgression speaks to the ungodly within his heart; There is no fear of God before his eyes.” NASB That is, transgression is the direct result of not fearing God. It moves sinners to conduct their lives just as though there was not a God at all. Transgression results from thinking – thinking with God on the outside of the circle of thought. Thus Jesus has charged the critics of His disciples with being nothing more than violators of God’s Word, and they have done so in order to conveniently maintain their own traditions.


AN EXAMPLE OF THE TRADITION OF MEN

               10 For Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother.”


               HONOR THY FATHER AND THY MOTHER. Jesus extracts one of their cherished traditions, and it dealt with the first commandment that was attended with a promise (Eph 6:2): “Honor thy father and thy mother” (Ex 20:12). The Law also said, “Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father” (Lev 19:3). New covenant writings say, “Children, obey your parents” (Eph 6:1; Col 3:20). That word is based upon the commandment Jesus mentions, but the commandment itself is not limited to the obedience of children. What did the commandment to honor one’s father and mother mean?


               “Honor” involves respect, love, concern for, and reverence. It means one does not speak against his parents, make life difficult for them, or ignore their needs. One man has observed, “parents are to be honored, whether living or departed, known or unknown, good or evil.” G.A. Goodheart One of the very first observations about the conduct of the young Jesus was that He “was subject” to His parents, Mary and Joseph (Lk 2:41,51). He was twelve years old at the time, and was “subject unto them” because He honored them. This was even though Mary had rebuked Him for remaining in the holy city, spending time in the Temple (Lk 2:48-49). Even when delivering a hard word to them about being about His “Father’s business,” He did so with great respect, and followed it up by being subject to them.


               I can well remember some sound thrashings I received when very young, because I spoke disrespectfully to one of my parents. I did not honor them properly, and thus they assisted me to keep the commandment.


               DEATH TO THE CURSING ONE. The Law was particular on this point –and the Law was given by Almighty God Himself. “And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death”(Ex 21:17). And again, “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him” (Lev 20:9). And again, “Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt“ (Deut 27:16). To “curse” is to speak evil of, to revile, vilify, or degrade.


               IT IS CORBAN. The word “Corban” means “A gift offered to God.” THAYER The play on words here is both piercing and convicting. The idea is that when the parents required some assistance from their mature children, religious tradition allowed them to say that the money that could have been given to them was given to God instead. One version reads, “anything of mine you might have been helped by is Corban (that is to say, given to God).” NASB Matthew’s account reads this way, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God” NKJV (Matt 15:5). Thus, in the name of religion, by simply saying “Corban,” the person was absolved from his responsibility to honor his parents by assisting them in the time of need.


           WHAT THEIR RELIGION ALLOWED. This tradition, the text states, allowed the person to “no longer do anything for his father or his mother.” NKJV An example of honoring parents is found in the Lord Jesus Himself, who obviously cared for His mother following the passing of Joseph. This is confirmed in His action on the cross, when He committed His mother into the care of John the beloved: “When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple standing by, whom He loved, He saith unto His mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith He to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home (John 19:27). He was honoring His mother. The “tradition” of the elders, however, would have allowed Him to refuse to thus honor her by saying His resources were being given to God.


           THE PROMINENCE OF THIS KIND OF THINKING. There are some today who ignore the mandate to edify and build up the saints (1 Cor 14:261 Thess 5:11), by saying the main purpose for the assembly is the conversion of sinners. Thus some require giving, what they call, “the plan of salvation” in every message. Others ignore the Divine instruction given to sinners (Acts 2:36; 8:37; 16:31), instead having “converts” repeat “the sinner’s prayer” to assure them of Divine acceptance.


           An even more subtle corruption of the Word of God is the modern penchant for, what is called, “praise and worship.” This activity is said to open the gates of heaven, causing the Lord to draw close to us – even though “faith” is consistently held out as the exclusive means of drawing near to, accessing, and receiving from God (Rom 5:2; Eph 3:17; Heb 11:6).


           Are such actions innocent? Indeed not, for in order to embrace such notions, the word of God must be rejected. One cannot hold to “the traditions of men” without doing this. If tradition moves people to engage the church in a misplaced emphasis, they can only do so by rejecting what God has said about the activities of His people. This kind of explanation is no more pleasing today than it was to the religious bigots Jesus confronted in His ministry.


MAKING THE WORD OF GOD OF NONE EFFECT

            13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.”


           Jesus is not through with His scathing rebuke of the Pharisees and scribes. They had asked, what appeared to be, a rather uncomplicated question. However, that inquiry was driven by their corrupted desire to hang on to their tradition, even though it meant the rejection of the commandment of the very God they professed to serve.


           MAKING THE WORD OF NONE EFFECT. Other versions read, “invalidating the word of God,” NASB “nullify,” NIV “making void,” NRSV “making . . . of none authority.” GENEVA Matthew reads, “Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition” (Matt 15:6). To make the word of “none effect” means “deprive it of its force and authority.” THAYER This equates to Isaiah’s statement about “truth” falling in the street and failing (Isa 59:14-15). It means that although it is present, it has no power, and does not work for the enlightenment and good of the people.


           Where this condition exists, the Scriptures can be read in the synagogues, yet their message be totally missed, and tradition embraced in their place (Acts 15:21; 2 Cor 3:14). In the churches there can be formal readings of the Word, responsive readings of Scripture, the singing of songs with Scripture, teaching from quarterlies with Scripture, and the recitation of Scripture at the Lord’s Table and in prayers. Yet, the Scripture has no effect, regardless of how much of it is audibly spoken. Instead, the people steadfastly hold to their traditions – lifeless and powerless traditions that serve to make them think they are religious.


           Some, in their simplicity, might say that it is not possible for as mortal to make the Word of God lose its effectiveness. It is true that, from one perspective, God’s word will accomplish what it is sent to do. As it is written, “So shall My word be that goeth forth out of My mouth: it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isa 55:11). However, that does not always mean it will bless. The very word that brought blessing to Israel brought cursing to Pharaoh, his army, and the citizenry of Egypt.


           God, we are told, “having raised up His Son Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities” (Acts 3:26). However, He does not bless everyone! There are some whom He will ultimately destroy – who, in spite of Him being sent to bless, “know not God,” and “obey not the gospel” (2 Thess 1:8). Many of these people appear very devout, having “a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof” (2 Tim 3:5). Their tradition, like that of the Pharisees and scribes, makes the word of God of “none effect.”


           TRADITION THAT IS DELIVERED. Other versions read, “have handed down,” NKJV “hand on,” RSV “given forth,” DOUAY “ordained,” GENEVA and “have ordered.” TNT A tradition that is “delivered” is promoted, taught, and aggressively disseminated among the people. It may take the form of a special class on the history of the brotherhood, a doctrinal book, a special presentation, or a handy manual. The point is to get the people acquainted with the traditions, so that they may be kept to the honor of those who made them. In a denominational setting there are colleges, publications, book publishers, and other institutions designed to propagate the traditions of the day. Tradition is, indeed, still being “delivered.”


           Just as surely as this methodology allowed the Pharisees and scribes to maintain their unique approach to Moses, so modern day traditionalists are allowed to justify their sectarianism and promote their own personal interests. However in all of this activity,. The Word of God is being nullified, rendered of none effect, and made void.


           MANY SUCH LIKE THINGS. Delivering traditions to the people was a way, or mode, with them – a manner of approaching things that had to do with their religious identity. Instead of promoting the truth itself, they elevated their own corrupted views. Of course, there is no other way to advance purely personal interests, a religious empire, or a “private interpretation” (2 Pet 1:20). The word of God cannot be employed for the furtherance of a merely human agenda and objective. When men make an attempt to do such a thing, the Word of God is made “of none effect.” It simply cannot empower or facilitate human interests. When men make an effort to bolster their traditions with Scripture, they are employing an empty text, for the power of God will not deliver a blessing in a realm that is cursed.


           If you want the blessing of the Lord, you must leave Egypt. If you want Divine provision, you must refuse the Egyptian diet. If you want “spiritual blessings,” you must renounce the world, and take up your abode in the “heavenly places” in which those blessings are found and made accessible to you(Eph 1:3; 2:6).


           Spiritual life, or living by faith and walking in the Spirit, requires a certain distaste for empty and traditional religion. At some point, the soul that fellowships with Christ must see the futility of empty religious routine that does not require the heart. When that time comes, the individual will find that he is at variance with much of professed Christendom.