Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy

JESUS WAS EXPOSING THE RELIGIOUS CROOKS
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
LUKE 7:9-13 9 And he continued, “You have a fine
way of setting asidethe commands of God in order to
observe[a]your own traditions!10 For Moses said,
‘Honor your father and mother,’[b]and, ‘Anyone who
curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[c]
11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might
have been used to help their father or mother is
Corban(that is, devotedto God)— 12 then you no
longer let them do anything for their father or mother.
13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition
that you have handed down. And you do many things
like that.”
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Externalism Versus Righteousness
Mark 7:1-23
A.F. Muir

In vers. 3, 4 of this chapter we are furnished with an interesting piece of
antiquarianism. The daily life of the devout Jew is setbefore us in its
ceremonialaspect;not as Moses had originally ordered it, but as customand
human casuistryhad gradually transformed it. The light thrown upon several
questions is very searching and full of revelation, viz. the various senses in
which baptism seems to have been understood by the contemporaries of
Christ, and the punctilio, vigor, and detail with which ceremonial
purifications were carried out. It is only as we realize the background of daily
Jewishlife, againstwhich the life to which Jesus calledhis disciples stoodout
so prominently, that we are in a position to appreciate the current force of the
objections raisedby Pharisee and scribe. We have here -
I. CHRISTIANITYCRITICIZED FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF
RELIGIOUS TRADITION. (Vers. 1-5.)The exaggeratedform the latter
assumedbrought out the more strikingly the peculiarity and essential
characterof Christ's teaching.
1. It was an age in which Jewishceremonalismhad reachedits highest. The
doctrine of Pharisaismhad penetrated the common life of the people. They
might be said to have fallen in love with it. The distinctions are artificial and
super-refined, e.g. between"common," "profane," or"defiled hands, and
hands ceremonially clean. They washeddiligently (a paraphrase of the
original substituted by our revisers for oft" of the Authorized Version, and
apparently the best rendering of the difficult word in the original),
"carefully," or the "many other Amongst the respectable Jewsceremonial
strictness and nicety held a place very similar to what "goodmanners," or
polite behavior and refinement, occupywith ourselves, having, of course, an
additional supernatural sanctionfrom associationwith the Law. Thus to-day
the customs and observances ofnations amongstwhom civilization has long
existed might equally serve as a foil for the Christian moralist; and all
casuistries orsecondary, customarymoralities.

2. The objectors were the leaders and representatives ofthe religious life of
the time. "Pharisees, andcertain of the scribes, which had come from
Jerusalem." Theywere the leaders and teachers ofmetropolitan fanatical
ritualism. It is well when Christianity is judged that such men appear on the
bench; there canthen be no question as to the representative and
authoritative characterof the criticism. It would be a splendid thing if the
representatives ofmodern political, social, and ecclesiasticallife could be
convenedfor such a purpose.
3. What, then, is the objectionthus raised? It concernedan observance of
daily life. Christians are now judged on the same arena. In small things as in
large the difference will revealitself. It depended upon an abstractdistinction:
the hand might be actually clean when it was not ceremonially so. It was, in
the eyes of those who made it, the worst accusationthey had it in their power
to make. The moral life of the disciples was irreproachable;they "had
wrongedno man, corrupted no man, takenadvantage of no man." The
Christians of to-day ought to emulate this blamelessness;infidels can then fire
only blank cartridge.
II. THE TABLES TURNED. (Vers. 6-23.)The critics are themselves reviewed.
Trifling captiousness mustbe summarily dealt with, especiallywhen it wears
the garb of authority. The characterofthe objectors is of the first
consequence in judging of Christ's tone. Grave issues were atstake. The
ground of the fault-finding was superficialand untrustworthy, and a truer
criterion must be discovered. "Deceiversmay be denounced, that the deceived
may be delivered" (Godwin). The essentialnature of rectitude - the grand
moral foundations must be laid bare.
1. Christ begins with an appeal to Scripture. He is carefulto show that the
distinction betweenrighteousness andritualism is a scriptural one, and not of
his owninvention. At the same time, he gives the reference a satiricalor

ironical turn by making a prophetic identification! We don't know how much
is lost in ignoring the written Word of God. It is "profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness."
2. He next pointed out the opposition that existedbetweentheir traditions and
the Law. The instance selectedis a crucial one, viz. that of the fifth
commandment - "the first commandment with promise." Others might have
been given, but that would be sufficient. Family obligations are the inner
circle in which religion most intensely operates;if a man is wrong there, he is
not likely to be very righteous elsewhere.To prove their oppositionto the Law
was to strip them of all pretense to religion.
3. Lastly, common sense and consciencewere appealedto as regarded rites
and ceremonies. The "multitude" is here addressed;it is a point which the
common man is supposed able to decide. There are many weapons that may
thus be supplied to the evangelicalarmoury. If philosophy was rescuedfrom
barrenness by this method in the hands of a Socrates ora Reid, may we not
hope for greaterthings with regardto a common-sense religion? The great
foundation of all religious definitions and obligations is the true nature of
man. The essentialbeing of man is spiritual; the body is only the garment or
case in which he dwells. Purity or its opposite must therefore be judged of
from that standpoint. If the soul, will, spirit, inner thought of a man is pure,
he is wholly pure. Spiritual and ceremonialcleannessmust not be confounded.
Religionis not a matter of forms, ceremonies,oranything merely outside; but
of the heart. Yet the thought and will must influence the outward action,
habit, and life. The spiritual is the only eternal religion (John 4:23, 24). The
private question of the disciples is worthy of notice. A "parable" seems to
have been their common name for a difficult saying of Christ's. Their
incapacity was not intellectual but spiritual. ProfessedChristians themselves
often require to be more fully instructed. The progressive life of the true
Christian will itself solve many problems. "Had our Saviour been speaking as
a physiologist, he would have admitted and contendedthat many things from

without, if allowedto enter within, will corrupt the functions of physical life,
and carry disorder and detriment into the whole fabric of the frame. But he
was speaking as a moralist, and hence the antithetic statement of the next
clause (cf. ver. 15)" (Morison). - M.
Biblical Illustrator
Then came togetherunto Him the Pharisees,and certainof the Scribes.
Mark 7:1-16
Scribes and Phariseescoming to Christ
L. Palmer.
I. WHEN THEY CAME. When Gennesaretturned its heart toward Him.
When diseasedbodies had felt the virtue of His touch, and imprisoned souls
had been setfree by His word. Then. As soonas ever the Church's Child was
born, the devil sought to drown Him (Revelation12).

II. WHO THEY WERE THAT CAME. Phariseesand scribes. The learned
and the religious. These two classeshave always beenthe greatestopponents
of Christ's kingdom.
III. WHENCE THEY CAME. From Jerusalem. Machiavelobservedthat
there was nowhere less piety than in those that dwelt nearestto Rome. "The
nearer the Church, the farther from God." "It cannot be that a prophet shall
perish out of Jerusalem."
IV. WHERE THEY CAME. To Jesus. As the moth flies at the lamp, and bats
fly at the sun, What a contrastbetweensuch a coming and those named in
Mark 6:56. "I will draw all men unto Me."
(L. Palmer.)
The tradition of men
Monday Club Sermons.
It is the folly of men that, in discharge ofme duties of religion, they are
satisfiedto put ceremonies and confessions thatcostbut little, in the place of
righteousness ofheart and life which costa greatdeal.
I. There is today an ECCLESIASTICALritualism, which is disastrous to
piety. It starts with the assumption that its methods of worship are the best
possible;and, after a little, declares they are the only ones acceptable to God.
The Church usurps the place of Christ. Of any church that estimates ritual
above character, that endeavours to build up form rather than shape life,
Christ says, "Fullwell do ye rejectthe commandment of God that ye may
keepyour tradition."

II. There is today a SOCIAL ritualism, which is disastrous to true piety.
Public opinion is a power;it has its theory of religion. Certainthings done,
and certainothers left undone, are the credentials of piety. Men's actions are
the only things takeninto account, not the men themselves. Societyhas agreed
that a little honesty, a little charity, and church going, shall be acceptedas
religion. Such rejectthe commandment of God that they may keeptheir
tradition.
III. There is a ritualism of PERSONAL OPINION, whichis disastrous to true
piety. Every man has his own idea of the conditions on which he personally
may be right with God. They forgetthat it is for God to decide what is
satisfactoryto Him. It is sometimes arguedthat, since there are so many
opposite theories and conflicting creeds, ouracceptanceorrejection of what is
calledreligion cannot be of much importance. But religion is a simple matter.
Piety is the being and doing what God has commanded; just that; nothing
more and nothing less. Those commandments are few, brief, intelligible.
Whatevervagueness and confusionthere may be in our ideas of religion, it is
of our own making. Let God speak for Himself, and listen only to Him, and all
is plain.
(Monday Club Sermons.)
Tradition accumulates rubbish
Accepting the traditions of men as our rule, we getto be heirs of a vast deal of
rubbish. Just as around the anchored rock in the ever-swinging tide, there
gathers all sorts of debris, floating fragments of wrecks, drifting grass and
weeds, with perhaps now and then some bright sea blossom, or shell of beauty
castup by the heave of the surge — so a church that takes as pattern of its
creedand ceremonialthe belief and methods of men of other times, is sure to

be cumbered with a mass of outworn mistakes, the refuse and driftwood of
centuries, with here and there a suggestionof world long value, but as a
whole, out of date and useless.
Tradition conceals truth
Eachgenerationencumbered the divinely ordained ritual with its own
comments; so after awhile men's notions overgrew and hid from sight God's
thought, as some wild vine in the forestwreathes its fetters of verdure around
the hearty tree, interlacing and interknotting its sprays, looping mesh on mesh
of pliant growth, till the tree is smothered and hidden, and the all-
encompassing vine alone is seenand seems to bare life.
Pervertedtradition the bane of the Church
J. Pratt, B. D.
It is a subtle artifice of the Great Enemy of mankind, to make the real Word
of God of none effect by means of a pretended Word. When he cannot prevail
with men to go contrary to what they know to be the Word which came from
God, then he deals with them as he taught his lying prophet to deal at Bethel
with the prophet of God who came from Judah. When Jeroboam"saidto the
Man of God, Come home with me, and refresh thyself, and I will give thee a
reward," the prophet resolutely repelled the invitation: "If thou wilt give me
half thy house, I will not go in with thee, neither will I eat bread nor drink
waterin this place; for so was it chargedme by the Word of the Lord, saying,
Eat no bread, nor drink water." An old prophet, however, followedthe man
of God, and gave him a like invitation, and receiveda like refusal. But, when
the greatdeceiverput a falsehoodinto the mouth of the wickedold man: "I

am a prophet also, as thou art, and an angelspake unto me by the Word of the
Lord, saying, 'Bring him back with thee into thy house, that he may eatbread
and drink water,'but he lied unto him" — the lie proved fatal! "He went back
with him, and did eatbread in his house, and drank water" (1 Kings 13). The
Man of God was greatly to be pitied, yet he was greatlyto be blamed. He had
receivedit explicitly from God that he should neither eatnor drink in
idolatrous Bethel;and it was his plain duty to adhere to that command, unless
God repealedit in the same way in which he gave it, or with equal evidence
that such was His will; whereas he believes an old man of whom he knows
nothing, on his own word, under suspicious circumstances, andin opposition
to what had been the Word of God to himself. While a direct and palpable
temptation to go contrary to God's command was offered, he resistedand
repelled the temptation; but when a temptation was offered, which came as a
repealof the command and in relief of his necessities,though on no sufficient
authority, then his weaknessprevailed. Why, think you, were lying prophets
permitted? Why are lying teachers stillsuffered? Why, even lying wonders?
To try the state of men's hearts. Is your heart, by the grace of God, made
humble and teachable? thenwill you be taught of the Spirit "to discern the
things which differ" — to detectthe fallacies and delusions practisedupon it
— and "to approve the things which are more excellent." Is your heart self-
sufficient, careless, carnal? thenwill it be deceived and led astrayby plausible
and flattering pretences. In contending that the Scriptures are the sole rule of
faith, we give them exclusive authority over the judgment and the conscience.
This authority lies in the real sense, andthe just application of that sense, not
in any sense orapplication contrary to that which is just and true, and which
man may seek to impose. This sense is to be ascertained, and the right
application of it is to be learnt by humble, teachable, diligent, and devout
study, with the use of all needful helps thereto. The influence of the Scriptures
on the heart is the specialwork of Him who dictated them. The blessing of
God is needful to our successin endeavouring to ascertainthe sense and right
application of them; but so great are the obstaclesto our "receiving with
meekness the engraftedWord," that "God, who commanded the light to shine
out of darkness, must shine into our hearts" by the specialgrace ofthe Holy
Spirit, in order to our feeling the transforming influence of the light of the
knowledge ofHis glory, as seenin the face of Jesus Christ. No consent of man

in any interpretation or application of Scripture is of binding authority on
others. Consentis often contagious — not enlightened. The influence of
leaders, the supposedinterests of party, early associations, andprejudices,
often bias the judgment. But the unerring standard remains. And the
deviations of churches, and councils, and nations, from this standard, and the
continuance of those deviations for ages, cannotdeflectthis standard one jot
or tittle from its rectitude. But while no consent of men can bind of authority
to any interpretation or application of Scripture, yet those views of truth
which are commended to us by the consentin them of varied bodies of
enlightened and devout men, come to us under a just and commanding
influence.
(J. Pratt, B. D.)
Ceremonialismand spirituality
J. R. Thomson, M. A.
I. CEREMONIALISM SUBSTITUTESWASHING WITH WATER FOR
PURITY OF HEART.
II. CEREMONIALISM SUBSTITUTESTHE TRADITIONS OF THE
ELDERS FOR THE COMMANDS OF GOD.
III. CEREMONIALISM SUBSTITUTES THE WORSHIP OF THE LIPS
FOR THE WORSHIP OF THE HEART.
IV. CEREMONIALISM SUBSTITUTESA SUBTLE EVASION FOR
FILIAL DUTY.
V. CEREMONIALISM SUBSTITUTESAVOIDANCE OF UNCLEAN
FOOD FOR AVOIDANCE OF IMPURE AND MALICIOUS THOUGHTS.

Application: It is possible to be, in a sense, religious, andyet, in a deeper
sense, sinful, and out of harmony with the mind and will of God. None is
wholly free from the temptation to substitute the external, formal, apparent,
for the faith, love, and loyalty of heart required by God. Hence the need of a
goodheart, which must be a new heart — the gift and creationof God by His
Spirit.
(J. R. Thomson, M. A.)
The tradition of men versus the commandments of God
R. Green.
In the conflict betweenthe Church and the sacredrelationships of common
life, to the latter must be assignedthe preeminence. The necessitiesofthe
temple, of its services orits servants, must not be met at the expense of filial
faithfulness. The sin of the Pharisees andscribes was —
I. A GROSS PERVERSIONOF THE RELATIVE CLAIMS OF THE
PARENT AND THE CHURCH.
II. A WICKED INTERFERENCEWITHTHE FIRST COMMANDMENT
WITH PROMISE.
III. A CRUEL UNDERMINING OF FILIAL AFFECTION AND FIDELITY
AND AS CRUEL AN EXPOSURE OF THE AGED AND ENFEEBLED
PARENTS TO A FALSELY JUSTIFIED NEGLECT.
IV. AN UNWARRANTED USURPATION OF AUTHORITY TO WEAKEN
THE OBLIGATION OF A DIVINE LAW.

(R. Green.)
The religion of the Jews
Expository Discourses.
The interference of the Phariseesand scribes servedto bring out their
religion. Considersome of its features. The religion here depicted and
condemned —
I. CONSISTED MAINLY OF EXTERNAL OBSERVANCES (vers. 2-4).
1. By this feature the same system of religion may be detectedin the present
day.
2. Religionin this sense is upheld by many strong principles in the nature of
man-awakenedconscience, self-righteousness,vanity.
3. This systemis exceedinglydangerous. Misleads the awakenedsinner;
produces a deep and fatal slumber.
II. RESTS ON HUMAN AUTHORITY AS ITS WARRANT (vers. 3, 5, 7).
1. By this feature we may detectit in the present day. Among those who take
awaythe right — duty and exercise ofprivate judgment. Among those who
derive their religious belief from man — in whatever way.

2. This form of false religion is exceedinglydangerous. It dishonours Christ as
a prophet, etc. It gives despotic power to man, which he is not qualified to
wield. It degrades the soul to be a servant of servants, etc.
3. Call no man mawr.
III. PUTS DISHONOUR UPON THE SACRED SCRIPTURES.
1. By this feature we detectits existence now. In the Church of Rome, etc., the
Scriptures are wholly concealed— made to speak according to tradition and
the Church. Amongst ourselves:opinions are not surrendered to them, and
they are neglected.
2. This form of religion stands opposedto those Scriptures which it
dishonours (John 5:39, and others).
3. Know the Scriptures and revere them.
IV. MADE LIGHT OF THE MORAL LAW (vers. 8-12).
1. May be seenin our own day — in the Church of Rome. May be seen,
amongstourselves, in those who put religious ceremonies in the place of moral
duties.
2. This form has its origin in the love of sin, and is accommodatedto an
unsanctified heart.

3. It has no tendency to purify, but the reverse.
4. Beware ofAntinomianism.
V. CONSISTED IN HYPOCRISY, putting on appearances.
VI. WAS VIGILANT AND JEALOUS OF CHRIST AND CENSURED HIS
DISCIPLES (vers. 1, 2).
(Expository Discourses.)
Unwashen hands
Geikie's Life of Christ.
It was laid down that the hands were first to be washedclean. The tips of the
ten fingers were then joined and lifted up, so that the water ran down to the
elbows, then turned down, so that it might run off to the ground. Freshwater
was poured on them as they were lifted up and twice againas they hung down.
The washing itself was to be done by rubbing the fist of one hand in the hollow
of the other. When the hands were washedbefore eating, they must be held
upwards, when after it downwards, but so that the water should not run
beyond the knuckles. The vesselusedmust be held first in the right, then in
the left hand; the waterwas to be poured first on the right, then on the left
hand; and at every third time the words repeated, "Blessedartthou who bast
given us the command to washthe hands." It was keenlydisputed whether the
cup of blessing or the handwashing should come first; whether the towelused
should be laid on the table or on the couch; and whether the table was to be
clearedbefore the final washing or after it.

(Geikie's Life of Christ.)
The tradition of the elders
The excess to which these regulations were carried is well illustrated by what
is told of one Rabbi Akaba, who, in his dungeon, being driven by a pittance of
waterto the alternative of neglecting ablution or dying with thirst, preferred
death to failing in ceremonious observance.
Moses commandedwashing very freely
R. Glover.
But it was always in connectionwith some very definite cause;being required
either
(1)because ofphysical pollution which had been gathered, or
(2)in connectionwith moral consecrationwhich was purposed.The priests at
consecrationwere washed. So was the leper after his recovery, and so were all
after defilement or contactwith those defiled. But the tradition of the elders
had come to require as many washings in a day as Moses wouldhave required
in a month. The secretof this development lay in the adoption of the principle
of "The Hedge," i.e., something which guarded the Law by prohibiting not
only actions forbidden, but all actions which might by any possibility lead to
them. Accordingly, because Mosessaid that he who was defiled by contact
with a corpse should wash, they held it was wellto washalways afterbeing
out of doors, as you might have touched someone who might have touched
some one or something dead...Thus life became a very slavery. Of course "the
common people," as they were contemptuously styled, could not afford either
time, or thought, or money, to practise such scruples. But a greatnumber
associatedthemselves together, calling themselves "Haberim," or
"Comrades,"to observe these scruples. The Phariseesbelongedto this society,
of course, to a man.

(R. Glover.)
Pharisaic prejudice
These Phariseesfound fault because Christ's disciples did not obey man's law,
the quoted "tradition," the authority of their Church. It was not until the
great(seventh) Earl of Shaftesbury was twenty-five years of age that he
supposedthat anyone outside the Church of England was worth listening to,
or ever wrote anything worth reading. "As to their having any views of their
own worthy of consideration," he says, "it never crossedmy mind until one
day I gothold of a copy of some Commentary, and, after reading for awhile
with greatinterest, it suddenly struck me, 'The writer must have been a rank
Dissenter!' and I instantly shut up the book, recoiling from it as I would from
poison. One of the first things that opened my eyes was reading of Doddridge
being condemned as a Dissenter, andI remember exclaiming, 'Good heavens!
how will he stand in the day of judgment at the bar of God, as compared with
Pope Alexander VI?' It was not till I was twenty-five years old, or
thereabouts, that I gothold of Scott's Commentary on the Bible, and, struck
with the enormous difference betweenhis views and those to which I had been
accustomed, I beganto think for myself."
A hypocrite
T. Manton.
A hypocrite has been likened to one who should go into a shop to buy a
pennyworth, and should steala pound's worth; or to one who is punctual in
paying a small debt, that he may getdeeper into our books and cheat us of a
greatersum.
(T. Manton.)
Hypocrites perform small duties and neglectgreat

C. H. Spurgeon.
Hypocrites make much ado about small things that they may be more easyin
their conscienceswhile living in greatsins. They pay the tithe of mint to a
fraction, but rob God of His glory by their self-righteousness. Theygive God
the shells, and stealthe kernels for their own pride and self-will.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
Heart worship required
C. H. Spurgeon.
God requires soul worship, and men give Him body worship; He asks forthe
heart, and they presentHim with their lips; He demands their thoughts and
their minds, and they give him banners, and vestments, and candies.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
Perverse penances
C. H. Spurgeon.
No matter how painful may be the mortification, how rigid the penance, how
severe the abstinence;no matter how much may be taken from his purse, or
from the wine vat, or from the store, he will be content to suffer anything
soonerthan bow before the MostHigh with a true confessionofsin, and trust
in the appointed Saviour with sincere, child-like faith.
(C. H. Spurgeon.)
Faith and works reversed, orthe plant upside down
Sword and Trowel.

Some time ago a lady showedme a small seedling acacia, remarking, "I
cannot make this plant out; it doesn'tdo well at all; it doesn'tgrow a bit,
though I waterit well, and attend to it carefully." I lookedat the plant, and
soondiscoveredthe cause. The little plant had a tap root, as all seedlings have,
and this tap root should have been inserted in the soil, where it would soon
have struck out its lateral rootlets;but, instead of this, the plant was upside
down, the leading root being in the soil, and the tap root exposedto the sun
and air. It was impossible that the plant could grow or even live. It is thus
with some people's religion.
(Sword and Trowel.)
In what sense worship is voluntary
Burkitt.
The duties of worship ought to be voluntary, as voluntary is opposedto
constrained;but they must not be voluntary, as voluntary is opposedto
instituted or appointed. God doth no more approve of that worship we give
Him according to our will, than He doth approve of our neglectof that which
is according to His ownwill.
(Burkitt.)
Human tradition versus Divine command
R. Glover.
The experience is a universal one, that God's commandments suffer from the
competition of human rules. The greatprecepts of God have only an unseen
God behind them, but behind the human rules there is generally a class whose
pride is gratified by their observance and incensedby their neglect.
Accordingly, wheneversmall rules of outward conduct begin to flourish, the
greatprinciples of religion — faith, love, honour — fall into the background.
It is so today. The Thug in India who confessedto having killed 320 people

had no pangs of conscienceforkilling them, but was somewhatdistressedon
accountof having killed a few of them after a hare had crossedhis path or a
bird whistled in a certain direction. Murder was no crime in his opinion, but
the neglectofan omen from Bowanywas a grave one. In Hinduism, which is
ceremonialthroughout, a man may be a most religious man, and yet very
wicked. Many in our own country would unscrupulously commit greatcrimes,
and yet be very carefulto avoid eating flesh on GoodFriday. It seems as if we
only had a certainamount of power of attention in us, and, if it goes to little
rules, there is none left for greatprinciples.
(R. Glover.)
Tradition and inspiration
Dr. Wylie.
As with the man who attempts to serve two masters, so with him who thinks to
walk by two lights: if he would keepin the straight loath he must put out one
of the two, and guide himself by the other.
(Dr. Wylie.)
Laying aside the commandment of God
Buck.
A philosopher at Florence could not be persuaded to look through one of
Galileo's telescopes, lesthe should see something in the heavens that would
disturb him in his belief of Aristotle's philosophy. Thus it is with many who
are afraid of examining God's Word, lest they should find themselves
condemned.
(Buck.)
The inefficacyof God's Word -- how produced

J. Gordon.
We make it of none effectwhen we —
I. Failto read and study it and to appropriate its blessings.
II. When we give precedence to any human authority or law.
III. When by our lives we misrepresentit before the world.
IV. When we fail to urge its truths upon the anxious inquirer or careless
sinner.
(J. Gordon.)
Ears to hear
Quesnel.
This rule must needs be of very greatimportance to Christians. For our Great
Master
(1)calls all the people unto Him on purpose to tell them only this.
(2)He requires of them a particular attention.
(3)He requires it of every one of them without exception.

(4)He exhorts them to endeavour thoroughly to understand it.
(5)He lets them know that in order, to do it they have need of a singular grace
and a particular gift of understanding.It was for want of understanding this
rule that the Jews still remained Jews, adhering to a mere external way of
worship. It is for the very same reasonthat numbers of Christians, even to
this day, serve God more like Jews than Christians.
(Quesnel.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(11) It is Corban.—The Hebrew word is peculiar to St. Mark. It occurs
frequently in Leviticus and Numbers (e.g., Leviticus 2:1; Leviticus 2:5;
Numbers 7:3; Numbers 7:5), and is translatedgenerally by “offering,”
sometimes by “oblation” (Leviticus 2:13; Leviticus 3:1), but elsewhere inthe
Old Testamentit only appears in Ezekiel20:28;Ezekiel40:43. It had come to
be applied specifically(as in the Greek of Matthew 27:6; Jos. Wars, ii. 9, § 4)
to the sacredtreasure of the Temple.
He shall be free.—The words, as the italics show, have nothing corresponding
to them in the Greek, nor are they needed, if only, with some MSS., we strike
out the conjunction “and” from the next verse. So the sentence runs, “If a
man shall say . . . ye suffer him no more . . .”

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
7:1-13 One greatdesign of Christ's coming was, to setaside the ceremonial
law; and to make way for this, he rejects the ceremonies men added to the law
of God's making. Those cleanhands and that pure heart which Christ bestows
on his disciples, and requires of them, are very different from the outward
and superstitious forms of Phariseesofevery age. Jesusreproves them for
rejecting the commandment of God. It is clearthat it is the duty of children, if
their parents are poor, to relieve them as far as they are able; and if children
deserve to die that curse their parents, much more those that starve them. But
if a man conformed to the traditions of the Pharisees,they found a device to
free him from the claim of this duty.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Full well - These words are capable of different interpretations. Some read
them as a question: "Do ye do well in rejecting?" etc. Others suppose they
mean "skillfully, cunningly." "You show great cunning or art, in laying aside
God's commands and substituting in their place those of men." Others
suppose them to be ironical. "How nobly you act!From conscientious
attachment to your traditions you have made void the law of God;" meaning
to intimate by it that they had actedwickedly and basely.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
CHAPTER 7
Mr 7:1-23. Discourse onCeremonialPollution. ( = Mt 15:1-20).
See on [1450]Mt15:1-20.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
See Poole on"Mark 7:11"
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

But ye say,.... Your elders, doctors, and wise men, in opposition to God and
Moses:
if a man shall say to his father or his mother, it is Corban, that is to say, a gift;
in the same manner is this word interpreted by Josephus, who speaking of
some that call themselves Corbanunto God, says (u) in the Greek tongue, ,
"this signifies a gift": now, according to the traditions of the elders, whoever
made use of that word to his father or his mother, signifying thereby, that
what they might have expected relief from at his hands, he had devoted it; or
it was as if it was devoted to sacreduses; adding,
by whatsoeverthou mightest be profited by me, he shall be free; and not
under any obligation to regard and relieve his parents, let their case and
circumstances be what they would. This is the form of a vow, which a man
having made on purpose, to free himself from the charge of the maintenance
of his parents, when reduced, repeats unto them; or which he makes upon
their application to him: various forms of this kind of vows, are produced in
the note see Gill on Matthew 15:5, which see:this was not the form of an oath,
or swearing by Corban, or the sacredtreasury in the temple, mentioned in
Matthew 27:6, of which I do not remember any instance;nor was it a
dedication of his substance to holy and religious uses;to the service of God
and the temple; but it was a vow he made, that what he had, should be as
Corban, as a gift devoted to sacreduses:that as that could not be
appropriated to any other use, so his substance, aftersuch a vow, could not be
applied to the relief of his parents; though he was not obliged by it to give it
for the use of the temple, but might keepit himself, or bestow it upon others.
L. Capellus has wrote a very learned dissertationupon this vow, at the end of
his Spicilegium on the New Testament;very and our learned countryman, Dr.
Pocock, has saidmany excellentthings upon it, in his miscellaneous notes on
his Porta Mosis;both which ought to be read and consulted, by those who
have learning and leisure.
(u) Autiqu. Jud. l. 4. c. 4. sect. 4.

Geneva Study Bible
But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to
say, a gift, by whatsoeverthou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Expositor's Greek Testament
Mark 7:11. Κορβᾶν: Mk. gives first the Hebrew word, then its Greek
equivalent.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
11. If a man shall say] Literally it runs, If a man shall say to his father or his
mother, That, from which thou mightest have been benefited by me, is
Corban, that is to say, a gift, or offering consecratedto God, he shall be free,
and ye suffer him no longerto do aught for his father or his mother. A person
had merely to pronounce the word Corban over any possessionor property,
and it was irrevocably dedicatedto the Temple. Our Lord is quoting a regular
formula, which often occurs in the Talmudic tracts Nedarim and Nazir.
Others would give to the words an imperative force, Be it Corbanfrom which
thou mightest have been benefited by me, i. e. “If I give thee anything or do
anything for thee, may it be as though I gave thee that which is devoted to
God, and may I be accountedperjured and sacrilegious.” This view certainly
gives greaterforce to the charge made by our Lord, that the command
“Whoso cursethfather or mother, let him die the death” was nullified by the
tradition.
Pulpit Commentary
Verses 11-13. -But ye say, If a man shall sayto his father or his mother, That
wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is Corban, that is to say,
Given to God - these words, "that is to say, Given to God," are St. Mark's
explanation of "corban" - ye no longer suffer him to do aught for his father or
his mother; making void the word of God by your tradition, which ye have
delivered. Now, this the scribes and Pharisees did for their own covetous ends.

For most of them were priests, who receivedofferings made to God as his
ministers, and then convertedthem to their ownuses. In this they greatly
erred; because the obligationof piety by which children are bound to support
their parents when they need it, is a part of the law of nature, to which every
vow, every oblation, ought to yield. Thus, if any one had devoted his goods to
God, and his father or his mother became needy, those goods ought to be
given to his parents and not to the temple. The word "corban" is a Hebrew
word, meaning "that which is brought near," "a gift or offering to God."
Hence, figuratively, the place where these offerings were deposited was called
the "corbanas," or, "sacredtreasury" (see Matthew 27:6, κορβανᾶν). Hence
to say of anything, "It is Corban," was to saythat it had a prior and more
sacreddestination. And when it was something that a parent might need, to
say, "It is Corban," i.e. it is alreadyappropriated to another purpose, was
simply to refuse his request and to deny him assistance, andso to break one of
the first of the Divine commandments. Thus the son, by crying "Corban" to
his needy parents, shut their mouths, by opposing to them a scruple of
conscience, andsuggesting to them a superstitious fear. It was as much as to
say, "That which you ask of me is a sacredthing which I have devoted to God.
Beware, therefore, lestyou, by asking this of me, commit sacrilege by
converting it to your own uses." Thus the parents would be silencedand
alarmed, choosing ratherto perish of hunger than to rob God. To such
extremities did these covetous scribes andPharisees drive their victims,
compelling a sono abstain from any kind offices for his father or his mother.
St. Ambrose says, "Goddoes not seek a gift wrung out of the necessitiesof
parents." Making void (ἀκυροῦντες);literally, depriving it of its authority,
annulling. In Galatians 3:17 the same word is rendered "disannul." By your
traditions; the traditions, that is, by which they taught children to say
"Corban" to their parents. Observe the words, "your tradition" (τῇ παρδόσει
ὑμῶν); your tradition, as opposedto those Divine traditions which God has
sanctified, and his Church has handed down from the beginning. And many
such like things ye do. This is added by St. Mark to fill up the outline, and to
show that this was only a sample of the many ways in which the
commandment of God was twisted, distorted, and annulled by these
rabbinical traditions.

Vincent's Word Studies
Corban
Mark only gives the original word, and then translates. See on Matthew 15:5.
CHAPTER 7

See on [1450]Mt15:1-20.
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father, or his mother.
According to the Jewishcanons (w), if a man vowed a thing which is contrary
to a command, he was obligedto keephis vow, and break the command: thus,
if a man vowed that his father or his mother should never receive any benefit
from what he had, but that his substance was as "Corban", oras any thing
devoted to divine service, he was obliged to keephis vow; nor was he allowed
after this to do any thing for his father, or mother, howeverpoor or helpless
they might be; unless he applied to a wise man to revoke his vow, or to give
him liberty to do it; for he could not do it of himself, as wickedas it was;and
though he might heartily repent of it, and was everso willing to make it null
and void: and though a dissolution it by a wise man was allowedof, yet hereby
they setup their own powerand authority againstGod, and his law; they did
not rescindthe vow, because it was contrary to the command of God: for
notwithstanding its being contrary to the command of God, it was to be
observed, though to the breaking of that, unless loosedby a wise man, at the
man's request; whereby they establishedtheir magisterialpower and
authority, without any regardto the honour and glory of God; and therefore
what follows, is justly observedby our Lord; See Gill on Matthew 15:5.
(w) Maimon. Hilch. Nedarim, c. 3. sect. 1.
Geneva Study Bible
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Mark 7:12. Here againthe constructionlimps; it would have been in order if
there had been no λέγετε after ὑμεῖς at beginning of Mark 7:11 = but ye, when
a man says, etc., do not allow him, etc.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(13) Making the word of God of none effect.—Againthe Greek wordis
somewhatmore technical, making null and void, cancelling, as in Galatians
3:17.
Through your tradition.—Here the structure of the sentence points to the
“tradition” as being the instrument with which the Law was made null and
void. In Matthew 15:6 the meaning is slightly different (see Note there).
Many such like things.—Assuming the words “washing ofcups and pots,” in
Mark 7:8, to be genuine, there is an emphatic scornexpressedin this iteration
of the same formula.

CHAPTER 7
See on [1450]Mt15:1-20.
Making the word of God of none effect, through your tradition,.... Beza says,
in his most ancient copy it is read, "your foolishtradition"; and such it was
indeed, that a vow made rashly, and in a passion, or if ever so deliberately
entered into, should be more binding upon a man than the law of God; that
rather than break this, he should transgress a divine command; and that
though he might see his folly, and repent of his sin in making such a wicked
vow, he could not go back from it, without the permission of a wise man:
should his poor distressedparents come to him for assistance, he was obliged

to answerthem, that he had bound himself by a vow, that they should receive
no advantage from his substance;and should they remonstrate to him the
command of God, to honour them and take care of them, and observe that
that command is enforced by promises and threatenings; he had this to reply,
and was instructed to do it, that it was the sense ofthe wise men and doctors,
and agreeablyto the traditions of the elders, to which he ought rather to
attend, than to the words of the law, that he should keepand fulfil his vow,
whatevercommand was neglectedorbroken by it.
Which ye have delivered: they receivedit from their ancestors, anddelivered
it to their disciples; and it is in this way, that all their traditions were
delivered: they say (x), that
"Mosesreceivedthe law (the oral law) at Sinai, "and delivered" it to Joshua;
and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets; and the prophets to
the men of the greatsynagogue;the last of which was Simeon the just; and
Antigonus, a man of Socho, receivedit from him; and Jose benJoezer, a man
of Tzeredah, and Jose ben Jochanan, a man of Jerusalem, receivedit from
Antigonus; and Joshua ben Perachiah(said to be the master of Jesus Christ),
and Nitthai the Arbelite, receivedit from them; and Judah ben Tabai, and
Simeon ben Shetach, receivedit from them; and Shemaiah and Abtalion
receivedit from them; and from them Hillell and Shammai.''
Who were now the heads of the two grand schools ofthe Jews;these received,
and delivered out these traditions to the Scribes and Pharisees, andthey to
their disciples:
and many such like things do ye; meaning, that there were many other
traditions besides this now mentioned; whereby, insteadof preserving the
written law, which, they pretended, these were an hedge unto (y), they, in a
greatmany instances, made it void.

(x) Pirke Abot, c. 1. sect. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. (y) Pirke Abot, c. 1.
sect. 1.
Geneva Study Bible
Making the word of God of none effectthrough your tradition, which ye have
delivered: and many such like things do ye.
Mark 7:13. ᾗ παρεδώκατε, whichye have delivered. The receivers are also
transmitters of the tradition, adding their quota to the weightof authority.—
παρόμοια τοιαῦτα πολλὰ:many such similar things, a rhetorically redundant
phrase (such, similar) expressive of contempt. Cf. Colossians2:21. Hebrews
9:10.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
13. through your tradition] The Jews distinguished betweenthe “Written
Law” and the traditional or “Unwritten Law.” The Unwritten Law was said
to have been orally delivered by God to Moses, andby him orally transmitted
to the Elders. On it was founded the Talmud or “doctrine,” which consists of
(1) the Mishna or “repetition” of the Law, (2) the Gemara or “supplement” to
it. So extravagantdid the veneration for the Traditional Law become, that
there was amongstmany other sayings this assertion, “The Law is like salt,
the Mishna like pepper, the Gemara like balmy spice.” Buxtorf, Synag. Jud.
ch. 3.
Bengel's Gnomen
Mark 7:13. Ἧ παρεδώκατε, whichye have delivered) Ye have made into a
tradition what was a mere custom among the ancients.
Vincent's Word Studies

Making of none effect
Rev., making void. See on Matthew 15:6.
Ye handed down
Note the pasttense, identifying them for the moment with their forefathers.
Compare Matthew 23:35, Ye slew. Christ views the Jewishpersecutors and
bigots, ancient and modern, as a whole, actuatedby one spirit, and ascribes to
one sectionwhatwas done by another.
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES
BRUCE HURT MD
Mark 7:9 He was also saying to them, "You are experts at setting aside the
commandment of God in order to keepyour tradition.
Wuest And He was saying to them, In a very beautiful way you are constantly
making the commandment of God null and void in order that that which has
been delivered to you for observance, youmay keep.
NET Mark 7:9 He also said to them, "You neatly reject the commandment of
God in order to setup your tradition.

NLT Mark 7:9 Then he said, "You skillfully sidestepGod's law in order to
hold on to your owntradition.
ESV Mark 7:9 And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the
commandment of God in order to establishyour tradition!
NIV Mark 7:9 And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the
commands of God in order to observe your owntraditions!
GNT Mark 7:9 Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, Καλῶς ἀθετεῖτε τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα
τὴν παράδοσινὑμῶν στήσητε.
KJV Mark 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment
of God, that ye may keepyour own tradition.
You are experts : 2Ki 16:10-16 Isa 24:5 29:13 Jer44:16,17 Da 7:25 11:36 Mt
15:3-6 2Th 2:4
setting aside, Mk 7:13 Ps 119:126 Ro 3:31 Ga 2:21
Mark 7 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries
RelatedPassages:
Luke 10:16+ “The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who
rejects (atheteo)you rejects (atheteo)Me; and he who rejects (atheteo)Me
rejects (atheteo)the One who sent Me.”

John 12:48 “He who rejects (atheteo)Me and does not receive My sayings,
has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last
day.
TRAINED IN KEEPING
TRADITION
He was also saying (imperfect tense) to them, "You are experts at setting aside
the commandment of God in order to (hina - purpose clause)keepyour
tradition - Note the strong clearcontrastin Jesus makes inHis declaration
(commandment of God versus your tradition). I like the NLT paraphrase
which says "You skillfully sidestepGod's law." This must surely have cut
these legalists like a sharp knife. Experts is actually the same Greek word
(kalos)Jesus had just used to describe Isaiah's prophecy "rightly (kalos)did
Isaiahprophecy of you hypocrites." (Mk 7:6). As Wuest observes "This
(repetition of the adverb kalos)is irony, and biting sarcasm."("In a very
beautiful way you are constantly making the commandment of God null and
void")
Setting aside is in the present tense indicating this was the common practice of
the Phariseesto in essence annul or make inoperative God's Holy Word of
Truth! This is an incredible realization. Think about this for a moment. These
were the very men who were the most respectedin Israelas religious leaders
and teachers and they actually in effectsetaside the only thing that could save
their souls and bring eternal life. No wonderJesus was so angry at these
religious charlatans for they were on a fasttrack to hell and were taking
multitudes with them (cf Mt 23:15, they were in a sense "murderers" like
their father = Jn 8:44, cf Acts 13:10+).

The irony of Jesus'accusationis these men are so deceived, they actually
think they are protecting and establishing the commandment of God when in
fact that are making it invalid! Deceptionis a deadly "disease!"
Spurgeon- Behold, a pretender to profound thought informs us that Moses
was in error, and Paul scarcelyknew what he wrote about. These philosophic
amenders of the gospelare as arrant triflers as the superstitious posture
makers at whom they sneer. The Savior makes shortwork of human
traditions and authorities. Your meats and your drinks, your fasting thrice in
the week, yourpaying of the tithe of mint, anise, and cumin, your broad
phylacteries and fringes, He waves them all awaywith one motion of His
hand, and He comes straightto the real point at issue. He deals with the heart
and with the sins which come out of it. He draws up a diagnosis ofthe disease
with fearless truthfulness, and declares that meats do not defile men, that true
religion is not a matter of observationor non-observationof washings and
outward rites, but that the whole matter is spiritual, and has to do with man’s
inmost self, with the understanding, the will, the emotions, the conscience, and
all else which makes up the heart of man. He tells us that defilement is caused
by that which comes out of the man, not by that which goes into him.
Defilement is of the heart, and not of the hands.
Wuest adds that setting aside "comes to mean “to thwart the efficacyof
anything, to nullify, make void, frustrate.” The Pharisees are chargedby our
Lord with thwarting the efficacyof that which has been laid down or
prescribed by God, namely, His commandments. They have made God’s
Word null and void, have nullified it, frustrated it in its soul-saving work.
This they did in order to keeptheir own tradition."
Setting aside (nullifying)(114)(atheteo from áthetos = not placed from a =
without + thetós = placed) means to do awaywith what has been laid down, to
setaside and thus to regardas nothing, to declare invalid, to not recognize, to

annul (make ineffective, inoperative or nonexistent), to spurn or to despise.
Atheteo was also usedof grain rejectedby the inspectoras unfit for food,
which is a goodparallelfor here these Pharisees were rejecting the Bread of
life (the PersonJesus and His Word of Life, the Bible, Mt 4:4+). Thayerwrites
that atheteo means "to acttoward anything as though it were annulled; hence,
to deprive a law of force by opinions or acts opposedto it, to transgress... to
thwart the efficacyof anything, nullify, make void, frustrate...to render
prudent plans of no effect(1Cor 1:19)...to reject, refuse, slight (eg, "the grace
of God" Gal2:21). In Classic Greek atheteo is usedto describe setting aside of
a treaty or promise. All uses of atheteo - Mk. 6:26; Mk. 7:9; Lk. 7:30+ = "the
Pharisees andthe lawyers rejectedGod’s purpose for themselves, not having
been baptized by John.";Lk. 10:16; Jn. 12:48;1 Co. 1:19; Gal. 2:21; Gal.
3:15; 1 Th 4:8; 1 Ti. 5:12; Heb. 10:28; Jude 1:8
Tradition (3862)see above on paradosis
Akin points out that "Notall traditions are bad. However, they do become
bad when we put them on the same level as/orin the place of Scripture. It is
possible to take a goodthing, turn it into a God thing, thereby making it a bad
thing. It is a “Bible plus” kind of religion. Adding to the Bible (cf Pr 30:6, Dt
4:2+ Dt 12:32 Rev 22:18,19+), youin practice make void the Bible and nullify
its truth and power in your life (Mk 7:13). Jesus makes this crystalclearas He
moves into round 2 with the Pharisees. Itis no contest. The “beatdown” is
ugly! The exposure of sinful hearts painful...Man made rules and regulations
became the object of obedience while God’s commandments get setaside, left
behind, “kickedto the curb.” We don’t need the Bible, the constitution and
bylaws have the final word in this church. I have seenit. I have heard it with
my ownears. I like the wisdom of Warren Wiersbe, “we must constantly
beware lesttradition take the place of truth. It does us goodto examine our
church traditions in the light of God’s Word and to be courageous enoughto
make changes” How often we foolishly push away the only reliable,
trustworthy and infallible source of authority we have. It is an act of pure

spiritual suicide. Have you seenthe sadprogressionunfolding before our eyes:
1) teachthe commandments of men (v.7); 2) leave the commandments of God
(v.8); 3) rejectthe commandments of God (v.9); 4) make void the Word of
God (v.13). And the tragedy of it all, we fail to see our hypocrisy in it. Oh, we
know it is possible to be a hypocrite. We see it so clearlyin others. It is when it
is in us that we go spiritually deaf, dumb and blind."
Believer's Study Bible - As in the case ofthe Sabbath controversies (Mk 2:23-
3:6), the Pharisees are guilty of ignoring the intent of the law by stressing the
letter of the law and insisting on strict adherence to their own traditional
interpretation of that law. The practice of calling something "Corban" (v11)
is an illustration of this abuse. The term "Corban" means "an offering
dedicatedto God." While the law clearly commanded honor for parents (v10),
the Phariseeseffectivelynullified this commandment in the practice of
Corban by allowing a callous child to declare his possessions "devotedto
God" so that the parents would have no claim to assistance. Shouldthe son
regrethis gift of Corban, the Pharisees wouldinsist that the vow be kept in
accordancewith Nu30:2. Jesus rejects this practice of using the letter of one
commandment to invalidate the intent of another.
RelatedResource:
Christian Morality: Jesus’Teaching onthe Law
J C Ryle - The last thing that demands our attention in these verses, is the
tendency of man’s inventions in religion to supplant God’s word. Three times
we find this charge brought forward by our Lord againstthe Pharisees.
“Laying aside the commandments of God, ye hold the traditions of men.”—
“Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keepyour own
traditions.”—“Making the Word of God of none effectthrough your
traditions.”—The first step of the Pharisees,was to add their traditions to the
Scriptures, as useful supplements. The secondwas to place them on a level

with the Word of God, and give them equal authority. The lastwas to honour
them above the Scripture, and to degrade Scripture from its lawful position.
This was the state of things which our Lord found when He was upon earth.
Practically, the traditions of man were everything, and the Word of God was
nothing at all. Obedience to the traditions constituted true religion. Obedience
to the Scriptures was lost sight of altogether.
It is a mournful fact, that Christians have far too often walkedin the steps of
Pharisees in this matter. The very same process has takenplace over and over
again. The very same consequences have resulted. Religious observancesof
man’s invention, have been pressedon the acceptanceofChristians,—
observancesto all appearance useful, and at all events well-meant, but
observancesnowhere commandedin the word of God. These very observances
have by and bye been enjoined with more vigour than God’s own
commandments, and defended with more zeal than the authority of God’s
own word. We need not look far for examples. The history of our own church
will supply them.*
Let us beware of attempting to add any thing to the word of God, as necessary
to salvation. It provokes God to give us over to judicial blindness. It is as good
as saying that His Bible is not perfect, and that we know better than He does
what is necessaryfor man’s salvation. It is just as easyto destroy the authority
of God’s word by addition as by subtraction, by burying it under man’s
inventions as by denying its truth. The whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible,
must be our rule of faith,—nothing added and nothing takenaway.
Finally, let us draw a broad line of distinction betweenthose things in religion
which have been devised by man, and those which are plainly commanded in
God’s word. What Godcommands is necessaryto salvation. What man
commands is not. What man devises may be useful and expedient for the
times; but salvationdoes not hinge on obedience to it. What God requires is
essentialto life eternal. He that wilfully disobeys it ruins his own soul.*

Mark 7:10 "ForMoses said, 'HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR
MOTHER';and, 'HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS
TO BE PUT TO DEATH';
Wuest ForMoses said, Be paying due respectand reverence to your father
and your mother. And the one who is constantly reviling father or mother, let
him come to an end by death.
NET Mark 7:10 For Mosessaid, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and,
'Whoeverinsults his father or mother must be put to death.'
NLT Mark 7:10 For instance, Mosesgave you this law from God: 'Honor
your father and mother,' and 'Anyone who speaksdisrespectfullyof father or
mother must be put to death.'
ESV Mark 7:10 For Mosessaid, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and,
'Whoeverreviles father or mother must surely die.'
NIV Mark 7:10 ForMoses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and,
'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'
GNT Mark 7:10 Μωϋσῆς γὰρ εἶπεν, Τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα
σου, καί, Ὁ κακολογῶνπατέρα ἢ μητέρα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω.
KJV Mark 7:10 For Mosessaid, Honour thy father and thy mother; and,
Whoso cursethfather or mother, let him die the death:

Honor: Mk 10:19 Ex 20:12 De 5:16
He who speaks evil : Ex 21:17 Lev 20:9 De 27:16 Pr 20:20 Pr 30:17 Mt 15:4
RelatedPassages:
Matthew 15:4+ (PARALLEL PASSAGE)“ForGod said, ‘HONOR YOUR
FATHER AND MOTHER,’and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER
OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH.’
Exodus 20:12+ ("FIFTHCOMMANDMENT") “Honoryour father and
your mother, that your days may be prolongedin the land which the LORD
your God gives you.
Deuteronomy 5:16; Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your
God has commanded you, that your days may be prolonged and that it may go
well with you on the land which the LORD your God gives you.
Exodus 21:17+ “He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to
death.
Leviticus 20:9+ ‘If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he
shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his
bloodguiltiness is upon him.
Deuteronomy 27:16 ‘Cursedis he who dishonors his father or mother.’ And
all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’

Proverbs 20:20 He who curses his father or his mother, His lamp will go out in
time of darkness.
Proverbs 30:17 The eye that mocks a father And scorns a mother, The ravens
of the valley will pick it out, And the young eagles willeat it.
JESUS GIVES AN EXAMPLE
OF HYPOCRITICAL WORSHIP
For - Term of explanation. Always ask the Spirit to help you discern what the
writer (speaker)is explaining. In this case Jesus is elaborating on the empty,
traditional worship of the religious leaders. How sad to be accusedof
worthless worshipby the Lord of lords, but now He gives these hard of
hearing leaders a clearexplain of their hypocrisy.
And do not miss the fact that againJesus bases His words on Scripture, a
goodpractice for all disciples to emulate!
Moses said- Notice that the Matthew 15:4 parallel has "Godsaid" indicating
that what Moses saidwas whathe had been inspired by the Spirit to say(cf 2
Peter1:21+). Notice that God could not have been cleareron the importance
of honoring one's parents. In the OT it was a matter of "life and death!"
HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER - Jesus quotes the Fifth
Commandment to undermine their mishandling of the Scriptures. Honor is
timao in the present imperative which calls for continual, unhesitating

tangible demonstration of reverence and respectto one's parents (our need to
depend on the Holy Spirit to obey). You would expectthat these religious
leaders who were zealous for keeping the Law of Godand traditions of men
would surely seek to obey this one of the Ten Commandments because it came
pre-packagedwith a promise of long life in the land! But sadly they had
allowedtheir imperfect traditional teachings from sinful men to even take
precedence ofthe perfectLaw of the Holy God! Honoring one's parents
clearly includes caring for them in their need.
Wuest on honor (timao) - The noun form, timē , carries with it the idea of “a
valuing by which the price is fixed, an evaluation.” Thus, the actof honoring
carries with it a proper estimation of the value of a person or thing. In the
case ofhonor due to parents, it is that respector reverence for them in view of
who and what they are, and their worth, which is their due.
and, 'HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT
TO DEATH - So not only was there a blessing for honoring parents, there was
also a curse for dishonoring them! And in spite of this "double motivation" to
keepthis commandment, the religious leaders opted for the traditions of men!
Note that speaks evilis not just an occasionalslur(most children would have
ended up stoned!) but is in the present tense which identifies this evil speaking
or insulting one's parents as a continual or habitual practice!
Be put to death is verb teleutao “to come to an end.” plus thanatos meaning
death. Thus, the Greek is literally, “Let him come to an end by death."
Wuest agreesadding that katalogeo"does notmean “to curse” in the sense of
Galatians 1:9+, where “accursed” is anathema (ἀναθεμα)“a curse, a man
accursed, devotedto the direst woes,”this curse of course being a divine
curse. There is no goodreasonto understand this construction here exceptin

the durative sense, whichmeans that the death penalty is inflicted on an
habitual offender."
Speaks evil(2551)kakologeo fromkakos = evil + lego = to speak)means
literally to speak evil of, to curse (e.g., of parents in Mt 15:4, Mk 7:10).
Kakologeomeans tio use unjustified and abusive language againstsomeone.
Kakologeois used in Mark 9:39 in regard to someone who was casting out
demons. Louw-Nida says kakologeomeans to revile or "to insult in a
particularly strong and unjustified manner." The derivative word katalogos
was a "slanderer." Hellenistically, kakologeomeans to imprecate evil on, to
curse someone (Lxx - Pr. 20:20; Ezek 22:7; Ex 22:28).
Now ponder this scene a moment. Jesus is quoting the writings of Moses
which the Pharisees claimedto revere, so they may have even been nodding
their approval. But Jesus is setting a trap for these "vipers" and proceeds to
shut the trap door in the next passage!
Mark 7:11 but you say, 'If a man says to his father or his mother, whateverI
have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),'
Wuest But as for you, you are saying, If a man should sayto his father and his
mother, Korban, namely, a gift, whateverfrom me you may be profited
NET Mark 7:11 But you say that if anyone tells his father or mother,
'Whatever help you would have receivedfrom me is corban'(that is, a gift for
God),

NLT Mark 7:11 But you say it is all right for people to say to their parents,
'Sorry, I can't help you. ForI have vowed to give to God what I would have
given to you.'
ESV Mark 7:11 But you say, 'If a man tells his father or his mother,
"Whateveryou would have gained from me is Corban"' (that is, given to
God)-
NIV Mark 7:11 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother:
'Whatever help you might otherwise have receivedfrom me is Corban' (that
is, a gift devoted to God),
GNT Mark 7:11 ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε, Ἐὰν εἴπῃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί,
Κορβᾶν, ὅ ἐστιν, Δῶρον, ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς,
KJV Mark 7:11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is
Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoeverthou mightest be profited by me;
he shall be free.
Corban: Rather, "Let it be a {corban,}" a formula common among the Jews
on such occasions;by which the Pharisees releaseda child from supporting
his parents; and even deemed it sacrilege ifhe afterwards gave anything for
their use. Mt 15:5 23:18 1Ti 5:4-8
RelatedPassages:

Matthew 15:5+ “But you say, ‘Whoeversays to his father or mother,
“WhateverI have that would help you has been given to God,”
CHRIST CONFRONTS
CRUEL CON OF CORBAN
Con means to persuade someone to do or believe something, typically by use
of a deception.
But you say - This is a striking term of contrast, in this case contrasting men's
words with God's commands!
THOUGHT - "Actually, if you ever hear yourself use the word “but” after
referring to the Bible, you should hear alarms going off because whateveryou
say next is going to be unbiblical and therefore wrong." (Brian Bill)
If (3rd. class cond. cl. where the cond. is possible)a man says to his father or
his mother, whateverI have that would help (opheleo) you is Corban(that is
to say, given to God) - The NLT paraphrase gives us a goodsense of the
meaning = "But you say it is all right for people to sayto their parents, 'Sorry,
I can't help you. For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to
you." Withholding money from needy parents in order to give it to God is in
direct disobedience to God and is dishonoring God's Word and substituting a
man-made tradition for God's Word. Basic human needs come first with God
before religious offerings. In short the scribes and Pharisees were defiantly
annulling God's clearcommand by which a son is required to honor his
parents by providing for their necessitieswhere they were in need. This is a
great(sad) example of the oppressive burden of legalistic religion!

Evans - For readers unfamiliar with Jewishreligious customs the evangelist
Mark explains that Corban means given to God (v. 11). Josephus understands
it similarly: “ ‘Corban’ to God—meaning what Greeks wouldcall a ‘gift’ ”
(Ant. 4.4.4 §73);“Now this oath (i.e., Corban) will be found in no other nation
exceptthe Jews, and, translated from the Hebrew, one may interpret it as
meaning ‘God’s gift’ ” (Ag. Ap. 1.22 §167). A first-century ossuaryinscription
from JebelHallet et-Tûrî (south of Jerusalem, in the Kidron Valley) reads:
“All that a man may find to his profit in this ossuaryis an offering [i.e.,
Corban] to God from him who is within it.” The Corbantradition was taken
very seriouslyby the Jewishpeople. It was Pilate’s dipping into the Corban
offerings held in the temple, for secular(or profane) use, that led to a riot (cf.
Josephus, J.W. 2.9.4§175, “he provokeda fresh uproar by expending upon
the constructionof an aqueduct the sacredtreasure known as Corban …
indignant at this proceeding, the populace formed a ring around the tribunal
of Pilate … large numbers of Jews perished, some from the blows that they
received, others trodden to death by their companions in the ensuing flight”;
see the parallel accountin Ant. 18.3.2§60–62). Note too that because Judas’
thirty pieces of silver were “the price of blood,” the ruling priests would not
allow them to be placedin the “temple treasury,” or (lit.) the Corbanas (cf.
Matt. 27:6). (Ibid)
Akin - the Phariseescreateda theologicalloophole thatallowedthem to
circumvent, to getaround, the clearcommand of God (vs. 11-12). Theysimply
declaredwhat they would have given to their parents “Corban” actuallya
Hebrew term referring to “a gift dedicated to God” (v. 11). Such a
declaration, such a vow (Nu 30:2), had to be honored and it allowedthem to
dis their parents, neglecttheir needs, and feelgoodabout it because it was
done, after all, in service to God. I serve Godby disobeying his expressed
command to honor my parents? What kind of logic is that?!

ILLUSTRATION - Actor and comedianW. C. Fields was an avowedagnostic,
so he surprised his friends when they discoveredhim reading a Bible while on
his deathbed. When askedwhy, Fields replied, “I'm looking for a loophole.”
Brian Bill - If someone pronouncedsomething, “Corban,” it became sacred
and therefore could not be used to help care for parents. It was like a deferred
gift that was pledged to the Temple but in many cases, it was never given. And
since Numbers 30:2 warns againstbreaking a vow, once someone declared
something Corban, they could never change their mind. It was actually a
rather convenient and sinister way to look spiritual and yet get out of one of
God’s clearcommands.
William Kelly explains that "The leaders had devised the scheme to secure
property for religious purposes and to quiet persons from all trouble of
conscienceaboutthe Word of God.… It was GodWho called on man to
honour his parents, and Who denouncedall slight done to them. Yet here
were men violating, under cloak of religion, both these commandments of
God! This tradition of saying ‘Corban,’ the Lord treats not only as a wrong
done to the parents, but as a rebellious actagainstthe express commandment
of God."
Help (profit) (5623)(opheleofrom ophéllo = heap up or from ophelos =
increase, profit) means to provide assistance,with emphasis upon the
resulting benefit. To help, to be of benefit, to be of use, to be an advantage, to
be advantageous. Opheleo is used in the sense of“bringing or gaining spiritual
benefit” in Jn 6:63; 1Co. 13:3; 14:6; Gal. 5: 2; Heb. 4: 2; 13:9. Opheleo occurs
in the question “What does it profit a person … ?” in Mt 16:26;Mk 8:36; Lk
9:25.

Mounce - Opheleo denotes the basic idea of benefiting through a particular
condition or situation, hence, “to gain, profit, value.”
Corban (2878)(korban)is transliterated from Hebrew and refers to a gift
offering to a deity that precludes that gift from being used in a non-sacred
sphere. Friberg - "from the Hebrew corban(gift), a word designating the
whole burnt offering among the levitical sacrifices;equivalent to dw/ron in the
NT". BDAG - "something consecratedas a gift for God and closedto
ordinary human use."
Ryrie explains that "If a sondeclaredthat the amount neededto support his
parents was Corban, the scribes saidthat he was exempt from his duty to care
for his parents as prescribed in the law. Evidently, too, he was not really
obliged to devote that sum to the Temple." In Mark 7:11 (Context - Mk 7:9-
13), korban is used to excuse a person from doing his filial duty toward his
parents. The rabbis actually allowedthe mere saying of this word by an
unfaithful sonto prevent the use of neededmoney for the support of father or
mother! Amazing! They must not have read nor understood the many uses of
korban in Leviticus! The Rabbis not only justified such a son's trickery in Mk
7:11, but held that he was prohibited from using it (the gift) for father or
mother, but he might use it for himself! Talk about conniving! This evil
practice permitted a son to be releasedfrom any obligationto care for his
parents, thus breaking the fifth commandment. He would claim his
possessionsbelongedto God and were therefore unavailable for other
purposes.
Given (1435)(doron)is that which is given or granted and stressesthe
gratuitous characterofthe gift. Anything given or bestowed. A gift is
something voluntarily transferredby one personto another without
compensation. Something presented as an act of worship and/or devotion (Mt
2:11). Doronis used of offerings to God exceptin Eph 2:8 and Rev 11:10. In

classicalGreek doronreferred to a votive (expressing a vow, wish or desire)
gift or offering to a god (little g) or a gift from the gods, as well as a present
given as a tribute or even as a bribe. Of the 166+ uses ofdoron in the non-
apocryphal Septuagint, most are used in the context of an offering to God (cf
Ge 4:4, Lev 1:2, 3, 10, 2:1, Nu 5:15, Dt 12:11, 1Chr 16:29, Jer 33:11, etc).
Chuck Smith - But you say, "Well, it"s Corban. I"ve given that to God; you
can"thave that." And you could actually wipe out any obligation you had to a
person by saying, "Anything I owe you is Corban. That is, it"s dedicatedto
God, and therefore you can"t have it." And by these traditions, they were
actually negating the law of God. (Commentary)
Paul gives some strong words to those who fail to help their needy parents...
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especiallyfor those of his
household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. (1
Timothy 5:8)
Question- What does Corban mean in Mark 7:11?
Answer: The word Corban is only found in Mark 7:11. The interpretation is
given in the same verse:“devoted to God as a gift.” The word described
something to be offered to God or given to the sacredtreasury in the temple.
If something was “Corban,” it was dedicatedand setapart for God’s use.
In the context of Mark 7:1-13, Jesus is speaking to the Phariseesaboutritual
without reality. The Pharisees hadaskedwhy the disciples did not washtheir
hands according to the ritualistic tradition of the elders (Mark 7:5). This

hand-washing was not what we think of today with soapand water. It was not
for cleanliness;rather, it was a prescribed ritual done as a show of piety.
In answerto the Pharisees’question, Jesus toldthem that they had rejected
the commandment of God in order to keeptheir own tradition (Mark 7:6-9).
Jesus gives the proof of their corruption of the Law by citing their use of
“Corban.” Moseshadinstructed God’s people to “honor their father and
mother” (Exodus 20:12), but the Phariseesnegatedthat command by teaching
that they could give money to the temple in lieu of helping their parents in
need. Whatevermoney might have been used to provide for aging parents
could be dedicatedto the temple treasury instead. Saying, “It is Corban”
would exempt a person from his responsibility to his parents. In other words,
the Phariseestook a legitimate Corban offering and used it in an illegitimate
and devious wayto defraud their parents (and enrich themselves). Thus, the
Law of God was nullified.
Jesus tells the Phariseesthat their misuse of Corban was an evil rationale to
avoid doing what they should. God never intended that the goodprinciple of
devoting something to the temple should be twisted to dishonor fathers and
mothers. Ritual without reality is what the Pharisaic religion was all about. It
was also ritual without righteousness and without relationship. Jesus taught
that, without a personal relationship with God, ritual profits nothing, and the
traditions of man should never usurp the authority of God’s Word. (Source:
GotQuestions.org)
Mark 7:12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his
mother;
Wuest no longerare you permitting him to do anything for his father and his
mother.

NET Mark 7:12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father
or mother.
NLT Mark 7:12 In this way, you let them disregardtheir needy parents.
ESV Mark 7:12 then you no longerpermit him to do anything for his father
or mother,
NIV Mark 7:12 then you no longerlet him do anything for his father or
mother.
GNT Mark 7:12 οὐκέτι ἀφίετε αὐτὸνοὐδὲνποιῆσαι τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί,
KJV Mark 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his
mother;
RelatedPassages:
Matthew 15:6+ he is not to honor his father or his mother.’ And by this you
invalidated the word of God for the sake ofyour tradition.
RELIGION THAT PREVENTS

HONORING RELATIONSHIPS
You no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother - NLT =
"In this way, you let them disregard their needy parents." Cranfield says
"Once the formula was used (perhaps hastily), one evidently was not allowed
to change one’s mind."
Simply by saying "Corban" overa gift, a soncould be freed of the obligation
of having to give the gift to their needy parents! In essencethe Pharisees and
their evil traditions were promoting sinful behavior by sons!Talk about being
deluded by doctrines of men! These Phariseeshad no conceptof the truth of
God nor of the true and Living God. That's the deadly effecttradition can
have on a heart! The heart becomes so unbelieving, so hardened, that it thinks
it is doing right when in fact it is actually doing wrong. This is exactlywhat
happened in the horrible days of the Judges where we read "In those days
there was no king in Israel;everyone did what was right in his owneyes.
(NOTICE EVEN THOUGH THEY DID WRONG, THERE WERE SO
DECEIVED, THEY THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING RIGHT!)" (Jdg
21:25+).
Mark 7:13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you
have handed down; and you do many things such as that."
Wuest You are rendering void the authority of the Word of God by that
which has been delivered to you to observe, which in turn you are delivering
over (to another) to keep. And many things of this kind you are constantly
doing.

NET Mark 7:13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you
have handed down. And you do many things like this."
NLT Mark 7:13 And so you cancelthe word of God in order to hand down
your own tradition. And this is only one example among many others."
ESV Mark 7:13 thus making void the word of Godby your tradition that you
have handed down. And many such things you do."
NIV Mark 7:13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you
have handed down. And you do many things like that."
GNT Mark 7:13 ἀκυροῦντες τὸνλόγον τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ παραδόσει ὑμῶν ᾗ
παρεδώκατε·καὶ παρόμοια τοιαῦταπολλὰ ποιεῖτε.
KJV Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effectthrough your
tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
the word: Mk 7:9 Isa 8:20 Jer8:8,9 Ho 8:12 Mt 5:17-20 15:6 Tit 1:14
such: Eze 18:14 Ga 5:21
JESUS'SUMMARY JUDGMENT
OF MEN'S TRADITIONS
RelatedPassages:

Matthew 15:6+ he is not to honor his father or his mother.’ And by this you
invalidated the word of God for the sake ofyour tradition.
Brian Bill - Jesus condemnedand correctedthe religious leaders for focusing
on outward hypocrisy instead of inward holiness. The religious leaders were
adamant about having cleanhands; Jesus was allabout having a clean heart.
To serious compassionimposture is provoking,
and sincere truthfulness is grieved by the mockeries ofpretense.
-Spurgeon
Thus invalidating the Word of God by your tradition (paradosis)which you
have handed down (paradidomi = passing on, transmit by teaching, passing
on tradition) - One of the meanings of the Greek verb invalidating (present
tense = continual negative effect of "traditions" and legalism) is to deprive of
power! Ponderthat thought regarding the effectof traditions (and legalismin
general)on the powerof the Word of God! Notice this summation by Jesus is
essentiallythe third time He emphasizes the negative effectof traditions of
men on the Word (Commandment) of God. (Mk 7:8 = neglecting, Mk 7:9 =
setting aside and Mk 7:13 = invalidating). Traditions of men are legalistic
burdens and Jesus says they counteractthe Word of Truth. In John 8:31-32
"Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in
My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth,
and the truth will make you free.” But here Jesus is saying in essencethatthe
traditions of men will blunt the liberating effectof the truth of the Word of
God and will cut off the flow of grace because oflegalistic rules!

And you do (present tense = continually) many (not a few!) things such as that
- What Jesus is saying is that the corrupt conceptof Corbanis just one
example of how their traditions invalidated the Word of God! (see quote
below from Mt 23:23)The clearimplication is that many other oraltraditions
setaside the written Law! Notice the pronoun "you" so He is directing this
accusationto the scribes and Pharisees.One can only imagine what was going
through their mind as Jesus exposedtheir horrible practice of Corban and
alluded to other similar scams they practiced which deprived the Word of
God of its authority and power!While they should have confessedand
repented, subsequent events demonstrate their hearts only hardened even
more!
Matt. 23:23, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees,hypocrites!For you tithe
mint and dill and cummin, and have neglectedthe weightierprovisions of the
law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should
have done without neglecting the others.
Akin - Jesus tells them (v. 13) it is the kind of reasoning that 1) makes void the
word of God, 2) sets up man-made traditions over God’s commands and 3)
opens the door for many more such actions that reveals the hardness of our
hearts, the hypocrisy of our worship, and the disobedience of our actions, all
in the name of religion! These are not atheist and secularist. These are the
religious and supposedly spiritual. Bottomline: they have placedtheir
traditions in the place of Scripture and themselves in the place of God! The
heart truly is an idol factory, and religious traditions are some of its besttools.
This truth should concernus all. I may be as guilty as the PhariseesofJesus’
day and not even see it.
Bruce - The receivers are also transmitters of the tradition, adding their quota
to the weightof authority. (EGT)

Invalidating (208)(akuroo from a = without + kuroo = to confirm) was a legal
technicalterm meaning to make invalid or void, to annul (Gal 3:17+) Often
used of annulling wills and contracts. It means to cancel, deprive of power.
Used in Mt 15:6 and Mk 7:13 describing depriving divine law of authority
(and power) by placing priority on human traditions! In the OT only in the
apocryphal writings - 1 Es. 6:31; 4 Ma. 2:1; 4 Ma. 2:3; 4 Ma. 2:18; 4 Ma. 5:18;
4 Ma. 7:14; 4 Ma. 17:2
Tradition (3862)see above on paradosis
William MacDonaldmakes a greatpoint - One of the great lessons inthis
passageis that we must constantly test all teaching and all tradition by the
Word of God, obeying what is of Godand rejecting what is of men. At first a
man may teachand preacha clear, scriptural message, gaining acceptance
among Bible-believing people. Having gainedthis acceptance, he begins to add
some human teaching. His devoted followers who have come to feelthat he
can do no wrong follow him blindly, even if his message blunts the sharp edge
of the Word or waters down its clearmeaning. It was thus that the scribes and
Pharisees hadgained authority as teachers of the Word. But they were now
nullifying the intent of the Word. The Lord Jesus had to warn the people that
it is the Word that accredits men, not men who accreditthe Word. The great
touchstone must always be, “Whatdoes the Word say?” (BBC)
Brian Bill draws some conclusions from Jesus'confrontationof the deadly
effectof the traditions of men - A legalistis one who believes that performance
is the way to gain favor with God. Legalism is the human attempt to gain
salvationor prove our spirituality by outward conformity to a list of religious
“do’s” and “don’ts.” It’s often disguisedin spiritual beliefs and behavior.
Here are some observations aboutlegalism. You may want tighten your
seatbeltbecause we’re aboutto go through some turbulence.

1. We tend to think others are legalistic, but that we’re not.
The fact is that we’re all legalistic by nature. We tend to judge others by our
own standards of what is acceptable andwhat isn’t. In essence, we think our
sins smell better than other people’s because we have very little tolerance for
people who sin differently than we do.
2. Legalismis highly contagious.
While it’s usually less consciousand systematizedin our minds than it was
among the Pharisees andthe scribes, legalismcanspread like a bad virus
through an entire congregation. That’s why Jesus reservedsome of his
harshestcriticism for legalistic list-makers.
3. Legalismcan take a vibrant faith and make it dull and lifeless.
It can evaporate enthusiasm, jettison joy, and stifle spirituality. Instead of
finding freedom through Christ, many believers become burdened by a bunch
of rules and regulations.
4. Legalismproduces large quantities of self-righteousness, judgment and
condemnation.
It majors in guilt and misguided sacrifice, urging its followers to evaluate
their relationship with God on the basis of standards and scores – and expects
others to do the same. Superficialspirituality short-circuits the work of grace.

5. Legalismmakes us narrow and divisive.
The legalistinsists that everyone live up to the standard they have adopted. In
other words, everyone needs to be like me. When we think this way, we miss
the delight of diversity in the church.
6. Legalismmakes it impossible for people to see Jesus.
There is nothing that pushes someone awayfasterthan a list of rules and
regulations when we inadvertently portray Jesus as a drill sergeantinsteadof
the Savior.
Mostof us fall into legalismwithout trying to do so. Let me illustrate.
Severalyears ago I askeda woman from China and a man from Puerto Rico
to lead us in prayer for the persecutedchurch (By the way, we’ll hear from
the Puerto Rico Go Teamnext weekend). It was beautiful to hear Hector pray
for the persecutedin Spanish. When Stella prayed in Mandarin, she told us
she was going to kneeland very graciouslyinvited us to do the same, if we
wanted to. I followedher lead and knelt. My motives were goodinitially as we
interceded for the needs of beleagueredbelievers around the world. But then I
took a peek and noticed only a small number were on their knees. A seedof
judgmentalism beganto germinate, as I secretlywonderedwhy others weren’t
as spiritual as I was. Now, work withme on this. Imagine that because I
found kneeling to be so helpful, I begankneeling during my quiet times. When
I led in prayer in services Iknelt as well. And then I started telling everyone
else they had to kneelwhen they prayed. I might even quote some Scripture.
And when I didn’t see people kneeling I startedto feelangry but also
spiritually smug because atleastI was doing what everyone else should be

doing. Do you see how subtle and sneakylegalismis? Its weeds are under the
surface in eachof our lives. Kneeling to pray is a goodthing but it can easily
become the standard by which we judge other people’s spirituality. In short, if
we’re not careful we’ll default to a performance-based, hypocritical kind of
faith. By the way, there are other acceptable prayerpostures in the Bible –
sitting, standing, lying down, bowing, hands in the air or praying to stay
awake during sermons.
One of the bestways to not slide into spiritual superficiality and ritualistic
religion is by serving those in need. James 1:27 says:“Religionthat is pure
and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in
their affliction, and to keeponeselfunstained from the world.”
WILLIAM BARCLAY
AN INIQUITOUS REGULATION (Mark 7:9-13)
7:9-13 He said to them, "You make an excellentjob of completelynullifying
the command of God in order to observe your own tradition. ForMoses said,
'Honour your father and your mother.' And, 'He who speaks evilof his father
or mother shall certainly die.' But you say, that, if a man says to his father or
mother, 'That by which you might have been helped by me is Korban,'--that is
to say, God-dedicated--youno longer allow him to do anything for his father
and mother, and you thereby render invalid the word of God by your
tradition which you hand on. You do many things like that."

The exactmeaning of this passageis very difficult to discover. It hinges on the
word Korban (Greek #2878)which seems to have undergone two stages of
meaning in Jewishusage.
(i) The word meant a gift. It was used to describe something which was
speciallydedicated to God. A thing which was Korban (Greek #2878)was as if
it had already been laid upon the altar. That is to say, it was completelyset
apart from all ordinary purposes and usages andbecame the property of God.
If a man wished to dedicate some of his money or his property to God, he
declaredit Korban (Greek #2878), and thereafterit might never again be used
for any ordinary or secularpurpose.
It does seemthat, even at this stage, the word was capable of very shrewd
usage. Forinstance, a creditor might have a debtor who refused or was
unwilling to pay. The creditor might then say, "The debt you owe me is
Korban (Greek #2878)," thatis to say, "The debt you owe me is dedicatedto
God." From then on the debtor ceasedto be in debt to a fellow-man and
beganto be in debt to God, which was far more serious. It may well be that
the creditor could discharge his part of the matter by making a quite small
symbolic payment to the Temple, and then keeping the rest for himself. In any
event, to introduce the idea of Korban (Greek #2878)into this kind of debt
was a kind of religious blackmail transforming a debt owedto man into a debt
owedto God.
It does seemthat the idea of Korban (Greek #2878)was alreadycapable of
misuse. If that be the idea behind this, the passagespeaks ofa man declaring
his property Korban (Greek #2878), sacredto God, and then when his father
or mother in dire need comes to him for help, saying, "I am sorry that I
cannot give you any help because nothing that I have is available for you
because it is dedicated to God." The vow was made an excuse to avoid helping

a parent in need. The vow which the scribal legalistinsistedupon involved
breaking one of the ten commandments which are the very law of God.
(ii) There came a time when Korban (Greek #2878)became a much more
generalizedoath. When a person declaredanything Korban (Greek #2878)he
entirely alienatedit from the personto whom he was talking. A man might
say, "Korban (Greek #2878)that by which I might be profited by you," and,
in so doing, he bound himself never to touch, taste, have or handle anything
possessedby the person so addressed. Or, he might say, "Korban (Greek
#2878)thatby which you might be profited by me," and, in so saying, he
bound himself never to help or to benefit the person so addressedby anything
that belongedto himself. If that be the use here, the passage means that, at
some time, perhaps in a fit of anger or rebellion, a man had said to his
parents, "Korban (Greek #2878)anything by which you may ever be helped
by me," and that afterwards, evenif he repented from his rash vow, the
scribal legalists declaredthat it was unbreakable and that he might never
againrender his parents any assistance.
Whichever be the case--andit is not possible to be certain--this much is sure,
that there were casesin which the strict performance of the scriballaw made
it impossible for a man to carry out the law of the ten commandments.
Jesus was attacking a systemwhich put rules and regulations before the claim
of human need. The commandment of God was that the claim of human love
should come first; the commandment of the scribes was that the claim of legal
rules and regulations should come first. Jesus was quite sure that any
regulation which prevented a man from giving help where help was needed
was nothing less than a contradiction of the law of God.

We must have a care that we never allow rules to paralyse the claims of love.
Nothing that prevents us helping a fellowman canever be a rule approved by
God.
CHRIS BENFIELD
B. He Condemned their Delinquency (10-13)– Here Jesus addressedanother
grievous error
many committed all while seeking to justify it according to the faith. In that
culture, and in most
today, one was expectedto care for their aging parents. Jesus reminded them
of the
commandment to honor their father and mother. However, the Jews had
devised a way to avoid
their responsibilities and justify their neglect. When their parents made a
request, the rebellious
son would declare that his available monies were “Corban.” This is a term
that meant the money
was dedicatedto God and could be spent for no other purpose than the needs
of the Temple or
sacredduties. These neglectedtheir responsibilities through false pretense and
were bold enough
to declare the money was reservedfor the Lord.
 Such activity remains today in some form or another. Folks may not tell
their parents their

money is reservedfor the Lord, but they seek to justify their actions through a
mandate or
expectationof the church. They are willing to neglectthe needs of those closest
to them in order
to continue their efforts of self-righteousness. Manychildren have been turned
from the faith
because ofthe legalistic demands of their parents, all while seeing the utter
hypocrisy in it.
BRIAN BILL
B. He Condemned their Delinquency (10-13)– Here Jesus addressedanother
grievous error
many committed all while seeking to justify it according to the faith. In that
culture, and in most
today, one was expectedto care for their aging parents. Jesus reminded them
of the
commandment to honor their father and mother. However, the Jews had
devised a way to avoid
their responsibilities and justify their neglect. When their parents made a
request, the rebellious
son would declare that his available monies were “Corban.” This is a term
that meant the money
was dedicatedto God and could be spent for no other purpose than the needs
of the Temple or

sacredduties. These neglectedtheir responsibilities through false pretense and
were bold enough
to declare the money was reservedfor the Lord.
 Such activity remains today in some form or another. Folks may not tell
their parents their
money is reservedfor the Lord, but they seek to justify their actions through a
mandate or
expectationof the church. They are willing to neglectthe needs of those closest
to them in order
to continue their efforts of self-righteousness. Manychildren have been turned
from the faith
because ofthe legalistic demands of their parents, all while seeing the utter
hypocrisy in it.
CAMBRIDGE BIBLE FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
Mark 7:9
And he said unto them, Full well ye rejectthe commandment of God, that ye
may keepyour own tradition.
Mark 7:10
For Mosessaid, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth
father or mother, let him die the death:
10. Honour thy father] The words are quoted partly from Exodus 20:12, and
partly from Exodus 21:17.
Mark 7:11

But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to
say, a gift, by whatsoeverthou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free.
11. If a man shall say] Literally it runs, If a man shall say to his father or his
mother, That, from which thou mightest have been benefited by me, is
Corban, that is to say, a gift, or offering consecratedto God, he shall be free,
and ye suffer him no longerto do aught for his father or his mother. A person
had merely to pronounce the word Corban over any possessionor property,
and it was irrevocably dedicatedto the Temple. Our Lord is quoting a regular
formula, which often occurs in the Talmudic tracts Nedarim and Nazir.
Others would give to the words an imperative force, Be it Corbanfrom which
thou mightest have been benefited by me, i. e. “If I give thee anything or do
anything for thee, may it be as though I gave thee that which is devoted to
God, and may I be accountedperjured and sacrilegious.” This view certainly
gives greaterforce to the charge made by our Lord, that the command
“Whoso cursethfather or mother, let him die the death” was nullified by the
tradition.
Mark 7:12
And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;
Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effectthrough your tradition, which ye have
delivered: and many such like things do ye.
13. through your tradition] The Jews distinguished betweenthe “Written
Law” and the traditional or “Unwritten Law.” The Unwritten Law was said
to have been orally delivered by God to Moses, andby him orally transmitted
to the Elders. On it was founded the Talmud or “doctrine,” which consists of
(1) the Mishna or “repetition” of the Law, (2) the Gemara or “supplement” to
it. So extravagantdid the veneration for the Traditional Law become, that
there was amongstmany other sayings this assertion, “The Law is like salt,
the Mishna like pepper, the Gemara like balmy spice.” Buxtorf, Synag. Jud.
ch. 3.

Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy

Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy

Similar to Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus Exposes Religious Hypocrisy