Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 7:9
And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Verse 9. Full well] , -a strong irony. How noble is your conduct! From conscientious attachment to your own traditions ye have annihilated the commandments of God!
That ye may keep] But , that ye may establish, is the reading of D, three others, Syriac, all the Itala, with Cyprian, Jerome, and Zeno. Griesbach thinks it should be received instead of the other. God’s law was nothing to these men, in comparison of their own: hear a case in point. “Rabba said, How foolish are most men! They observe the precepts of the Divine law, and neglect the statutes of the rabbins!” Maccoth, fol. 22.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And he said unto them,…. He continued his discourse, saying,
full well, or “fairly”,
ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition: these words may be considered, as spoken ironically, thus; as pious and excellently good men, you in a very fair and handsome manner, reject and make void the commandments and laws of God; and it is very fit it should be so, in order to preserve your own traditions, that nothing may be wanting to keep up the honour of them, and a due regard to them. The Arabic version reads the words by way of interrogation, “is it fit that you should omit the commandments of God, and keep your own statutes?” and so the Ethiopic, “do ye rightly make void the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own commandment?” Which makes them come nearer to the passage in Matthew; [See comments on Mt 15:3].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Full well do ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your traditions ( ). One can almost see the scribes withering under this terrible arraignment. It was biting sarcasm that cut to the bone. The evident irony should prevent literal interpretation as commendation of the Pharisaic pervasion of God’s word. See my The Pharisees and Jesus for illustrations of the way that they placed this oral tradition above the written law. See on Mt 15:7.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) ”And He said unto them,” (kai elegen autois) “And He said directly to them,” the tradition-bound Pharisees and Scribes who had come up from Jerusalem to entrap Him, Mar 7:1.
2) “Full well ye reject the commandment of God,”(kalos apeteite ten entolen tou theou) “You all full well set aside the commandment of God,” brush it aside, according to your selfish, covetous whims. You “fill the bill” of Isa 29:13.
3) “That ye may keep your own tradition.” (hina ten paraclosin humon teresete) “in order that you may keep, guard, preserve, protect, or hold on to your own tradition,” indicating a lack of love for God, while worshipping their ancestor elders, Joh 4:24.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
B. CONFLICT OVER PARENTAL CARE. 7:9-13
TEXT 7:9-13
And he said unto them, Full well do ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, He that speaketh evil of father or mother, let him die the death: but ye say, If a man shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is Corban, that is to say, Given to God; 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: and many such like things ye do.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 7:9-13
330.
What is meant by the expression full well as in Mar. 7:9?
331.
Did these Jews accept the fact that they had rejected the commandment of God? Does this carry any warning for us today?
332.
What were the two areas of respect for parents? i.e. what is involved in the word honorand speaking evil?
333.
Was there a death penalty for speaking evil of father or mother?
334.
Explain in your own words the use of the expression Corban.
335.
What possible advantage was there in the use of Corban?
336.
If any belief or practice today makes void or meaningless the word of God can we expect the same rebuke? Cite examples.
COMMENT
TIMESummer A.D. 29.
PLACEIn or near Capernaum.
PARALLEL ACCOUNTSMat. 15:3-6.
OUTLINE1. Jesus accusation:you reject the commandment of God, Mar. 7:9. 2. The fourth commandment is a specific example, Mar. 7:10-12. 3. The word of God is made void by your tradition, Mar. 7:13.
ANALYSIS
I.
JESUS ACCUSATION:YOU REJECT THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD, Mar. 7:9.
1.
In a fine, beautiful, admirable sense you reject the commandment of God.
2.
You prefer your tradition to the commandments of God.
II.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT IS A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE, Mar. 7:10-12.
1.
Moses was very plain (Exo. 20:12; Exo. 21:17) about the honor to parents.
2.
You have set aside the law of God by your traditionwhat belongs to the parents is supposedly given to the temple (or the priests).
3.
Your mother and father can starve while you justify your selfishness and disobedience by tradition.
III.
THE WORD OF GOD IS MADE VOID BY YOUR TRADITION. Mar. 7:13.
1.
The authority of Gods word is set aside by your tradition.
2.
There are many other examples that could be cited.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
I.
JESUS ACCUSATION:YOU REJECT THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD.
Mar. 7:9. And he said unto them probably indicates a break in the discourse; caused, perhaps, by indignant interruptions, or by a call for particulars to illustrate so broad and fearful a charge. So their ancestors asked, Wherein have we despised thy name? (Mal. 1:6; Mal. 3:8; Mal. 3:13).Whether called for or not, he was ready with particulars to illustrate the substitution of tradition for command. Full welli. e. finely, beautifully, admirablyye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. The adverb is the same as in Mar. 7:6 : Well hath Isaiah prophesied of you. The repetition is intentional, and the word this time is scathingly ironical: Admirably do you fulfill the word that Isaiah so admirably spoke concerning you. The holy indignation is thoroughly aroused, and he cares not how heavily he lays on the lash. (W. N. Clarke)
II.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT IS A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE.
Mar. 7:10-12. Yet his first illustration is not the one that called out the question. Instead of beginning with the traditions respecting defilements by contact and the necessary cleansings, he goes at once to the Decalogue, and convicts them of setting aside the fundamental law of God to Israel. Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother. An exact quotation from the LXX. of Exo. 20:12.He adds a second extract, giving the same law as expounded and applied in the legislation of Moses. Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death. Emphatic way of saying, Let him die. Exo. 21:17 quoted almost exactly from the LXX. Both passages are quoted from what Moses said, but both are adduced as the commandment of God (Mar. 7:9) and the word of God (Mar. 7:13). Thus, Jesus recognizes the Mosaic legislation as the law of his Father; and not merely the milder parts of it, but even the provision for the execution of the disobedient and insulting child. This he brings forward as a part of that law that he has come not to destroy, but to fulfilli.e. to exhibit and establish in the fullness of its spiritual meaning. The principle of honor to parents he recognizes as of perpetual and universal force, and he intends to set up for universal obedience and reverence the truth that was honored by the Mosaic provision of death for the disobedient. Incidentally, his mode of citing the second passage is itself exegetical. Viewed in the light of the context, that passage must mean that the spirit of the prohibition can be violated without a profane or blasphemous word, and that not to bless parents by such care as a child can give is to curse them, according to the true intent of this law. Such, then, is the commandment of God respecting parents: they must be treated with honor, and no one is at liberty to withhold from them what blessing he can give.But now for the tradition of men respecting parents which the Pharisees are diligently keeping. Translate Mar. 7:11-12, But ye say, If a man say to his father or mother, Whatever thou mightest receive in aid from me is Corban, that is, a gift (to God), ye no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother. Corban is a Hebrew word meaning gift, but appropriated to use with reference to sacred gifts, acts of devotion to the service of God. The simple uttering of the word CorbanSacred giftover a thing that was supposed to set that thing apart from all ordinary uses and give it the character of a consecrated thing. (See Ewald, Antiquities of Israel, p. 81.) Now, Jesus affirms that they apply this mode of consecration to the unholy purpose of escaping duty to parents. If a man utters the magical word Corban over his relation to his parents, and so declares that it is devoted to God, he is no longer held under obligation to them. The Corban carries no real consecration to God in such a case; it gives no new character to the mans life: it is only a fictitious arrangement for releasing him from a duty that has become irksome. Thus the tradition of men enables them to annul or virtually repeal the commandment of God. The liberty which the tradition gives them is more agreeable to their selfish hearts than the duty to which the commandment binds them; and so they set aside the commandment, in order that they may keep the tradition. To accept such a tradition was to dethrone Jehovah. (See Pro. 28:24.) One is reminded here of Luthers sore conflict as to whether the monastic vow which was urged upon him was consistent with his duty to his aged father, and of innumerable similar cases in the long history of monasticism. True consecration is not the escaping from obligations, but the reacceptance of all genuine duty from the hands of God. Consecration to God never releases from duty to man. He who consents to an obligation to God thereby consents to all obligations that God has placed upon him. To suppose the contrary, as these men did, is to trifle with all obligation.
III.
THE WORD OF GOD IS MADE VOID BY YOUR TRADITION.
13. Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition. The word translated making of none effect ( akurountes ) is found in the New Testament only in this discourse and at Gal. 3:17 : it means to deprive of authority or lordship, and so, of a law, to annul. It implies more than neglect: it tells of actual nullification.And many such like things do ye, which is not genuine in Mar. 7:8, is genuine here, and may possibly be the reporters summary of a further discourse, in which other abuses of a similar kind were treated as sharply as the intrusion of Corban to the family. The subsequent discourse seems to imply that something had been said at this very time of the distinction between clean and unclean food. There were abuses enough within reach to justify a long and terrible discourse. (W. N. Clarke)
FACT QUESTIONS 7:9-13
369.
Do you imagine someone called for specific examples for the general principle laid down in the fearful charge.?
370.
Is Jesus being ironic or sarcastic in the way in which He speaks of Isaiahs prophecy and its fulfillment? Discuss.
371.
Jesus does not deal with traditions respecting defilement firstwhy?
372.
Did Jesus recognize the law of Moses as the law of God? Specify.
373.
Did Jesus quote from the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures? i.e. from the Septuagint?
374.
Jesus gives an exegesis of Exo. 21:7 in the manner of citing the passagewhat is it?
375.
Explain in your own words the tradition invented by the Pharisees called Corban.
376.
What was the problem Luther had with the monastic vow?
377.
Can you cite an example in your own experience?
378.
What does the expressionmaking the word of God of none effect mean? Cf. Gal. 3:17.
379.
Can we make the word of God of none effect by our busy schedule of living?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(9) Full well ye reject.The adverb is peculiar to St. Mark, and has in it the ring of a scathing and indignant irony. The word reject is hardly formal enough, the Greek conveying the idea, as in Gal. 3:15, Heb. 7:18, of rescinding or repealing. This the Pharisees practically did when they added traditions which pretended to be interpretations, but were in reality at variance with it.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Jesus Illustrates His Point From A Specific Example (7:9-13).
Here Jesus takes one outstanding example of their attitude which may well have had in mind a recent case known to all which had become infamous.
Analysis.
a
b For Moses said, “Honour your father and your mother”, and, “He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him die the death” (Mar 7:10).
c But you say, “If a man shall say to his father or his mother, “That by which you might have benefited by me is Corban, that is to say, Given to God” (Mar 7:11).
b “You no longer expect him to do anything for his father or his mother (Mar 7:12).
a “Making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have delivered: and many similar things you do” (Mar 7:13).
Note that in ‘a’ they are seen as rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep their traditions, and in the parallel of thus making it void. In ‘b’ He cites what the Law said about parents, and in the parallel how they actually behaved towards them in particular instances. Centrally in ‘c’ He gives an example of one of their interpretations.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
‘And he said to them, “Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honour your father and your mother’, and ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother let him die the death’. But you say, ‘If a man shall say to his father or his mother, “That by which you may benefit from me is Corban”,’ that is to say, given to God, you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother, making void the word of God by your tradition which you have delivered. And many such like things you do.” ’
Jesus pulled no punches. He called on an example of what their tradition was actually doing. It was in effect rejecting God’s commandments, even though it appeared to be honouring God, for it was altering them to fit in with their ideas. Then having done that they fixed all their attention on observing the particular rules that they had determined, even though it resulted in breaking the main principles that lay behind it. (This is something of which we can all be guilty).
Note Jesus’ emphasis on ‘what Moses said’. They claimed to honour Moses and yet set aside his teaching. The quotations are taken from Exo 20:12; Exo 21:17, the latter demonstrating how seriously the matter was to be taken.
The principle described here is that by which a man might avoid his obligation to his parents by a religious device. Jesus may be referring to a case that had actually recently occurred and was the talk of Galilee. The man would declare that his possessions were ‘Corban’, ‘given to God.’ Corban constituted a solemn Jewish oath. Once a gift was ‘corban’ it was dedicated to God. Thus while useable by himself he would not be allowed to use his possessions to support his parents, for those possessions now belonged to God and when he died they therefore had to go to God. Meanwhile he retained free use of them for himself, except perhaps for a portion devoted to religious use, but could avoid his responsibility towards his parents. It was a device which could be used to get out of obligations. And as certain Rabbis had declared on this, had ‘delivered’ it, if he did it he was actually looked on by them as righteous, even though he was failing to honour his father and mother, and breaking the serious requirements of the word of God.
(The Rabbis themselves would in fact later accept, as recorded in the Mishnah, that no oath could so abrogate the command to honour father and mother. That may even have been as a consequence of the publication of this criticism by Jesus although they would never have admitted it).
Alternately Jesus might be indicating a situation where a man had in a rash moment made his goods ‘Corban’ as against his parents and now wished to restore the position but was being told by certain Rabbis that he could not withdraw his oath. Their decision being that the goods were dedicated to God and could not be used for the parents. Either way God’s prime commandment was being thwarted, whether by the man with the connivance of certain Rabbis, or by the Rabbis themselves.
We note again that Jesus saw ‘the Law’ as the commandment of God. It had to be obeyed. In contrast He saw the traditions of the elders as the traditions and precepts ‘of men’, as against the Pharisees who considered them as almost of equal weight. To Jesus the word of God was primary and inspired by God, but its interpretation, where there was doubt, He saw as secondary and not so inspired, simply being men’s ideas about it. To the Pharisees the interpretation as made by them was equally the word of God, and equally inspired (and often thereby supplanted it). This was the main point Jesus was contending against. He was fighting for an unadulterated acceptance of the word of God.
‘Which you have delivered.’ The word means ‘handed down, passed on’. The traditions of the elders were both passed down by the Rabbis and also passed on in their verdicts. They were wholly of their making. ‘Delivered’ often refers to a legal verdict.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The attack of Christ:
v. 9. And He said unto them, Full well ye reject the command of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
v. 10. For Moses said, Honor thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father and mother, let him die the death.
v. 11. But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, he shall be free.
v. 12. And ye suffer him no more to do aught for his father or his mother;
v. 13. making the Word of God of none effect through your tradition which ye have delivered; and many such like things do ye. Having defended Himself successfully and silenced His detractors, the Lord now assumes the offensive. He employs pointed sarcasm: It is a fine way in which you frustrate the commandment of God that your tradition may be upheld! The Pharisees not only placed the precepts of tradition on the same level with those of God, but by their peculiar emphasis upon them actually set the latter aside. An example of this irreverent and blasphemous method: setting aside the Fourth Commandment for the sake of a probable sacrifice. God’s Law is clear on the relation of children to parents, Exo 20:12; Deu 5:16, also regarding the punishment of those that disregard the rights of the parents, Exo 21:17; Lev 20:9. He had placed the service to parents next to that of Himself. But the Pharisees took advantage of the fact that God had sanctioned free-will offerings or sacrifices. They taught: If a man says to his father or his mother, Corban, that is, a free-will gift, let that be what you would have from me for your benefit or help. The final understanding of the expression came to be: if a son or daughter took the money, the goods, the earnings, the means, with which he could and should assist his poor and needy parents, and dedicated it to God as a sacrifice or free-will offering for the Temple, he did well. The Pharisees held the mere making of such a vow, the mere use of the expression Corban, for a service done to God, which could very well take precedence of the service due to parents. In doing so, they set aside even the plain truth of the Old Testament, Pro 28:24. The result of such teaching soon became evident: The honor due to parents was forgotten, the fact that they were God’s substitutes was disregarded. Thus they literally set at naught the Word of God, and such instances could be multiplied. That was Christ’s attack, one that showed the real relation of values.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mar 7:9. Full well ye reject Full well ye make of no effect. The word , rendered full well, might be rendered fairly, entirely. Dr. Heylin renders the clause, Ye do mighty well indeed to reject, &c. The words your own, at the end of the verse, are emphatical, distinguishing the commandments of men, the corrupt traditions of the Pharisees, from the commandments of God. See 1 Corinthians 11. 2Th 2:15 and Mangey.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Ver. 9. Full well ye reject ] q.d. It is finely done of you, is it not? . Sane, Bene. Ironice; ye are wise men therewhile. This was check to their masterships. Sapientes sapienter in infernum descendent, saith a father. The world’s wizards have not wit enough to escape hell.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
9. ] ironical: see ref.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 7:9-13
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
Mar 7:9
NASB”You are experts at setting aside”
NKJV”All too well you reject”
NRSV”You have a fine way of rejecting”
TEV”You have a clever way of rejecting”
NJB”How ingeniously you get around”
This is cutting sarcasm, much like Joh 3:10.
Mar 7:10 “Moses said” The parallel of Mat 15:4 has, “God said.” This shows God’s inspiration behind Moses’ words.
“‘honor'” This is a quote from the Ten Commandments recorded in Exo 20:12 and repeated in Deu 5:16. It is from a Hebrew commercial word “to give due weight to” (BDB 457), which means to recognize the worth of something.
Mar 7:11 “if” This is a third class conditional sentence, which speaks of potential action. Jesus is referring to contemporary ways of circumventing God’s Law (cf. Mar 7:12).
“‘your father and your mother'” This shows the required respect for both parents.
“‘he who speaks evil of father or mother'” This is a quote from Exo 21:17. Dishonor brought severe judgment. The rabbis had set this verse aside by means of their traditions.
“‘Corban'” This was a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew (not Aramaic) “gift” given to God (i.e., or to the Temple, cf. NKJV). Jesus shows one example of how the Jewish religionists of His day circumvented the intent and stated laws of the OT by their Oral Traditions. They had devised many loopholes in their Oral Traditions (cf. Mat 5:33-34; Mat 23:16-22).
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Full well. Same as “Well” in Mar 7:6
reject = set aside.
keep = observe.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
9.] -ironical: see ref.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mar 7:9. , full well ye reject) , for which the LXX. have , i.e. it is well said, when it is so said [It is a true saying that ye, etc.] Just as a true picture of a conflagration is well done. And also they had supposed they were doing well in doing so.-, in order that) This is a true accusation against them, although the hypocrites did not think that this was their own intention.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Full: 2Ki 16:10-16, Isa 24:5, Isa 29:13, Jer 44:16, Jer 44:17, Dan 7:25, Dan 11:36, Mat 15:3-6, 2Th 2:4
reject: or, frustrate, Mar 7:13, Psa 119:126, Rom 3:31, Gal 2:21
Reciprocal: Gen 45:11 – General 1Ki 18:27 – Elijah Ecc 7:29 – they Hab 1:4 – the law Mar 14:41 – Sleep Eph 6:2 – General Jam 2:19 – thou doest
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
9
Full well applies to the truthfulness of the statement and not to what the Pharisees were doing; truly, ye reject, etc. That ye may keep denotes they could not keep such traditions as theirs in the way they desired without disregarding the commandments of the Lord.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mar 7:9. Well. Ironical; the same word as in Mar 7:6.
Your tradition. The tradition of the elders was that of men, and they had made it theirs, living by it, contrary to the laws of God. At the bottom of all rigorous enforcement of traditional observances there is an unconscious, or half conscious, repugnance to submit perfectly to the law of God (Lange).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Mar 7:9-13. And he said, Full well , fairly, wholly; ye reject, &c. Or, reading the word separately, Finely done! How praiseworthy is your conduct! A strong irony. Ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your own tradition The words, your own, are emphatical, distinguishing the commandments of men, the corrupt traditions of the Pharisees, from the commandments of God. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother Lest the charge, which our Lord brought against the Pharisees, should be thought without foundation, because it contained an imputation of such gross profaneness, he supported it by an instance of an atrocious kind. God, saith he, has commanded children to honour their parents, that is, among other things, to maintain them when reduced to poverty, as the word honour signifies, 1Ti 5:17, promising life to such as do so, and threatening death against those that do otherwise. Nevertheless, ye Pharisees, presumptuously making light of the divine commandment, affirm that it is a more sacred duty to enrich the temple than to nourish ones parents, though they be in the utmost necessity; pretending that what is offered to the great Parent is better bestowed than that which is given for the support of our parents on earth; as if the interest of God were different from that of his creatures. Nay, ye impiously teach that a man may lawfully suffer his parents to starve, if he can say to them, It is corban, (a gifts) &c., by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me That is, that which should have succoured you, is given to the temple. Thus ye hypocrites have, by your frivolous traditions, made void the commandment of God, though of immutable and eternal obligation; and disguised with the cloak of piety the most horrid and unnatural action that a man can easily be guilty of. See Macknight, and the note on Mat 15:4-6.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
7:9 {5} And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
(5) True religion, which is completely contrary to superstition, consists in spiritual worship: and all enemies of true religion, although they seem to have taken deep root, will be plucked up.