Void Word, Vain
Religion
Gospel
Reading : Mark
7:1-13
One
of today’s bad words is the word tradition. If someone asks you, “What
kind of worship do you have at your church?” you may be embarrassed to answer,
“Traditional Presbyterian worship.” If another person asks, “What does your
church believe?” you may hesitate for fear of turning him off before you say,
“Traditional Reformed doctrine.”
For
a lot of reasons tradition is suspect in our culture. It implies an authority
from the past that is imposed on us, and we are Americans, whose country was
formed in revolution, and we value our individualism and independence and
autonomy. Moreover, we live on the other side of the 1960’s when everything
old, including anyone over 30, was not to be trusted.
In
the Bible tradition is not always a bad word. It often means something that is
true and right that has been handed down to you by a trustworthy source, which
you are supposed to believe, practice, preserve, and pass down to the rising
generation. Traditional Presbyterian worship is the form of worship that our
forefathers developed by their careful study of the Bible’s teaching on
worship. We do not find fault with their conclusions, so we worship according
to the tradition. Traditional Presbyterian doctrine, such as the Westminster
Confession of faith, is the summary of the Christian faith written by scholarly
and godly men who carefully studied the Bible. We find that their statement
remains an accurate and faithful the teaching of the Bible, and so we embrace
it.
There
is a form of tradition however that is evil – it is the tradition that goes
beyond the Bible and that is given a place next to or over the Bible. This kind
of tradition makes God’s word void and religion vain. This is what Jesus
confronts in Mark 7.
I.
Criticism
The
local Pharisees from Galilee and some scribes from Jerusalem show up in chapter 7. Whenever
these men appear, we might play the Dragnet theme: “Dum, da-dum, dum”,
for it always means trouble. They are never up to anything good. They are
hostile to Jesus and His teaching, and they are looking for opportunities to
criticize and discredit Him. This kind of spirit did not go away after Jesus
left. The Apostle Paul experienced the same sort of thing as he taught the
gospel of Jesus and established churches built on that doctrine. In Galatia
the Judaizers undermined His teaching. In Corinth the “super-apostles”
and “super-spiritual Christians” undermined his authority. When he was in jail
in Rome ,
some other teachers wanted to take advantage of the situation to advance themselves.
The
Pharisees and scribes got their opportunity to criticize Jesus soon enough.
Jesus’ disciples were observed eating without washing their hands. Now, even we
might be somewhat offended by that, since we have been taught by mothers and
teachers to wash our hands before we eat. For us it’s a matter of hygiene. But
hygiene was not the issue for these men who had come to look for an opportunity
to attack Jesus.
The
issue was whether Jesus’ disciples were “clean” or not when they ate. Their
concern was not germs but ritual cleanliness. When they saw the disciples not
wash their hands and then eat, they believed they were eating with defiled
hands. Mark offers us Gentiles an explanation of how this was offensive to them
and gave them an opportunity for criticism. “For the Pharisees and all the Jews
do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the tradition of the
elders…” Because Israel was no longer
under Israelite control and had Gentiles not only ruling but living among them,
they were very concerned lest they contract ritual defilement. They also might
become unclean through contact with a non-observant Jew, one of the “sinners.”
And then there were the kinds of things that conveyed uncleanness that were
listed in the Law of Moses. So they did their best to keep themselves ritually
clean.
The
Law of Moses taught about only one ritual washing. There was a basin in the
courtyard of the tabernacle and temple, where the priests washed their hands
and feet before they went to offer sacrifice or entered the Holy Place . But over the years, a
teaching and practice developed that called for all people to engage in ritual
washings. This became an authoritative tradition. So Mark tells us about some
of the washings they observed. They washed their hands with a fistful of water
anytime they ate. If they went to the marketplace, they went through a more
thorough cleansing. They washed for ritual purposes cups and pots and copper
vessels. They even washed couches – it is uncertain whether these were dining
couches or beds, but in any case it is another indication of how far they went
to assure purity and how much it meant to them. Devotion to ritual purity was
one of the distinguishing marks of the whole Pharisaic movement.
So
when they observed the indifference of Jesus’ disciples to these things, they
went to Jesus and said, “Why do your disciples not walk according to the
tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?” They went to Jesus rather
than the disciples, because Jesus was the Teacher and responsible for the
conduct of His followers. They could not respect a Teacher whose rules of
conduct for His followers were less stringent than theirs. How could He be a
holy man and sent from God, if He did not teach His disciples to observe the
traditions about purity?
Not
just the Pharisees but many people will always find fault with Jesus when they
require Him to meet their expectations. Only when we submit ourelves to Him,
and learn from Him who He is, will we be able to believe in Him and follow Him.
It is a sad thing that both within and without the church there are many who
try to impose on Jesus their ideas of who He should be and how He should act.
II.
Citation
The
criticism of the Pharisees and scribes was answered by Jesus with a citation
from Isaiah. Now before we look at what He says, we need to look at how Jesus
responds. For many people, including not a few Christians, Jesus is pretty much
the nicest guy who ever lived. He never got upset, never responded sharply,
always protected everybody’s feelings. But this is not the Jesus we find here.
One of the things most needed in the Christian world today is the liberation of
Jesus from those who would strip His personality all manliness. In His answers
to His critics, He really escalated the argument to a new and more intense
level. He called them hypocrites and then called into question the whole of
their worship. Then in the next section, which we will consider in the next
point, Jesus uses sarcasm against these men. In content and tone Jesus here is
not the Jesus so many want Him to be.
He
addresses them as hypocrites. The word for hypocrite came from the Greek word
for actor. In those days, before elaborate make-up and disguises, actors
performed behind masks. And, it is the idea of someone living behind a mask
that is conveyed by the Biblical word for hypocrite. Jesus was not accusing
them of being insincere. That is one kind of hypocrite – he pretends to be what
he knows he is not. But these men were very sincere, believing that their
religion was the way of pleasing God. Jesus is not saying they are not
dedicated – that they call people to live by one standard while they themselves
ignore it. That is another kind of hypocrisy, one we ministers may be
especially in danger of committing.
What
Jesus is saying is in effect, “Other people look at you, and they are impressed
with the holiness of your life. They see you being scrupulous about your
washings. They see how careful you are about your tithes and your prayers. They
look up to you and perhaps wish they could be like you. Moreover, you
yourselves think of yourselves as righteous because you do all these things.
You think God approves of you while He disapproves of others. But what others
think you are and what you think you are is not the reality. The reality is
that you do not know God; you have no relationship with God; you do not really
desire to please Him. You have the mask of righteousness and holiness, but the
reality behind the mask is a cold and dead heart and a lifeless religion.”
We
hardly need to be reminded that one does not have to belong to the Pharisee
party to be guilty of their sin. We can be known for our church attendance,
devotional exercises, service, giving, and lifestyle, and be honored by others,
when we are far from God. May God save us all from deceiving others, and even
more from deceiving ourselves, and may He give us warm and sincere hearts
toward Him.
Jesus
quoted from the prophet Isaiah. He found that the description Isaiah had given
of the people of his day was appropriate to describe the Pharisees and scribes.
It got to the bottom line issue in religion, which is worship. Religion is
about whom you worship and how you worship. We spend a lot of energy inquiring
into whether worship is pleasing to us, when we should spend all that energy
asking if it is pleasing to God.
The
people of Isaiah’s day had two problems. One was that, when they worshiped,
they said things to God that were worshipful; they used the forms of worship
that were prescribed. So far so good. But, when they were worshiping, their
hearts were far from God. Right words, right forms, wrong hearts.
Their
second problem was that they taught for doctrines the commandments of men. That
is, they either added to the doctrine revealed by God, doctrines that had been
invented by men, or they substituted the doctrines invented by men for the
doctrines revealed by God. Here they were wrong in the form.
What
we believe is not a matter of indifference, as though all is fine so long as we
are sincere and nice about it. Doctrine is about truth – God’s truth. Whenever
we do anything to diminish the accuracy or the authority of God’s truth, we are
playing loose with what matters immensely to the Lord God of truth. This makes
all our worship vain. We can worship however long we like, with however much
excitement and enthusiasm we like. We can even feel very good and very
spiritual about it, but if we have denied God’s truth it is empty, useless
worship, unacceptable to God.
Nothing
should concern us as Christians more than our worship – the form of our worship
and whether it conforms to revealed truth – and the state of our hearts in
worship and whether they are drawing near to God. Jesus said the true nature of
their religion was that they left the commandment of God order to hold their
tradition. They turned their back on God’s commandments and embraced man’s
traditions. Thus their religion was worth nothing and their worship was
profane.
III.
Corroboration
When
a prosecutor makes his case, he lays out his charge and then he presents his
corroborating evidence. Jesus, by citing Isaiah, has made out the charge that
His opponents are hypocrites whose religion and worship are vain. Now He
presses on to present one line of corroboration. He focuses in on their
handling of the fifth commandment.
Here
is where the sarcasm comes into his voice: “You have a fine way
of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition.”
Taken literally it is a complement. But, of course, it was not meant to be a
complement, for what they have done is to discover a way to get around God’s
Law so that they can keep their tradition. Here is where they went wrong. They
had the Law of God revealed through Moses. But through the years an oral
tradition had grown up that was supposed to show how the Law was to be applied
to life. These rules also “put a hedge around the Law,” or a fence meant to
keep people from getting anywhere near to disobedience. The problem was that
these traditions went beyond the Law to require more than the Law required.
These became a burden to the people, rather than a blessing. Then sometimes
there could be contradictions between the Law and the traditions. When these
arose, the scribes had to come up with a way of settling the matter. Jesus used
this to show how the scribes used the tradition to reject the Law.
The
example Jesus gave was the fifth commandment. It said, “Honor your father and
your mother.” But how do you honor your parents? It can differ according to
what your age was. It you were a child, it meant to respect and obey your
parents. If you were an adult, it meant to care about your parents, even to the
point of taking care of them in old age if they needed it.
The
Law makes it clear how serious the matter of dishonoring parents is. One of its
judicial rulings said, “Whoever reviles father and mother must surely die.” Now
this was not the penalty for a single incident of disrespect in words. It was
when a young person became so recalcitrant as to have an habitual attitude of
disrespect toward his parents so that he reviled or cursed them chronically. This
may seem very harsh to us. And we should note that these judicial rulings in
the Old Testament, while helpful us to show us principles of justice, are not
in themselves part of the binding Law of God today. But this prescribed penalty
for dishonoring parents shows us how seriously God takes this sin.
There
are surely Christian children and young people who think they may with impunity
show disrespect toward their parents. And there are parents who overlook it.
But the commandment has a promise with a negative implication. “Honor your
father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land the Lord your
God is giving you” (Exodus 20:12). If long life is promised to those who honor,
is it not true also that God is warning that a consequence of dishonoring
parents could be a life cut short? That should move parents and children alike
to take seriously the matter of respect and obedience.
There
was a “Corban practice.” Corban, as Mark explains, means something given
to God or devoted to God as an offering. The way this seems to have worked was
like a deferred giving plan. In deferred giving plans a person gives an
investment or a piece of property to a charitable organization, only it does
not go to the organization until the donor’s death. During his lifetime the
donor retains the use of the gift and any profits that may come from it. It seems that there was a practice among the
Jews that resembled this practice. A man could give a gift to God and then
retain the use of it until his death. There were all sorts of regulations about
the Corban gifts.
What
happened if the man’s parents in their old age needed help and what the man had
given could help provide for their needs? Well, the Pharisees and scribes
turned again to the Law of Moses, which warned very strongly against breaking
vows. So they reasoned, “You vowed to give this gift to God, and so you must
keep your vow. You cannot take back your gift and use it to help your parents.”
Even if a man who had made Corban gift wanted to revoke the arrangement and use
his property or other forms of wealth to help his parents, the tradition did
not allow it. The result was that the fifth commandment was broken. Adult
children of aged parents would not, or in some cases, could not honor their
father and mother but using the Corban gifts to help their parents.
Jesus
says that this made the word of God void. You know what it is to countermand an
order. The order is given and someone says that it must not be obeyed. In the military,
or in business, or other structures, it is only the person with superior
authority who can countermand an order of someone under him. But in this case
the Pharisees used their tradition to countermand the word of God. By their
tradition they made God’s word null and void. Did they know they were doing
this? Did they think that were voiding God’s word? No. Nevertheless, by their
use of tradition they denied the authority of God and His word. Jesus went on to make the point that He was
giving one example, not the one case of their voiding the word of God. In fact
they did “many such things.” There were many cases where their adherence to
tradition given by man voided the word given by God.
What
a strong warning Jesus gives us. There is the word of God, which is the
revelation of God’s truth and behind which stands the Person and the authority
of God Himself. And how prone we are as sinners to invent reasons not to hear
or to obey the word of God. We can show how the word cannot possibly be taken seriously
in certain circumstances. We can show how the word cannot possibly be meant to
apply to us. We can talk about how in certain situations adherence to the word
of God is not possible or will result in some unacceptable hardship. When we do that, we do what the Pharisees
did. We may not void the word of God by tradition. In fact we may be as
suspicious of tradition as any other American. We might never be accused of
being traditional. But we void the word of God when we, for any reason, will
not hear it or will not obey it. And to make void the word of God is simply a
recipe for disaster.
May
God give us open ears, softened hearts, and compliant wills, that we may hear
the word of God and do it.
whs
5/30/04
No comments:
Post a Comment