Tradition and Vain Worship
Hypocrites are self-righteous, focus on externals, and elevate tradition above Scripture.
I. Self-Righteousness vs. Righteousness
rabbis promoted the idea that Moses had received two laws on Mt. Sinai, the written Torah and the oral Mishnah. The Mishnah was believed to preserve an unbroken chain of authorized tradition extending from Moses to the “Great Synagogue” of Jesus’ day (m. Avot 1:1–13). The Mishnah called the oral interpretation “a fence around the Torah” (m. Avot 3:13)—“fence” being understood as preservation of the integrity of the written law by elaborating every conceivable implication of it
The food laws of Lv. 11 and 17, and the whole concept of ritual purity which underlies them, were of central importance to Jewish culture and identity. Together with the rite of circumcision and their observance of the sabbath, the literal adherence to these dietary laws served to mark out the Jews as the distinctive people of God, and to separate them socially from other people. The sharing of meals is one of the most basic forms of social integration, and these laws effectively made it impossible for Jews to share in meals prepared by non-Jews.
The Mishna, a collection of Jewish traditions in the Talmud, records, “It is a greater offense to teach anything contrary to the voice of the Rabbis than to contradict Scripture itself.”
II. External Worship vs. Internal Worship (vv. 6-9)
III. Tradition vs. Scripture (vv. 9-13)
In the hypothetical situation proposed by Jesus, if the son declared his property qorban to his parents, he neither promised it to the Temple nor prohibited its use to himself, but he legally excluded his parents from the right of benefit.
Today a person may will property to a charity or institution at his or her death, though retaining possession over the property and the proceeds or interest accruing from it until then. In the case of Corban, a person could dedicate goods to God and withdraw them from ordinary use, although retaining control over them himself. In the example of v. 11, a son declares his property Corban, which at his death would pass into the possession of the temple.
The biblical mandate that the priests had to wash their hands and feet prior to entering the Tabernacle (Ex. 30:19; 40:13) provided the foundation for the wide-spread practice of ritual washings in Palestinian and diaspora Judaism. At least as early as the second century B.C. many Jews voluntarily assumed the purity laws of the priests and regularly washed their hands before morning prayer. The accompanying benediction was designed not for the priests, but for laymen: “Blessed be Thou O Lord, King of the universe, who sanctified us by thy laws and commanded us to wash the hands.”11
In the hypothetical situation proposed by Jesus, if the son declared his property qorban to his parents, he neither promised it to the Temple nor prohibited its use to himself, but he legally excluded his parents from the right of benefit.
The food laws of Lv. 11 and 17, and the whole concept of ritual purity which underlies them, were of central importance to Jewish culture and identity. Together with the rite of circumcision and their observance of the sabbath, the literal adherence to these dietary laws served to mark out the Jews as the distinctive people of God, and to separate them socially from other people. The sharing of meals is one of the most basic forms of social integration, and these laws effectively made it impossible for Jews to share in meals prepared by non-Jews.
rabbis promoted the idea that Moses had received two laws on Mt. Sinai, the written Torah and the oral Mishnah. The Mishnah was believed to preserve an unbroken chain of authorized tradition extending from Moses to the “Great Synagogue” of Jesus’ day (m. Avot 1:1–13). The Mishnah called the oral interpretation “a fence around the Torah” (m. Avot 3:13)—“fence” being understood as preservation of the integrity of the written law by elaborating every conceivable implication of it
Today a person may will property to a charity or institution at his or her death, though retaining possession over the property and the proceeds or interest accruing from it until then. In the case of Corban, a person could dedicate goods to God and withdraw them from ordinary use, although retaining control over them himself. In the example of v. 11, a son declares his property Corban, which at his death would pass into the possession of the temple.
The Mishna, a collection of Jewish traditions in the Talmud, records, “It is a greater offense to teach anything contrary to the voice of the Rabbis than to contradict Scripture itself.”
The Mishna, a collection of Jewish traditions in the Talmud, records, “It is a greater offense to teach anything contrary to the voice of the Rabbis than to contradict Scripture itself.”