I was given great pause for thought during a recent exhortation where the tradition of “Corban” was discussed. The morning reading was from Mark 7.
While the practice is perhaps not fully understood by us today, “Corban” is generally taken to be a policy or formula whereby a man could dedicate his wealth to the temple and thereby circumvent his responsibilities to his parents. A son need only declare that what he had intended to give his father and mother be considered “Corban”, i.e., a gift devoted to God, and then it could no longer be designated or used for the care of his parents.
By devoting the gift to God, a son did not necessarily promise it to the temple nor did he prevent its use for himself. What he did do was to exclude legally his parents from benefiting from it (Mark 7:12). Thus the very purpose for which the commandment regarding parents was given was set aside by the tradition. This is what Jesus meant by “nullifying” the word of God (Mark 7:13).
In the exhortation, the brother certainly broadened the application of this particular practice of the Pharisees. He provided potential examples of our dealings with our failing elders, helping to bring the “Corban” concept into our own time. This is certainly within the context of Mark 7. Any self-respecting Pharisee could “spin” it this way. For example, if your aged parents did not wash properly around your clean and godly house, as the law of Moses prescribed, then this fact trumped the fifth commandment (Exod. 20:12). Cleanliness became the higher ideal, above the command to honour your father and mother, etc. Excluding your parents for this reason could also become “Corban”.
In Mark 7, Jesus clearly contrasts the “commands of God” and the “traditions of men”. While the discussion obviously included the whole subject of cleanliness, it was also directed toward a far more urgent consideration. Following is a useful quote from The Expositor’s Bible Commentary:
“It is clear that this great body of Jewish tradition had failed to get to the heart of God’s commands. It was supposed to fence in the law so that the people would not infringe on it. Actually, however, the tradition distorted or ossified the law. In fact, it had even become a means of getting around God’s law” (Vol. 8, p. 678).
At the time of Mark’s writing, these “traditions of men” consisted of a great mass of oral tradition that had arisen around the law during the previous three to four hundred years. About 200 AD it was all written down in what became known as the Mishnah, but in Jesus’ day it was still in oral form.
The purpose of the oral tradition was to regulate completely every aspect of life. When the law was ambiguous or even silent on a matter, tradition was explicit and vocal. It was promulgated by the leading rabbis, was passed down from one generation to another, and was considered binding. It had the effect of replacing God in the hearts of the people with the more visual and imperative reality of the local religious power elite. Of course, if Biblical and godly principles reigned within the hearts of the people, then the elite would be to a large extent “out of business”.
The real issue, of course, is that we are all easily tarred with the same brush. It is common for human nature of all ages to trump the commandments of God with the traditions of men. Our own “idols” are very compelling.
As good Bible understanding and exegesis become less common, we all need constantly to re-examine everything we do, say and think. We need to make certain it is in accordance with the will and commandments of God, rather than the more easily applied and often more attractive and tempting traditions of men.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One