Sermon Tone Analysis

*“Empty Religion”*

*Mark 7.1-23*

 

Jaroslav Pelikan wrote that "Tradition is the living faith of the dead, traditionalism is the dead faith of the living."

David Garland writes, "One may compare tradition to the shell of the blue crab.

To live and grow it must shed its shell from time to time.

Until it creates a new shell, the crab is extremely vulnerable.

But if the shell becomes so strong and rigid that the crab cannot escape, that is the shell in which it dies.

Losing traditions that make one feel safe and comfortable can cause great anxiety.

But hanging on to traditions so that one becomes "hard-shelled" is fatal."

I recently had the opportunity to watch “Fiddler on the Roof” with family over the holidays but unfortunately I declined to play another round of Settlers of Catan.

I now regret the decision because it likely would have provided some great illustrations for the sermon this morning.

We are dealing with yet another confrontation between the Pharisees and Jesus.

It seems as though the popularity of Jesus was not all that impressive to the religious leaders.

We just witnessed Jesus teaching and feeding multitudes because of his great compassion for the people.

You recall that they were sheep without a shepherd.

Word continued to spread quickly as reports speak of Jesus walking on water and the healing of many in Gennasaret.

People had come from all over to lay the sick in the marketplaces where they touched the garment of Jesus and were healed.

And the reports went even to Jerusalem, the capital.

This is where we pick up our text.

We are in Mark 7.1-23 this morning.

Please stand as we read God’s word.

We begin by looking at the first of two points, which is *Tradition Trouble*.

So apparently Jesus has drawn enough attention to bring the Pharisees and scribes down from Jerusalem in order to squelch his teachings and ministry.

This happened before in Mark 3.22 when they accused Jesus of operating by the power of Satan.

The Pharisees and scribes were working hard as influencers over the Jews and Jesus was really messing things up for them.

The Pharisees join together with the scribes in verse one and approach Jesus and his disciples.

In similar fashion to other occurrences, they seemingly wait for an opportunity to trap him.

And at this point, they feel as though they got him.

His disciples ate with hands that were unwashed.

Now, on the surface, this seems to be a valid concern.

We know that it is in our best interest to wash our hands before eating.

We ask this of our kids and we do it as well.

If this were what they were getting at, you would think that the response would be an overreaction to this observation.

But as we will see, the Pharisees and scribes were not concerned with hygiene, but religious scruples.

The accusation was that the disciples did not ceremonially wash before eating with their hands.

This, they determined, was defilement.

As we know from our Old Testament, there were certain purity regulations that were meant to be followed.

We see though that their expectations often exceeded that which was written.

And this will become the crux of the issue going forward.

Verse 3 begins a parenthetical insertion that seeks to further explain what is going on in this situation.

Mark indicates that the Pharisees and “all the Jews” (this is an overstatement to emphasize their widespread influence) do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the */tradition/* of the elders, and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash.

And there are many other */traditions/* that they observe – washing all these utensils and dining couches?? I’m not quite sure what it going on with the dining couches here.

But this isn’t the point.

The point is that the religious leaders have elevated tradition over the commands of God.

In Exodus 30:17–21, “17 The Lord said to Moses, 18 “You shall also make a basin of bronze, with its stand of bronze, for washing.

You shall put it between the tent of meeting and the altar, and you shall put water in it, 19 with which Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet.

20 When they go into the tent of meeting, or when they come near the altar to minister, to burn a food offering to the Lord, they shall wash with water, so that they may not die.

21 They shall wash their hands and their feet, so that they may not die.

It shall be a statute forever to them, even to him and to his offspring throughout their generations.”

Here is the command of God – directed to the sons of Aaron, the priests.

Exodus 40:12 “12 Then you shall bring Aaron and his sons to the entrance of the tent of meeting and shall wash them with water.”

Same thing.

In their effort to extend this ritual washing to all the Jews, they were enforcing a tradition and not a command.

Notice that Jesus does not deny any allegations.

But he identifies them as traditions.

David Garland notes that “Jesus’ counterattack cites an extreme example to show how the tradition of the elders sanctions the subversion of God’s will.

In verse 8 is the indictment.

They have left the commandment of God and held to the tradition of men, or the tradition of the elders in verses 3 and 5.

We have a record of many of these in the Mishna which is these oral traditions that have been collected and reduced to writing.

In defense of the Pharisees, they possess great zeal.

They took the Law seriously – and yet missed its intent.

The Pharisees and scribes ask a question in verse 5.

They question why the disciples do not walk according to this tradition and eat with defiled hands.

Do you think that their question was really concerning /them?

Or Jesus?

/They were trying to undermine Jesus and his teaching.

And they do so through a widely recognized tradition of these ritual washings.

This is a pivotal moment.

And I think that this is why Jesus responds so strongly.

He quotes the prophet they would have held in high esteem – the greatest of prophets in their mind, Isaiah.

And Jesus says that he prophesies of them??

But first he calls them hypocrites.

He calls the religious leaders actors in a play.

They were the ones who wore the masks in the theatre.

They were different on the outside than on the inside.

In this context, Jesus implies that though they have the appearance of honouring God, they do not worship from the heart.

They are merely actors and have no relationship with God.

And this is attributed to the fact that they teach as doctrines, their own fabrications.

And this is dangerous and worthy of the rebuke!

And beyond this, they lead others to do the same.

Jesus goes on to describe another way they do this other than the ritual washings.

And he reverts back to the commandment to honor father and mother from Exodus 20, otherwise known as the Ten Commandments.

And Jesus includes a further warning from Exodus 21.17.

Incidentally, it is noteworthy that Jesus here identifies Moses as God’s inspired mouthpiece because we know that these words came from God and Moses recorded them.

But the religious leaders had altered this commandment.

They even created something called “corban,” which means “dedicated to God.”

The offering involved a vow to dedicate it irrevocably to God.

As a result the offering was placed under a ban so that it could not be used for any other purpose, as is implied by verse 12.

Under no circumstances would the scribes of Jesus’ day permit a person annul such a vow.”

By doing this, people could neglect the physical needs of their parents under the guise of “dedicated to God.”

This is NOT what God desires for his people.

Notice the progression regarding the commandments of God.

In verse 8, Jesus says that they “leave” the commandment of God.

In verse 9, they “reject” it.

And in verse 13, they “make void” the word of God.

The religious leaders would likely be the last to suggest that they would make void the very word of God.

Yet in fact this is what they were doing by imposing the traditions of men.

And MANY such things you do.

This wasn’t just about ritual washings or corban.

This was a pattern.