What About Traditions? (Mark 7:1-23)

J. C. Ryle gives his opinion of this passage, and it is quite a remarkable assessment of its importance: ‘This passage contains a humbling picture of what human nature is capable of doing in religion. It is one of those Scriptures which ought to be frequently and diligently studied by all who desire the prosperity of the Church of Christ.’

Traditions are part of life. They exist wherever there is a long history, although they can also be the consequences of recent actions. So in our country we have strong political traditions as anyone who has seen the Houses of Parliament in operation knows. We even get traditions connected to football teams and comments can be made if a new manager does not follow them. And we have traditions in religious practices. It is the last type that Mark refers to here when he relates an interaction between Jesus and the Pharisees. How long had these traditions been around? Long enough to be given an imposing title designed to prevent criticism and assessment – they were now ‘the traditions of the elders.’

We know that Jesus was preparing his followers for effective service once he would leave them at his ascension. So far in our studies in Mark we have looked at various situations or classrooms in which the disciples learned important lessons about serving God. We could regard this incident in which Jesus disputes with the Pharisees as a lesson that is taking place in another school that imagined it was training people to serve God, but which it was not doing, although most of the public would have assumed that it was. So we can look at the details and see if we can learn helpful principles for responding to tradition.

The Traditionalists

The traditionalists here are the Pharisees and the scribes. They saw themselves as the defenders of a particular religious lifestyle and were regarded by themselves and others as one of the more conservative groups in Israel as against more open to change groups such as the Herodians and the Sadducees. The problem that was at issue here for the Pharisees was that the disciples of Jesus did not wash their hands in a ritualistic way before they ate food. Of course, Mark is not referring to practices of hygiene here.

The description by Mark of the traditionalists is interesting. First, they were very observant – they noticed that the disciples of Jesus did not wash their hands. No doubt there were other groups who did not wash their hands in a ritualistic way, but the point I am mentioning is that the traditionalists noted what true disciples of Jesus did not do.

Second, the traditionalists were confrontational. They immediately began to question Jesus regarding the behaviour of his disciples. It was an issue that was so small as not to matter, yet they were ready to make it into an issue about which to have a public debate. Their traditions became weapons to use against people that Jesus was training to serve him. Sad to say, their agenda was not connected to the way the kingdom of God would develop.

Third, the traditionalists were comprehensive as far as their range of activities were concerned. Mark points out that there ‘there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.’ Tradition can be very extensive, almost to the stage that it covers the entirety of one’s behaviour. The list can be so long and broad that nothing is unaffected by it.

Fourth, the traditions that the Pharisees followed made life very complicated. How often did they have to wash their utensils! They would have to ensure that they did not inadvertently break one of their traditions and be observed by others as disobedient. I suppose that what happened was that eventually traditions of one kind or another filled the whole of their time.

Fifth, the traditionalists on this point were scripture-less. All they could appeal to was the tradition of the elders. In the eyes of the Pharisees, the disciples were guilty (unclean) before God because they ignored a ritual handed on by a group of people who imposed this ritual on others. Why the elders had introduced this practice is not known. They may have imagined that it would help maintain a devotional life. So it might have seemed good at the time.

What can we say initially about such traditions? They question the wisdom of God because they suggest that there are important details connected to serving God that he has not mentioned and which humans have to provide. Traditions also question the sufficiency of scripture because their supporters take upon themselves the temerity to add to its requirements.

The response of Jesus to the Pharisees

The reaction of Jesus to the question of the Pharisees regarding tradition makes clear that he personally put the teaching of the Bible into its own unique place of authority. Jesus obeyed the word of God and not the pronouncement of humans. Some may respond, ‘Did Jesus not obey authorities and pay their taxes? Yet there is no guidance in scripture about how much tax we should pay.’ That is true, yet there is the command to obey the civil authorities, including the taxman. So Jesus was showing the best example to his disciples when he submitted himself to the requirements of the Word of God.

The response of Jesus also tells us something about the relevance of biblical statements. He quotes a passage from Isaiah, which in its initial delivery had a strong message for the people of Judah at that time. Yet he also says that Isaiah’s message to them was also a prophetic message to people living hundreds of years later in the time of Jesus. And we can also say that the same message speaks powerfully to people today.

This means that the message of the Bible is a permanent one and we should make it our aim to believe what it says and to obey what it requires. Otherwise, as Ryle observed, ‘It is just as easy to destroy the authority of God’s word by addition as by subtraction, by burying it under man’s inventions as by denying its truth. The whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, must be our rule of faith – nothing added and nothing taken away.’

What was the message? It was that those whose religion is run by the traditions of men only have an external one which does not involve their hearts. Instead of serving God they were hypocrites because they did not worship him properly. They were treating him similar to how others regarded idols. Instead of bringing them close to God, their traditions ensured they remained far from him.

Jesus gave an example connected to the fifth commandment. Instead of obeying that commandment they created a way to avoid obeying it, and what was worse their way of avoiding obeying was blasphemous because they misused the name of God. An easy ruse in which a person said that he had devoted his possessions to God allowed that individual not to provide for his parents. In their case, the giving of the possessions to God need not occur for many years!

The application by Jesus

The first thing we can refer to by Jesus is the universal relevance of his teaching. He wanted all the people to benefit from his message in contrast to the Pharisees whose teachings shut out people from the kingdom. Of course, this universal application reveals to us the heart of Jesus for them and his desire that they would be delivered from being misled by the wrong teachings of the Pharisees.

Then we can refer to the emphasis that Jesus places on the necessity of correct understanding. He tells his listeners that they must understood who they are and why they did things. In contrast, those who follow traditions usually do so mindlessly, without asking where the practices originated and whether or not they please God. This is important because one day God will ask us why we did what we did.

A third detail to note from the application of Jesus is that there is a universal problem shared by everyone. The problem is that everyone defiles himself by what he is inside and not by what is outside of him. It is clear that the illustration of Jesus was not understood by his listeners, not even by his disciples. The point of the illustration is that traditions don’t deal with the problems of the heart.

Then a fourth detail is that it would become the responsibility of the disciples to explain the saying of Jesus to the people. They had the privilege of having direct interaction with Jesus and of receiving enlightenment from him. So when one of the crowd later met one of the disciples and asked him what Jesus meant by his illustration, that disciple would be able to explain the meaning of Jesus. That is still the calling of his disciples today, to be ready to explain the teaching of Jesus through the understanding he has given them.

There is a fifth detail we have to note and it is connected to the authority of Jesus to alter the Old Testament ritualistic prohibitions. As we know, there were some foods – bacon, for example – that were forbidden to devout followers of God in Israel. Probably, the traditions of the elders were connected to helping them observe those prohibitions. It is the case that those prohibitions were difficult to follow and the traditions only added to the burdens of the people. In contrast, Jesus made it easier for his followers by abolishing those prohibitions. A Christian can eat a bacon sandwich and read the Old Testament simultaneously for spiritual profit without having to worry about pointless traditions devised by men to deal with the problem – which is what a Pharisee could never do. We are to prize the freedom that Jesus has given us.

The sixth detail from the application of Jesus is that what I need is a new heart and not a set of traditions. What an accurate and awful picture Jesus gave of each person’s heart! All the terrible things that happen took place because someone thought about the details. I suppose we are prone to look at the list and select which ones apply more directly to ourselves as individuals. So we might admit that we have evil thoughts and then state that we would not engage in theft or murder. Yet every person who stole or killed would probably have made the same claim before they later performed the outward sin. The point that Jesus is making is that each of us is capable of any sin.

The traditionalists imagined that the remedy for defilement was a set of ludicrous rules. Jesus informs us that the remedy is a new heart. From where will we get a new heart? By asking Jesus to give us one. What is different about a new heart? It is filled with love – love to God, to Jesus, to his gospel and to his commandments. I have never seen a person in love wanting to change his circumstances if he is with the one he loves. A Christian follows the instructions of Jesus and not the traditions of men.