What does Mark 7:11 reveal about honoring parents in biblical times? Text of Mark 7:11 “But you say, ‘If a man says to his father or mother, “Whatever you would have received from me is Corban (that is, devoted to God),” ’ ” Historical and Cultural Background First-century Jewish life expected adult children to provide for aging parents, based on the fifth commandment (Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16). Rabbinic sources confirm that financial and practical support were considered central to “honor” (Mishnah Pe’ah 4:9; b. Kiddushin 31b). At the same time, a legally binding vow—Korban (קָרְבָּן, “offering” or “gift”)—allowed a person to dedicate money or property to the Temple treasury (Mishnah Nedarim 1:1). Once pronounced, the item became legally “reserved,” though it often remained in the individual’s possession until death. By Jesus’ day the practice was routinely manipulated to avoid familial responsibility without technically breaking Torah or civil law. The Command to Honor Father and Mother The Mosaic command carries both relational and material dimensions. Jesus re-affirms it (Mark 7:10) and the apostles echo it (Ephesians 6:1-3; 1 Timothy 5:4, 8). Honoring parents therefore includes ensuring their welfare. Because Torah promised “long life” for obedience (Exodus 20:12), the community viewed filial piety as a barometer of covenant faithfulness. The Practice of Corban The Hebrew term appears in Leviticus 1:2 and Numbers 7:3 describing offerings set aside for sacred use. In later practice, any asset declared “Korban” became off-limits to profane use (Josephus, Antiquities 4.73). However, since the gift did not have to be transferred immediately, unscrupulous vow-takers could claim piety while denying support to parents. Pharisaic casuistry further insulated the vow from annulment (cf. Mishnah Nedarim 9:1-4). Conflict Between Tradition and Commandment Mark 7:11 reveals Jesus’ charge that human tradition can “invalidate the word of God” (Mark 7:13). The moral weight of honoring parents is non-negotiable; any system—religious or secular—that circumvents that duty violates divine law. Jesus appeals directly to Scripture, not merely to custom, demonstrating that Scripture’s authority surpasses later interpretive traditions. Original Language Insights “Corban” (κορβᾶν) is transliterated in Mark to clarify a uniquely Jewish concept for a mostly Gentile audience. The clause ὠφεληθῇς (“you would have received help”) stresses tangible benefit—food, shelter, money—linking honor to practical care. The present tense λέγετε (“you say”) exposes an ongoing, systemic abuse rather than an isolated event. Archaeological Corroboration An Aramaic inscription discovered in Jerusalem (catalogued CIJ 751) lists household items labeled “qrbn,” illustrating everyday use of the vow. Ostraca from Qumran (e.g., 4Q325) record monetary pledges to the Temple using the same term, confirming that Korban extended beyond animal sacrifice into personal finance and inheritance. Theological Significance 1. Upholding Parental Honor: Jesus upholds the enduring moral law even while confronting extra-biblical accretions. 2. Exposure of Hypocrisy: Religious façades cannot excuse neglect of God-ordained duties. 3. Christ’s Authority over Tradition: By judging tradition, Jesus asserts divine prerogative, reinforcing His identity as “Lord of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28) and hence Lord over all covenant stipulations. Ethical and Practical Application Today Believers must prioritize parental care—financial, emotional, and physical—over discretionary religious expenditures. Modern parallels include withholding support under the guise of “ministry commitments” or “personal calling.” Scripture permits offerings only after essential responsibilities are satisfied (Proverbs 3:27-28; 1 John 3:17). Designed Familial Structure Family obligation reflects intentional design: God establishes multigenerational communities for mutual support (Genesis 2:24; Psalm 127:3-5). Neglect of parents disrupts this created order, weakening societal fabric and testimony. Summary Mark 7:11 exposes how a misused religious vow allowed first-century Jews to sidestep the divine mandate to honor parents. Jesus rebukes the practice, reasserting Scripture’s primacy, condemning hypocrisy, and affirming that authentic devotion to God includes tangible care for one’s father and mother. |
    |