How does Matthew 15:3 relate to the Pharisees' practices? Text of Matthew 15:3 “Jesus replied, ‘And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?’ ” Canonical Context Matthew situates the dispute immediately after Jesus’ Galilean healing ministry (Matthew 14) and before Peter’s confession (Matthew 16), underscoring mounting tension between Jesus and the Jerusalem religious establishment. The parallel in Mark 7:1-13 amplifies the same incident, emphasizing common early-church memory. Both Evangelists frame the event as a clash between divine revelation and human tradition, thereby preparing readers for Jesus’ later denunciations of the Pharisees (Matthew 23). Historical Background of Pharisaical Traditions By the first century the Pharisees, emerging from Second-Temple pietism, guarded an oral corpus (later codified in the Mishnah, ca. A.D. 200). This “tradition of the elders” (παράδοσις τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, Matthew 15:2) regulated ritual washings (Mishnah, Yadayim 1–4), vows, corban formulas, and Sabbath minutiae. Archaeology corroborates the Pharisaic obsession with purity: the proliferation of stone vessels (ritually non-defiling) unearthed at first-century sites such as Capernaum, Chorazin, and Jerusalem’s “Priestly Quarter,” and more than nine hundred stepped mikvaʾot (ritual baths) catalogued in Judea (Netzer, 1992; Reich, 2013) reveal a culture preoccupied with ritual scrupulosity that surpassed explicit Torah mandates. Specific Practice Challenged: Corban Matthew 15:4-6 specifies the tradition at issue: declaring possessions “a gift devoted to God” (κορβᾶν, cf. Mark 7:11). This vow exempted one from financially supporting aging parents—directly violating the fifth commandment. Jesus quotes Exodus 20:12 and Exodus 21:17 to show that the Pharisaic loophole nullified (“ἐκυρώσατε”, Matthew 15:6) God’s word. Rabbinic sources attest the practice: Mishnah Nedarim 9:1-7 describes vows that prohibit personal use of dedicated goods yet allow their retention, confirming Jesus’ historical accuracy. Ritual Hand-Washing Issue The presenting complaint (“Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders, for they do not wash their hands when they eat,” Matthew 15:2) concerns ceremonial—not hygienic—cleansing. Qumran fragments (4Q274, Purification Liturgy) and Josephus (Ant. 13.10.6) document contemporaneous washing rituals. Jesus, however, redirects the debate from external purity to moral integrity, exposing the Pharisees’ priorities. Old Testament Foundation The fifth commandment (“Honor your father and mother,” Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16) carries an attached promise of longevity in the land, underscoring covenantal blessing tied to familial piety. Violating it warranted capital punishment (Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9). Thus, the Pharisaic corban tradition not only ignored parental welfare but also invited covenantal curse. Theological Implications: Scripture over Tradition Jesus affirms the plenary authority and inerrancy of the written Law, arraigning any human system—however well-intentioned—that rivals divine revelation. The passage anticipates sola Scriptura principles later articulated in the Reformation but rooted in Christ’s own hermeneutic: “It is written” governs all ethical and doctrinal questions. Pharisaical Reaction and Heart Condition Matthew 15:7-9 cites Isaiah 29:13, exposing the Pharisees’ lip-service religiosity: “This people honors Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me” . Behavioral science confirms that external conformity often masks internal rebellion—what modern psychology labels “moral licensing.” Jesus diagnoses the phenomenon centuries earlier, locating impurity in the heart (Matthew 15:19) rather than in unwashed hands. Relation to Salvation History By confronting Pharisaical self-righteousness, Jesus foreshadows the gospel of grace in which salvation rests on His atoning death and resurrection, not ritual performance (Ephesians 2:8-9). Matthew’s narrative arc leads from this confrontation to the crucifixion and empty tomb, demonstrating that legalistic traditions cannot redeem; only the risen Christ can. Contemporary Application Modern believers risk repeating the Pharisees’ error when cultural customs, ecclesiastical policies, or personal preferences eclipse clear biblical directives. Christian institutions must continuously audit their traditions by the touchstone of inspired Scripture. Where conflict arises, obedience to God’s word must triumph. Conclusion Matthew 15:3 exposes a Pharisaic practice that, under pious guise, annulled God’s explicit command. By championing Scriptural authority, Jesus reveals both the folly of elevating human tradition and the necessity of heart-level obedience—truths as urgent today as in first-century Judea. |
    |