What is the context?
Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem question Jesus about His disciples eating without washing their hands. Their complaint concerns the tradition of the elders. Mark 7:1–5 explains that the washing belongs to their practices of ceremonial cleanliness. The dispute is about religious obligation, rather than a lesson about hygiene.
Jesus answers with a question about their own teaching. God commands people to honor their parents, yet they allow a declaration that resources are devoted to God to keep those resources from helping a father or mother. A religious rule is being used to set aside a duty God has given.
Mark calls the declaration Corban. The Greek spelling is κορβᾶν, korban (kor-BAHN), from the Hebrew word for an offering. Thayer's entry explains it as a gift offered, or intended to be offered, to God. In Mark 7:9–13, the problem is that the declaration prevents the help the parents should receive.
Jesus then applies Isaiah's warning about honoring God with words while the heart is far away. The claimed devotion does not excuse the neglected command. His reply asks whether religious teaching leads people to obey God or gives them a way around what He says.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Christians commonly read this as a warning against human teaching that defeats God's commands. Traditions differ over how to distinguish a human custom from teaching received with divine authority.
The Reformed Westminster Confession, 1.6 and 1.10, makes Scripture the final test and rejects additions to God's revealed teaching from human traditions. The 1689 Baptist Confession, 1.6 and 1.10, teaches the same principle. The Methodist Articles of Religion, V, likewise say that a belief cannot be required as necessary for salvation unless it is taught in Scripture or can be proved from it.
The Catholic Church's Catechism, 80–83, distinguishes apostolic Tradition, received from Christ and the apostles, from later customs that can change. It receives Scripture and apostolic Tradition together. Paragraph 86 says the Church's teaching office serves God's word. Catholic teaching therefore does not understand Jesus' rebuke as a rejection of apostolic Tradition. The difference concerns where authoritative teaching is received and how it is recognized.
Where does this fit in God's plan?
Jesus explicitly connects this dispute with Isaiah 29:13–14. The warning about lips and hearts shows that the problem reaches deeper than one disputed washing practice. God's people are called to honor Him in truth, including how they treat people entrusted to their care.
That connection continues in James 1:22–27. Hearing God's word must become doing it; an unrestrained tongue can make a person's religious claims empty, while care for vulnerable people belongs to faithful devotion. God's purpose for His word includes a changed life, not simply a religious explanation for avoiding responsibility.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.