Mat 15:5-7, Eph 6:1-2 | Barnes | STEP | Verse 5. It is a gift . In Mark it is corban . The word corban is a Hebrew word, denoting a gift . It here means a thing dedicated to the service of God; and, therefore, not to be appropriated to any other use . The Jews were in the habit of making such dedications. They devoted their property to him, for sacred uses, as they pleased. In doing this they used the word corban , or some similar word; saying this thing is corban , i.e., is a gift to God, or is sacred to him. The law required that when a dedication of this kind was made, it should be fulfilled. "Vow, and pay unto the Lord your God," . See . The law of God required that a son should honour his parent; i.e., among other things, provide for his wants when he was old, and in distress. Yet the Jewish teachers said that it was more important for a man to dedicate his property to God than to provide for the wants of his parent . If he had once devoted his property--once said it was corban , or a gift to God --it could not be appropriated even to the support of a parent. If a parent was needy and poor, and if he should apply to a son for assistance, and the son should reply, though in anger, "It is devoted to God--- this property which you need, and by which you might be profited by me, is corban , I give to God,"--the Jews said the property could not be recalled, and the son was not under obligation to aid a parent with it. He had done a more important thing, in giving it to God. The son was free. They would not suffer him to do anything for his father after that. Thus he might in a moment free himself from the obligation to obey his father or mother. In a sense somewhat similar to this the chiefs and priests of the Sandwich Islands had the power of devoting anything to the service of the gods, by saying that it was tabu , or tabued . That is, that it became consecrated to the service of religion; and no matter who had been the owner, it could then be appropriated to no other use. In this way they had complete power over all the possessions of the people, and could appropriate them to their own use under the pretence of devoting them to religion. They thus deprived the people of their property under the plea that it was consecrated to the gods; the Jewish son deprived his parents of a support under the plea that the property was devoted to the service of religion. The principle was the same and both systems were equally a violation of the rights of others. Besides, the law said that a man should die that cursed his father; i.e., that refused to obey him, or to provide for him, or spoke in anger to him. Yet the Jews said, that though in anger, and in real spite and hatred , a son said to his father, "All that I have which could profit you, I have given to God," he should be free from blame. Thus the whole law was made void, or of no use, by what appeared to have the appearance of piety. No man, according to their views, was bound to obey the fifth commandment, and support an aged and needy parent, if either from superstition or spite he chose to give his property to God, that is, to some religious use . Our Saviour did not mean to condemn the practice of giving to God, or to religious and charitable duties. This the law and the gospel equally required. He commended even a poor widow that gave all her living, . But he meant to condemn the practice of giving to God, where it interfered with our duty to parents and relations: where it was done to get rid of the duty of aiding them; and where it was done out of a malignant and rebellious spirit, with the semblance of piety, to get clear of doing to them what God required.

Matthew 15:5-7

Verse 5. It is a gift. In Mark it is corban. The word corban is a Hebrew word, denoting a gift. It here means a thing dedicated to the service of God; and, therefore, not to be appropriated to any other use. The Jews were in the habit of making such dedications. They devoted their property to him, for sacred uses, as they pleased. In doing this they used the word corban, or some similar word; saying this thing is corban, i.e., is a gift to God, or is sacred to him. The law required that when a dedication of this kind was made, it should be fulfilled. "Vow, and pay unto the Lord your God," Ps 76:11. See De 23:21. The law of God required that a son should honour his parent; i.e., among other things, provide for his wants when he was old, and in distress. Yet the Jewish teachers said that it was more important for a man to dedicate his property to God than to provide for the wants of his parent. If he had once devoted his property--once said it was corban, or a gift to God --it could not be appropriated even to the support of a parent. If a parent was needy and poor, and if he should apply to a son for assistance, and the son should reply, though in anger, "It is devoted to God--- this property which you need, and by which you might be profited by me, is corban, I give to God,"--the Jews said the property could not be recalled, and the son was not under obligation to aid a parent with it. He had done a more important thing, in giving it to God. The son was free. They would not suffer him to do anything for his father after that. Thus he might in a moment free himself from the obligation to obey his father or mother. In a sense somewhat similar to this the chiefs and priests of the Sandwich Islands had the power of devoting anything to the service of the gods, by saying that it was tabu, or tabued. That is, that it became consecrated to the service of religion; and no matter who had been the owner, it could then be appropriated to no other use. In this way they had complete power over all the possessions of the people, and could appropriate them to their own use under the pretence of devoting them to religion. They thus deprived the people of their property under the plea that it was consecrated to the gods; the Jewish son deprived his parents of a support under the plea that the property was devoted to the service of religion. The principle was the same and both systems were equally a violation of the rights of others.

Besides, the law said that a man should die that cursed his father; i.e., that refused to obey him, or to provide for him, or spoke in anger to him. Yet the Jews said, that though in anger, and in real spite and hatred, a son said to his father, "All that I have which could profit you, I have given to God," he should be free from blame. Thus the whole law was made void, or of no use, by what appeared to have the appearance of piety. No man, according to their views, was bound to obey the fifth commandment, and support an aged and needy parent, if either from superstition or spite he chose to give his property to God, that is, to some religious use.

Our Saviour did not mean to condemn the practice of giving to God, or to religious and charitable duties. This the law and the gospel equally required. He commended even a poor widow that gave all her living, Mk 12:44. But he meant to condemn the practice of giving to God, where it interfered with our duty to parents and relations: where it was done to get rid of the duty of aiding them; and where it was done out of a malignant and rebellious spirit, with the semblance of piety, to get clear of doing to them what God required.

Mt 15:1 Verse 6.

Mt 15:1

(e) "honour not" De 27:16 Verse 7. Ye hypocrites. Mt 7:5. Hypocrisy is the concealment of some base principle under the pretence of religion. Never was there a clearer instance of it than this--an attempt to get rid of the duty of providing for needy parents under an appearance of piety towards God.

Esaias, That is, Isaiah. This prophecy is found in Isa 29:13.

Prophesy of you. That is, he spoke of the people of his day--of the Jews, as Jews--in terms that apply to the whole people. He properly characterized the nation in calling them hypocrites. The words are applicable to the nation at all times, and they apply, therefore, to you. He did not mean particularly to speak of the nation in the time of Christ; but he spoke of them as having a national character of hypocrisy. See also Isa 1:4.

Mt 15:1

Ephesians 6:1-2

EPHESIANS Chapter 6

ANALYSIS OF THE CHAPTER.

THIS chapter comprises the following subjects:

(1.) An exhortation to children to obey their parents, with a promise of the blessing that would follow from obedience, Eph 6:1-3.

(2.) An exhortation to fathers to manifest such a character that children could properly obey them, and to train them up in a proper manner, Eph 6:4.

(3.) The duty of servants, Eph 6:6-8.

(4.) The duty of masters towards their servants, Eph 6:9.

(5.) An exhortation to put on the whole armour of God, with a description of the Christian soldier, and of the Christian panoply, Eph 6:10-17.

(6.) The duty of prayer, and especially of prayer for the apostle himself, that he might be enabled to speak with boldness in the cause of his Master, Eph 6:18-20.

(7.) In the conclusion, Eph 6:21-24, he informs them that if they wished to make any inquiries about his condition, Tychicus, who conveyed this letter, could acquaint them with his circumstances; and then closes the epistle with the usual benedictions.

Verse 1. Children. τεκνα. This word usually signifies those who are young; but it is here used, evidently, to denote those who were under the care and government of their parents, or those who were not of age.

Obey your parents. This is the first great duty which God has enjoined on children. It is to do what their parents command them to do. The God of nature indicates that this is duty, for he has impressed it on the minds of all in every age; and the Author of revelation confines it. It is particularly important,

(1.) because the good order of a family, and hence of the community, depends on it; no community or family being prosperous where there is not due subordination in the household.

(2.) Because the welfare of the child depends on it; it being of the highest importance that a child should be early taught obedience to law, as no one can be prosperous or happy who is not thus obedient.

(3.) Because the child is not competent, as yet, to reasons on what is right, or qualified to direct himself; and, while that is the case, he must be subject to the will of some other person.

(4.) Because the parent, by his age and experience, is to be presumed to be qualified to direct and guide a child. The love which God has implanted in the heart of a parent for a child secures, in general, the administration of this domestic government in such a way as not to injure the child. A father will not, unless under strong passion or the excitement of intoxication, abuse his authority. He loves the child too much. He desires his welfare; and the placing of the child under the authority of the parent is about the same thing, in regard to the welfare of the child, as it would be to endow the child at once with all the wisdom and experience of the parent himself.

(5.) It is important, because the family government is designed to be an imitation of the government of God. The government of God is what a perfect family government would be; and to accustom a child to be obedient to a parent is designed to be one method of leading him to be obedient to God. No child that is disobedient to a parent will be obedient to God; and that child that is most obedient to a father and mother will be most likely to become a Christian, and an heir of heaven. And it may be observed, in general, that no disobedient child is virtuous, prosperous, or happy. Every one foresees the ruin of such a child; and most of the cases of crime that lead to the penitentiary, or the gallows, commence by disobedience to parents.

In the Lord. That is, as far as their commandments agree with those of God, and no farther. No parent can have a right to require a child to steal, or lie, or cheat, or assist him in committing murder, or in doing any other wrong thing. No parent has a right to forbid a child to pray, to read the Bible, to worship God, or to make a profession of religion. The duties and rights of children, in such cases, are similar to those of wives, Eph 5:22; and, in all cases, God is to be obeyed rather than man. When a parent, however, is opposed to a child; when he expresses an unwillingness that a child should attend a particular church, or make a profession of religion, such opposition should, in all cases, be a sufficient reason for the child to pause and re-examine the subject. He should pray much, and think much, and inquire much, before, in any case, he acts contrary to the will of a father or mother; and, when he does do it, he should state to them, with great gentleness and kindness, that he believes he ought to love and serve God.

For this is right. It is right,

(1.) because it is so appointed by God as a duty;

(2.) because children owe a debt of gratitude to their parents for what they have done for them;

(3.) because it will be for the good of the children themselves, and for the welfare of society.

(a) "obey your parents" Prov 23:22, col 3:20 Verse 2. Honour thy father and mother. Ex 20:12. Comp. Mt 15:4.

Which is the first commandment with promise. With a promise annexed to it. The promise was, that their days should be long in the land which the Lord their God would give them. It is not to be supposed that the observance of the four first commandments would not be attended with a blessing, but no particular blessing is promised. It is true, indeed, that there is a general declaration annexed to the second commandment, that God would show mercy to thousands of generations of them that loved him, and that kept his commandments. But that is rather a declaration in regard to all the commands of God than a promise annexed to that specific commandment. It is an assurance that obedience to the law of God would be followed with blessings to a thousand generations, and is given in view of the first and second commandments together, because they related particularly to the honour that was due to God. But the promise in the fifth commandment is a special promise. It does not relate to obedience to God in general, but it is a particular assurance that they who honour their parents shall have a particular blessing as the result of that obedience.

(b) "thy father and mother" Ex 20:12