Matthew 15:1–9 is often used to warn Christians about religious traditions.The passage begins when Pharisees and teachers of the law confront Jesus:  “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!”  Jesus responds by accusing them of something much more serious:  “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?”

A common explanation of this passage goes something like this:  Religious traditions and cultural practices can hinder us from following Jesus.

Examples might include prioritizing the teachings of:

  • pastors
  • parents
  • friends
  • denominations

over the Word of God.  Doing so, we're told, can make our worship pointless or empty.  Then comes the personal question:  “Are you willing to examine any religious traditions you may have?”  That sounds reasonable.  We absolutely should examine what we've inherited.  But is Jesus actually warning against religious traditions in general?  Or is something much more specific happening?

What Started the Argument?

The Pharisees ask Jesus why his disciples don't follow:  “the tradition of the elders.”  Specifically:  They aren't performing the customary handwashing before eating.  This isn't primarily about hygiene.  The dispute concerns ritual practice and inherited interpretations about purity.  So the Pharisees' question essentially asks:  Why aren't your disciples following the accepted religious practice?

Jesus doesn't directly defend their handwashing habits.  Instead, he turns the question around.  And he raises the stakes dramatically.

Jesus Isn't Simply Saying “Traditions Are Bad”

Jesus responds:  “Why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?”  That's much more specific than:  Religious traditions are dangerous.  Jesus identifies a particular tradition and demonstrates what is wrong with it.  He quotes:  “Honor your father and mother.”

Then he describes a practice through which someone could designate resources as devoted to God and thereby avoid using those resources to support their parents.  Whatever the precise mechanics of that practice, Jesus' objection is clear:  You've constructed a religious practice that allows someone to avoid doing what God commanded.  That's the problem.  Not simply:  tradition exists.

Pattern #1: A Particular Tradition Becomes All Religious Tradition

Watch the first move:  Jesus challenges:  a specific tradition

because:  it undermines a specific command.

That becomes:  Religious traditions can prevent people from following God.

Then:  Your religious traditions may prevent you from following God.

And finally:  Are you willing to examine your traditions?

There's truth in the broader principle.  Traditions certainly can become destructive.  But Jesus isn't giving a lecture about the inherent dangers of tradition.  He's exposing what this tradition is producing.  That's an important distinction.

Tradition Isn't Automatically the Enemy

In fact, it's impossible to live without traditions.

  • Churches have traditions.
  • Families have traditions.
  • Cultures have traditions.
  • Bible studies have traditions.
  • Ways of interpreting Scripture become traditions.

Even communities that strongly insist: “We don't follow traditions—we just follow the Bible” have traditions.

They have inherited ways of:

  • reading Scripture,
  • organizing worship,
  • defining discipleship,
  • understanding baptism,
  • conducting Bible studies,
  • selecting passages,
  • asking questions,
  • and determining what counts as a correct interpretation.

The absence of the word tradition doesn't mean tradition has disappeared.  Sometimes it simply means our traditions have become invisible to us.

Pattern #2: “Tradition” Becomes “What Other Churches Teach”

Look at the examples often supplied:

  • pastors
  • parents
  • friends
  • denominations

These examples aren't neutral.  They subtly direct our attention outward.  The danger becomes:  things other people taught you before you arrived here.

  • Your parents may have taught you incorrectly.
  • Your pastor may have taught you incorrectly. (yep)
  • Your denomination may have taught you incorrectly. (yep)
  • Your friends may have taught you incorrectly.

And of course, any of those people can be wrong.  But there's an obvious missing category:  What about the people teaching me this study?

Their interpretation can also be wrong.  Their church can have traditions.  Their teachers can inherit assumptions.  Their system can prioritize certain interpretations.  If we're going to examine tradition, the examination has to work in every direction.  Otherwise, “question your traditions” can quietly mean:  Question everything you were taught before—but don't question what we're teaching you now.  That's not what contextual Bible reading should produce.

Pattern #3: Tradition Gets Placed Opposite “The Word of God”

The next move is particularly powerful:

traditions versus the Word of God.

Once those categories are established, the choice seems obvious.  Who would choose human tradition over God's Word?  But there's a hidden problem.  Someone still has to interpret the Word of God.  The real comparison usually isn't: human tradition vs. God's perfect interpretation.  It's: one human interpretation vs. another human interpretation.

The person telling you: “You're following tradition instead of the Bible”  is also interpreting the Bible.  That doesn't make every interpretation equally good.  It means we should evaluate interpretations using context, language, history, genre, the larger biblical story and other evidence rather than simply labeling one position: tradition and another: biblical.

The Irony Is Worth Seeing

This is where Matthew 15 becomes an especially useful learning example.  Imagine a religious community develops a particular method for interpreting Scripture.  Certain verses are repeatedly selected.  Those verses are studied in a particular order.  Certain questions are asked.  Certain answers are expected.  Those answers establish particular requirements.

The method is repeated for years.  New members learn it.  They eventually teach it to others.  The process becomes deeply embedded in the community.  What would we call that?  At some point, we might reasonably call it: a tradition.  That doesn't automatically make it wrong.  But it does mean that a community cannot escape tradition simply by saying: “We only follow the Bible.”

The important question isn't: Do we have traditions?  Everyone does.  The better question is: What are our traditions producing?  And that's remarkably close to Jesus' concern in Matthew 15.

What Was Their Tradition Producing?

Jesus doesn't merely criticize the origin of the tradition.  He looks at its result.  The command says: Honor your father and mother.  Their religious reasoning creates a way around that obligation.  So Jesus exposes the contradiction.  Their religious practice actually enables them to avoid the very faithfulness they claim to protect.  That's why Jesus quotes Isaiah:  “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.”  Then: “They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.”  The problem isn't merely that they have inherited religious practices.  The problem is that their religious system has become capable of protecting disobedience while appearing deeply religious.  That's much more challenging.

Pattern #4: Jesus' Criticism of Them Becomes an Examination of You

Then comes the final question:  “Are you willing to examine any religious traditions you may have?”  Again, that's potentially an excellent question.  We should.  But watch the progression:

The Pharisees have a problematic tradition.

↓

Religious traditions can oppose God.

↓

Pastors, parents, friends and denominations teach traditions.

↓

Those traditions may contradict God's Word.

↓

Your worship could therefore be empty.

↓

Are YOU willing to examine YOUR traditions?

The passage has moved from Jesus confronting particular religious leaders about a specific practice to asking the person studying the passage to question what they previously believed.  That doesn't automatically make the application wrong.  But we should recognize the pattern.

What Happens If We Turn the Question Around?

Here's where this passage becomes much more useful.  Instead of asking only:  “Are you willing to examine the religious traditions you brought with you?”  ask: “Are we willing to examine the religious traditions we are teaching you?”

Now the question becomes genuinely open.  Are we willing to examine:

  • our church?
  • our denomination?
  • our favorite teachers?
  • our Bible-study method?
  • our preferred translations?
  • our interpretation of baptism?
  • our definition of discipleship?
  • our assumptions about salvation?
  • our favorite verses?
  • our way of organizing worship?
  • our way of interpreting Scripture?

Everything goes on the table.  Including the traditions we don't realize are traditions. (this has a fancy word its called deconstruction)

Watch What the Questions Are Doing

Once again, the pattern matters:

specific first-century controversy

↓

general principle about religious traditions

↓

examples drawn from the reader's previous influences

↓

tradition contrasted with “the Word of God”

↓

previous beliefs become suspect

↓

personal commitment to reconsider them

The final question can be valuable.  But only if we're willing to apply it consistently.  Otherwise, the question isn't really: “Will you examine tradition?”  It's:  “Will you examine your old traditions using our interpretation?”  Those are very different invitations.

Maybe Jesus Gives Us a Better Test

Jesus doesn't appear to evaluate tradition simply by asking:

  • Is it old?
  • Did people inherit it?
  • Is it associated with organized religion?

Instead, he asks what happens when the tradition encounters God's purposes.  Does it help people become faithful?  Or does it create sophisticated religious reasons for avoiding faithfulness?  That's a much better test.  And it applies equally to traditions that are:

  • ancient,
  • modern,
  • Catholic,
  • Protestant,
  • evangelical,
  • non-denominational,
  • restorationist,
  • progressive,
  • conservative,

or anything else.  No community gets an exemption.

A Better Question

So perhaps we shouldn't end only with:  “Are you willing to examine any religious traditions you may have?”  Absolutely.  But let's add one word:

all.

“Am I willing to examine all of my religious traditions—including the ones I've been taught aren't traditions?”

And perhaps an even more challenging question:  “What if the way I've been taught to read this very passage is itself a tradition worth examining?”  Now Matthew 15 isn't simply a tool for questioning where we came from.  It becomes a mirror for wherever we are now.