ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε· ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί, δῶρον ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς, καὶ οὐ μὴ τιμήσει τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ ἢ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ· (Matthew 15:5–6a)
The Traditions That Undermine the Law
In this striking rebuke, Jesus exposes the religious leaders’ distortion of divine commandments through their man-made traditions. The Greek syntax mirrors this distortion with sharp contrast and layered conditional grammar. Through conditional clauses, subjunctive verbs, and a future denial, Jesus reveals how tradition can be used to nullify the clear command to honor one’s parents.
Let us explore how the grammar communicates this theological irony.
1. Direct Address and Contrast: ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε
Jesus opens with a direct confrontation:
- ὑμεῖς – “you,” emphatic nominative
- δὲ – “but,” contrastive conjunction
- λέγετε – Present Active Indicative, 2nd Person Plural of λέγω, “you say”
This line draws a sharp contrast between what God commanded and what the Pharisees taught. The emphasis on “you” highlights responsibility.
2. Conditional Clause with Subjunctive: ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ
This phrase introduces a general third-class condition with subjunctive:
- ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ – “whoever might say”
- εἴπῃ – Aorist Active Subjunctive, 3rd Person Singular of λέγω
This type of condition (with ἄν + subjunctive) expresses a potential or hypothetical action, setting up a broad statement:
“If anyone says to his father or mother…”
3. Corban Formula: δῶρον ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς
This clause reflects the Corban tradition, where one declares something as a gift to God — thus avoiding responsibility to use it for family needs.
- δῶρον – “gift,” nominative noun used here declaratively
- ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς – relative clause defining the nature of the gift
Within this clause:
- ἐὰν – “if,” introduces another conditional clause
- ὠφεληθῇς – Aorist Passive Subjunctive, 2nd Person Singular of ὠφελέω, “to benefit”
- ἐξ ἐμοῦ – “from me,” source of benefit
Thus, the phrase means:
“a gift [i.e., devoted to God] whatever you might have benefited from through me.”
This twisted logic allows one to declare resources untouchable, removing them from familial responsibility.
4. Coordinated Consequence: καὶ οὐ μὴ τιμήσει
The conjunction καὶ links the false declaration with a future consequence — that the person will not honor their parent.
- οὐ μὴ τιμήσει – Future Active Indicative with emphatic negation
- οὐ μή – strong double negative, meaning “he will certainly not”
- τιμήσει – Future Active Indicative, 3rd Person Singular of τιμάω, “to honor”
This is the grammatical high point of the rebuke. Jesus doesn’t merely say they fail to honor — He shows the system guarantees they won’t.
5. Object of Neglect: τὸν πατέρα … τὴν μητέρα
These direct objects appear at the end, drawing emphasis:
- τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ – “his father”
- ἢ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ – “or his mother”
This reflects Exodus 20:12, where honoring one’s parents is part of the Decalogue. By contrast, the Pharisees’ teaching displaces it with loopholes.
Syntax That Exposes Hypocrisy
The grammar in Matthew 15:5–6 is designed to expose spiritual evasion:
- Third-class conditional clauses show the hypothetical but real scenario
- Relative clauses define how the supposed “gift” functions
- Future negation guarantees failure to obey
This is not a theoretical critique — it is a syntax of contradiction, where human tradition replaces divine command.
The Gift That Robs
In this verse, grammar becomes a scalpel, cutting through surface piety. Jesus reveals how the language of holiness can be twisted to void the law. Through conditional structures, intensifying particles, and legalistic phrasing, He shows the tragic irony:
A “gift to God” that robs one’s parents is no gift at all.
