Why is "Honor your father and your mother" in the Ten Commandments?

The honouring of both father and mother is the one positive command. In God's ordering of human society the family is the fundamental unit, and of that unit the father and mother are the responsible heads, and to be recognized and honoured as such. If they are not so honoured rapid disintegration sets in, and all the relations of life are adversely affected. Proof of this stares us in the face today. Men of wholesome mind — magistrates, and others — join in deploring what is called "juvenile delinquency," as directly traceable to the break-up of home life. In most cases the parents themselves are mainly to blame. Obsessed with the pleasures of sin, parental discipline is neglected, and the children left to their own devices.

The Apostle Paul points out in Ephesians 6:2 that this is "the first commandment with promise;" the promise being long life in the land which was to be given to them. Conversely, the flouting of this command was to entail severe penalty, as we see in Deuteronomy 21:18-21. The penalty pronounced against the "stubborn and rebellious son," who would not, "obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother," may seem to us very drastic, but it serves to emphasize the great importance of this fifth commandment in the thought of God. Were it faithfully and universally observed, there would be very little infringement of the remaining five commandments.

Let us examine the first part. The grand principle is laid down at the outset — the fear of the Lord on the one side, and on the other the madness of self-will, which despises the wisdom and instruction that restrain it. For, besides the knowledge of good and evil in respect of which the fear of the Lord will operate, there is that exercise of authority in God's created order which is a check on will (the origin of all disorder), as that confided to parents and the like. And these are carefully insisted on, in contrast with independence, as the basis of happiness and moral order in the world. It is not simply God's authority giving precepts, nor even His statements of the consequence of actions, but the order He has set up in the relationships He has established amongst men, especially of parents, subjection to them is really owning God in His order. It is the first commandment with promise.

(2) We come now to the second part: here of six commandments. The first claims honor for parents, the earth-type and representatives of the Creator-Father. And to this, as the apostle notes, a special "promise of life"— though but the continuance of it — is attached. The second forbids killing — of course, of men: which our Lord interprets as the prohibition even of anger without cause. It is, as one may say, the salvation-ordinance of the life that is. The third sanctions and sanctifies marriage, and how far it extends the Lord again declares. The fourth has to do with things, not persons, — the goods of others, which it protects from the spoiler. The fifth, under the prohibition of false witness, condemns deceit of every kind, the resource of weakness at all times where God is not before the soul. The numerical place here seems to be intended to remind the creature of his need of God, walking with whom the holiness of truth will be maintained. The sixth and last tracks sin to its lair, discovers it in "lust," as the apostle shows (Rom. 7:7), and shows where victory over it must be found: although the secret of the victory it cannot penetrate. The law is but the "strength of sin" (1 Cor. 15:56), and not of holiness.

The first four commandments clearly refer to Israel's responsibility toward God. The following six (vv. 12-17) are toward people. The fifth, therefore (v. 12), requires honor toward parents. This respect for proper authority would result in (normally speaking) prolonging one's life on earth, for it would involve respect for God's authority too. One of the sad marks of the last days, even in professing Christendom, is “disobedience to parents' (2 Tim. 3:1-2). Actually, no-one should need a law to lead them to respect their parents, and certainly Christians need no such law, for such things are written in their hearts. On the other hand, unbelievers in Israel constantly disregarded such laws (Matt. 15:3-6).

The subjection of children to their parents is part of God's order as seen in nature; and under the law a special blessing was attached to the observance of the commandment in which this duty was enjoined. Christianity takes up the obligation, but transplants it from natural to divine ground. "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honour thy father and thy mother; which is the first commandment with promise; that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth." (Eph. 6:1-3.) Thus the obligation of children, as of wives, is connected with "the Lord." It is not merely the dictate of nature, though perfectly right, but the acknowledgment of the Lord's claims as represented in the parents. The blessed Lord Himself, who "learned obedience," was the beautiful example of this. Of Him in His lifetime it is recorded that He went with His parents "to Nazareth, and was subject unto them." The law is not here introduced as showing that believers are under it, but as proving the special value which God attached to this duty, so as even to depart from the ordinary character of law, by coupling it with a promise which makes known the connection between this duty and earthly blessing.

Some have found difficulty in the Spirit's use of the fifth commandment in this place, as apparently sanctioning the placing of Christians under the law. This is not so, for the word of God never contradicts itself. Christians have been delivered from the law by the body of Christ, having died to that wherein they were held, and have a new and higher standard set before them for walk below, even a heavenly Christ. To turn back to law is to build again the things we have destroyed, to place ourselves under the curse, to be removed from Him Who called us in the grace of Christ to another gospel. But what the apostle shows here is that God has always insisted on due honour and obedience being rendered to parents, under the law as truly as under Christianity; so important, indeed, is it with Him, that Jehovah added a promise to the commandment (the first with such an attachment) "that it may be well with thee and that thou mayest live long on the earth." This is stated to show what the promise was; strictly, of course, in keeping with the calling of Israel. The Christian is called to heavenly blessing, he expects trial and difficulty, and perhaps persecution in this world; though it is not denied that there is present blessing in the government of God for those who do His will.

The last six commandments deal with Israel's responsibilities toward others. Thus the fifth commandment is "Honor your father and mother, as the Lord your God has commanded you, that your days may be long, and that it may be well with you in the land which the Lord your God is giving you" (v.16). Ephesians 6:1 refers to this as "the first commandment with promise." Israel soon sadly failed in this, as is exampled in Absalom, son of David, who rebelled against his father and sought to kill him (2 Sam.17:1-4). His days were not long on the earth. It may be that a father is hard and cruel, but his children are still to honor him; a mother may be even irresponsible, but her children are to honor her that is, to show proper respect. Though this is not a legal commandment for believers today, yet Ephesians 6:1 shows it to be of moral importance still. Our motives are not to be those of submitting to legal demands, but of delighting to please God.

The scribes and Pharisees had found fault with the disciples for eating bread with unwashen hands, complaining that they did not walk according to the tradition of the elders. (vv. 2 - 5.) To this the Lord gave a threefold answer: first, He charged the Pharisees with hypocrisy, inasmuch as they were satisfied with honouring God with their lips, while their hearts were far from Him; secondly, He declared that worship which was regulated by man's commandments was vain; and thirdly, He told them that they had rejected the commandments of God in order to maintain their own tradition. As an illustration of the last point He cites a special case, and it is in connection with this that the word "Corban" occurs. First, then, the Lord adduces the law of Moses, the word of God - "Honour thy father and thy mother." This command plainly made it obligatory upon the Jews to maintain their parents, if necessary. (See Proverbs 3:9, for a similar use of the word "honour.") But they desired to escape this responsibility, and they devised a pious pretext for doing so. They taught that, if a man devoted his property to God for His service, they were released from the duty of honouring their parents; and consequently they said, "It is Corban" - that is, a gift, or a thing devoted to sacred uses - to excuse themselves from their responsibility. They thus set aside the word of God, through their own tradition, and made the word of God of no effect. Truly, in every age, it is necessary to proclaim that to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams; and that no greater dishonour can be done to God than by the substitution of man's teachings in the place of His commandments.

Then He refers to another example of this in the way in which they treated the plain commandment, "Honor thy father and thy mother." Though the law also demanded the death of one who showed contempt for his father or mother, yet the Pharisees had invented a doctrine that could get around the law of God. In the case of a man who had the means by which he might relieve the need of his parents, yet tradition allowed him to say "It is Corban," meaning that his money was a gift devoted to spiritual uses, and therefore not to be given to his parents. This was simply a matter of the tradition sanctifying the cold-hearted selfishness of the son. This kind of pretense is contemptible, of course, but Pharisees encouraged it, thereby making the Word of God of no effect. It was not merely a tradition added to the Word (which is bad enough), but a tradition opposing God's Word. The Lord adds, "and many such like things ye do." This was only one example, for when once the Word of God is despised in the smallest matter, it is not long before men's cunning deceit undermines anything and everything it pleases, not realizing the horror of this wicked contempt for God Himself.

"Honour thy father and thy mother" (ver. 4) is the first commandment with promise. Yet it would be a gross thing indeed to think that when a person is now left here to a great age it is because he honours his father and mother. A Jew was blessed according to his dispensation — dispensation of the law. A Christian is blessed with every kind of spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ, for now is the economy of grace. Yet is there blessing attached to this fifth commandment. The apostle said to depart would be far better, but to "remain" to help the saints was "worth his while." The tradition of the elders diverted the honour due to the parents from the children, by the acknowledgment of the offerer's "gift." What would have been the parents' portion is denied them under the ostensible plea of a "gift" to God, in contravention of His law! Thus were the sons delivered from all responsibility to their parents by this tradition, making the word of God of none effect. It was the best possible case to bring their conduct home to them, for anyone can see the hollowness of such behaviour. It makes the word of God utterly void.