The Ten Commandments
HONORING OUR PARENTS
(Ex. 20:8-11; Is. 58:13, 14; Luke 13:10-17; Gal. 4:8-11; Col.2:16; Rev. 1:10: KJV)
Subject
The Respect To Which Parents Are Always Entitled
Golden Text
“Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee.” (Ex. 20:12).
Plan of the Lesson
The Command to Honor Our Parents (Ex. 20:12)
How Jesus Honored His Parents (Luke 2:46-52)
Jesus’ Tender Solicitude for His Mother As He Was Dying (John 19:26, 27)
The Ideal Christian Home (Eph. 6:1-4)
Setting of the Lesson
Time: The Decalogue was given 1498 B.C.; our Lord was in the temple talking with the doctors during the Passover early in April, A.D. 8; His crucifixion took place exactly twenty-two years later, Friday, April 7, A.D. 30; the epistle to the Ephesians was written A.D. 64.
Place: The Decalogue was given from Mount Sinai; the scene from our Lord’s boyhood took place in the temple at Jerusalem; the crucifixion of our Lord occurred outside the city, probably a little way toward the north; the epistle to the Ephesians was addressed to the church at Ephesus, the greatest city of the province of Asia of Paul’s day, on the coast of the Ægean Sea.
Scripture Reading: Exodus 20:12
The Command To Honor Our Parents
20:12 … “Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which Jehovah thy God giveth thee.” The Fifth Commandment is a link between the first group of four and the second group of six. The first group has to do exclusively with our relations to God. It will be noticed that in the last five, which have to do exclusively with human relationships, the name of God is not mentioned. In the Fifth Commandment, which is one that also has to do with human relationships, God is mentioned, so that this commandment is, as it were, a bridge from the first group to the second group. This being the first of six commandments expounding the laws that should prevail among men as they live together, it must be recognized that of all human relationships, that between parents and children is considered the most important and, as we will see later, the most fundamental. Duty to parents stands directly next to duty to God and before all duties to other people.
“The parents are the only natural superiors, for they are, under God, the authors of the existence of those children for whose maintenance and training they labor with all the assiduity of natural affection. The parent stands to the child in the relationships of progenitor, benefactor, teacher, and ruler. As progenitor he is, under God, the author of the child’s existence; and this gives him a rightful authority over the child second only to that supreme authority which creation gives to God over both parent and child. The wisdom and experience of age qualify him to cultivate the intellectual, active, and moral powers of his child; in the discharge of which duties he foreshadows the functions of the prophet, the teacher, and the preacher... His authority as parent entitles him, and his affection and experience befit him, to exercise a benignant sway over his child. The ‘father’ and ‘mother’ are distinctly specified to indicate that they are equal in authority and therefore equally entitled to that honor which the mother will attract by her love and the father will enforce by his power. This honor naturally resolves itself into reverence for the authors of our being, gratitude for the nameless blessings of a home, docility to the parent and persevering educators of our infant minds, and obedience to the commands of our natural superiors” (James G. Murphy).
“The word ‘honor’ involves reverence (Lev. 19:32); obedience (Col. 3:20); gratitude (1 Tim. 5:4); the following of advice (Prov. 1:8; 23:22); and, of course, the exclusion of all the feelings and actions opposite to these (Ex. 21:15, 17; Deut. 27:16)” (F.W. Farrar).
See also Leviticus 19:3; Deuteronomy 5:16; Proverbs 30:17; Matthew 15:4-6; Mark 7:10-13.
What honoring our parents involves
“Three elements stand out conspicuous: respect, obedience, and affection. The true child must learn to revere his father and mother, partly because they are older and wiser than he, partly because they are the fountains of his being; partly, too, because they are his models, and deserve reverence for the gravity of their virtue; most of all, because they are God’s own vicegerents to him, wearing a little of that awful attribute of authority, or rightful command, which is at its fountainhead the prerogative of the divine Majesty. . . . It belongs to the respect due to such a relationship and inspired by it, that the child should be modest and lowly before his relationship and inspired by it, that the child should be modest and lowly before his parents; should meekly recognize their superiority and delight in their honor; . . . The duty of obedience in the immature child is literally unlimited, save by the express command of our higher Parent, God Himself. It offers to us the only instance among human relationships in which one person’s will is lawfully subjected to that of another throughout all the details of his conduct. The young child has no right to dispute commands, because he has not the ability to sit in judgment on them. No responsibility for the rightness of wrongness of what he is told to do rests with him. That is the parent’s affair. With the child is solely the responsibility to do as he is bid” (J. Oswald Dykes).
The first of social laws
“The unit of society is not the individual but the family. Every man enters the world in a social circle of at least three – his father and his mother and himself. However that circle may be widened, or however its bonds may be broken by physical absence or death, the social meaning of it is never altered. The family continues to be the unit of society. Government started there and still starts there. Discipline began there and still begins there. The law which touches the family is necessarily a fundamental one. This is the law of the family Honor thy father and thy mother. We may not stop to point out how the commandment changed family relations from the day of its writing, in that the mother took her place by the father for equal honor from the son. Enough that now we shall see that that social circle is to be one maintained on the basis of honor” (C.B. McAfee).
“However far afield society may develop itself as it grows away from its base, it must continue true to the end of time that every community is but an aggregate of households; that the family is the social unit; and that the principles of social order – authority in the ruler, subordination in the governed – look back forever to the home as their birthplace and their nursery” (J. Oswald Dykes).
The promise attached to this commandment
“There can be no doubt that the personal element is present, for in the majority of cases the honoring of the parents results in the realization of habits and character that tend to the lengthening of the days. Character molded in the atmosphere of honor to parents has within it the element of quiet power which tends to prolong life. On the other hand, character formed in the atmosphere of insubjection has within it the element of recklessness and fever which tends to prolong life. On the other hand, character formed in the atmosphere of insubjection has within it the element of recklessness and fever which tends to the shortening of life. The true application of the promise is, however, to the nation, and may thus be started. That people among whom the sacredness of the family ideal is maintained, and children render obedience to their parents during the period of immaturity and always honor, will be that nation of strength, retaining its hold upon its own possessions, and abiding long in the land” (G. Campbell Morgan).
“The main intention of the promise was national, and all history has confirmed its national fulfillment. ‘The corner-stone of the commonwealth,’ it has been said, ‘is the birthstone.’ The nation which produces bad sons will assuredly not have good citizens. Loveless homes very soon produce disorganized societies and decadent nations” (F.W. Farrar).
The commandment covers all of life
“It is too often taken for granted that this is a commandment addressed to young children only. Nothing can be further from the truth. Assuredly it is, in the first place, addressed to such, for the simple reason that in the order of nature children are always young first. To imagine, however, that the command loses its force when the days have gone in which it is possible to speak of children as young is to misunderstand at least half of its deep significance. The word ‘honor’ has a much larger meaning than that of obedience. The thought of obedience is necessarily included. In the process of the years, however, all human beings, for the development of their own possibilities, come to the place of personal responsibility, when they have to choose for themselves in the great crises and the minor matters of life. A boy will never be a man if he always must obey his parents. The training of the years of obedience will affect all the choice of subsequent years; but beyond the period of control there must come that of individual responsibility. It is at once evident that this command includes the whole life of a child, for all men and women are still the children of their parents; and even though the days have passed when it is necessary or right that they should obey, the days are never past when it is necessary and right that they should honor their parents” (G. Campbell Morgan).
In recording the awful moral consequences of turning from a worship of the true God to idolatry, it is significant that in that terrible catalogue of sins he puts at the end of the first chapter of his epistle to the Romans, the apostle Paul lists among these blackest vices disobedience to parents (Rom. 1:30). In his last epistle, the second one to Timothy, in listing the various sins that will mark the last days of this age, Paul once again speaks of the crime of disobedience to parents (1 Tim. 3:2). A powerful illustration of how men can dishonor their parents may be found at the end of the ninth chapter of the book of Genesis, in the account of Ham’s shameful conduct toward his father, Noah, when Noah became drunk with wine. A beautiful illustration of how a son may always show honor to his father, even when his father is not worthy of that honor, may be found in the records of Jonathan’s conduct toward his father, Saul.
“There is a significant story about the great lexicographer and scholar, Dr. Samuel Johnson, who late in life was staying with friend. One day, without announcing where he was going, he left the home of his hostess, and did not return until late in the evening. When he returned, he said to his hostess, explaining his absence: ‘Madam, fifty years ago I committed a breach of filial piety, which has ever since lain heavy on my mind. My father was a bookseller, and used to attend the local flea-market and open a stall for the sale of his books. One day, being ill, he asked me to go in his place. My pride prevented me from doing my duty, and I refused. In memory of this disobedience I went today to that market place at the time of high business, uncovered my head, and stood bare for an hour before the stall my father had formerly used, exposed to the sneers of the standers-by and inclemency of the weather. In contrition I stood, and I hope the penance was expiatory for this only instance, I believe, of contumacy to my father’” (F.W. Farrar).
The need for this commandment today
A few months before he suffered serious strokes that eventually ended his life, Dr. James E. Priest was asked, “What, in your opinion, is the most serious problem in our nation today?” His answer was, “The breakdown of parental discipline.”
Few questioned that the home is the greatest institution we possess until this age, which now inclines to parody the song, “Home, Sweet Home.” Today, the shelves of our public libraries have various books charging almost all evils to the home. We are told that civilization is founded on “repression,” and that the Fifth Commandment itself is a device of the elderly for holding youth in check. But, observation shows us that usually young people think they are suppressed even where there is least repression. Still, the springs of our emotional life are laid down in infancy; thus home is the source of all our valuations, which are rooted not in things but in persons.
Scripture Reading: Luke 2:46-52
How Jesus Honored His Parents
The only incident we have of the first thirty years of Jesus’ life, between the time of the return of the Holy Family from their flight into Egypt and the beginning of His ministry, is this story of what happened when He was twelve years of age. Probably Joseph and Mary went up to Jerusalem every year to celebrate the Passover, but whether they took Jesus with them every year or not, we do not know. We need not assume that this is the first time He had been in the city since His presentation in the temple when a babe. It was the custom in those days for men to travel in one group in a large caravan, and women to travel in another group, and the boy could travel either with the men or the women. This accounts for the fact that neither Joseph nor the mother of Jesus became anxious for the boy until after they had been some time out of the city of Jerusalem. Returning to the great city as soon as they were aware that their boy was not in this large crowd going back to Galilee, they found him in the temple, discussing the great themes of the Old Testament with the teachers and rabbis gathered together in this holy place.
2:46, 47 … “And it came to pass, after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both hearing them, and asking them questions: and all that heard him were amazed at this understanding and his answers.” We are not to infer that Jesus was in any way disputing with these old men. He was simply asking questions as any boy His age, but in asking them He was revealing a remarkable knowledge of the Word of God and of spiritual truth that the doctors of the temple perceived that there was one with more wisdom than even they had in many of these matters.
2:48-50 … “And when they saw him, they were astonished; and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? Knew ye not that I must be in my Father’s house? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.” Regarding: “Knew ye not that I must be in my Father’s house” – in the Greek there is no word after the word “Father,” and some have supplied the word “things.” These are the first words uttered by the Lord Jesus of which we have any record in the New Testament. Even in the boy Jesus, in a way far greater and truer than any man is by natural birth, it shows consciousness of a divine mission – of being the Son of God. Also revealed here is an early age understanding of a life-purpose, to be engaged in the things of God. The phrase that follows – “they understood not the saying which he spake unto them” – is one of the saddest statements in the New Testament. So many parents in this age fail to understand their children, and it is a doubly tragedy when that failure to understand pertains to a child’s spiritual aspirations.
2:51, 52 … “And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth; and he was subject unto them: and his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.” The particular part of this passage that applies to our lesson is the statement found in verse 51 that Jesus returned and lived at Nazareth in subjection to the discipline and authority of Joseph and His mother. The form of the verb here used indicates the permanence of this submission and its spontaneous and deliberate character.
“The ideal Boy, His volition poised to the will of God, expressed it in subjection to His parents. That is to say, the perfect response of the Boy to the will of God meant for Him natural correspondence to ordinary conditions. It did not set Him free from responsibilities to the home in which He had been brought up; but under the mastery of the will of His one Father He submitted His life to the authority of the home” (G. Campbell Morgan).
Even though as a boy the Lord Jesus was without sin, while His parents were sinners; even though at this tender age the Boy knew far more of the inner, deeper spiritual meaning of the Word of God and the will of God than His parents; even though His communion with God was more intimate, more uninterrupted, than His parents ever could have had, still, throughout His boyhood Jesus was perfectly obedient to what we call the Fifth Commandment. We sometimes hear that genius knows no law, and that a man of supreme brilliance and ability is not bound by the normal moral restraints of civilization. Jesus never gave any support to such an iniquitous philosophy. Though He was the only perfect man that ever walked this earth, and therefore the only perfect and sinless Boy, truly the Son of God’s love, yet He lived the life any other boy ought to live as far as His relationship to His parents was concerned. It is absolutely unbecoming and hypocritical for Christian parents to claim to be following the Lord Jesus when, with such an example as this before them they shabbily, discourteously, insultingly treat their fathers or mothers. The idea of a Christian boy or girl talking back flippantly to, or deliberately disobeying or speaking disrespectfully of a father or mother, is absolutely abhorrent to God, and a sin in the light of His Word.
Scripture Reading: John 10:26, 27
Jesus’ Tender Solicitude for His Mother As He Was Dying
10:26, 27 … “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold, thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold, thy mother! And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home.” Long years before this, in the temple at Jerusalem, Simeon had said to the mother of our Lord, “A sword shall pierce through thine own soul” (Luke 2:35); and now, as she stands before the cross, seeing her first-born son, the only sinless One who had ever lived, the Anointed of God, hanging on a cross and dying, her heart is pierced with the sword of which Simeon prophetically spoke. She could do nothing about it. She could not cool His brow; she could not moisten His parched lips. Moreover, she knew that the One there hanging was innocent, and perhaps she also felt that all the hopes of which He had spoken and all the plans He had made were now forever dashed to pieces. At this hour our Lord perfectly fulfilled the highest implications of the commandment we have been studying, and, as James Stalker said: “From the pulpit of His cross Jesus preaches to all ages a sermon on the Fifth Commandment.” That He spoke to her would in itself bring infinite comfort to her heart; but He did more than that; He made provision for her. There is hardly anything more despicable in life than sons who neglect to care for their aging parents. Mary was not aging, but Jesus was going. The voice of her son, the look on His face, the tenderness with which He made arrangements for her future, drew the edges of a gaping wound together, and stanched the flow of grief from mere natural affection. Only one little sentence, one drop of ointment; but its perfume healed her little world. Jesus chose John’s home as the one in which His mother was thereafter to live, because John apparently was the most able of all the disciples to have this extra burden. He was a man of means, and had a large home with servants. She could be more comfortably cared for in that home. Moreover, John was the disciple whom Jesus loved, and the one who in everything he did manifested love for the Lord; and Jesus knew that not only would His mother be more comfortably provided for in John’s home, but also she would be more lovingly cared for. How natural it is that only John should record this utterance of our Lord, which is known as the third word from the cross.
“The mother-love that was poured out on John flowed into the expression of John’s Gospel. Surely he must have received some impression of Christ through the long, intimate years when he cared for her as a son. It is significant that the apostle who knew Mary most intimately is the one who breathes his absolute assurance of the deity of Jesus into every paragraph of his book” (M.T. Shelford).
Scripture Reading: Ephesians 6:1-4
The Ideal Christian Home
6:1-4 … “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honor thy father and mother (which is the first commandment with promise), that it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but nurture them in the chastening and admonition of the Lord.” The Christian religion penetrates into every part of human life. There is no aspect of life – economic, commercial, intellectual, social, domestic, moral, physical – that is not referred to, exalted, glorified, and sanctified in the teachings of the New Testament. With most of this passage we need not tarry, for we have looked at it closely in a previous part of this lesson. The verb here translated “nurture” literally means “to nourish up to maturity,” and comes from a verb meaning “to feed,” “to support” – the very word used by our Lord when he refers to God’s care for the birds (Matt. 6:26), a mother’s care for her child (Luke 23:29), and in Luke’s reference to Jesus’ bringing up in the city of Nazareth (Luke 4:16). Every true parent brings up his child – in one way or another. The parent not only provides for the child’s physical needs, food, clothing, shelter, books, etc.; but the parent also guides the footsteps of his child, disciplines the child, holds up ideals before the child. Every parent brings up a child, but Paul says a Christian parent is to bring up his child in the chastening and admonition of the Lord. The word translated here “admonition” means “training by word,” by the word of encouragement, when this is sufficient, “but also by the word of remonstrance, of reproof, of blame where these may be required” (R.C. Trench). Thus are parents not only to talk to their children about the Lord, to be agents in bringing them to a confession of the Lord Jesus Christ; but they are to do everything in their power to persuade their children to live as the lord would have them live. Parents have a right to insist that their children not take the name of the Lord in vain, or swear, or lie.
“I suppose that under God the primary condition of a successful Christian education is that the parents should care more for the loyalty of their children to Christ than for anything besides, more for this than for their health, their intellectual vigor and brilliance, their material prosperity, their social position, their exemption from great sorrows and great misfortunes” (R.W. Dale).
A parent who says, “My child simply will not come with me to worship,” is saying, first, that he has no control over his child, which is a sin on his part; and, secondly, he is really saying that what God commands it is impossible for him to do. When a child becomes eighteen, it is too late to try to bring him up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, but not when he is eight; and remember, a parent cannot bring up a child to know the Lord and to walk inn the ways of the Lord, if the parent does not know the Lord, and walking in His ways. We cannot guide our children to any place where we do not intend going, and we must never expect our children to be what we refuse to be ourselves.
