Stoned to death

[Christ the King]

"Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 orders killing of children up to any age for disobedience. Why is that?"

Someone asked me this so i had a look and found

"If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid."

I read some commentaries to see if i may have misinterpret it but it appears I haven't.
I don't know what to say to this person who asked me. They stoned this boy or man to death for being stubborn, rebellious, eating and drinking too much

 

[Christ the King]

wondering OzSpen JLB

Ok Ive tried to draw the attention of some of the best thinkers on here...
Have any of you guys got a defensive argument for this passage.

We were debating abortion and he pulled out this which really surprised me.

I was going to say that the NT supersedes the laws in Deuteronomy before quoting the passage where Jesus says that a millstone should be tied around the neck of anyone who makes a child stumble and tossed into the sea.

I didn't go ahead with this argument as I wasn't confident, so I retreated from the debate...

Have u ever come across this argument for abortion, using this passage?
What would be the best response to it?

 

[JLB]

wondering OzSpen JLB

Ok Ive tried to draw the attention of some of the best thinkers on here...
Have any of you guys got a defensive argument for this passage.

We were debating abortion and he pulled out this which really surprised me.

I was going to say that the NT supersedes the laws in Deuteronomy before quoting the passage where Jesus says that a millstone should be tied around the neck of anyone who makes a child stumble and tossed into the sea.

I didn't go ahead with this argument as I wasn't confident, so I retreated from the debate...

Have u ever come across this argument for abortion, using this passage?
What would be the best response to it?

I think this scripture in Matthew 18 is a good one to show people how Jesus cherishes innocent little children, especially those still in the mother’s womb.


“But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!
Matthew 18:6-7



JLB

 

[Christ the King]

I think this scripture in Matthew 18 is a good one to show people how Jesus cherishes innocent little children, especially those still in the mother’s womb.


“But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!
Matthew 18:6-7



JLB

Yes thats all good but I was asking for a defensive argument to the scripture in my opening post


The person I was debating about abortion asked this...

"Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 orders killing of children up to any age for disobedience.
Why is that?"

"If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid."

It's a fair question. It becomes difficult to defend abortion from a religious stand point when this passage gets referenced.

If the son was killed for murder then i could make a case that the killing of the son was a just punishment for the crime.

But the son was killed for being stubborn, rebellious, a glutton and a drunkard.
It damages the religious case for abortion

 

[OzSpen]

Christ the King,

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (NIV)

From a surface reading of the text, it seems that this law is ruthless in dealing with out-of-control children and youth. However, this child is not like the one who misbehaves in church on Sunday as a 6-year-old.

This son is:

• ‘stubborn and rebellious’,
• ‘does not obey his father and mother’.
• ‘He is a glutton and drunkard’.

This behaviour is a violation of the fifth of the Ten Commandments, ‘Honour your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you’ (Ex 20:12).

We need to remember the NT application, ‘Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right’. To obey parents is to obey God’s representatives and to rebel against them is to be stubborn and rebellious towards them.

The parents were to teach their children the law of God: ‘These commandments that I give you today are to be on your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up’ (Deut 6:6-7).

One of the commandments for parents to teach children relates to the consequences for cursing parents: ‘‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death’ (Ex 21:17 NIV). Again, these are not tiddly winks misbehavious. It is very serious rebellion and parents were required to teach their children the consequences for rebellion, drunkenness, etc.

There is a connection between a child’s obedience to parents and that child’s length of life.

More later (I’m very weary) about the responsibility of discipline of children of parents vs Israelite community.

Oz

 

[JLB]

The person I was debating about abortion asked this...

"Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 orders killing of children up to any age for disobedience.
Why is that?"

The answer is : that all of Israel will hear about this and fear.

If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who, when they have chastened him, will not heed them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city, to the gate of his city. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones; so you shall put away the evil from among you, and all Israel shall hear and fear. Deuteronomy 21:18-21


This will actually teach the children of Israel to be obedient to their parents and to Lord, so that there will be fewer souls who are lost to the eternal fires of hell.



The fear of the Lord is a fountain of life,
To turn one away from the snares of death.
Proverbs 14:27


You shall honor father and mother that your days may be long in the land the Lord your God is giving you.


JLB

 

[Corn Pop]

Why do you think Jesus said whoever is without wrong cast the first stone when according to the Law the adulterous woman was to be stoned to death.

People don't get it. All God was trying to say is man has fallen, and the penalty for sin is death, yet he has mercy and forgiveness on those who believe his word, and that word is Yeshua Christ.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes thats all good but I was asking for a defensive argument to the scripture in my opening post


The person I was debating about abortion asked this...

"Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 orders killing of children up to any age for disobedience.
Why is that?"

"If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid."

It's a fair question. It becomes difficult to defend abortion from a religious stand point when this passage gets referenced.

If the son was killed for murder then i could make a case that the killing of the son was a just punishment for the crime.

But the son was killed for being stubborn, rebellious, a glutton and a drunkard.
It damages the religious case for abortion

Hey CtK....
I'm happy you clarifed the O.P. with the above post.

The fact is that it was not God that wrote the entire Old Testament.

Moses wrote some of it,,,who knows what other man wrote some of those rules. It was written 4,000 years ago and it's not that God sat down at a computer and wrote all the words.

Some of the laws are clearly man-made. There is proof for this...no need to wonder. In fact, Jesus changed some of those rules because He knew they were wrong and not of God.

I don't like to discuss the O.T. because it becomes difficult when speaking to persons to explain this....it becomes difficult to know which laws are of God and which are of man.

We can be sure of this:
The 10 commandments,,,which comprise the MORAL LAW are of God and one of the commandments is: YOU SHALL NOT KILL.
This, of course, includes abortion.

Try to stick to the MORAL LAW and to the N.T.
Jesus loved children and said we even have to become like them.
He told the Apostles (can't remember which ones) to let the children come to Him....they were telling the children to leave Jesus alone because He was tired at that moment,,,I believe He had been preaching near the Sea of Galilee.

Now, does this mean I don't believe the O.T. is the inspired word of God? NO! I do believe the O.T. was written for our benefit and that it seems like one book instead of many...it is certainly inspired. But some of it is from man, and this should not deter anyone from believing what God said.

 

[OzSpen]

CFnet community,

It's important to realise this capital punishment for rebellious youth was for the Israelite nation and not for 21st century Gentiles. It was to maintain the purity of the nation.

Why was it so severe?

1. Parents were to impress on their children the consequences of rebelling against parents (Deut 6:6-7).
2. There is a limit on the discipline of the parents/family in Deut 21:19-21. It was not the parents' responsibility to commit capital punishment on rebellious children. That was the responsibility of the Israelite elders.
3. Generally, witnesses were required to be involved (Deut 17:7). However, 'all the men of the town' stoned the juvenile delinquent.
4. If one family included out-of-control youth, it affected the community. So parents had responsibility to bring the guilty child to the men of the community.
5. Some kinds of behaviour were cursed by God. This includes children abusing parents (see Deut 27:16).

Remember that there was a substitution or ransom that could be offered (see Num 35:31) except for premeditated murder.

Oz

 

[Susannah]

At the risk of being stoned, I have to ask. Is there no room at all in the Bible for passages being outdated like being stoned. Or like women wearing a veil?

 

[OzSpen]

At the risk of being stoned, I have to ask. Is there no room at all in the Bible for passages being outdated like being stoned. Or like women wearing a veil?

Susannah,

The Old Testament regime has been fulfilled and ended in Christ. For an exposition of this, see: How Christ Fulfilled and Ended the Old Testament Regime.

The stoning of rebellious children in the OT no longer applies in the NT. It was designed to keep God's people holy in the OT era.

Oz

 

[Susannah]

Thank you . . .

 

[OzSpen]

Thank you . . .

Susannah,

As for women wearing a veil/head covering, why don't you read: Are women supposed to wear head coverings in church?(1 Corinthians 11:2-17)

This article opposes the continuation of head coverings and gives biblical reasons.

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

CFnet community,

It's important to realise this capital punishment for rebellious youth was for the Israelite nation and not for 21st century Gentiles. It was to maintain the purity of the nation.

Why was it so severe?

1. Parents were to impress on their children the consequences of rebelling against parents (Deut 6:6-7).
2. There is a limit on the discipline of the parents/family in Deut 21:19-21. It was not the parents' responsibility to commit capital punishment on rebellious children. That was the responsibility of the Israelite elders.
3. Generally, witnesses were required to be involved (Deut 17:7). However, 'all the men of the town' stoned the juvenile delinquent.
4. If one family included out-of-control youth, it affected the community. So parents had responsibility to bring the guilty child to the men of the community.
5. Some kinds of behaviour were cursed by God. This includes children abusing parents (see Deut 27:16).

Remember that there was a substitution or ransom that could be offered (see Num 35:31) except for premeditated murder.

Oz

Oz,
For the first time ever, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
Why? Because if these passages in Deuteronomy are from God...then .those who say that the God of the O.T. is different from the God of the N.T. are truly correct.

In Genesis 9:4 we learn that the life is in the blood.
In Genesis 4:15 we learn that God is going to protect EVEN Cain because God did not want him to be killed.

In Exodus 20:13 we hear from the 10 commandments that we are not to murder.

What happened between Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 21:19....?

If you notice the curses and laws in Exodus chapter 27 it starts with: "Then Moses and the elders of Israel charged the people, saying 'Keep all the commandments which I command you today'.

Then the instruction to the Israelites began and the curses end with verse 26.

I profer that God is the same God in both the O.T. and the N.T. or else Jesus revealed the wrong God to us.

Therefor, I say again, some of the laws in the O.T. are of man and not of God.

As to Numbers 35:31...I think this is an incorrect verse.

 

[OzSpen]

Oz,
For the first time ever, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
Why? Because if these passages in Deuteronomy are from God...then .those who say that the God of the O.T. is different from the God of the N.T. are truly correct.

In Genesis 9:4 we learn that the life is in the blood.
In Genesis 4:15 we learn that God is going to protect EVEN Cain because God did not want him to be killed.

In Exodus 20:13 we hear from the 10 commandments that we are not to murder.

What happened between Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 21:19....?

If you notice the curses and laws in Exodus chapter 27 it starts with: "Then Moses and the elders of Israel charged the people, saying 'Keep all the commandments which I command you today'.

Then the instruction to the Israelites began and the curses end with verse 26.

I profer that God is the same God in both the O.T. and the N.T. or else Jesus revealed the wrong God to us.

Therefor, I say again, some of the laws in the O.T. are of man and not of God.

As to Numbers 35:31...I think this is an incorrect verse.

wondering,

It's good for us to disagree as 'one person sharpens another' (Prov 27:17).

I'd like to pick up on a couple of your points.

1. There is only one God revealed in OT and NT but there are 2 covenants, Old Covenant and New Covenant. There are different laws applying to each covenant. Since Golgotha much has changed for the Christian believer of grace through faith.
2. You asked: "What happened between Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 21:19....?" Nothing extra happened. Ex 20:13 dealt with premeditated murder while Deut 21:19 dealt with the consequences of rebellious behaviour. There's no contradiction here or introduction of human laws. These are 2 different consequences under the Mosaic Law.
3. Num 35:31 was a correct verse to demonstrate for whom a ransom could be applied.

Oz

 

[Susannah]

And whoever among us is sinless let him cast the first stone.

 

[JLB]

For the first time ever, I'm going to have to disagree with you.
Why? Because if these passages in Deuteronomy are from God...then .those who say that the God of the O.T. is different from the God of the N.T. are truly correct.

It’s not that the God of the Old Testament is different.


It’s because the law that was added to the Covenant was added temporarily until the Seed should come.


What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:19


By saying “until” the Holy Spirit is indicating the law was temporary.


JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

It's good for us to disagree as 'one person sharpens another' (Prov 27:17).

I'd like to pick up on a couple of your points.

1. There is only one God revealed in OT and NT but there are 2 covenants, Old Covenant and New Covenant. There are different laws applying to each covenant. Since Golgotha much has changed for the Christian believer of grace through faith.
2. You asked: "What happened between Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 21:19....?" Nothing extra happened. Ex 20:13 dealt with premeditated murder while Deut 21:19 dealt with the consequences of rebellious behaviour. There's no contradiction here or introduction of human laws. These are 2 different consequences under the Mosaic Law.
3. Num 35:31 was a correct verse to demonstrate for whom a ransom could be applied.

Oz

I don't understand Numbers 35:31 then:
New American Standard Bible
'Moreover, you shall not take ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death."

Doesn't the above say that we CANNOT take a ransom??

As to the two covenants:
I have to assume that we're talking about the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant.

In the Mosaic Covenant we receive the 10 commandments,,plus there are other laws which total 613 in total.
God gave the Israelites these laws because they had been in slavery for almost 400 years and no longer had a sense of community.

We say that these laws were necessary to show that man is a sinner and indeed they were. But they were also necessary to teach these freed persons how to live a normal life again and to know that rules had to be followed.

There's a whole number of rules in Numbers that truly makes one wonder if they are God-inspired....This is not my concept but one that many theologians accept.

I am not a fundamental christian and allow for errors in the bible, contradictions, and I understand that not every word is directly from God. This does not affect my belief in God or my trust in Him...it actually has helped me to clear up many problems.
We do not even know for sure who wrote the Torah. This creates no problem for me since it's really difficult to know who wrote something 4 thousand years ago...But I also acknowledge that the O.T. is the most proven book of all time.

So the Mosaic Covenant did not work although God always poured out His grace on persons and they were always saved through faith.

In the New Covenant what changes is that obedience to God and having a new heart to serve Him becomes POSSIBLE through Jesus and the on-going help from the Holy Spirit.

I really would rather not get into this too much as I do not want to discourage anyone who may be new at Christianity...however, this understanding of the O.T. does answer many questions that come up when studying.

I hope JLB also sees this.

Jesus revealed God Father.
A God of love, mercy and justice.

Jesus said not to stone the adulteress woman.
Then has God changed??
NO!

 

[GodsGrace]

It’s not that the God of the Old Testament is different.


It’s because the law that was added to the Covenant was added temporarily until the Seed should come.


What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. Galatians 3:19


By saying “until” the Holy Spirit is indicating the law was temporary.


JLB

And a bad law it was then.
Please see post no. 18 to Oz.

 

[WIP]

I don't understand Numbers 35:31 then:
New American Standard Bible
'Moreover, you shall not take ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death."

Doesn't the above say that we CANNOT take a ransom??

As to the two covenants:
I have to assume that we're talking about the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant.

In the Mosaic Covenant we receive the 10 commandments,,plus there are other laws which total 613 in total.
God gave the Israelites these laws because they had been in slavery for almost 400 years and no longer had a sense of community.

We say that these laws were necessary to show that man is a sinner and indeed they were. But they were also necessary to teach these freed persons how to live a normal life again and to know that rules had to be followed.

There's a whole number of rules in Numbers that truly makes one wonder if they are God-inspired....This is not my concept but one that many theologians accept.

I am not a fundamental christian and allow for errors in the bible, contradictions, and I understand that not every word is directly from God. This does not affect my belief in God or my trust in Him...it actually has helped me to clear up many problems.
We do not even know for sure who wrote the Torah. This creates no problem for me since it's really difficult to know who wrote something 4 thousand years ago...But I also acknowledge that the O.T. is the most proven book of all time.

So the Mosaic Covenant did not work although God always poured out His grace on persons and they were always saved through faith.

In the New Covenant what changes is that obedience to God and having a new heart to serve Him becomes POSSIBLE through Jesus and the on-going help from the Holy Spirit.

I really would rather not get into this too much as I do not want to discourage anyone who may be new at Christianity...however, this understanding of the O.T. does answer many questions that come up when studying.

I hope JLB also sees this.

Jesus revealed God Father.
A God of love, mercy and justice.

Jesus said not to stone the adulteress woman.
Then has God changed??
NO!

Wondering, I noticed that you use the pronoun "we" when speaking of OT law. Wasn't the Mosaic law given to one special group of people, God's chosen, Israel? And, when Jesus came, was that law not fulfilled in Him, therefore, we who are in Christ are not held captive by that law?