Introduction
Okay, you can turn in your Bibles to Deuteronomy chapter 21 as we return to our study in this fifth book of Moses. The book of Deuteronomy, remember it's a series of addresses by Moses on the plains of Moab to the children of Israel prior to their entrance into the promised land prior to their entrance into Canaan, where they will indeed dispossess the land of the Canaanites and take their possession, or take the possession that God had given to them by his grace. The largest section of the book deals with the law, chapter 4, verse 49, all the way to chapter 26 and verse 19. Remember that in chapter 5, the Decalogue, or the 10 words, the 10 commandments are given That is the foundation, the sum and substance of Israel's moral code, not just Israel but all men everywhere.
And then what we have after Deuteronomy chapter 5 is an application and a detailed exposition of how those laws apply in the land that the Lord God is giving to them. Now we need to remember, as we approach this particular chapter, we are not a theocracy. Israel was a theocracy, that means they were ruled directly by God, and these were rules or laws that would apply to them in the land of Canaan. So as we work our way through this particular chapter, you will see things that do not apply. like when we want to take a wife that's a captive or a prisoner from war.
Obviously, that's not something that is directly applicable to us in our current situation. So basically, what I want to do is study the passage with a view, to expound it, to see what it meant in its context, and then draw out some lessons that are appropriate to us. And one of the things that I think is helpful as we approach this book is to read it or to have a bit of an understanding in terms of apologetics. By apologetics, I mean defense of the faith.
Very often, Christians sound like they're embarrassed of what we find in the Old Testament. In fact, the non-Christian oftentimes takes shots at the Old Testament, saying that it's barbaric and it's inhumane and it's just filled with, you know, a wrathful, vengeful God doing horrific things. Well, I think one of the points or one of the things that I want to get across tonight as we study this passage is that it is equitable, that it is fair, that it is righteous, that it is just, and that it does reflect the character of a good and a holy and a gracious God. So basically there are five sections in chapter 21 or five particular issues that Moses deals with.
The first is the law concerning an unsolved murder. or an unsolved homicide. The second is the rule on how to obtain a wife with reference to female prisoners of war. Again, I know that sounds a little bit shocking that we would study this in our context, but please bear with me. The third section is the inheritance right of the firstborn son.
The fourth section deals with the rebellious son or the incorrigible son. And then the chapter ends by detailing the disposition of the body of an executed criminal. So now that we've alienated everybody that's out there listening, who are probably shutting off their computer, I would say stick around. This does have a lot of bearing for us.
Scripture Reading
So I'll just read the chapter, beginning in chapter 21, verse 1. If anyone is found slain lying in the field in the land which the Lord your God is giving you to possess, and it is not known who killed him, then your elders and your judges shall go out and measure the distance from the slain man to the surrounding cities. And it shall be that the elders of the city nearest to the slain man will take a heifer which has not been worked and which is not pulled with a yoke. The elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to a valley with flowing water, which is neither plowed nor sown, and they shall break the heifer's neck there in the valley.
Then the priests, the sons of Levi, shall come near. For the Lord your God has chosen them to minister to him and to bless in the name of the Lord. By their word, every controversy and every assault shall be settled. and all the elders of that city nearest to the slain man shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley. Then they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, nor have our eyes seen it.
Provide atonement, O Lord, for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed, and do not lay innocent blood to the charge of your people Israel. And atonement shall be provided on their behalf for the blood. So you shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you when you do what is right in the sight of the Lord. When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God delivers them into your hand, and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and desire her, and would take her for your wife, then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails.
She shall put off the clothes of her captivity, remain in your house, and mourn her father and her mother a full month. After that, you may go into her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall set her free, but you certainly shall not sell her for money. You shall not treat her brutally because you have humbled her.
If a man has two wives, one loved and the other unloved, and they have born him children, both the loved and the unloved, and the firstborn son is of her who is unloved. Then it shall be, on the day he bequeaths his possessions to his sons, that he must not bestow firstborn status on the son of the loved wife in preference to the son of the unloved. the true firstborn, but he shall acknowledge the son of the unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his. 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.
If a man has committed a sin deserving of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. For he who is hanged is accursed of God. Amen.
Introduction to the Five Sections
So just a reminder, we are not in a theocracy. There is not a direct one-for-one correlation between chapter 21 and the situation that we find ourselves in. Again, this is not the land of Canaan. But nevertheless, there are very valuable and very important lessons here.
So our confession of faith says the judicial law has expired with that body politic, speaking of the theocracy of Israel. But it does go on to indicate that the general equity of those laws do continue on. I take from that there is wisdom to be gleaned, there is instruction to be had when we look at these judicial laws as they function in the land of Canaan.
The Unsolved Homicide
So the first section, as I mentioned, deals with the rule regarding an unsolved homicide. Presumably it was a murder, but I don't think anything argues against it being an accidental homicide. Basically, somebody comes across a dead body. There's no evidence, they didn't have the DNA capability to figure out who it was that was responsible for that particular body.
That's the situation. Verse 1, If anyone is found slain, lying in the field in the land, which the Lord your God is giving you to possess? It's important. You note that, you note the last verse in the chapter, where it speaks of not defiling the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
The Lord gave them this gift and the Lord regulates how they are to conduct themselves in the land. It was paramount and it was absolutely crucial that through their own recklessness and through their own sinfulness and through their own waywardness they didn't defile the land. That's why these laws are given, that's why these prescriptions are set down, so that the people of Israel would not abominate the land that the Lord God had given to them. So someone finds lying in the field, in the land, which the Lord your God is giving you to possess, and it is not known who killed him.
So we don't understand or we don't have a particular perpetrator, we don't have a particular suspect. That then introduces a particular rule in verses 2 to 8. Basically what happens is the elders and the judges go out and measure the distance from the slain man to the surrounding cities. Now these elders and judges more than likely are from that central tribunal, those indicated in chapter 17, verses 8 to 13.
Not the local city, not the local level judiciary, probably these are from the central tribunal. We notice that because priests then make an appearance in verse 5, they too made up. that central tribunal. So basically they find the body and then they measure the distance and the city that is nearest assumes responsibility for this particular corpse. So then what happens in verse 3? it shall be that the elders of the city nearest to the slain man will take a heifer which has not been worked and which is not pulled with a yoke.
This isn't a typical common garden variety cultic sacrifice. This is not the rule prescribed for how one does a sacrifice. Probably what we have here is a particular right associated with this civil crime that does bring atonement or provides atonement or covering for the guilt of the sin that has been incurred. Notice in verse 4, the elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to a valley with flowing water.
Again, not take it to the altar, but take it to this particular valley? Probably because the crime itself happened in an isolated place. Not that they're duplicating the crime in a one-for-one manner, but it's not a cultic situation. It's not a sacrifice per se, rather it is a means by which this particular victim, his blood is being atoned for.
And so the elders take the heifer down to a valley with flowing water which is neither plowed nor sown and they shall break the heifer's neck there in the valley. And then verse 5, the priests, the sons of Levi shall come near for the Lord your God has chosen them to minister to him and to bless in the name of the Lord by their word every controversy and every assault shall be settled." So they break the neck, it's not, you know, put the knife in as it would be in a cultic sacrifice, but they break the neck and then they bring the heifer down to a valley with flowing water, and then they break the neck in the valley there, and I think what is being, oh there it is, verse six, and all the elders of that city nearest to the slain man shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley. So they've assumed responsibility, but they are free from the guilt of this particular criminal activity. So there is responsibility assumed by the city that is nearest.
They're not saying they've actually done this, but they're going through this particular rite so that the land does not bear defilement as a result of this innocent blood. And then notice the prayer in verses 7 and 8. Then they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, nor have our eyes seen it. Provide atonement, O Lord, for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed, and do not lay innocent blood to the charge of your people Israel." So again, what is being done here is atonement for this particular crime.
Because we can't find the perpetrator, because we don't have a suspect, the elders from the closest city accept responsibility. They break the neck of this particular heifer And then they, as sort of a visible, tangible way of getting rid of the guilt of this sin, they engage in this particular activity. They wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley. We see something similar in the rite dealing with the scapegoat.
Remember what happens with the scapegoat, Leviticus 16. They send the goat out into the wilderness as a visible, emblematic sign that sin has been removed from the camp. That's what I think is going on here in verse 6 with this particular rite. But then notice the nature of their prayer.
When they pray, they say, Our hands have not shed this blood, nor have our eyes seen it. Provide atonement, O Lord. It's a very interesting concept. They took seriously life.
Even if they didn't have a perpetrator and they didn't have a suspect, they didn't just say, well, you know, that's the way things go when you live in the land of Canaan. No, each body, each criminal activity, each unaccounted for death, murder, homicide needed to be reckoned with. And I'll give a quote in just a moment that shows something of the significance of that. But notice in this prayer.
Craigie says, the basis for forgiveness is offered in the prayer. It is not the merit of Israel, but the fact that God had ransomed his people from the bondage of Egypt. Notice, our hands have not shed this blood, nor have our eyes seen it. Provide atonement, O Lord, for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed. not who are a wonderful lot, not who is an excellent group, but rather the ones whom you have redeemed, Lord.
The act of ransom itself had been an act of grace. And on the basis of such glorious precedent, the elders sought another act of grace in receiving the forgiveness of God. So you see, when a man was wandering by and he saw this body, he didn't just write this off. No, he took it to the tribunal.
They sent out officers. They measured the distance. The elders within the city that was closest assumed judicial responsibility for the blood that was shed by breaking the neck of the heifer, by laying their hands over it, by giving this tangible evidence and then praying to the Lord, there was atonement. And this is precisely what the text specifies.
It says, and atonement shall be provided on their behalf for the blood, and then the very specific purpose, so you shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you when you do what is right in the sight of the Lord. You need to remember that death murder, accidental homicide, while oftentimes ignored by us, is not ignored by God the Lord. He actually values his image bearers. Christopher Wright said this.
It's a bit of a lengthy quote, but I think it really does draw out a most excellent lesson that we ought to gain from this section. He says, it is often when the Old Testament seems most culturally remote from us that we need to pay closest attention to its challenge. He says, what ought to strike us from this law is not the oddity of a cow with a broken neck in an uninhabited wadi. but the expected response of the whole community through its civil, judicial, and religious leaders to a single human death. One person matters in Old Covenant Israel.
He goes on to say, in our society, a violent death has to be particularly gruesome or shocking to become even newsworthy. I mean, it's probably going to be the case that if you walk into a bank and you only shoot five people, you're not going to make it on the 11 o'clock news. I mean, we've got people shooting, you know, whole scads, you know, movie theaters full of people. He says, We have lost not only any concept of corporate responsibility for blood guilt, having rejected a sovereign moral god to whom we might even be corporately responsible, he says, but we increasingly have lost any sense of the sanctity of life itself.
We, or at least our emergency services, can cope with hundreds of road deaths. We can tolerate millions of abortions. What need have we for rituals of cleansing that would acknowledge responsibility even where personal guilt cannot be assigned? Shedding innocent blood, which is what verse 9 says, has become a fact of life, silently sanitized by statistics.
I mean, that is a pretty conspicuous lesson from this passage. I mean, we're talking about one body that somebody finds. There's no perpetrator. There's no suspect.
Do we just bury them in a field and say, well, you know, that's the price of doing business in a fallen world? No, we go to the tribunal. we measure out the distance, the elders accept responsibility, they take the heifer into the prescribed place, they break its neck, they cleanse their hands, they seek God in prayer for atonement, for the blood guiltiness of the land, and God grants them this favorably. I mean, that passage in Numbers 35, I think, I've always thought, is very chilling in light of things like abortion, in light of things like unpunished murderers. In Numbers 35, it says, moreover, you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death.
You shall take no ransom for him who has fled to his city of refuge, that he may return to dwell in the land before the death of the priest. So you shall not pollute the land where you are, for blood defiles the land and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it except by the blood of him who shed it." Again, this isn't Canaan. This isn't a theocracy, but certainly God still abominates hands that shed innocent blood. There was a stipulation in place to deal with an unsolved homicide in Old Covenant Israel.
It highlights and underscores for us the value of the sanctity of life. The life of man has sanctity because we are made in the image of God Most High. As Gerhardus Voss said, when man assaults another, when man seeks to destroy another, it is the image of God that is ultimately under attack because we bear God's holy image. So chapter 21, verses 1 to 9, in terms of cows and neck breaking and flowing water and all that sort of thing may seem far removed.
But the underlying principle in terms of the value of human life and the dignity of life and dealing even with an unsolved murder or an unsolved homicide goes a long way to furthering the interests of God Most High.
The Female Prisoner of War
Notice, secondly, the female prisoner of war. These next three have to deal with family matters. We have the female prisoner of war, and I call it a family matter because a man is seeking a wife. Then we have the account of the firstborn son, and then we have the account of the rebellious son.
So the three central ones deal with the home, deal with family. Notice specifically in verses 10 to 14, when you go out to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hand and you take them captive. We need to remember Deuteronomy 7 and we need to remember Deuteronomy 20. There were seven nations specified that they were not to take captive.
There were seven nations specified that they were to obliterate. They were to utterly destroy. In fact, if you go back to Deuteronomy chapter 7 for just a moment, just to remind ourselves that the cities in view in chapter 21, 10 to 14, are those cities far away. not the cities under the ban, not the cities of the Canaanites. Notice in chapter 7 verse 1, when the Lord your God brings you into the land which you go to possess and has cast out many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than you.
And when the Lord your God delivers them over to you, you shall conquer them and utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them, nor show mercy to them. nor shall you make marriages with them. You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor take their daughter for your son. For they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods.
So the anger of the Lord will be aroused against you and destroy you suddenly. But thus you shall deal with them. You shall destroy their altars and break down their sacred pillars and cut down their wooden images and burn their carved images with fire." So those are not the cities in view here. with these female captives. Going back to Chapter 21, if you look over in Chapter 20, verses 10 to 15, deal with those cities which are very far from you.
Those were the cities that you could offer a peace treaty to and bring them into subjection and plunder their goods. So there's a distinction here. Not the cities under the ban. So these female captives come from those cities that were conquered in war according to the plan and will of God.
Now notice the law concerning these female captives. When you read this, it probably seems a bit bizarre, doesn't it? Do you know that this passage is protecting the female captive? That's what the text is about.
See, this body of legislation, far from being a barbaric and brutal code, is equitable. It is good. It is righteous. It is kind.
The person protected is the woman. Christopher Wright, again, says this. We might like to live in a world without wars, and thus without prisoners of war, right? However, Old Testament law recognizes such realities and seeks to mitigate their worst effects by protecting the victims as far as possible.
If we ask whose interests this law serves, the answer is clearly the female captive. If we ask whose power is being restricted, the answer, equally clear, is the victorious soldier. The law is thus a paradigm case of the Old Testament's concern to defend the weak against the strong, war being one of the most tragic human expressions of that situation. So if we ask the question, what are the means of protection specified in the passage for this particular woman?
Notice verse 11, you see among the captives a beautiful woman and desire her and would take her home for your wife. Then you shall bring her home to your house and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. Don't let that you know, just throw you into a tizzy here. That was what the leper had to do in a law of purification.
That's what a Levite had to do in a law of purification. Speaks of purifying oneself. Speaks of transfer from the foreign community to the covenant community. Also indicates the mourning that would go on.
She shall put off the clothes of her captivity, remain in your house and mourn after her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go into her and be her husband and she shall be your wife. First of all, the woman is not to be raped or violated. What is in view is marriage, a binding, solemn covenant before God the Lord.
Verse 13 indicates that. Verse 13 highlights that. After that, you may go into her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. Do you actually think that armies alongside of Israel had a mandate from their God not to go out and plunder the women and use them as the objects of their lust?
The Yahweh of Israel specifies that if you see a female captive that you are interested in, there are laws and rules regulating how you are to pursue that particular individual. The woman is not to be raped or violated, only marriage is intended. Secondly, the woman is to be given time to adjust to her new circumstances within the home, not a prisoner of war camp. She is given time.
She is given space. Now again, we may not like this particular arrangement. It might not be the way that we would choose. But remember, we just conquered this particular city-state in war.
No other persons or or people groups have such noble ways of conquest. Remember, this is a wartime situation, a wartime contingency. The shaving of the head, the trimming of the nails indicates, again, purification rights, transfer from the foreign community, the covenant community, And then mourning, as the text goes on to indicate. She mourns her father and her mother.
She's giving time to adjust to her new surroundings. Notice, thirdly, the soldier, the victor, the man, has to restrain himself for an entire month. He's not supposed to engage in sexual relations. He's not supposed to engage in sexual congress with the intention here of a full month.
Again, I doubt that Babylon or Assyria operated in such a noble fashion. When they went in and conquered, I doubt that marriage was the issue, I doubt that rules were prescribed, and I doubt that they waited a month before they engaged in satisfying their desires. But then notice, specifically in verse 14, And it shall be, if you have no delight in her, then you shall, here it is, set her free. Now, feasibly, she could have been a slave woman in the city that you conquered.
She could have been a slave in that body politic. She has now been brought into a covenant community. She has been married. Yes, the man finds no favor in her, so he sends her out.
But she is not property. She is not for purchase. She is free to go wherever she wants. You shall set her free.
You certainly shall not sell her for money. You shall not treat her brutally because you have humbled her. So what we find here is consistent with what we'll find in Deuteronomy 24. We are not to assume that this divorce is any different than what we find in Deuteronomy 24.
But the point is, when she is sent out, she is sent out as a free woman, not a prisoner of war, not a conquered piece of property, not a piece of chattel that is up for grabs for anybody out there. She has legal rights. She has legal protection. And she has the law of God on her particular side.
It really is quite a blessed state. and position for a woman whose city was destroyed, she's been brought into the community, and not only being brought into the community, she may be married to this particular man until death does them part, or he may send her away, but she goes away as a free woman, not as a prisoner of war. It's really amazing, the equity that we find here.
The Firstborn Son's Inheritance
Thirdly, the right of the firstborn son. forgot to mention in the introduction. Polygamy is also in the passage here, right? If a man, verse 15, has two wives, One loved and the other unloved, and they have born in children, both the loved and the unloved. And if the firstborn son is of her who is unloved, then it shall be on the day he bequeaths his possessions to his sons that he must not bestow firstborn status on the son of the loved wife in preference to the son of the unloved, the true firstborn." Pretty easy.
Guy's got two wives. You know, he really loves this one, and this one not so much. So what is the tendency? The tendency is to favor the son in that union.
Right? That's not what you're supposed to do. If the firstborn is from the woman that you don't love so much, he has the legal prerogatives. He has the rights.
And in fact, he gets a double portion of the inheritance. So what, again, is God doing here? He is protecting the innocent in this particular arrangement. Now polygamy is not sanctioned here.
It is assumed. But the fact that it is there, God regulates it for the protection of the innocent. There are various things since the fall that have been introduced into this world that if there was no fall, there wouldn't be that. But because there was a fall and there is that, God then regulates to protect the innocent.
I probably just lost everybody, so let me say that again. If we lived in an unfallen world, you wouldn't need a law for divorce, right? If we lived in an unfallen world, you wouldn't need detailed legislation about capital punishment. If we lived in an unfallen world, you wouldn't need legislation on how to treat a thief.
But we don't live in an unfallen world. We live in a fallen world such that laws concerning slavery, laws concerning polygamy, laws concerning punishment, laws concerning warfare are given to protect the innocent people in that particular circumstance. So that polygamy was being practiced, no one will argue, based on this text. But that God regulates it so that this woman's son, because the man doesn't love her as much as this one, he is not without protection.
He has the law of God on his side to afford him, not just the firstborn inheritance, but a double portion. Verse 17, he shall acknowledge the son of the unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his. So there are issues that exist as a result of sin.
And what God then does is speak to those circumstances to afford protection for those who are most vulnerable in a given situation. That's why in Deuteronomy 24 there's legislation concerning divorce. It's to protect the women. It's to afford them legal status.
It is to cover them so they're not left to bandy about in Israel seeking what they may from whomever they may. These laws are good and right and just, and that is what Moses is giving them on the plains of Moab. Now, unfortunately, as soon as they enter into the land of Canaan, they don't do any of this, right? They go in and they set up a store.
But on this side of the plains of Moab, this is their marching orders on how they are to conduct themselves in the land of Canaan, in the language of Deuteronomy 4, so that the nation surrounding them would see them as a model and would see the wisdom of God and the wisdom of their laws displayed in that particular body politic.
Tyranny and Anarchy in the Family
Now we move from this situation, which speaks of Basically, parental fatherly abuse, right? Isn't that what we find here? The firstborn inheritance rights speaks and seeks to reduce the tyranny of a father. Right?
Everybody with me? If I'm a father and I've got two wives and I prefer this one over this one, so I'm going to make sure he gets the large share, that's a tyrannical decision on my part. I am living arbitrarily. I am living with disregard to God and His Word.
No, we need to honor the inheritance laws of the firstborn. So if verses 15 to 17 deal with the tyranny that can affect the family, verses 18 to 21 deal with the anarchy they can deal, or they can affect the family. You see? We move from the son that is being shunned to the son that needs to be shunned.
That's the connection here. Meredith Klein says it this way. If misuse of authority produced tyranny, disrespect for proper authority would produce anarchy, the very contradiction of the covenant order as a manifestation of Yahweh's Lordship." It's a great statement. Meredith Klein, Varsalou calls him the theological Shakespeare.
He and I just read a book together by Meredith Klein and it was like reading theological Shakespeare, but he nails it. There's a connection here. We've got tyranny in the first section. We've got anarchy in verses 18 to 21.
Now, this passage has been misunderstood, so we're going to try to navigate our way through it so that we have a proper understanding. Again, it probably cuts against the grain of what we're used to. It certainly is not what we witness in our own generation, but it's not what oftentimes it's purported to be.
Identifying the Rebellious Son
Notice, with reference to the identification of this sun. We need to identify what we're dealing with here in verses 18 to 21. We're not dealing with a five-year-old. We're not dealing with the terrible twos here.
The text does not apply to a naughty child, but to a rebellious adult son. Probably late teens is where he's at. Some use the word adolescent. I don't think the word adolescent was even acknowledged in this particular time frame.
You had child, you had adult, okay? You didn't have sort of this in-between where kids play Nintendo and, you know, do nothing. They were either a child or they were adult. Adolescence is an American phenomenon.
That's, you know, what we categorize that age when they don't do anything except they're a pain in the neck. So the text does not apply to a naughty child, but to a rebellious adult son. How do we know that he's a rebellious adult son? Because five-year-olds are not gluttons and drunkards.
I mean, a five-year-old may eat an extra piece of cake, or he may eat an extra piece of pie. But the text is specific. And notice, that's not his sin. It's not that he's being brought up to be stoned to death because he's a glutton and a drunkard. gluttony and drunkenness are symptomatic of his life as a rebel disobedient to his parents and therefore disobedience to the God of Israel remember the fifth commandment is absolutely crucial in the proper order of society it's not only parental authority, but it's societal authority.
If a young man is going to disobey his parents, he is certainly going to disobey the RCMP, or whatever the equivalent was in Old Covenant Israel. So the text does not apply to a naughty child, but to a rebellious adult son. Secondly, the text presupposes the exercise of parental discipline. These aren't shoddy parents.
These aren't terrible parents. Aren't we often prone to do that? We see a particularly good son, whatever we want to call him, a knucklehead. We automatically assume that his parents must be Satan.
No, maybe they actually have sought to chasten him. That's what's envisioned here. When they have chastened him and will not heed them. This is a last resort.
They're not just saying to this son who came home on a Friday night drunk, hey, I'm taking you to the elders and they're going to stone you. No, these parents have borne long with this particular child. Thirdly, this passage demonstrates the state's, follow me, monopoly on capital punishment. You know what a monopoly is?
That means when the state has the absolute right for a particular task. It is the state that executes criminals, not the family. It is the state that executes the criminal, not the church. God has given the sword, not to the family, not to the church, but he has given the sword to the state.
Genesis chapter 9 verse 6 and Romans chapter 13 verses 1 to 4 make this evident, make this clear. Fourthly, this particular case shows the equality of parental authority for both father and mother. Notice, he will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother. Honor your parents, plural, not just your father.
The mother has the crown set on her head by God Most High for the infliction of parental discipline. And then fifthly, this case highlights the specific violation in view. He is stubborn and rebellious. That's his issue.
The two symptoms are drunkenness and gluttony. So it's not as if he ate too much and he drank too many beers, let's take him to the city, let's take him to the elders rather, and have the men of the city take him outside and stone him. No, he is rebellious, he is incorrigible, he cannot be reasoned with, he will not listen, he will not submit himself, and two of the symptomatic patterns of his life are this gluttony and drunkenness. Craigie says, the latter words, glutton and a drunkard, do not specify the crime, but indicate by way of example the kind of life that has resulted from disobedience to parental authority.
We need to inculcate this in our children. No good ever comes from disobeying your parents. No good ever comes from learning how to resist authority. No good ever comes because God has stationed authority over you.
And to resist your parents, and according to Paul in Romans 13, to resist the state is to resist God Himself. That is bad.
The Legal Process and Execution
Notice the particular rule involved, verses 19 to 21. The parents are involved. They take him to the elders of the city. The parents level charges concerning his crimes.
They bring him out to the elders of the city, to the gate of the city, and they shall say to the elders of the city, this son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. But brethren, again, I don't think these people are cavalier here. I don't think they're just, you know, hey, well, you know, he did this. This is killing these parents.
This is tough. Their son is beyond hope. Their son is resistant. Their son is rebellious.
Their son is incorrigible. They now have to come and participate in the judicial proceedings. We're not to suppose that the laws of Deuteronomy 17 don't apply. What we find here is some shorthand.
They make the report. The son is executed. Well, certainly the laws of witnesses and evidences, all that's taken into play. They're just a bit of shorthand here to get to the particular point.
So they shall say to the elders of the city, imagine having to do this. This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voice. He is a glutton and a drunkard.
They probably said this with tears, knowing the inevitable result. This is the last resort. This isn't, you know, I'm going to check him into rehab. What's the result here?
Verse 21. Then all the men of his city... And again, I believe Deuteronomy 17. It's taken into place.
They've heard the witnesses, they've surveyed the data, they've interviewed friends, they've interrogated witnesses. 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. Verne Poythress in his helpful book called The Shadow of Christ and the Law of Moses said this, the death penalty for wholesale violation of parental authority may seem harsh to modern sentiments.
He says, but I would argue that it is not only just, but realistic. Listen to his reasoning. Parental authority, even if very imperfectly exercised, every parent exercises it imperfectly, right? Even the Apostle in Hebrews 12, they disciplined us as seemed best to them.
There's an arbitrariness about parental authority. There's an inconsistency. There is a sinfulness. But nevertheless, He says, parental authority, even if very imperfectly exercised, takes place in the context of personal relationships and natural pressures in the direction of love.
He says, parents have many advantages over the state. If a person does not receive instruction from parents, the chances of receiving instruction from the states, more impersonal discipline, are nil. He says the person who rebels in wholesale fashion against parents will also rebel against the state and create general destruction and disorder until eliminated. He says it is mere sentimentality to refuse to come to grips with this reality.
There's some bad eggs out there. There's some incorrigible sons out there. And there was an old covenant Israel. It was at least in view.
And if it got to that point, then these sons themselves were a threat to the very order. And so the parents had a responsibility to bring him to the elders of the city. to make this statement and then turn him over for execution. Again, it's not a five-year-old. It's not the first.
This is after a long process, I am sure. Probably the last thing that the husband or the wife wanted to hear was, we need to take him to the elders. Probably a lot of chastening and a lot of hardship and a lot of tears and a lot of pleading and a lot of loving and a lot of pressure went on that young man before he ever got to the point where he was turned over for this particular punishment.
The Executed Criminal's Body
And then fifthly and finally, the disposition of the body of an executed criminal. And again, just reading that is like, whoa, man. But this was something you had to deal with. I mean, God, through Moses, is laying down the necessity for capital punishment.
That creates an issue. What do we do with these bodies after we stone them to death? Well, it seems to be the case that they would put the body on a tree. But they weren't supposed to leave the body on the tree overnight.
That's what this particular law speaks to. This doesn't have in view military operations. There were times they would hang up offending kings and offending soldiers on a tree. This is to deal with those who had within the body politic committed a sin deserving death.
He is put to death not by hanging on the tree. He is put to death more than likely by stoning and then he is hung on the tree probably so that Israel would hear and fear. so that they would not engage in the same activity. So the disposition of the body, according to verse 23, his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, for he who is hanged is accursed of God. So it is a rule or a law prescribing the disposition of the body of the executed criminal.
You don't leave him on the tree overnight. You take his body off of the tree and then you bury the body. Even in the execution of just judgment and righteousness, There is a humanity involved, there is a dignity that goes alongside even the disposal of the body in this particular situation. Craigie reminds us, the body was not accursed of God because it was hanging on a tree.
It was hanging on a tree because it was accursed of God. Now
The Equity of God's Law
I submit that these five lessons or these five sections in Deuteronomy 21 teach us something of the equity of God's law. God's law is just. God's law is right. Whether we are familiar with thinking about how to deal with female prisoners, if we want to marry them or not.
You cannot come away from this thinking that God did not speak to a situation and build into it protection for the victim or protection for the, not the victim necessarily, the protection for the weak one or for the one that was at a position of disadvantage. We see the equity of law In verses 15 to 17, the firstborn gets the inheritance, a double inheritance, even if it happens to be his mother isn't as loved as much as the other mother. And then we see the equity of the law with reference to the unsolved murder, the rebellious son, and then this situation concerning the hanging of a body.
Christ in Deuteronomy 21
But I think this passage or this section also teaches us something about the glory of God's Son. You might wonder, how? Well, 21, 1 to 9, uphold the principle of substitutionary curse bearing. It upholds the principle of substitute.
Now, there are differences between the cultic sacrificial death of animals in the temple or in the tabernacle. But nevertheless, this heifer who had its neck broken, there was death that occurred to an innocent victim. And it was based on the death of that innocent victim that atonement came to the land. But as well, this rebellious son narrative teaches us something about the glory of the Son of God.
Remember that instance in Matthew 11, specifically in verse 9. Oops, sorry about that. Verse 19, what did they accuse Jesus of? What?
That's right. What do you think was in their mind? He's a winebibber and a glutton. He's a drunkard and a glutton.
He deserves to die. Well, Jesus, the innocent, takes on all of our wine-bibbing and gluttony and dies in our stead. I think really what we're supposed to see there with the theologian, Matthew, is that that was their charge against Jesus, wine-bibber and a glutton. In other words, he was the sinful and the rebellious son.
But the section as a whole teaches us it's really Israel. that is the Deuteronomy 21, winebibber, glutton, disobedient son. And if you say, well, that's a bit of a stretch there. Well, different terminology to be sure. If we went to the Greek translation, different words than what are used specifically in Matthew 21.
But certainly the concepts are there. But you see, we have a New Testament use of Deuteronomy 21 with reference to the death of Jesus Christ. in this last statement, for he who is hanged is accursed of God. Paul the Apostle appeals to this in Galatians chapter 3 verse 13. Christ was made a curse for us.
So we see the equity of God's law in Deuteronomy 21, but we see the glory, the beauty, and the majesty of God's Son. Substitutionary curse bearing, Christ taking on himself the role, not the actual activity of the rebellious son, but standing in the place of the true rebellious son, you and I, and being taken outside the city and essentially stoned to death with stones. And then we find this statement that he who is hanged is accursed of God, applied to the Lord of glory, in Galatians chapter 3 verse 13. So Deuteronomy 21, though with a bit of a different application, does show itself in Matthew 11 and in Galatians 3, and it teaches us that not only is God's law equitable, but God's Son is glorious.
Closing Prayer
So let us pray. Our Father, we thank You for Your Word, we thank You for Your holiness, we thank You for the fact that You have dealt so graciously and so mercifully with us. We thank You, God, for blood atonement through the Lamb, We thank you for that one who died in our place and who rose again and now lives at your right hand where he always lives to make intercession for his people. God may these passages teach us about our Savior and may these passages as well teach us about your kindness and your grace and your goodness.
Even in your law you regulate society so that the innocent and the victim and the the weak are oftentimes protected. We just pray now that you would go with us, watch over us in the remainder of this week. Bless all of our brothers and sisters who are unable to be with us tonight. Bless all those, Lord God, in our local church.
And we pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.