← Back to sermon library

Exodus chapter 20, I'll read 
the section and then our focus is on verse 12, the fifth commandment. So beginning in verse one, and 
God spoke all these words saying, I am the Lord your God who brought 
you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. 
You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make 
for yourself a carved image, any likeness of anything that 
is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that 
is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them 
nor serve them, for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God. visiting 
the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and 
fourth generations of those who hate me, but showing mercy to 
thousands to those who love me and keep my commandments. You 
shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the 
Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain. Remember 
the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and 
do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord 
your God. In it you shall do no work. You 
nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your 
female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within 
your gates. For in six days the Lord made 
the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, 
and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the 
Sabbath day and hallowed it. Honor your father and your mother, 
that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your 
God is giving you. You shall not murder. You shall not commit 
adultery. You shall not steal. You shall 
not bear false witness against your neighbor. You shall not 
covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's 
wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, 
nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's. Now 
all the people witnessed the thunderings, the lightning flashes, 
the sound of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking. And when 
the people saw it, they trembled and stood afar off. Then they 
said to Moses, You speak with us and we will hear, but let 
not God speak with us lest we die. And Moses said to the people, 
Do not fear, for God has come to test you, and that his fear 
may be before you, so that you may not sin. So the people stood 
afar off, but Moses drew near the thick darkness where God 
was. So we have concluded the first 
table of the law. The first deals with our duty 
toward man, and it's summarized by Jesus in Matthew 22. You shall 
love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. 
We move into the second table, which is like it, but it says 
you shall love your neighbor as yourself. We read that in 
Leviticus 19 verse 18 the other night. So the second table is 
our specific responsibility toward other men. And intriguingly, 
the location of the fifth commandment is interesting. The first of 
the second table, which highlights that submission to lawful authority 
precedes all of the other commandments wherein man relates to man. So 
I want to look first at the command stated, and then secondly, the 
promise given. Pretty simple. Honor your father 
and your mother. And then the promise is given 
that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your 
God is giving you. So with reference to the command, there's three 
things to observe. First, the explanation. Secondly, 
the scope. And then thirdly, the sanction. 
First of all, the explanation, the specific duty and your mother. Now this word heavy, weighty, 
burdensome, or honored. The connection between heaviness 
and honor is clear. We're not to treat our parents 
like them as heavy, not fat, but in terms of dignity, the 
way we do with God. The connotation in this specific 
passage is to make honorable Leviticus chapter 19. Reverence 
is used, and that's a very... Every one of you, Leviticus 19.3, 
shall revere his... If you want to turn over to Deuteronomy 
chapter 4, you see how this command is vital in Israel's covenant 
relationship with God Almighty. In Deuteronomy chapter 4 at verse 
9, "...keep yourself, lest you forget the things your eyes have 
seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your 
life. And teach them to your children and your grandchildren, 
especially concerning the day you stood before the Lord your 
God in Horeb, when the Lord said to me, Gather the people to me, 
and I will let them hear my words, that they may learn to fear me 
all the days they live on the earth, and that they may teach 
their children. So children were a vital component 
in the covenant community, and we see that the parents had the 
responsibility to teach their children and to teach their grandchildren. And then notice in chapter 4 
at verse 40. You shall therefore keep his 
statutes and his commandments, which I command you today, that 
it may go well with you and with your children after you, and 
that you may prolong your days in the land which the Lord your 
God is giving you for all time. One commentator, Craigie, says, 
the close parallel between these words and the language of the 
Fifth Commandment and Deuteronomy 440 indicates that the basic 
issue involved in the commandment was the continuity of the covenant. 
Parents were responsible to teach their children concerning the 
covenant, and by so doing, both children and parents would prosper 
in the land and see the fulfillment of the covenant promise of God. 
But to teach effectively, there must be a receptive audience. 
The fifth commandment is absolutely crucial for that covenant continuity. If the children do not obey, 
the children do not honor their parents, they're not going to 
receive that body of instruction or teaching that will help promote 
fidelity among children in the land. He goes on to say, if children 
did not honor their parents and were rebellious and self-centered, 
they would not be able to learn about the covenant relationship 
with God, which had been so central to the lives of their parents. 
And as a consequence of dishonoring their parents, they would not 
prosper in the promised land, for they would not know intimately 
the Lord of the covenant promise. So it was a vehicle by which 
this kind of faithfulness was inculcated in the covenant community. Now, it's not just here in the 
Fifth Commandment that you see this emphasis upon parental authority. You see it all throughout the 
Scripture. Turn over to Exodus 21. We'll 
come to that eventually in terms of the case law application of 
the Ten Commandments. But specifically in chapter 21 
at verse 15, he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely 
be put to death. And then again in verse 17, he 
who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to 
death. And then if you turn to the Proverbs 
of Solomon, I know this is material that we have covered in the past, 
but just a few passages that underscore parental authority 
in the home with reference to the children. Proverbs 15 and 
verse 20, a wise son makes a father glad, but a foolish man despises 
his mother. And then in Proverbs 17 at verse 
25, a foolish son is a grief to his mother and bitterness 
to her who bore him. And then Proverbs 19 and verse 
13, a foolish son is the ruin of his father and the contentions 
of a wife are a continual dripping. Notice the emphasis of Solomon 
in these passages, how fundamental family relationships are. A disregarding 
of the fifth commandment basically ruins life in the context of 
family. If your children are uncontrolled 
and unmanageable rebels, or unmanageable rebels, and you are the kind 
of parent that does not enforce discipline or those sorts of 
things, you are producing a climate of chaos, a climate that is not 
conducive to a good life. And then notice in 1926, he who 
mistreats his father and chases away his mother is a son who 
causes shame and brings reproach. And then 3017. Now, you're probably thinking, 
there's a lot of passages that speak about the infliction of 
the rod and reproof. Yeah, I'm not looking at those 
ones particularly, but just underscoring the fundamental necessity for 
good relationship between parents and their children. Proverbs 
30, 17, the eye that mocks his father and scorns obedience to 
his mother, the ravens of the valley will pick it out and the 
young eagles will eat it. And then in the New Testament, 
you have two classic passages in Ephesians 6 and then in Colossians 
3. So Ephesians 6, the apostle, 
and in Colossians 3, the apostle is working from this mindset 
of the fifth commandment, and he is exhorting the people of 
God, specifically Gentile people of God, of their responsibility 
with reference to the Decalogue. Remember, we have talked about 
that. Dispensationalism has taught that the Ten Commandments are 
not for Gentiles. The Ten Commandments are not 
for the church. The Ten Commandments are for 
the Jews as Jews. Paul doesn't believe that because 
Paul teaches the Ten Commandments to Gentile churches. Notice in 
Ephesians 6 at verse 1, Children, obey your parents in the Lord, 
for this is right. Honor your father and mother, 
which is the first commandment with promise. that it may be 
well with you, and you may live long on the earth. And you fathers, 
do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in 
the training and admonition of the Lord." It's important that 
we attach our understanding of verse 4 to that, because the 
fifth commandment not only deals with inferiors, but with superiors 
as well, to command that legislates human relationships where one 
person or party has authority over another. The language of 
superior and inferior is probably very politically incorrect and 
triggering and Snowflakes will cry and all that sort of thing. 
But in the history of the church and interpretation, nobody had 
a problem with referring to persons as superiors and others to inferiors. So Paul emphasizes the first 
commandment with promise, that it may be well with you and that 
you may live long on the earth. Now the word obey means precisely 
what it says. It means obey. It means to follow 
instruction. It means to comply. It means 
to do what you're told. And this involves honor or reverence 
toward them. So this involves the right attitude. See, a child may externally comply. A child may outwardly obey. But 
if his heart is distant or his heart is not good, then that's 
not effectively obeying the commandment. So to honor or reverence them, 
regard with reverence or have the right attitude toward parents, 
it also involves to obey them, to do what they are told. And then as well, and Calvin 
makes this observation in his commentary, it's not just the 
honor or reverence for them and obedience unto them, but it's 
also, as you get older, the idea of repaying them material needs 
in their old age. not repaying them in some sort 
of a transaction way, but caring for your aged parents. The Lord 
Jesus deals with this in Matthew chapter 15. There was a practice 
called Corban, and the people would indeed try to get out of 
clear duty by saying, oh, this is devoted or it's a gift to 
God, and thus they would nullify the commandment of God that specified 
that you needed to tend to your parents. If you look at Matthew 
15 at verse 1, then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem 
came to Jesus saying, Why do you disciples transgress the 
tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands 
when they eat bread. These guys have all the subtlety 
of a bull in a china shop. I mean, they come right out and 
they indict Jesus at every step of the way. And then he answered 
and said to them, why do you also transgress the commandment 
of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, honor your 
father and your mother, and he who curses father or mother, 
let him be put to death. Intriguingly, that Jesus quotes 
not only the fifth commandment, but that prohibition in Exodus 
21. So he cites the penal sanction 
that is attached to the violation of the fifth commandment, and 
he assumes it is binding. He who curses father or mother, 
let him be put to death. Verse 5, but you say, whoever 
says to his father or mother, whatever profit you might have 
received from me is a gift to God, then he need not honor his 
father or mother. So the idea being is that if 
he put the coffers into the temple tax, he might get that back, 
especially if he's a Pharisee, or especially if he's a scribe, 
especially if he takes money as a result of his work for the 
temple. So it was a means of bypassing 
the commandment of God in a manner of subterfuge. So instead of 
giving to your parents who had need, you kept it for yourself. And he indicts them for that. 
And then he says, thus you have made the commandment of God of 
no effect by your tradition. Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy 
about you, saying, These people draw near to me with their mouth, 
and honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 
And in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments 
of men. And then in 1 Timothy chapter 
5, we saw this recently in our scripture reading. 1 Timothy 
chapter 5, the Apostle Paul assumes that the family is the first 
line of defense to care for aging widows. And why do you think 
he does that? Probably because of the fifth 
commandment. Probably because of the teaching 
that Jesus gives in Matthew chapter 15. Probably because with reference 
to honoring our parents, it's not only a matter of revering 
and honoring them in terms of our attitude, but we obey them 
in terms of action when we are under their direct authority. 
But when they get older and when they're incapacitated through 
the normal process of aging in life, we are supposed to be there 
to care for them and to help them. And that's the apostles' 
emphasis in 1 Timothy 5.3. Notice, honor widows who are 
really widows. Honor their means, give them 
money. Honor their means to pay them. Give them things such as, 
or give them money such that they can buy shoes and dresses 
and food and those sorts of things. But if any widow has children 
or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and 
to repay their parents, for this is good and acceptable before 
God. Now she who is really a widow and left alone trusts in God 
and continues in supplications and prayers night and day, but 
she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives. And these 
things command that they may be blameless. But if anyone does 
not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, 
he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. So 
in that particular context, we'd see it for sure as a father and 
a mother having responsibility to their children. But the larger 
context means not only their children, but also their aged 
parents, those who are, again, incapacitated, not able to work. The woman's husband has died. 
They don't have the wherewithal to be able to support themselves 
anymore. So Paul says that a man that 
doesn't provide for his own, including his children and his 
parents, and especially for those of his own household, he has 
denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. So to honor 
or reverence them, to obey them, to provide for their material 
needs in their old age, and as well to be thankful for them. 
This is a great posture for an inferior with reference to the 
superior, to pray for your parents, to esteem them, and to thank 
God for their provision or for his provision of them in your 
life. Now obviously we qualify this 
as we do with other commands in the scripture, that with reference 
to submission to God-ordained authority, that submission to 
God-ordained authority isn't to be questioned or challenged 
unless the God-ordained authority commands something that's sinful. 
If the God-ordained authority commands something like torture, 
or sexual predation, or any kind of a thing like that, the child 
must disobey. He is not to comply with that. 
That would be a qualification that we would give, and when 
we extend this particular commandment, superiors and inferiors, to the 
civil state, we see the same emphasis in the Bible. Romans 
13 tells us that He's God's minister to us for good. But if He's actually 
crossing that threshold and He's become God's, not God's minister, 
but God's sort of scourge upon us for bad, then we're not bound 
by Scripture to obey Him. We see those provisos in Acts 
5 with reference to the apostles. We must obey God rather than 
men. So this qualification holds not 
only in the civil sphere, but as well in the familial sphere. 
And if a father is an abusive father or a mother is an abusive 
mother, then the child has the recourse to disobey. Now, practically, 
that's going to be a tough situation. But in terms of theologically 
or philosophically, the child is not duty-bound to obey godlessness 
when it is inflicted upon him or her. Now, in terms of the 
scope of the command, so the explanation is simple, honor, 
obey, provide, and give thanks. But in terms of the scope of 
the command, it's the relationship between superiors and inferiors. Now, with reference to the commandments 
given at Sinai and Moab, the audience is primarily adult. I mean, there would be children, 
but it would be primarily adult. And so it is not only the parent-child 
relationship that is in view, but it's every lawful God-instituted 
authority structure where you have authorities, or where you 
have superiors, and where you have inferiors. The Westminster 
Larger Catechism is very helpful here. Number 124 says, who are 
meant by father and mother in the Fifth Commandment? by father 
and mother in the fifth commandment are meant, not only natural parents, 
but all superiors in age and gifts. And especially such, as 
by God's ordinance, are over us in place of authority, whether 
in family, church, or commonwealth." Again, that is the scope of the 
command. So yeah, the primary emphasis 
is within the family structure, your children must obey you. 
You have a responsibility as a superior to them to conduct 
yourself in a godly way. But extrapolating the principle, 
we see how it applies in other contexts in the world. So you've 
got the family, fifth commandment. You've got the workplace. We 
read this recently in 1 Timothy chapter 6 in terms of bond servants 
toward their masters. You see the same emphasis in 
Ephesians 6. After dealing with children, obeying their parents, 
and fathers not provoking their children to wrath, he then moves 
into the employer-employee relationship, or the master and slave relationship. And then of course the church, 
same sort of a thing. Now church authority is not magisterial, 
it is ministerial, it functions under Christ in a manner of teaching 
and preaching the word of God, but there is clear commandment. 
Hebrews chapter 13 has two specific words concerning obedience to 
ecclesiastical authority. Again, the context being superiors 
and inferiors in Hebrews chapter 13 at verse 7. Remember those 
who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose 
faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct. And then in verse 17, it says, 
Obey those who rule over you and be submissive. We know he's 
not talking about civil authority, because civil authority doesn't 
watch out for your souls as those who must give account. Let them 
do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable 
for you. So for your profit, do it in a manner that is consistent 
with the revealed will of God. Everybody functions in that capacity 
when things are done properly and orderly. So you've got the 
family, you've got the workplace, you've got the church, and then 
of course you've got the commonwealth. You can turn to Romans chapter 
13, probably the clearest expression of the authority of civil government 
in terms of individuals. And in verse 1 it says, Let every 
soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no 
authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are 
appointed by God. Therefore, whoever resists the 
authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist 
will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to 
good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of 
the authority? Do what is good, and you will 
have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you, 
notice, for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, 
for he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister 
and avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil." So 
as much as this particular text specifies the duty of the inferior 
toward the superior, it also reflects the duty of the superior 
with reference to the inferior. He is God's minister to you for 
good. If he transgresses that and becomes 
an instrument of bad in terms of the governing, in terms of 
the civil polity, then we do invoke Acts chapter 5. Now, it 
can't just be preferences. It can't just be, well, I don't 
like to drive 55 in this particular place. I'm going to not submit 
to the governing authority out of principle. But when they tell 
us we can't meet for church because of a virus, we must obey God 
rather than men. We do not have the right to suspend 
public worship at the behest of a governing authority that 
is attempting to involve themselves in things that are not their 
particular purview. So again, submission to God-ordained 
authority does not mean absolute submission. If the authority 
commands or incites the subordinate to sin, the subordinate must 
obey God rather than man. That is a foundational principle 
that, for whatever reason, hasn't been challenged up until the 
COVID-19 pandemic. Christians of all ages and stripes 
and various places and personages always saw that what the government 
can command is limited. They don't have universal, comprehensive, 
sovereign authority to command whatever it is that they want 
to command. That is simply being read into 
the passage. When we universalize Romans 13, 
we create a context that God never condoned, God never suggested 
to take place, and it's one that ultimately breeds great confusion 
and ultimately contempt on the part of the inferior for the 
superior. And then finally, under the command 
stated, the sanction related to the command. Sanction simply 
means the punishment. What is the penalty for violating 
the fifth commandment? Well, I mentioned the rod and 
reproof. You can turn back to Proverbs. 
Proverbs is very explicit on this particular matter. And brethren, 
if you do not think that this particular commandment is important 
today, go to Walmart just about any time of the week and watch 
how kids treat their parents. This is an epidemic, the way 
that children are rebellious against their parents. Do we 
actually think that if a child is that kind of a rebel against 
his parent, who, because of the way God made things, there's 
already some degree of love between the parent and his spawn? If 
that child is disobedient to the point of utter rebellion 
there, What's that child going to be toward you and me? What's 
that child going to be toward the civil government? See, parents 
who indulge their kids, parents who do not discipline their kids, 
are ultimately inflicting society with a great woe. They are inflicting 
future pastors. They are inflicting future spouses. 
They are inflicting future workplaces with great woe. It is imperative 
that we take this command seriously and raise our children the way 
that God stipulates. Everybody invokes the passage, 
children are a gift from the Lord, and well we should. Discipline 
children. If you have 15 kids and you don't 
know the 15th's name, and you never spank or reprove any of 
them, that's not going to be a blessed home, brethren. It's 
going to be just the opposite of a blessed home. Children are 
a blessing from the Lord provided we rear them in the manner that 
God demands. If we do not take this seriously, 
we are not helping anybody in terms of not only family, but 
civil society. Notice in Proverbs 13 at verse 
24. He who spares his rod hates his 
son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly. Now discipline in Proverbs isn't 
child abuse, it isn't crushing their spirit, it isn't thrashing 
them within inches of their life. That's not what's in view here. 
But reproof, verbal, and then this idea of correction that 
is physical in nature or corporeal is what God demands. And God 
knows the human being and the psyche better than we do. Notice 
in Proverbs 19, Proverbs chapter 19, at verse 18, and the language 
that he uses is so epic. It's so dramatic, but there's 
a reason why. If we don't rear our children 
the way we ought, we are setting them up for great failure. Notice 
in verse 18, chasing your son while there is hope, and do not 
set your heart on his destruction. I remember reading Bridges on 
Proverbs, and he said, the father said, if the child's will wasn't 
broken by the age of two, you've lost him. Man, I hope that's 
not true. That seems even more epic than 
Solomon does. But I get their point. I get 
their understanding. You need to not break the will, 
but by God's grace, restrain it. And then Proverbs 22 at verse 
15. Proverbs 22 at verse 15. Foolishness is bound up in the 
heart of a child. The rod of correction will drive 
it far from him. And then Proverbs 23, 13 and 
14. Do not withhold correction from 
a child. For if you beat him with a rod, 
he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod 
and deliver his soul from hell. Again, that epic language. You 
beat him with the rod. rod and deliver his soul from 
hell. There's this direct connection between the rear end and the 
soul. And if you neglect the discipline 
in terms of the rear end, that soul may perish in hell. Now obviously Solomon is not 
teaching salvation through the implementation of the rod. but 
he is highlighting the means with reference to the fifth commandment 
and the necessity for parents to not only assert their authority 
but to vindicate that authority by the implementation of the 
rod and reproof. So you've got rod and reproof 
that should correct just about everything in terms of children. But if you go back to Deuteronomy 
21, and it's a passage we've looked at before, and it's a 
passage we'll probably look at again. Because oftentimes, passages 
like these are yanked out of the Bible, and we are told that 
this is vicious and barbaric. But typically, when we understand 
the passage, we will see it is anything but vicious or anything 
but barbaric. So we've already seen that not 
only rod and reproof in the book of Proverbs, but the death penalty. Exodus 21, 15, one who strikes 
his father shall be put to death. Exodus 21, 17, a man who curses 
his father shall be put to death. Well, here in Deuteronomy 21, 
you have a real live application in terms of a civil society context. Notice in verse 18, 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 in fear. 
Now before we investigate that just a little bit further, notice 
Whatever we might think of this particular passage, whatever 
we might think of the God-haters who take passages like this and 
throw them in our faces to tell us this is a barbaric and antiquated 
system of religion, notice the value of the Fifth Commandment 
in Israel's covenant life. Notice the importance of this 
particular commandment for the maintenance of order in a civil 
society. Again, brethren, if we don't 
control our children in the home, what makes us think that persons 
outside of the home are going to be able to control that? If 
they don't respond to the pressure of love and kindness and compassion 
that is given to them in the home, if they have learned how 
to despise that parental authority, Most likely they're going to 
take that set of godless principles into the workplace, into society, 
into the world, and make it a less happy place. Now back to Deuteronomy 
21. In the first place, this does 
not apply to a naughty two-year-old who doesn't eat his broccoli. 
Notice he is an adult rebel son. Verse 20, this son of ours is 
stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voice. He 
is a glutton and a drunkard. So this isn't a five-year-old 
that you're having trouble with because he's not sharing his 
Hot Wheels. Notice as well the passage presupposes the exercise 
of parental discipline. They've tried. they have exercised 
not only loving, you know, love probably, but also physical chastening. Notice what it says in verse 
18. 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 that. This is your 
sort of equivalent in old covenant Israel to, what is that called 
where you take Kids sometimes, I can't remember, like a boot 
camp or something like that. You just turn them over because 
they won't listen to you. Well, this isn't a boot camp. 
This isn't just a few more chores in their lives. This is capital 
offense. So again, when we look at these 
commandments, the world says horror of horrors, the thought 
of executing an adult rebel son is absolutely shocking. But what 
happens when you don't execute adult rebel sons? You have prisons 
filled with them, teeming with them. absolutely overflowing 
with them. If we do not take seriously the 
need to discipline children and adult rebel sons, then we are 
not doing anybody any favors. As well, notice that this demonstrates 
the state's role with reference to capital punishment. The man 
and the woman don't execute the son on their own. They don't 
say, you know, son, we've tried the rod, the reproof. We've listened 
to Solomon. The blueness of the wound hasn't 
saved your soul. So we're going to take you out 
back and we're going to stone you to death. That's not what 
they do. They go through a system of due process. They bring him 
out to the elders of the city. They turn him over and say, this 
son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voice. He 
is a glutton and a drunkard. This shows the seriousness of 
the Fifth Commandment and the honor that is due to parents. 
If this is lacking, it's not going to happen elsewhere. If 
a man does not treat his mother, this is something we always taught 
our kids. Watch girls or guys how the person 
treats their mother or their father. If a man treats his mother 
like garbage, typically when he gets married, think he's gonna 
be lovey-dovey and sweetness and pie and kindness to his wife? If he's got a pattern and a habitual 
action of disrespecting his mother? Now, God's grace can come in, 
can change his heart, can do wonderful things, but in terms 
of the reality of it, it's not usually the case that there's 
this automatic switch. And then as well, this case highlights 
specific violations. He is a glutton and a drunkard, 
which are symptomatic of the larger problem. His gluttony 
and drunkenness are the evidence of a stubborn and rebellious 
heart. So it's not that gluttony and 
drunkenness per se are capital punishment offenses. No, the 
capital punishment offense is resistance to God's authority 
in the home. It is a violation of the fifth 
commandment. Craigie again 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. The crime, in other 
words, is disobedience. But the result of the crime is 
the dissolution of a proper style of life. And then Verne Poythress 
has an excellent statement concerning this particular law. If any of 
you know anything about theonomy, Verne Poythress writes a book 
that's anti-theonomy. But he comes out sounding very 
much like a theonomist, especially in his treatment of this particular 
passage. He notes its general equity in 
our own current situation. He says the death penalty for 
wholesale violation of parental authority may seem harsh to modern 
sentiments. Now brethren, please don't go 
out on Facebook, Jim Butler says you should execute your rebel 
sons. That's not what I'm saying. I want to deal with this particular 
text in the larger context of the fifth commandment to show 
the gravity and the seriousness of it. Again, I think we have 
a pandemic or epidemic of badly behaved children today. Badly 
behaved rebel children, not just little ones, but teenage ones. And it is symptomatic of the 
lack of authority given in the home. So back to Poitras. He says, it may seem harsh to 
modern sentiments. He says, but I would argue that 
it is not only just, but realistic. Parental authority, even if very 
imperfectly exercised, takes place in the context of personal 
relationships and natural pressures in the direction of love. Parents 
have many advantages over the state. If a person does not receive 
instruction from parents, the chance of receiving instruction 
from the state's more impersonal discipline are nil. The person 
who rebels in wholesale fashion against parents will also rebel 
against the state and create general destruction and disorder 
until eliminated. It is mere sentimentality to 
refuse to come to grips with this reality. Again, sentiment 
cannot affect jurisprudence. Sentiment cannot affect, well, 
he's just a son, he's just a daughter. The worst criminals in the world 
were just sons and daughters. I mean, come on. If parents fail 
in their duty with reference to the fifth commandment, when 
I say that, brethren, don't go home and cry, because we all 
fail. in our duty as parents. We all have shortcomings, we 
all have inconsistencies, we all make many a mistake and fumble 
the ball on a whole host of occasions. But, praise be to God, we get 
up the next day, we pray to God for forgiveness, and then we 
try to put these things into practice. But there are parents 
out there that do nothing in terms of the discipline of children. 
There are persons out there that just let them do whatever it 
is they want to do, which may be fine at 5, but at 15 and 25, 
that's not fine. That's no bueno. That's not good 
when we have a society filled with that kind of rebellious 
disposition. And again, all you have to do 
is look around and see this sort of thing. We don't care about 
the fifth commandment generally in society. Now another way that 
we know that this was in fact a grave offense was seen in Ezekiel 
22. you can turn to the prophet Ezekiel. 
So we see that rod and reproof should deal with children and 
rebellion in the home. We see that penal sanction up 
to and including capital punishment in Deuteronomy 21. And again, 
Jesus assumes this when he teaches in Matthew 15. Notice he doesn't 
quote 2117 of Exodus and say, oh, but that's no longer binding. 
He assumes it's binding character. He assumes that it's still extent, 
at least at that point. Now, whether it is into this 
new covenant era, that's a different argument, one that I'm not going 
to get into right now. But look at the gravity of this 
offense. Notice in Ezekiel 22 verse 6, 
look, the princes of Israel each Each one of you has used his 
power to shed blood in you. In you they have made light of 
father and mother. Is that what the commandment 
says? Make light of father and mother? No, it's to treat them 
as heavy. It's to honor them. In you they 
have made light of father and mother. In your midst they have 
oppressed the stranger. In you they have mistreated the 
fatherless and the widow. And then notice in verse 15, 
I will scatter you among the nations. So God, through the 
prophet, is announcing why exile is coming. If the children of 
Israel were scratching their melons, wondering why they're 
being transported off into Babylon, and they said, what's God's problem 
with us? Well, here's God's problem with 
you. And it includes a wholesale rejection of the fifth commandment. So verse 15, I will scatter you 
among the nations, disperse you throughout the countries, and 
remove your filthiness completely from you. You shall defile yourself 
in the sight of the nations, then you shall know that I am 
the Lord. So it is given as a reason, not 
the only reason, but a reason among many for the exile. As well you see it in Deuteronomy 
27. Curses of the covenant are applied 
to persons that violate the fifth commandment. In fact, you can 
turn that. I think it's 2716. 2716. Yeah, cursed is the one who treats 
his father or his mother with contempt. So this is the rationale 
behind Ezekiel 22. So if they were going to say, 
why is it that we're now in Babylon? Why is it that we're now in this 
place of punishment and penalty and sanction? Well, you were 
told, cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with 
contempt. So we see the gravity of the 
offense as a reason, one of the reasons, for the exile into Babylon. But then turn to the New Testament. 
Intriguingly, the fifth commandment makes it into several vice lists 
in the New Testament. A vice list is Paul condemning 
the various sins of the heathen or the pagan or the Jews that 
they were committing. And in Romans chapter 1 at verse 
30, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors 
of evil things, disobedient to parents. Right there! I mean, we all love Romans 1. How many times have we all invoked 
Romans 1 over the last two years? This is fitting and appropriate. 
God is giving us over for our sins as a nation. Abortion, and 
murder, and the gross sexual immorality, and disobedience 
to parents. The fifth commandment makes its 
way into this vice list. 1st Timothy chapter 1, same sort 
of a thing. The apostle in 1st Timothy 1 
at verses 9 and 10 appeals to the Decalogue. He appeals to 
the Ten Commandments. First Timothy 1.8, but we know 
that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this, the 
law is not made for a righteous person. In this context, he's 
not dealing with every use of the law. He's dealing with the 
civil use of the law. When he says that the law is 
not made for a righteous person, it simply means because they're 
already doing it. The best sort of analogy I can 
use here is that counterfeiting laws, they're not made for us. 
Why? Because we're not counterfeiters. That's the point in this passage. 
He's not dealing with the pedagogical use, and he's not dealing with 
the normative use. He's dealing with the use of 
the law that is either civil or political, wherein it functions 
to restrain the wickedness of man. It is a boundary. It is 
a parameter. So knowing this, the law is not 
made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, 
for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for 
murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for 
fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, 
and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. 
Now he goes to the farthest extent here, murderers of fathers and 
murderers of mothers, but the very root of that is the Fifth 
Commandment. chapter 20. And so the reason 
for, or a reason for the exile, and then again a recurring item 
in New Testament vice lists, it's in 2nd Timothy chapter 3 
as well, when Paul describes the characteristics of the men 
in the last days. The last days being that time 
between the first and second coming of the Lord Jesus. We 
are in the last days. So verse one, know this, that 
in the last days perilous times will come. For men will be lovers 
of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, 
disobedient to parents. Again, if it was chump changer, 
it wasn't that important, it wouldn't be repeated so much 
as it is. I think it is a foundational commandment, not only in society, 
but within the Ten Commandments, the Decalogue. So our first duty 
with reference to man is to be subject to those over us. That 
is crucial in life. God has made it such that we're 
not, you know, a group of hippies in a commune. There is structure 
and order in family, there is structure and order in church, 
there is structure and order in workplaces, and structure 
and order in society. And in order for structure and 
order to be doable, you have superiors and you have inferiors. And if persons don't do what 
they're supposed to do, everything breaks down and it's a mess. 
So this is a most vital commandment within the Decalogue, within 
the Bible as a whole, and within civil society. That if we neglect 
it, we're going to reap the consequences, and those consequences are certainly 
not pretty. Now, secondly, the promise given. 
It's very clear. Honor your father and your mother. 
In the Old Covenant expression, the promise says that your days 
may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. 
So they're poised to go to the promised land they're going to 
take Canaan, they're going to dispossess it of the Canaanites, 
and they're going to have a land flowing with milk and honey. 
So provided that they do what they're supposed to do in terms 
of their covenantal obligations, they will enjoy a long tenure 
in the land. But if they do not, they will 
be ejected from the land just like we saw in Deuteronomy 27 
and then in Ezekiel chapter 22. So if you violate God's holy 
law, if you disregard his commandments, then it will not go well with 
you in the land. That's just the way it goes in 
God's moral universe. Now in the New Covenant, in the 
New Testament, we see that teaching in Ephesians chapter 6, same 
sort of an emphasis. Children, obey your parents and 
the Lord, for this is right. Sort of an appeal there to natural 
law or to the light of reason. It's right. I mean, if your child 
says, but why? Because it's right. I mean, don't 
get into the billion whys with your kids. You want to betray 
the fifth commandment? Play the why game with your kid. 
Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Because I 
said so. That is a legitimately excellent 
expression or answer to the question as to why. A five-year-old doesn't 
need a theological or philosophical rationale for why you're going 
to discipline him. You tell him his offense, and 
you give him what is coming to him. You don't need, I mean, 
I'm sure you parents have lawyers for kids that are, like, fantastic, 
and, you know, could try to talk you out of anything and everything. 
Don't play their games. But back to verse 1. Children, 
obey your parents and the Lord, for this is right. Honor your 
father and mother, which is the first commandment, with promise 
that it may be well with you. And then notice, and you may 
live long on what? Not in the land, because this 
is transcending the sort of border and confines of Old Covenant 
religion in terms of Canaan, but that you may live long on 
the earth. Now this is a general maxim, 
sort of like the Proverbs. I mean, you know, the Proverbs 
tell us that Solomon says, I've never seen the righteous begging. That those are general generalities. You can't press proverbs to be 
absolutely positively true in all things. Solomon is surveying 
the world. He's giving general principles 
as to most of the time what happens. And that's what's going on here. 
This does not mean that a that an obedient 10-year-old or 12-year-old 
can't contract some serious disease and die. You can't say, oh, but 
God, you said that if that child was good, they would live long 
on the earth. Again, in the moral universe 
governed by our God, for the most part, when persons do what 
they're supposed to do, as Hodge says, it is the usual course 
of his providence. The usual course of his providence. Those who do what they're supposed 
to do, things typically go well. I've heard it ascribed to Ronald 
Reagan. I'm not sure if it was him, but 
someone said it. Perhaps it was him. He said something 
like, the luckier I get or the harder I've worked, the luckier 
I've been. The harder I've worked, the luckier 
I've been. What do you think the point is? 
You don't just sit around and wait for things to happen. You 
work hard and then you reap the benefits. He's being kind of 
tongue-in-cheek. The harder I work, the luckier 
I've been. No, it's because you've worked hard that you've been 
blessed or you've been benefited. You've ever had that? People 
see you and they see your kids and they say, wow, you've got 
so lucky. Anybody ever had that? We were 
at a pizza place, and the kids were little, and we had our food. And then afterwards, we went 
to pay. And the lady said, oh, this fellow over there paid for 
you. He was a businessman. He was trying to do his work. 
And he was happy that your five brats weren't jumping off the 
furniture in Pizza Hut or whatever. So that was kind of a cool thing. 
But I've been around others who said, oh, you just got lucky. 
Lucky? You think well-behaved children fall out of heaven? 
I mean, you have to pray. You have to reprove, you have 
to discipline, you have to correct, you usually have to weep and 
there's probably fasting in there and lots of deprivation and a 
whole lot of things involved. It's not lucky that produces 
good children. It is God's grace, and in the 
usual course of His providence, that is blessed. Edi says it 
is a principle of the divine administration, and again, the 
usual course of providence. So it's not a passage that if 
something horrible happens to your son or daughter, you bring 
that to God or use that for, you know, the reason why you're 
going to commit apostasy. No, it is the usual course of 
His providence. Now, in terms of some applications 
and final thoughts, in the first place, the positive aspect of 
the command. Inferiors are supposed to render 
honor, obedience, and gratitude toward their superiors. Honor, 
obedience, and gratitude toward their superiors. That does not 
mean that they are perfect people. That doesn't mean that at all. 
You can't say, well, I'm not going to do that because they're 
not perfect. Jesus continued in subjection 
to his earthly parents. And if anybody could have argued 
that, well, they're not perfect people, so I'm not going to do 
that, it would have been Jesus. But Jesus continued in subjection. So the perfection of the superior 
is not an essential element in terms of our duty toward that. 
Everybody got that? You can't say, well, this superior 
is a real jerk, so I'm not going to submit. No, if that superior 
is a jerk, but even so isn't commanding you to sin, you're 
still duty-bound to do what you're told by that particular superior. And then superiors are supposed 
to govern in a righteous way. I know this seems odd, but as 
parents, I think we would reflect upon that. We don't have the 
right to run around and scream at our children and chase them 
with tree branches and threaten them with bloody murder. That's 
not godly parenting. That's not legit. It's not righteous. But in terms of the civil sphere, 
Brethren, it seems like in the last two years we've gone from 
being treated as children to now being treated as enemy combatants. That's not a lawful move on the 
part of civil government. This is what Westminster Larger 
Catechism says concerning what is required of superiors towards 
their inferiors. Answer, it is required of superiors 
according to that power they receive from God Never forget 
that. Let every soul be subject to 
the governing authority. For there is no authority except 
from God. Those persons that are in that 
position are in that position because of God. They're not there 
because of them. They're not there because they're 
wonderful human beings. They're there from God. It goes 
on to say, and that relation wherein they stand, they are 
to love, pray for, and bless their inferiors, to instruct, 
counsel, and admonish them, countenancing, commending, and rewarding such 
as do well, and discountenancing, reproving, and chastising such 
as do ill, protecting and providing for them all things necessary 
for soul and body, and by grave, wise, holy, and exemplary carriage 
to procure glory to God, honor to themselves, and so to preserve 
that authority which God has put upon them." So in other words, 
just because you're the authority or the father or the mother doesn't 
mean that you can be derelict in your duty You can't expect 
your children to obey and comply and submit and to reverence and 
do all those things if you're not conducting yourself in a 
reciprocal fashion. There is a consistency in terms 
of the commandment that an inferior has specific responsibilities, 
but so does the superior to the inferior. And then in terms of 
the sins prohibited, the failure of inferiors to honor, obey, 
and express gratitude toward their superiors, and the failure 
of superiors to conduct themselves in a godly way. You've got Eli 
that serves as a perfect example of wretchedness as a parent. 
Remember, what were Eli's sons? Does anybody remember Eli's sons? What's that? No, no. What did they do? What was their 
job? They were priests. And what did they do that was 
not good priestly stuff? No, they didn't offer up the 
strange fire. Right. Two pretty big things, 
right? I mean, if you're a priest and 
you're laying with women at the tabernacle, or you're a priest 
and you're stealing meat that the worshiper brings to offer 
up to God, that's bad. Those are symptomatic, though. 
1 Samuel 2.12, I think it's 2.12, says that they did not know Yahweh. 
So they were not rightly connected to God. They had no experiential 
saving knowledge of the Lord. But added to that, they had a 
lazy father who did not restrain them. And that was the specific 
indictment in 1 Samuel chapter 2. In fact, we should ponder 
those words because as parents, we should take very seriously 
the emphasis in the Word of God on how we're to function as superiors. So 1 Samuel 2, 22 to 36 gives 
us the conduct of, I'm sorry, 1 Samuel 2, verse 12. Now the 
sons of Eli were corrupt. They did not know the Lord. And 
then it outlines a few of the particular infractions that they 
engaged in. And then 1 Samuel chapter 3 is when God speaks 
to Samuel. And we read in verse 11, 1 Samuel 
3, 11. Then the Lord said to Samuel, 
behold, I will do something in Israel at which both ears of 
everyone who hears it will tingle. In that day I will perform against 
Eli all that I have spoken concerning his house from beginning to end. 
For I have told him that I will judge his house forever for the 
iniquity which he knows, because his sons made themselves vile 
and he did not restrain them. And therefore I have sworn to 
the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli's house shall not be atoned 
for by sacrifice or offering forever." So he knew these things 
and he did not restrain them. That should serve as a clarion 
call to all of us to seek by the grace of God to restrain 
our children in light of the fifth commandment. And then finally, 
in terms of the threefold use of the command, civil use. I 
argue that society would be a whole lot better off if parents did 
their jobs. We'd be a whole lot better off 
if parents restrained their children. Calvin says those who abusively 
or stubbornly violate parental authority are monsters, not men. This fellow named Klaus Bachmuel 
says the parents who reject the first commandment can expect 
their children to reject the fifth one. The parents who do 
not submit to God should not expect their children to submit 
to them. So if it were the case that persons in society took 
seriously what is right that children obey their parents, 
we'd all be better off. Pedagogically, all of us should 
see our failures when we look at the law of God, and that should 
point us back to Jesus for his blood and for his righteousness. 
And then the normative use as God's people who have the Holy 
Spirit, we can't save our children. We do not have that sovereign 
authority, we can't open their hearts, we can't make them believe, 
we can't sort of shake them into the kingdom, but we can use the 
means that God has given. And when you look at the means 
that God has given, specifically when we look at Proverbs, and 
the emphasis on rod and reproof, and we see those parallel statements, 
you beat him with the rod, he will not die, you will save his 
soul from hell, again, We can't save a child through rod and 
reproof, but it is a means that God uses for their restraint, 
for their overall health, and in terms of common grace, it 
puts them in that position to be able to hear the gospel of 
special grace. So the uses of the law with reference 
to the fifth commandment, it is still binding, it is still 
upon us, and may God help us as we put these things into practice. 
Well, let us pray. Our Father in heaven, we thank 
you for your word, we thank you for your grace, we thank you 
for the fact that the commandments speak to individuals, to families, 
to society as a whole, and God help us in the application of 
these things in our own lives. We thank you for children and 
for grandchildren, they are a blessing and a gift and a joy, We know 
it's as well a great responsibility, so help each of us in these positions 
to exercise the restraint that is necessary, to exercise the 
function that we've seen in the Scriptures tonight, and to seek 
to be faithful by Your grace and for Your glory. And God, 
again, bless our children, bless our young people. Open their 
hearts to the truth of the Gospel at an early age, and may they 
rise up, and may they glorify and honor You. And we ask this 
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Well, any questions or 
comments on any of that? Yes, Leslie. Yeah, I mean, it's going to vary 
on a case by case basis. I think honoring your parents 
Again, it's not the superior has to be converted or the superior 
has to be an honorable person straight across the board, right? 
I think our relationship to our parents is always conditioned 
by the fifth commandment such that if they are not converted, 
I think there's still common ground and we can still relate 
to them. I think it's, you know, I can only speak in terms of 
practical experience. My mother was not a professing 
Christian. So as I had opportunity, I would 
share the gospel. I initially burned bridges. When 
I first got saved, I just let her have it. And it took a long 
time to build that back up. So later on, as much as I could 
show love and kindness and affection to her, when opportunity arose 
and I could give her the gospel or biblical teaching, I would 
try to do that. But I think that your parents don't have to be 
believers in order for us to honor them based on their station, 
kind of like the prime minister or the president. I mean, I don't 
particularly like either of those fellows, but I respect the office. And certainly, if I went to go 
see them, I'd put on a suit. And I would do those things that 
are honorable among men in that kind of a condition or situation. 
So, I mean, if they're openly antagonistic to the gospel, I 
mean, you've got decisions to make. If you've got little kids 
and you're having family worship and your dad or mom are mocking 
scripture or something like that, well, then you've got to use 
wisdom and not sort of provide a context for any kind of that 
kind of thing to happen. So I mean, I think it would differ 
from case to case, but I think that a child, a believing adult 
child, should still be able to engage in evangelical obedience 
to the fifth commandment. There's a way for us to honor 
and, you know, obey is a bit of a different thing, because 
we're not under their direct authority anymore. Yes, Jonathan. I was just going to mention that, 
unfortunately, we live in the age, and have for quite a long 
time, where the civil authority enables the very thing that you 
were teaching about tonight, the disobedience of children 
towards parents. There's laws in society. You 
grew up in Walmart trying to discipline your child. One complaint 
to the Ministry of Families and see what comes of it. I could 
tell you stories from experience of that stuff. This has been 
going on for 40 years. When I was young it wasn't the 
case. be very careful in the implementation 
of the rod. I mean we live in a yeah I think 
we've probably all heard the horror stories right here in 
Chilliwack that people will dime you out and rat you out I mean, 
Orwell would be shocked at what we've come to in our society. So yes, definitely practice discretion. And yeah, at Walmart, I want 
to smack kids. And I'm sure that wouldn't go 
over very well. So yeah. My comment is on a similar 
point, actually. Almost like we look over our 
shoulder. discipline our children because we're not trusted to 
use the proper amount of discipline to them. And then you look at 
the passage in Deuteronomy. It's interesting where the civil 
authority of that day took the parents' word for it and executed 
their child upon the parents' word. But yet today, the same 
elders of the town, we have to look over our shoulder to make 
sure we're exercising restraint in any sort of correction that 
we're giving our children. That's right. That's right. Yeah, 
when you're dealing with a civil authority that will give abortions 
to minor children, or birth control pills to minor children, or vaccinations 
to minor children, that is far out of their lane. That is way, 
way, way out of their lane. For the civil authority to encroach 
upon parental authority, and yeah, it's not new. It's getting 
ramped up, though, I would suggest. I'm going to make it sound like 
you're way older than I, but you certainly have seen more 
in terms of that. But yeah, I've seen the same 
sort of thing. Yes? parents not filling the void, 
or creating a void, whereby the state feels justified. So in 
terms of all the, not to pick on single parents, because that's 
a tough thing, but there's something to be said about people who are 
crudest to us, create those scenarios, and now the state feels justified 
to turn into big sister rather than big brother in that regard. 
Yeah, well, I think whatever the issues in the family, the 
state should not encroach, unless there's criminal activity. But 
we talk about the churches giving up ground to the state. I think 
there's many separate households that have given up ground to 
the state. So we're now wrestling the state. 
Oh, yeah. Yeah. I think, yeah, it's definitely a two-pronged 
issue. And then on the point of church and state relations, 
something I noticed this past weekend was the blanket curfew 
in Kiev. And the point that came to my 
mind is, if this was an invasion scenario, like summer 1940, where 
Nazis are dropping bombs on our capital city, like in London, 
right? Battle of Britain days. Or if 
we were in Kyiv this past weekend, and they asked nobody to go on 
the streets, absolute lockdown for civilians, for 36 hours, 
from Saturday night until Monday morning, for the express purpose 
of catching spies and saboteurs, I'd like to think that we would 
comply with that, because that's a completely different life and 
death scenario than Yeah, and I've said as much, right? I mean, 
we canceled church for snow. If bombs were falling, yeah, 
brethren, live stream MacArthur today, right? Yeah, when there's 
imminent threat to a person's bodily existence, but that's 
not what we were dealing with in life either. It's just to 
say that it seems to me that's a strong attitude that I've seen 
in certain discussions. Oh, yeah. As if we're advocating 
an absolutism no matter what. as much as we can. Yeah, one 
more. It's an interesting thing. I 
guess we've been talking about it for a long time. But it's 
interesting because you all have gone through this in the last 
couple of years for continuing on to obey the Lord. And I'm 
not saying we're doing anything when it comes to the relationship 
with the Catholic Lord and the Church. But we deal with some 
of the things now. I know I've struggled with having 
to work through them When the civil authority tells me that 
I'm required to obey their health regulations, take their vaccines 
into my body, whatever, I have to make sure I have a good conscience 
that I'm not disobeying the civil authorities when I'm supposed 
to obey them or disobeying God. So I've worked through that for 
myself, but it's something that we all have to remember. And some of these things are 
not really easy to talk about. But I just bring it up because 
I think maybe some of us feel bad when we resist the authority 
of some of these things, but we have even a lot I think bodily autonomy is a 
fundamental inalienable right. I have the right to put into 
my body or not put into my body whatever I choose and if anybody 
else disagrees with that Tough. Sorry. I mean, my body, my choice 
at that level. So yeah, I think it's not so 
much feeling bad. It's guilt manipulation from 
others. But yeah, if you'd have told 
us 10 years ago we'd be at this crossroads, I would have thought, 
no, we're not going to be there. So yeah, that's something everybody 
does need to wrestle with. all right and not tonight