Deuteronomy 21
One general idea, the sacredness of human life and of
personal rights, connects the
laws in this chapter together, as well as connects them withthe
laws in the two
preceding chapters. Expiation
of uncertain murder; treatment of a captive taken
to
wife, rights of the firstborn, a rebellious refractory son to be judged and
punished; a malefactor who has been hanged to be buried before
nightfall.
EXPIATION OF UNCERTAIN MURDER (vs. 1-9)
If a body was found lying dead from a wound, and it was not
known by whom
the
wound had been inflicted, the whole land would be involved in the
guilt of
the murder,
unless it was duly expiated as heredirected. First, the elders and
judges (presumably of the neighboring towns; of Josephus,
‘Antiq.’ 4:8, 16)
were to meet, the former as magistrates representing the communities, the latter
as
administrators of the law, and were to measure the distance from the body
of
the slain man to each of the surrounding towns, in order to ascertain which
was
the nearest. This ascertained, upon that town was to be laid the duty of
expiating the crime.
1 “If one
be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth
thee
to possess it, lying in the field, and it be
not known who hath slain him:
2 Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall
measure unto the cities which are round about him
that is slain:
3 And it
shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even
the elders of that city shall take an heifer,
which hath not been
wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the
yoke;” - a young cow
which had not been rendered unfit for consecration, nor had its
vital
force impaired, by being subjected to forced labor (compare Numbers 19:2).
4 “And the
elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough
valley,” – literally,
a stream of perpetuity, a perennial stream (compare Psalm
74:15, Authorized Version, “mighty rivers;” Amos 5:24); but here rather the
valley or wady through which a stream
flowed, as is evident from its being
described as “which is
neither eared” – that is, ploughed (literally, wrought,
tilled) - “nor
sown,”- a place which had not been profaned by
the hand of man,
but
was in a state of nature. This regulation as to the locality in which the act
of
expiation was to be performed was probably founded on the idea that
the water
of
the brook-valley would suck in the blood and clean it away, and that the blood
sucked in by the earth would not be brought to light again by the
ploughing and
working of the soil - “and
shall strike off the heifer’s neck there in the valley:” –
rather, break the heifer’s neck. As this was not an
act of sacrifice, for which the
shedding of blood would have been required, but simply a symbolical
representation of the infliction of death on the undiscovered murderer,
the animal
was
to be killed by breaking its neck (compare Exodus 13:13).
5 “And the
priests the sons of Levi shall come near;” – The
presence of the
priests at this ceremony was due to their position as the servants
of Jehovah
the
King of Israel, on whom it devolved to see that all was done in any matter
as
His Law prescribed. The priests present were probably those from the nearest
Levitical town - “for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto
Him, and to bless in the name of
the LORD; and by their word shall every
controversy and every
stroke be tried:” - literally, And upon their
mouth shall
be every strife and every stroke, i.e. by their judgment the character of the
act
shall be determined, and as they decide so shall the matter
stand (compare ch.
10:8; 17:8-9). In the present case the presence of the
priests at the transaction
gave it sanction as valid.
6 “And all
the elders of that city,” – The elders, by the
significant act of
washing their hands, indicated that they threw off from them,
utterly
repudiated, the charge of blood-guiltiness on the part of the town
which
they represented (compare Psalm 26:6; 73:13; Matthew 27:24) -“that are
next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands
over the heifer that is
beheaded in the valley:”
7 “And
they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed
this blood,
neither have our eyes seen it.” This act they were to accompany with a solemn
declaration of their innocence of this crime, and of their entire
ignorance of the
perpetrator of it; and with an earnest cry to God that the sin which
had
been done might be forgiven. 8
Be merciful, O LORD, unto
thy people
כַּפֵר לְ, see Leviticus 1:4) - “whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not
innocent blood” - the
blood of the innocent man who has been slain -
“unto thy people of
9 “So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among
you,
when thou shalt do
that which is right in the sight of the LORD.”
In this way they were to deliver themselves as a nation
from blood-guiltiness.
Expiation was made by the killing of the transgressor when
he could be found
(ch.19:13; “the land cannot be cleansed of the blood
that is shed therein,
but
by the blood of him that shed” - Numbers
35:33); when
he was not known,
by
the process here described. Of course, if afterwards he were apprehended,
he
would suffer the penalty he had incurred - after the Talmud..
The Preciousness of One Human Life in the
Sight of God (vs. 1-9)
The value of this paragraph can be duly appreciated only as
the indifference with
which pagan nations of old regarded human life is studied and
understood. As a
piece of civil legislation, it is far superior to anything in
the code of the nations around
at
that time. Here we have undoubtedly the origin or
the germ of modern coroners’
inquests. The following points in it are worthy of
note:
o
It is a rule to be
observed when they should be settled in the land of
o
It indicates that from
the first, each human life should be regarded
as an
object of common interest to the whole people, and that it was to
be
one of their prime points of honor, that no human life could be
tampered with WITHOUT AROUSING NATIONAL
INDIGNATION AND
CONCERN! (Consider the import of
50,000,000 abortions
weighing on the shoulders of the United
States of America,
much less the world. It is GHASTLY
how
many
abortions are performed around the world and each one
of them
is associated with the major topic here and that is
BLOOD! – Consider Abortion Rational –
CY – 2012)
o
God would teach them,
that if it should be found that any one’s life
had been trifled with, it was A SIN AGAINST HEAVEN as
well
as A CRIME AGAINST EARTH! (As you can see from the
previous paragraph, as Jerry Lee Lewis might say, there has been
“A
WHOLE
o
That this sin could
be LAID AT THE DOOR OF ALL THE
PEOPLE if they
were indifferent to the fact of its commission,
and if they did not make full inquiry respecting it, and
solemnly
put it away from
among them. (I recommend Charles
Spurgeon’s
sermon on neglect and the
sin of omission: See Numbers ch. 32 v. 23 –
Spurgeon Sermon – The Great Sin of Doing Nothing – this web site –
CY – 2012) At the back of this piece of civil legislation, yea, as the
fount from which it sprang, we get this beautiful, sublime, and comforting
truth — “EACH HUMAN LIFE
IS AN OBJECT OF DIVINE
CONCERN!”
INDIVIDUAL?
Ø
The fact of man’s
ill-treatment of his fellow man is recognized.
Ø
This ill-treatment is
rebuked and marked out as a brand of
shame
on any community which tolerates it.
Ø
When God fences every
man round with such a guard against ill
treatment from others, it may well lead us to “honor all men.”
(I
Peter 2:17)
Ø
It should teach us to
cultivate the spirit of a universal brotherhood.
“Have we not all one Father?” (Malachi 2:10)
Ø
In demanding an
account thereof, God foreshadows His
own coming
judgment. “Because He
hath appointed a day, in the which He
will
judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He
hath
ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men,
in that He hath raised Him from the dead.” (Acts 17:31)
Ø
Consider the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 18; Luke 12 and 15.
Note the stress He lays on “one.”
Ø
The death
of the Lord Jesus Christ for every man, is a standing
proof of every man’s worth before God; “For God so loved the
world that
He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in
Him should not perish but have everlasting life!”
(John 3:16) – “For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who
knew no
sin; that we might be made the righteousness of
God.” (II Corinthians 5:21)
Ø
The Holy Spirit
of God stirreth
in every man to move his sluggish
nature that it may rise toward heaven. “It is not the will of your
Father
in heaven that one of
these little ones should perish.”
(Matthew 18:14)
Ø
It should make us very
indignant at any doctrines concerning the
constitution and destiny of man, that would put him, or even seem to
put him, on a level with the brute creation. (Romans 1:21-25)
Ø
If men TRIFLE with the
interests and destinies of their brother
man, God will call them
to account at the JUDGMENT!
The voice of Abel’s blood cried
unto God from the ground. If a
neglected, mutilated, slain body of any one, HOWEVER OBSCURE,
was found in
nations for inquiry and for expiation. And terrible beyond all
power of expression, will be THE SHAME AND DISMAY, AT
THE BAR OF GOD, OF THOSE WHO HAVE TRIFLED
WITH HUMAN
INTERESTS, AND WHO GO INTO
ETERNITY LADEN WITH
THE GUILT OF THEIR
BROTHER’S BLOOD! (I wonder how many newsmen of
the nightly newscasts will regret their exultation of the slant they
presented in “abortion on demand”, not to mention the authors of the
cases and the legislators and judges, yea, many American
citizens who “love to have it so.” – Jeremiah 5:31 – CY – 2012)
TREATMENT OF A CAPTIVE TAKEN TO WIFE
(vs. 10-14)
If an Israelite saw among captives taken in war a woman,
fair of aspect, and loved
her,
and took her to be his wife, he was to allow her a full month to mourn her lost
kindred, and become accustomed to her new condition, before he
consummated
his
union with her. This refers to
captives from other nations than those of
Canaan, with whom the Israelites were to form no alliance,
and whom they
were not to take captive, but either wholly destroy or render
tributary (ch.
7:3;
Numbers 21:1; Joshua 11:19).
10 “When
thou goest forth to war against thine
enemies, and the LORD
thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken
them captive,
11 And seest
among the captives a beautiful woman, and
hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; 12 Then
thou shalt bring her
home to thine house, and she shall shave her head,
and pare her nails;” - The shaving of
the head and the paring of the nails,
as
well as the putting off of the garments worn when taken captive, were
signs of purification, of separation from former heathenism,
preparatory to
reception among the covenant people of Jehovah (compare Leviticus 14:8;
Numbers 8:7). Pare her
nails; literally, make or prepare her nails, i.e.
by
cutting them down to a proper size and form (compare II Samuel 19:25,
where
the
same word
is used of dressing the feet and trimming the beard). The
Targum of Onkelos takes this in quite an opposite sense, rendering, as in
the
margin of the Authorized Version, “suffer to grow,” and the rabbins who
adopt this meaning suppose that the design of the prescription was
that the
woman, being rendered unlovely, the man might be deterred from
taking
her
to be his wife. But this is altogether alien from the spirit and scope of the
passage.
13 “And
she shall put the raiment of her captivity” – i.e. the raiment she had
on
when taken captive; this she was to lay aside, that she might put on garments
of
mourning - “from off her, and shall remain
in thine house, and bewail her
father and her mother a full month:”
– literally, a month of days; the period
of
mourning was forty days (compare Genesis 50:3) - “and
after that thou shalt
go in unto her, and be her husband, and
she shall be thy wife.”
14 “And it
shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt
let her go
whither she will; but thou shalt
not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not
make merchandise of her, because thou hast
humbled her.” Should the man
afterwards come no longer to have pleasure in her, he was
to let her go whither
she
would, but he was not to sell her for money or use any violence to her.
Thou shalt not make merchandise of her. The verb in the form
here used occurs
only here and in ch. 24:7; derived from a root
which signifies to gather or
press, it properly means to press for one’s self, to lay hands
on one, to use
violence to one.
RIGHTS OF THE FIRSTBORN (vs. 15-17)
If a man have two wives, one of whom is a favorite and the
other disliked, and
if
his firstborn son be the child of the latter, he is not to allow his love for
the
other to prejudice the right of the son, but must allow him,
both in his own
lifetime and in the disposition of his property after death, the
full privilege and
right of a firstborn son.
15 “If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and
they
have born him children, both the beloved and
the hated; and if the
firstborn son be hers that was hated: 16 Then it
shall be, when he maketh
his sons to inherit that which he hath, that
he may not make” – literally, is
not
able to make; i.e. is
legally incapable of making -
“the son of the
beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which
is indeed the firstborn:”
17 “But he
shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by
giving him a double portion” - literally, a mouth of two; i.e. a
portion (so
“mouth” is used in II
Kings 2:9; Zechariah 13:8) equal to that of two;
consequently, the firstborn inherited twice as much as any of the other
sons. Amongst all nations and from the earliest times, the right of the
eldest
son
to pre-eminence among his brethren has been recognized; and in
legislating for
already existing; the assignment, however, of a double share in
the
inheritance to the eldest son is a new and special provision,
mentioned only
here - “of all that he hath: for he is the beginning
of his strength;” -
(compare Genesis 49:3) - “the right of the firstborn is his.”
Monogamy Essential to Domestic Peace (vs.
15-17)
Every indication of God’s will is a finger-post to
felicity. A wise man will not wait for
peremptory law. The faintest whisper
of Jehovah’s will is law to him. Without
doubt, that each man should be the husband of one
wife was the ordination
of God.
PRIVILEGE AND POWER. All human
government is built upon the
model of the family. Within
the compass of the family the firstborn was a
sovereign, had sovereign rule and responsibility. In families like
Jacob’s,
where there were many children and dependents, this was a
position of
eminence and power. In every case, special duties devolve upon the
firstborn. He has often to act as the representative of the family,
and to
defend family rights. He becomes the natural arbitrator in family
disputes.
His influence, for
good or for evil, is great. Therefore,
to sustain his
position and power, a double portion of the ancestral estate was
his.
time the firstborn son is sole heir to his father’s rank and
riches; hence, for
reasons external to him, it would be unjust to depose him. And injustice
always leads to strife, disorder, and mischief. Filial reverence would be
undermined. Seeds of hatred would be sown. The removal of the father’s
authority by death would be the sign for feud, litigation, and
waste. What
God has ordained let
not man disturb. Our earthly
possessions are
entrusted to us temporarily by God, and the entailment has been
determined by the Divine Proprietor. For the just management of our
secular estates and of our family concerns, we are accountable at
the great
assize. Favoritism among
children is a prolific evil.
OF WIVES. (May I
say, it matters not whether bigamy, polygamy, secret,
or public; whether through divorce, common in
secret trysts, or open adultery, THERE
IS A LOT OF MISCHIEF IN
THIS ONCE GREAT NATION BECAUSE OF
OUR SINS OF THIS
SORT FINDING US OUT – CY – 2012) God has often tolerated among
men what He has not approved. He does this, in some respect,
every day.
If he had imposed capital
punishment upon the violation of monogamy, the
effect, in many cases, would have been unchastity.
Law, in order to be
effectual, can never transcend the highest level of moral sentiment
prevalent
in the age. Otherwise
judges themselves would be culprits, and no one
could be found to administer the law. But the family intrigues, quarrels,
and miseries which spring from a plurality of wives are God’s visible
brands and scourges
on disobedience. What works best for
society, for
the human race, is (in the absence of
other instruction) THE REVEALED
WILL OF
GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Wherever there is more than one
wife there
must be divided affection, divided interests, divided
authority. THE HOUSE
IS DIVIDED
AGAINST ITSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(I once read, many years ago, of an irate husband who tried to enter a
movie theater, with a gun. He was claiming that someone was there with
his wife and he was going to kill him. The movie proprietors called the
police and tried to stall and retain him in the front as long as they could.
Meanwhile, an employee went to the auditorium and announced what
was happening. He said, to avoid embarrassment, we will turn out the
lights and the guilty party can slip out the exit. When they turned the
lights back on, half the crowd had left!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! – CY – 2012)
A REBELLIOUS, REFRACTORY SON
TO BE JUDGED
AND PUNISHED (vs. 18-21)
If a son was refractory and unmanageable by his parents,
if, given to sensual
indulgence, he would yield neither to reproof nor to chastisement (incorrigible), —
the
parents were to lay hold on him, and lead him to the elders of the town,
sitting as magistrates at its gates, and there accuse him of his
evil ways and
rebelliousness. The testimony of the parents was apparently held
sufficient to
substantiate the charge, and this being received by the elders, the culprit
was to be
put to death by stoning.
18 “If a
man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the
voice of his father, or the voice of his mother,
and that, when they have
chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and
his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out
unto the elders of his city,
and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of
his city, This our son is stubborn and
rebellious, he will not obey our voice;
he is a glutton, and a drunkard.” Gluttony and
drunkenness were regarded
by
the Hebrews as highly criminal. The word rendered by “glutton,” however
(זולַל, from זָלַל, to shake, to shake out, to squander), includes
other kinds
of
excess besides eating. It designates one who is prodigal, who wastes his
means or wastes his person by indulgence. In Proverbs 23:30, the whole phrase
(זולְלֵי בָּשָׂר) is given —
squanderers of flesh, i.e. wasters of their own body,
debauchees. In Ibid.
ch.28:7, the word is translated “riotous
men” in
the
Authorized Version. DISOBEDIENCE TO PARENTS WAS DEEMED
AN OFFENCE WHICH
STRUCK AT THE ROOTS OF THE WHOLE
SOCIAL
INSTITUTE. (One
of the signs of the end of time will be is
children will be “disobedient to parents.) II Timothy 3:2)
21 “And
all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die:
so shalt thou put
evil away from among you; and all
and fear.”
The penalty of such crimes was death; but
the power of
inflicting this was not among the Hebrews — as among some other
ancient
peoples, the Greeks and Romans, for instance — left with the
father; the
punishment could be inflicted only by the community, with the
sanction of
the
magistrate. A Hebrew parent might chastise his child with severity, but
not
so as to affect his life (Proverbs 19:18, “Chasten
thy son while there is
hope,
and let not thy soul spare for his crying.” but raise not thy soul [let
not thy passion rise so high as] to slay him”). While parental authority was
sacredly preserved, a check was by the Law imposed on hasty passion.
(“all
directly contradicting the philosophy of modern false prophets who
claim that “fear is not a
deterrent to evil!”
Bad Sons, a State Peril (vs. 18-21)
This is a very remarkable provision. It is based on the
well-known fact that there
are
some who need a strong deterrent to keep them from being a plague and peril to
a
State, and also on the all-important principle, that whoever is a pest and nuisance
in
the home, IS THE BANE OF THE COMMONWEALTH to which he belongs.
Moses had just laid down the duty of the parent to deal justly
with his sons, whatever
his
personal partialities might be. He now lays down the extent and limits of
parental
authority over the son. He does not
give the father the absolute power of life and
death in reference to the child, as some ancient codes did, but,
without
abolishing that power altogether, he places such checks upon it that
while,
on
the one hand, if a bad son became so
outrageous that his life was
putting others in peril through its poisonous influence, he would have
before him the possibility of capital punishment; yet, on the other hand, this
penalty could only be inflicted with the sanction of the elders of
the city;
the
consent of both parents was required ere he could be brought before
them; and they (the parents) were expected to be able to say that they had
exhausted every known means of reclaiming him before they brought
him
to
that tribunal. (IT IS A STRANGE SOCIETY INDEED, WHICH WOULD
BALK AT EVEN THE
AGREEMENT OF BOTH PARENTS IN THE
ABOVE SCENARIO, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, CRYING TO
LOWEST HELL [I started to say “high heaven” but that would be sacriligious],
COMPLAINING THAT
BOTH PARENTS WOULD BE REQUIRED
TO HAVE AN ABORTION?????????????????????????? – CY – 2012)
It is evident that the law is enacted with the intention
of being so deterrent
that
it may never need to be put into execution. And thus indeed it seems to
have proved. For there is no known instance in Jewish history of its having been
carried out. (Now Sharia Law of Islam is a different thing – when Googling
this I noticed that the Federal Courts [the ones who have had their fingers
all
over abortion] have struck down a law in
Law in that state – I refer you back to the title of this
section A
STATE IN
PERIL – and
I am not talking about
Forming part, as it did, of an ancient civil code for the Hebrew nation only, it is
not
in force with us now, and we are not called upon to appreciate its real
worth
as
a guard to the
stability of the Hebrew nation. But here, as elsewhere, even in
obsolete statutes, we
discover permanent principles, which it behooves teachers to
develop and enforce, if they would not “shun
to declare the whole counsel
of God” (Acts
20:27). The truth here taught is this — A bad son is a State peril.
Five lines of thought may with advantage be followed out
here, with the view of
impressing this truth upon the hearts of the people.
is made up of its own cities, towns, villages, and hamlets.
Each one of
these is made up of its homes. If
they are all good, little
legislation will be
required; if they are all bad, no legislation will avail, even if
it could be
secured. And according as the good
or bad element preponderates, will a
State be
secure and prosperous or otherwise.
(Thus the foolishness of
INSUBORDINATION TO PARENTS IS A GRAVE OFFENCE
AGAINST SOCIETY. It is treated here, not simply as a private wrong,
but as a crime. Hebrew
society rested so largely on the patriarchal basis that
the due maintenance of parental authority was a necessity of
its existence.
The theocratic principle,
according to which parents were
invested with a
peculiar sacredness as representatives of God, likewise called for the
repression of incorrigible disobedience. But, whatever the form of
social
order, a spread of the
spirit of insubordination to parents is the
invariable prelude to a universal loosening of the ties and obligations
of corporate
existence. It has been found,” says Dr. William Fleming,
in his ‘
Moral Philosophy,’ “in the history of all nations that the best security for the
public welfare is a wise and happy exercise of parental authority; and
one of the surest forerunners
of national degradation and public anarchy
and disorder is neglect
or contempt of domestic happiness or rule.”
within our present province to illustrate or even take up the
truth that it is
extremely unlikely any son will become incorrigible, unless there is some
grievous failure in duty on the part of the parents in not correcting him
betimes, and in not keeping the reins in their own hands. It is, unhappily,
too often true, like Eli — “his
sons made themselves vile, and he restrained
them not” (I Samuel 3:13). But,
however it may come about, the truth
is the same, that where a son hearkens not to the voice of his father,
and despises to obey
his mother,
there will be in any home in which
such is the case, a source of deep sorrow and indescribable misery;
UNSPEAKABLE MISCHIEF. For the sons who act so mischievously in
the house are, as a rule, those who wander far and wide in
pursuit of
forbidden pleasure, giving way to the lusts of the flesh, and to
sins of the
tongue, polluting others wherever they go. (This in days before
the bane
of THE DRUG CULTURE! – CY – 2012) Thus a moral miasma,
pestilential and even deadly, may be carried from street to street, and
from
town to town. (For any
young person going down this road I highly
recommend that you ask God to help you understand the teaching in
Proverbs 1:10-31 – CY – 2012)
OTHER HOMES, One home
will infect others. Each infected home will
spread the contagion. And
so the evil will spread far and wide, not only in
an arithmetical, but in a geometrical progression, till even
in the course of
one or two generations, it will assume a proportion which
baffle all powers
of calculation to formulate it, and a virulence which may
defy the most
powerful legislation to arrest it.
(I would like to say that I believe that
the CONSOLIDATION OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS has expedited this
spread of THE CONTAGION in the last forty
years.
– CY – 2012)
OUT OF WHICH SUCH COMPLICATED AND WIDESPREAD
MISCHIEF MAY ARISE, IS A
SOURCE OF GRAVE PERIL TO
ANY COMMONWEALTH IN
THE WORLD! It may not be seen nor
Even suspected when in germ. But germs of evil are fraught with all the evil of
which they are the germs.
Consider:
o
What seems severity to
the individual is really mercy to
the nation. Preventive measures, though severe, may
be most genuinely philanthropic.
o
the importance of wisdom and firmness in maintaining
parental authority.
o
Think of the amazing
issues projecting themselves FROM TIME
INTO ETERNITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who can
adequately
set forth the importance of taking heed to those
early steps ON
WHICH DEPEND THE DIRECTION OF THIS EARTHLY
LIFE AND THE JOY OR THE WOE OF THE LIFE
WHICH IS TO
COME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
o
Parents who
neglect these duties have little cause to wonder
at a son turning out ill; the wonder would be
if he should
turn out well. It is they, as much as the
son, who deserve
blame.
o
Compare with the
behavior of this rebellious son OUR OWN
TREATMENT OF OUR
HEAVENLY FATHER!!!!!!
A Slippery Path to Ruin (vs. 18-21)
It is of the first importance that a child should begin
life well. A twist in the young stem
will develop into a gnarled and crooked tree. A slight divergence at the
outset of a
voyage may end in a complete reversal of the ship’s course. Early obedience is the
pathway to a prosperous life; disobedience leads
to death. The tongue that curseth
its father shall be scorched with devouring flame.
human body is to be the servant of the mind. If the appetites and
lusts of
the body are allowed to rule, the mind becomes a slave,
and all
the better
principles are manacled and enfeebled. We begin life as dependent children,
and the fresh sense of loving obligation should be an antidote
for selfishness.
But if we set out in life with a resolve to please self, we are already on the
way to ruin. Reverence
for the parental character, and regard for parental
authority, are the only solid foundations for a noble life. To feed unduly the
body, and for gratification alone, is to starve the soul. Sensuality fosters
SELF-WILL.
authority soon chokes and strangles filial feeling. The tie of sonship is
snapped. The qualities and attributes of a son are wanting. There
is a
relationship of body, but no true
relationship of soul. Alienation has
sprung
up instead of vital union. The lad may dwell under the old
roof-tree, but in
reality there is a great gulf between him and his parents: he is a
descendant,
but not a son. To be
the children of God there must be resemblance of
character.
The medicine that does not do good, does harm. The flame that does not
melt, hardens. Parental chastisement, when needed, is an
imperative duty,
but should be administered with wisdom, self-restraint, and
pity. (“Like as
a father pitieth his children, so
the Lord pitieth them that fear Him.” –
(Psalm 103:13). The obstinacy of the son is not infrequently
due to the
foolish leniency or unrestrained severity of the parent. Chastisement
is a serious experiment, and always produces some effect,
either favorable
or unfavorable. We are not the same men after trial or pain
that we were
before.
valuable is human life that the State wisely claims the sole power
of capital
punishment. If the disciplines and
chastisements of home have failed to
produce a virtuous citizen, the whole community must deal with the
incorrigible reprobate. The State cannot afford, for its safety’s sake, to
allow a firebrand to be let loose in its midst. The example and influence of
such a miscreant would be fatally mischievous. The whole State
has vital
interests to serve, and it would be sheerest folly to sacrifice them
to a
drunken madman.
It must be a duty, the most
painful for human nature to perform, to
surrender a son to public execution. Yet it sometimes is a duty. The
hope
of amendment has been quenched.
To continue such a one in life has
become a bane to himself and to others. If all remedies have
failed,
destruction must ensue. All the men of the city shall put their hand
to the
deed. This may be done by personal service or by
representation. The mad
career of the culprit ends in pain, loss, and perpetual disgrace. It is
A SYMBOL OF THE GREAT JUDGMENT DOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A MALEFACTOR WHO HAS BEEN HANGED
TO BE BURIED ERE NIGHTFALL (vs. 22-23)
When a criminal was put to death and was hanged upon a
tree, his body was not to
remain there over-night, but was to be buried the same day on
which he was executed.
22 “And if
a man have committed a sin worthy of death,” - literally, If there be
on a man a judgment of death; if he lie under sentence of death - “and he be to be
put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:” This refers not to putting to death by
strangling, but to the impaling of the body after death. This was an aggravation of
the
punishment, as the body so impaled was exposed to insult and assault (compare
Numbers 25:4; Genesis 40:19).
23 “His
body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt
in any
wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged
is accursed of God;) - literally, a
curse of God. Some take
this as meaning an insult to God, a contemning of Him,
since in man His image is thus given up to scorn and insult. But
the more probable
meaning is “a curse
inflicted by God,” which the
transgressor is made to endure
(compare Galatians 3:13) - that thy land be not defiled,” - The land was
defiled,
not
only by sins committed by its inhabitants, but also by the public exposure of
criminals who had been put to death for their sins (compare
Leviticus 18:24-25;
Numbers 35:33-34).
On this law Joshua acted (Joshua 8:29; 10:26-27) “which the
LORD thy God giveth thee for an
inheritance.”
"Excerpted text Copyright AGES
Library, LLC. All
rights reserved.
Materials are reproduced by
permission."
This material can be found at:
http://www.adultbibleclass.com
If this exposition is helpful, please share
with others.