Deuteronômio 21
Bob Utley · Citado em PreceptAustin
Deuteronômio 21
Utley - “wash their hands over the heifer” This symbolizes cleansing (cf. Ps. 26:6; 73:13) from guilt by the proximity of the dead body. The elders represent the whole community as they corporately wash the guilt away from the village and area. NET NOTE on valley - Heb “wadi,” a seasonal watercourse through a valley. Deuteronomy 21:7 and they shall answer and say, 'Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it. Nu 5:19-28 2Sa 16:8 Job 21:21-23,31-34 Ps 7:3,4 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries WE ARE NOT GUILTY and they shall answer and say, 'Our hands did not shed this blood, nor did our eyes see it - They are saying they were not guilty and had no information on who was guilty of the murder. NET NOTE- nor did our eyes - Heb “our eyes.” This is a figure of speech known as synecdoche in which the part (the eyes) is put for the whole (the entire person). SEE IT - Heb “seen”; the implied object (the crime committed) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Utley - “Our hands have not shed this blood nor did our eyes see it” The rabbis relate this to help for the stranger, poor, orphan, or widow. Since the villagers did not see the stranger’s need for help they were absolved from meeting that need. This may have been a way to stop the victim’s family (i.e., blood avenger) from killing an innocent member of the nearest village in retaliation. Deuteronomy 21:8 'Forgive Your people Israel whom You have redeemed, O LORD, and do not place the guilt of innocent blood in the midst of Your people Israel.' And the bloodguiltiness shall be forgiven them. do not place Nu 35:33 2Sa 3:28 2Ki 24:4 Ps 19:12 Jer 26:15 Eze 23:3,24,25 Jon 1:14 Mt 23:35 1Th 2:15,16 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages (other translations of Dt 21:8) ESV Deuteronomy 21:8 Accept atonement, O LORD, for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed, and do not set the guilt of innocent blood in the midst of your people Israel, so that their blood guilt be atoned for.' NIV Deuteronomy 21:8 Accept this atonement for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed, O LORD, and do not hold your people guilty of the blood of an innocent man." And the bloodshed will be atoned for. YLT Deuteronomy 21:8 receive atonement for Thy people Israel, whom Thou hast ransomed, O Jehovah, and suffer not innocent blood in the midst of Thy people Israel; and the blood hath been pardoned to them, NKJ Deuteronomy 21:8 `Provide atonement, O LORD, for Your people Israel, whom You have redeemed, and do not lay innocent blood to the charge of Your people Israel.' And atonement shall be provided on their behalf for the blood. SEEKING GOD'S FORGIVENESS Forgive (Heb "Atone for") our people Israel whom You have redeemed (padah; Lxx - lutroo), O LORD, and do not place the guilt of innocent blood in the midst of Your people Israel.' - Forgive is kapar the same word used in Nu 35:33 (see above translated expiation). Notice they don't say forgive us but Your people, so all of Israel was in effect held responsible for this unsolved murder. The Lxx translates forgive (kapar) with hileos (hildos genou = be merciful) which means to favorably disposed to another with implication of overcoming obstacles that are unfavorable to a relationship - gracious, merciful. (BDAG). Note how the prayer is based on the Lord's glory - specifically they remind God that they were His people and that He had redeemed them. The implication is that based on these truths He would be willing to forgive them based on His character and what He had accomplished for them. Redeemed = padah - used 6x in Deut - Redeemed from the house of slavery (Dt 7:8), redeemed through your greatness (Dt 9:26), redeemed from the house of slavery (Dt 13:5), the LORD your God redeemed you (Dt 15:15), the LORD your God redeemed you from there (you were a slave in Egypt). (Dt 24:18). The reason they would seek forgiveness is based on Numbers 35:33+ = "So you shall not pollute the land in which you are; for blood pollutes the land and no expiation (kapar - ESV, NIV = ATONEMENT) can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it." In this case it is not known who shed the blood of the dead person. NIDOTTE According to Deut 21:8, in the ritual for an unsolved homicide the elders of the closest city were instructed to break the neck of a heifer and implore the Lord: “accept this atonement (lit., atone, pi. vb.) for your people Israel, whom you have redeemed, O LORD …” (NIV; NASB has “forgive your people Israel”). In this case it was the Lord who needed to make (or accept, NIV) the atonement for the city. Kapar (see also kapar) - The vb. occurs 102× in the OT (q. 1× in Gen 6:14; pi. 92×; pu. 7×; hitp. once in 1 Sam 3:14; nitp. 1× in Deut 21:8), the majority of them in the priestly ritual sections of Exod-Num (ca. 73×) and other ritual passages strewn throughout the rest of the OT (e.g., 1 Chron 6:49 [34]; 2 Chron 29:24; Neh 10:33 [34]; Ezek 43:20, 26; 45:15, 17, 20). The primary focus in this article is naturally atonement in the priestly ritual system, but a survey of other usages and an analysis of some of the most suggestive nonpriestly passages is also found here. The Eng. word itself is interesting. “To atone,” or in nominal form “atonement,” is a combination of “at” plus Middle English “one(ment),” meaning to be or make at one. The dictionaries tend to define it as a word for reconciliation or reparation to bring about reconciliation. On one level this is, in fact, a good definition of the basic effect that to atone, make atonement (the vb. כָּפַר) had in the relationship between God and human beings within the Israelite cultic sacrificial system (see the extensive discussion below). 2. The nom. form כֹּפֶר, bribe, ransom, occurs 13× in the HB (cf. the single instance of כֹּפֶר, pitch, tar (#4109), in Gen 6:14 along with the only occurrence of the q. vb. כָּפַר, cover, paint, smear pitch (#4106), on Noah’s ark; see kupru, pitch, bitumen, used in the Gilgamesh Epic Tablet 11 flood account for sealing the boat, CAD K 554). It means bribe money (1 Sam 12:3; Prov 6:35; Amos 5:12) or ransom money (Exod 21:30; 30:12; Num 35:31, 32; Job 33:24; 36:18; Ps 49:7 [8]; Prov 13:8; 21:18; Isa 43:3). The relationship between this term and the foundational meaning of the vb. כָּפַר, atone, will be discussed below (OT 8–18). The abstract term כִּפֻּרִים, atonement, occurs 8× (Exod 29:36; 30:10, 16; Lev 23:27, 28 [the only anarthrous use]; 25:9; Num 5:8; 29:11), and כַּפֹּרֶת, place of atonement, mercy seat, or cover (over the ark) (referring to the plate with the two gold cherubim placed on top of the ark of the testimony, Exod 25:17–22) occurs 26× (Exod 25:17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22; 26:34; 30:6; 31:7; 35:12; 37:6, 7, 8, 9; 39:35; 40:20; Lev 16:2 [2×], 13, 14 [2×], 15; Num 7:89; 1 Chron 28:11). It is clear from the contexts in which these two terms occur that they are closely related to the vb. כָּפַר, atone, and can therefore contribute to our understanding of the foundational meaning of atonement, and vice versa (NIDOTTE) Utley on forgive - This is the Hebrew VERB “cover” ( Piel IMPERATIVE). It is used twice in this verse (the second use is a Nithpael PERFECT). This term, so common in Leviticus and Numbers, is used only three times in Deuteronomy (21:8 [twice]; 32:43). Its basic meaning is “to ritually cover by means of a sacrifice.” “redeemed” This VERB (BDB 804, KB 911, Qal IMPERFECT, but JUSSIVE in meaning) is parallel to “forgive” (i.e., cover). do not place The VERB (BDB 678, KB 733, Qal IMPERFECT, but in a JUSSIVE sense) is a prayer for ritual absolution from the consequences of an unsolved murder. . Doug McIntosh explains that "Although not a sacrifice in the strictest sense, the ritual would have the effect of a sacrifice since the bloodshed would be atoned for." The strangeness of this rite should not blind our eyes to the values that lie behind it. God was concerned for even one unknown and unclaimed life in Israel. Any wrongful death produced a moral stain on the whole nation. The guilt of innocent blood was not to be dismissed but purged by prescribed ritual. (Holman Old Testament Commentary) And the bloodguiltiness shall be forgiven (kapar) them - Bloodguiltiness is the state of being guilty of bloodshed or murder. God says after performing this ritual, the people are forgiven (kapar). The Lxx translates kapar with the verb hilaskomai in the NT use in Heb 2:17+ refers to the act of our Lord offering Himself on the Cross to satisfy the righteous demands of God’s justice so that His government might be maintained, and that mercy might be shown on the basis of justice satisfied. The words “reconciliation” and “propitiation” are to be understood in this light. (See related word study on hilasterion) Bloodguiltiness - Exod. 22:2; Exod. 22:3; Lev. 17:4; Lev. 20:9; Lev. 20:11; Lev. 20:12; Lev. 20:13; Lev. 20:16; Lev. 20:27; Deut. 19:10; Deut. 21:8; Deut. 22:8; Ps. 51:14; Hos. 12:14 Philip Logan - Bloodguilt made a person ritually unclean (Num. 35:33–34) and was incurred by killing a person who did not deserve to die (Deut. 19:10; Jer. 26:15; Jon. 1:14). Killing in self-defense and execution of criminals are exempted from bloodguilt (Exod. 22:2; Lev. 20:9). Bloodguilt was incurred (1) by intentional killing (Judg. 9:24; 1 Sam. 25:26, 33; 2 Kings 9:26; Jer. 26:15); (2) by unintentional killing (See Num. 35:22–28 where one who accidentally kills another may be killed by the avenger of blood implying that the accidental murderer had bloodguilt. See Avenger.); (3) by being an indirect cause of death (Gen. 42:22; Deut. 19:10b; 22:8; Josh. 2:19); (4) a person was under bloodguilt if those for whom he was responsible committed murder (1 Kings 2:5, 31–33); and (5) the killing of a sacrifice at an unauthorized altar imputed bloodguilt (Lev. 17:4). The avenger of blood could take action in the first two instances but not in the latter three. When the murderer was known in instance (1) above, the community shared the guilt of the murderer until the guilty party had paid the penalty of death. No other penalty or sacrifice could substitute for the death of the guilty party, nor was there any need for sacrifice once the murderer had been killed (Num. 35:33; Deut. 21:8–9). The one who unintentionally killed another [(2) above] might flee to a city of refuge and be safe. If, however, the accidental killer left the boundaries of the city of refuge, the avenger of blood could kill in revenge without incurring bloodguilt (Num. 35:31–32; Deut. 19:13). The community was held to be bloodguilty if it failed to provide asylum for the accidental killer (Deut. 19:10). In cases where the blood of an innocent victim was not avenged, the blood of the innocent cried out to God (Gen. 4:10; Isa. 26:21; Ezek. 24:7–9; cp. Job 16:18), and God became the avenger for that person (Gen. 9:5; 2 Sam. 4:11; 2 Kings 9:7; Ps. 9:12; Hos. 1:4). Even the descendants of the bloodguilty person might suffer the consequences of God’s judgment (2 Sam. 3:28–29; 21:1; 1 Kings 21:29). Manasseh’s bloodguilt and Judah’s failure to do anything about it was the cause of Judah’s downfall over 50 years after Manasseh’s reign (2 Kings 24:4). Judas incurred bloodguilt by betraying Jesus (“innocent blood,” Matt. 27:4). Those who called for the crucifixion accepted the burden of bloodguilt for themselves and their children (Matt. 27:25). Pilate accepted no responsibility for the shedding of innocent blood (Matt. 27:24). (Holman Bible Dictionary) HCSB - Innocent blood defiled the land so that the land figuratively became hostile toward the guilty person and resisted his attempts to make use of it. When Cain killed Abel, Abel's blood cried out to the Lord from the ground. It would thereafter withhold its yield from Cain (Gen 4:10-12). The soil of Israel would likewise become polluted by the blood of innocent victims (Num 35:33-34; Dt 19:13).
Deuteronômio 21
Utley- The ritual (cf. vv. 1–8) was seen as “purging” (Piel IMPERFECT) the effects of corporate sin (i.e., unsolved murders) from the whole community (similar to the rituals of “the Day of Atonement” in Leviticus 16). Sin, even unintentional corporate sin, affects the blessing of YHWH and even brings collective wrath (i.e., curses, cf. Deuteronomy 27–29). Deuteronomy 21:10 "When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive, Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Outline Firstborn Inheritance Rights Dt 21:15-17 Miscellaneous Dt 21:22-22:12 "PEOPLE PLUNDER" FROM BATTLE Utley - Dt 21:10–14 These verses address how to appropriately deal with women (i.e., not Canaanites, but others, cf. Dt 20:10–15) captured in war, even they had rights in YHWH’s land. This care for the poor and powerless is unique in the ancient world’s law codes. When you go out to battle against your enemies, and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take them away captive - Into your hands signify into your power and authority and control. In context he is speaking about war outside the promised land because Canaanite woman were to be killed. Obviously this section deals with non-Israelite women who were not Canaanites. Deuteronomy 21:11 and see among the captives a beautiful woman, and have a desire for her and would take her as a wife for yourself, desire: Ge 6:2 12:14,15 29:18-20 34:3,8 Jdg 14:2,3 Pr 6:25 31:10,30 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries SEE, DESIRE TAKE and see among the captives a beautiful (literally "beautiful form) woman, and have a desire for her and would take her as a wife for yourself - Watch the flesh work - SEE...BEAUTIFUL > DESIRE > TAKE. In this context God does not condemn it because the women were not under the ban (devoted to Yahweh). Joshua 7:21 has a similar progression - SEE BEAUTIFUL > COVETED > TOOK > CONCEALED. We see this same sequence in Genesis 3:6 "When the woman SAW that the tree was good for food, and that it was a DELIGHT to the eyes, and that the tree was DESIRABLE to make one wise, she TOOK from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate." LESSON - LOOK OUT WHAT YOU LOOK AT!!! Desire (ḥāšaq/chashaq:) in Lxx is translated with enthumeomai which means to reflect on, which speaks of an inner reflection, a processing of information by thinking about it carefully, in this case the "information" his eyes see in the beautiful (form of) woman! Note that even here God is protecting the women because the Israelite male could not simply grab her and use her for sexual favors as his fallen flesh likely would have desire (just being honest!) He has to "man up" and marry her! Deere adds that "Israelites were not to rape, plunder, or otherwise mistreat captives as other armies of the ancient Near East did." (Bible Knowledge Commentary) The verb take does not indicate a sexual union in this context, but simply a taking the woman into his house, because the actual "consummation" of their marriage is described later. Coakley gives some background - Moses legislated a number of family related laws, the first dealing with regulations regarding captive women. Earlier the law stated (Dt 20:14) that women and children from captured cities were to be spared. The possibility arose, as described here, that one of the soldiers might find one of the captive woman attractive enough for marriage. Caution was in order here because intermarriage was expressly forbidden with women from the Canaanite nations (7:3) and should not have been even possible if all the inhabitants, including the women, were put to death as the Lord had instructed. The background for this situation (although not explicitly stated) is that some of the captive women might wish to associate themselves with the God of Israel (like Rahab), and now the possibility of an Israelite marrying one of these women was an option. (Moody Bible Commentary) Beautiful (03303) יָפֶה yapheh: Delighting the sense or exciting intellectual or emotional admiration. An adjective meaning lovely, beautiful. It is used in many settings to describe the beauty of various things and persons: of women (Gen. 12:11, 14; 2 Sa 13:1; Esth. 2:7) Swanson - 1. beautiful, fair, lovely, handsome, i.e., pertaining to an appearance that is considered attractive in relation to its person, class or kind (1Sa 17:42; 1Sa 25:3); 2. proper, i.e., pertaining to what corresponds to an expectation (Ecc 5:17) (Dictionary of Semantic Domains - Hebrew) Used 38v - Gen. 12:11; Gen. 12:14; Gen. 29:17; Gen. 39:6; Gen. 41:2; Gen. 41:4; Gen. 41:18; Deut. 21:11; 1 Sam. 16:12; 1 Sam. 17:42; 1 Sam. 25:3; 2 Sam. 13:1; 2 Sam. 14:25; 2 Sam. 14:27; 1 Ki. 1:3; 1 Ki. 1:4; Est. 2:7; Job 42:15; Ps. 48:2; Prov. 11:22; Eccl. 3:11; Eccl. 5:18; Cant. 1:8; Cant. 1:15; Cant. 1:16; Cant. 2:10; Cant. 2:13; Cant. 4:1; Cant. 4:7; Cant. 5:9; Cant. 6:1; Cant. 6:4; Cant. 6:10; Jer. 11:16; Ezek. 31:3; Ezek. 31:9; Ezek. 33:32; Amos 8:13 Form (08389. תֹּאַר toar: A masculine noun meaning form, appearance, beauty. It refers to the contours and outward form of something, e.g., the body of a woman or a man (Gen. 29:17; 39:6; Deut. 21:11; 1 Sam. 16:18); of an animal’s body, it means healthy, strong-looking (Gen. 41:18, 19). It is used in a stereotypical way, the form of the son of a king, a royal-looking person, a person with dignity (Judg. 8:18). It also refers to the shape of trees, plants, etc. (Jer. 11:16). Especially noteworthy is the use of toʾar twice in the fourth Suffering Servant Song (Isa 52:13–53:12). The Servant’s form was horribly marred and disfigured (52:14), repulsive to look at (53:2). As H. C. Leupold (Exposition of Isaiah, II, p. 224) puts it: “Little wonder that many of the fathers of the church of days of old claim that the account reads as though Isaiah had sat at the foot of the cross” (see Mk 14:65; 15:15–20). Swanson - tōʾar: 1. appearance, form, shape, what one looks like, i.e., that which distinguishes the way an object looks, usually implying a positive, attractive appearance (Jdg 8:18; 1Sa 16:18; 28:14; Isa 52:14; 53:2; La 4:8+); 2.unit: יָפֶה תֹּאַר (yā·p̄ě(h) tō·ʾǎr) beautiful, handsome, formally, fair of form, i.e., of a desirable appearance relative to the kind or class of the object (Ge 29:17; 39:6; 41:18; Dt 21:11; 1Sa 25:3; Est 2:7; Jer 11:16+); 3. unit: רַע תֹּאַר (rǎʿ tō·ʾǎr) ugly, unattractive, formally, bad of form, i.e., of an undesirable appearance relative to the kind or class of the object (Ge 41:19+); 4.unit: טוֹב תֹּאַר (ṭôḇ tō·ʾǎr) beautiful, handsome, formally, good of form, i.e., of a desirable appearance relative to the kind or class of the object (1Ki 1:6+)(Dictionary of Semantic Domains - Hebrew) Toar - 15v - Gen. 29:17; Gen. 39:6; Gen. 41:18; Gen. 41:19; Deut. 21:11; Jdg. 8:18; 1 Sam. 16:18; 1 Sam. 25:3; 1 Sam. 28:14; 1 Ki. 1:6; Est. 2:7; Isa. 52:14; Isa. 53:2; Jer. 11:16; Lam. 4:8 Have desire - 02836. חָשַׁק ḥāšaq/chashaq: A verb meaning to be attached to, to love, to delight in, to bind. The root idea of this verb is “to be devoted” to a person or thing. In the OT, it is always used figuratively for emotional attachment, for love which is already bound to its object. Laws in Deuteronomy described the procedure for taking a slave woman to whom one has become attached as a wife (Deut. 21:11). Chāshaq could simply refer to physical attraction, as in the case of (NON-JEW) Shechem’s soul longing after Dinah, who was an Israelite (Gen. 34:8). God’s binding love for Israel is described as unmerited love (Deut. 7:7). Hezekiah describes the figurative way in which God’s love for his soul delivered him by casting all his sins behind His back (Isa. 38:17). The verb comes to mean “to kiss” in Middle Hebrew, while an Arabic cognate means “to love passionately.” Swanson - desire, love, set one’s affection, formally, be attached to, i.e., have a strong feeling for an object, as a figurative extension of the joining or fastening of two objects together (Dictionary of Semantic Domains - Hebrew) TWOT - ḥāšaq emphasizes that which attaches to something or someone; in the case of emotions (to which the biblical usage is limited) it is that love which is already bound to its object. It should be distinguished from ʾāhab “love,” ʾāwâ “desire, wish,” ḥāmad “desire, take pleasure in.” Also, contrast ḥāšaq, II “to join, furnish with fillets or rings.” Our root occurs twelve times. This root may denote the strong desire of a man toward a beautiful woman (Gen 34:8) who could, however, be put away if she did not live up to expectations (Deut 21:11–14). A deep inward attachment (in a positive sense) is descriptive of God’s love of Israel (Deut 10:15). He was bound to them of his own volition (love) and not because of anything good or desirable in them (Deut 7:7). It is to God’s attachment (love) that Hezekiah attributes his deliverance (Isa 38:17). This is the love that will not let go. If a man has such an attachment toward God he will be delivered (Ps 91:14). ḥāšaq/chashaq - 8v - have a desire(1), kept(1), longs(1), loved(1), pleased*(2), set his affection(1), set his love(1). Gen. 34:8; Deut. 7:7; Deut. 10:15; Deut. 21:11; 1 Ki. 9:19; 2 Chr. 8:6; Ps. 91:14; Isa. 38:17 Take (Lxx in Dt 21:11 = lambano - take in an active sense as to grasp or seize) - 3947. לָקַח lāqaḥ: A verb meaning to take, to get. Its exact meaning must be discerned from its context. It is used of grasping or seizing a person or an animal (Gen. 12:5; Ex. 17:5; Ezek. 8:3; Hos. 14:2[3]). The ark was captured (1 Sam. 4:11; 17, 19). It has the sense of keeping what one has (Gen. 14:21). It may mean in context to receive or acquire, to buy (2 Kgs. 5:20; Prov. 31:16). It is used of a bird carrying or loading its young onto its wings (Deut. 32:11). It is used figuratively of obeying, “taking on” commands, instructions (Pr 10:8). It is used of taking a wife (Gen. 25:1). With nāqām as its object, it means to take vengeance (Isa. 47:3). One’s ear can “receive,” hearken to God’s Word (Jer. 9:20[19]). It is used of one’s heart sweeping away, carrying away oneself (Job 15:12). In its passive usage, it means to be brought in (Gen. 12:15; Esth. 2:8, 16). It takes on the nuance of flashing, bolting here and there like fire or lightning (Ex. 9:24; Ezek. 1:4). Deuteronomy 21:12 then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails. and she shall: 1Co 11:6 Eph 4:22 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PREPARATION FOR MARRIAGE: HAIR AND NAILS "UNDONE!" then you shall bring her home to your house, and she shall shave her head and trim her nails - The purpose of these acts is not clear Coakley - The most likely reason is that these acts demonstrate that she needed to remove anything pertaining to her former life and embrace life within the Israelite community. This would also remind her husband that he is no longer to treat her as an alien but as a wife. (Moody Bible Commentary) NET NOTE - This requirement for the woman to shave her head may symbolize the putting away of the old life and customs in preparation for being numbered among the people of the LORD. The same is true for the two following requirements. Utley has an interesting comment (not sure I agree with every point) - “she shall shave her head and trim her nails” This was a (1) concluding (cf. Num. 6:9, 18–19); (2) cleansing (cf. Lev. 13:33; 14:8–9); or (3) mourning (cf. 14:1; Lev. 21:5; Jer. 41:5; Ezek. 44:20) ritual. Here it symbolized a new day, a new life, a new family. It is interesting that her conversion to YHWH is assumed, but not stated. The husband’s faith was the family’s faith!
Deuteronômio 21
Utley- This paragraph recognizes the cultural practice of polygamy. The first example in the OT is Lamech (Gen. 4:23). The most famous early polygamist was Jacob in Genesis 29. Polygamy was practiced among wealthy or powerful people, not usually the common people (although vv. 10–14 could refer to bigamy). “unloved” is literally “hated” (vv. 15 [twice], 16, 17). But it is functioning here as a Hebrew idiom of comparison—loved versus unloved (cf. Gen. 29:30–31; Mal. 1:2–3; Rom. 9:13 [quotes Mal. 1:2–3]; Luke 14:26). Believer's Study Study - The passage does not necessarily speak of polygamy. The two wives could have been successive rather than concurrent. There is certainly no permission given here for polygamy. The law is concerned with fairness toward one's children. (Criswell, W A. Believer's Study Bible) NET NOTE - Heb “one whom he loves and one whom he hates.” For the idea of שָׂנֵא (sane’, “hate”) meaning to be rejected or loved less (cf. NRSV “disliked”), see Gen 29:31, 33; Mal 1:2–3. Cf. A. Konkel, NIDOTTE 3:1256–60. Related Resource: Why did God allow polygamy / bigamy in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org Hard Sayings of the Bible - Ge 29:25–28 Is Polygamy Approved by God? Is this episode a case of polygamy? Or did the special circumstances excuse Jacob, Laban or both? If it is polygamy, what is the case for or against polygamy? Polygamy was never lawful for any of the persons in the Bible. There never existed an express biblical permission for such a deviation from the ordinance of God made at the institution of marriage in the Garden of Eden (Gen 2:21–24). There are at least four passages that conceivably could be construed as giving temporary permission from God to override the general law of marriage found in Genesis 2:24. They are Exodus 21:7–11, Leviticus 18:18, Deuteronomy 21:15–17 and 2 Samuel 12:7–8. But each one falls far short of proving that anything like divine permission was being granted in these passages. Scripture does not always pause to state the obvious. In many cases there is no need for the reader to imagine what God thinks of such states of affairs, for the misfortune and strife that come into the domestic lives of these polygamists cannot be read as a sign of divine approval. It is true that Jacob was deceived by Laban on Jacob’s wedding night, but that did not justify Jacob in agreeing to Laban’s crafty plan to get him to stay around for another seven years to ensure continued prosperity. Two wrongs in this case did not make a right. Deuteronomy 21:16 then it shall be in the day he wills what he has to his sons, he cannot make the son of the loved the firstborn before the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn. 1Ch 5:2 26:10 2Ch 11:19-22 21:3 Ro 8:29 Php 4:8 Heb 12:16,17 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries FIRSTBORN TO BE FIRST SHOW NO PARTIALITY Then - Marks progression in the narrative. It shall be in the day he wills what he has to his sons, he cannot make the son of the loved the firstborn before the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn - The firstborn could not be switched because of greater affection for the second wife. Doug McIntosh - Firstborn Israelites were warned not to tamper with reality when it came to writing their wills: "It shall be, on the day he bequeaths his possessions to his sons, that he must not bestow firstborn status on the son of the loved wife in preference to the son of the unloved, the true firstborn" (Deut. 21:16 NKJV). Firstborn, as this verse makes clear, is a term that refers to legal status as well as chronological precedence. The firstborn of the family received a double portion of his father's estate and was regarded as senior among surviving sons.Cults often teach that applying the term firstborn to Jesus proves that he was a created being and thus is not God. Nothing could be more misguided. Jesus' firstborn status relates him to us, not to creation: "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers" (Rom. 8:29). As the senior member of God's human family, Jesus is deserving not simply of respect, but of worship: "When He again brings the firstborn into the world, [God] says: 'Let all the angels of God worship Him'" (Heb. 1:6 NKJV). (Holman Old Testament Commentary) Deuteronomy 21:17 "But he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength; to him belongs the right of the firstborn. by giving: Ge 25:5,6,32,34 1Ch 5:1,2 the beginning: Ge 49:3 Ps 105:36 the right: Ge 25:31-34 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries DOUBLE PORTION TO FIRSTBORN But he shall acknowledge the firstborn (see note; Lxx = prototokos), the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the beginning of his strength (aka "his procreative power"); to him belongs the right of the firstborn - NET - "Rather, he must acknowledge the son of the less loved wife as firstborn and give him the double portion of all he has, for that son is the beginning of his father's procreative power– to him should go the right of the firstborn."
Deuteronômio 21
Utley - elders and judges” There are local appointed leaders who sat in the gates of the city and tried the cases of the community. Only if they had a problem did they take the cases to a higher authority (i.e., Levitical priests, cf. v. 5). They measured the distance from the found body to the cities around. The nearest town had to perform certain rituals (cf. vv. 3–8). This demonstrates their sense of guilt by proximity. The closest city was responsible for the blood-guiltiness, which could affect YHWH’s blessings on the whole region (cf. Dt 19:13 = “You shall not pity him, but you shall purge the blood of the innocent from Israel, that it may go well with you."). Deuteronomy 21:3 "It shall be that the city which is nearest to the slain man, that is, the elders of that city, shall take a heifer of the herd, which has not been worked and which has not pulled in a yoke; Nu 19:2 Jer 31:18 Mt 11:28-30 Php 2:8 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passage: Numbers 19:2+ “This is the statute of the law which the LORD has commanded, saying, ‘Speak to the sons of Israel that they bring you an unblemished red heifer in which is no defect and on which a yoke has never been placed. NEAREST CITY "RESPONSIBLE" FOR THE MURDER It shall be that the city which is nearest to the slain man, that is, the elders of that city, shall take a heifer of the herd, which has not been worked and which has not pulled in a yoke - The death of the heifer may amount to either a substitute execution or a curse on the murderer. As described below "a red heifer was needed to help accomplish the purification from sin." What is the significance of a red heifer in the Bible? Is a red heifer a sign of the end times? To meet the requirements of the Old Testament law, a red heifer was needed to help accomplish the purification from sin—specifically, the ashes of a red heifer were needed. The red heifer was a reddish-brown cow, probably at least two years old. It was to be “without defect or blemish” and to have never borne a yoke. The sacrifice of the red heifer was unique in the law in that it used a female animal, it was sacrificed away from the entrance to the tabernacle, and it was the only sacrifice in which the color of the animal was specified. The slaughtering of a red heifer is described in Numbers 19:1–10. Eleazar the priest was to oversee the ritual outside the camp of the Israelites. After the animal was killed, Eleazar was to sprinkle some of its blood toward the front of the tabernacle seven times (verse 4). Then he left camp again and oversaw the burning of the carcass of the red heifer (verse 5). As the red heifer burned, the priest was commanded to add “some cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet wool” to the fire (verse 6). The ashes of the red heifer were collected and stored “in a ceremonially clean place outside the camp.” The ashes were used “in the water of cleansing; it is for purification from sin” (Numbers 19:9). The law goes on to detail when and how the ashes of the red heifer were used in purifying those who came into contact with a dead body: “Whoever touches a human corpse will be unclean for seven days. They must purify themselves with the water on the third day and on the seventh day; then they will be clean” (verses 11–12). The purification process involved the ashes of the red heifer in this way: “Put some ashes from the burned purification offering into a jar and pour fresh water over them. Then a man who is ceremonially clean is to take some hyssop, dip it in the water and sprinkle . . . anyone who has touched a human bone or a grave or anyone who has been killed or anyone who has died a natural death” (verses 17–18). The imagery of the red heifer is yet another foreshadowing of the sacrifice of Christ for believers’ sin. The Lord Jesus was “without blemish,” just as the red heifer was to be. As the heifer was sacrificed “outside the camp” (Numbers 19:3), Jesus was crucified outside of Jerusalem (Hebrews 13:11–12). And just as the ashes of the red heifer cleansed people from the contamination of death, so the sacrifice of Christ saves us from the penalty and corruption of death. The red heifer ritual was established in the Mosaic Law; in the interval since that time, Judaism has added many standards to what was originally a straightforward, rather simple set of instructions. Talmudic tradition speaks of the type of rope the red heifer was to be bound with, the direction it was to face when being slaughtered, the words spoken by the priest, the wearing of sandals during the ritual, etc. The rabbinical rules listed many things that would disqualify a red heifer from being sacrificed: if she had been ridden or leaned on, if she had a garment placed over her, if a bird had rested on her, and if she had two black or white hairs, among many other conditions. According to rabbinical tradition, there have been nine red heifers sacrificed since Moses’ time. Since the destruction of the second temple, no red heifers have been slaughtered. The rabbi Maimonides (1135—1204) taught that the tenth red heifer would be sacrificed by the Messiah Himself. Those who anticipate the construction of a third temple are eager to find a red heifer that meets all the conditions, because the red heifer ashes will be necessary to purify the new temple. Many consider that the appearance of a red heifer will herald the construction of the temple and the return of Christ. According to the Temple Institute, a group advocating the construction of a third temple, a flawless red heifer was born in August 2018 in Israel. According to the futurist timeline of eschatology, there will indeed be a third temple of God in Jerusalem. Jesus prophesied a desecration of the temple during the tribulation (Matthew 24:15; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:4); for that to occur, there obviously will have to be a temple in Jerusalem to desecrate. Assuming that those who dedicate the end-times temple follow Jewish law, they will need the ashes of a red heifer, mixed with water, for the ceremonial cleansing. If a blemish-free red heifer has truly been born, it could be seen as one more piece falling into place leading up to the fulfillment of biblical prophecy. GotQuestions.org Deuteronomy 21:4 and the elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to a valley with running water, which has not been plowed or sown, and shall break the heifer's neck there in the valley. shall break the heifer's neck 1Pe 2:21-24 3:18 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries SUBSTITUTE IS KILLED ATONEMENT ACCOMPLISHED and the elders of that city shall bring the heifer down to a valley with running water, which has not been plowed or sown, and shall break the heifer's neck there in the valley - Apparently the valley did not have to be adjacent to the crime scene because running water was necessary for the following ritual. Breaking the heifer’s neck symbolized that the crime deserved capital punishment. Breaking the heifer's neck would certainly be a reminder that murder deserved punishment and that punishment was death. As discussed below it seems that the heifer's life served in effect as an atonement for the sin of murder.
Deuteronômio 21
Utley- The valley, too, had to be unpolluted by human activity or in a natural state. The water symbolized carrying the guilt away (similar to the goat of Leviticus 16). “shall break the heifer’s neck” Later rabbis said “chopped head off with an ax” because breaking the neck was a difficult task (cf. Exod. 13:13; 34:20). However, blood does not seem to be involved in the ritual, but the concept of substitution. The innocent heifer ceremonially takes the place of the unknown murderer. The purpose was to rid the land of innocent bloodguiltiness (cf. Nu 35:33–34). Coates - This was not a sacrificial act because the blood was not to be poured out on the ground or manipulated in any way. Breaking the neck of the heifer symbolized that a capital crime had occurred and the guilty one, even though unknown at that time, was worthy of death. The priests, the Lord’s representatives in this matter, were to be summoned to the valley where they would wash their hands (with the running water nearby as a symbol of purity; v. 4) over the dead heifer TSK - As the word {nachal} signifies both a torrent, and the valley or glen through which it flows, {nachal aithan} may be rendered a rapid torrent. Many torrents in Judea are dry during a great part of the year; when not only their banks but their beds may be ploughed, and yield a crop. Hence there is no impropriety in specifying that such a place should be one that "is neither cared nor sown;" while the circumstance that the elders were to wash their hands over the heifer, whose head had been struck off into the stream, confirms this interpretation. The spot of ground where this sacrifice was made must be uncultivated, because it was considered as a sacrifice for the atonement of murder, and, consequently, would pollute the land. Deuteronomy 21:5 "Then the priests, the sons of Levi, shall come near, for the LORD your God has chosen them to serve Him and to bless in the name of the LORD; and every dispute and every assault shall be settled by them. them: De 10:8 Dt 18:5 Nu 6:22-27 1Ch 23:13 by their word: De 17:8-12 Mal 2:7 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Then - Marks progression of this narrative. The priests, the sons of Levi, shall come near, for the LORD your God has chosen them to serve Him and to bless in the name of the LORD - The final judicial authority rested with the priests. Utley - “to bless in the name of the LORD” Blessing was one of the functions of priests/Levites (cf. 10:8; 1 Chr. 23:13). One example of a priestly blessing is recorded in Num. 6:22–26. This blessing is related to Israel’s covenant keeping (cf. Num. 6:27; Deut. 28:3–6). YHWH’s personal presence (i.e., name) was honored or rejected by each Israelite’s obedience or willful disobedience to YHWH’s revelation (i.e., covenant). Israel’s blessing, both individual (cf. Ex. 19:5–6) and corporate, was determined not by arbitrary or capricious choice, but by personal faith in YHWH, demonstrated by covenant obedience (lifestyle). YHWH wanted to bless (cf. Exod. 20:24; 2 Chr. 30:27). and every dispute and every assault shall be settled by them - The priests were a go between and would in effect settle the matter in accord with God's will. Utley- “every dispute and every assault shall be settled by them” The VERB is the common one, “to be” (BDB 224, KB 243, Qal IMPERFECT). The translation “be settled” comes from the previous NOUN phrase, “by their word” There are two types of legal problems mentioned: (1) “dispute” (i.e., lawsuit)—BDB 936, cf. 1:12; 19:17; 21:5; 25:1; Exod. 23:2, 3, 6 (2) “assault”—BDB 619, cf. 17:8. Here it refers to physical attack, but the term can mean disease, cf. 24:8 (many times in Leviticus). Moses has described this earlier... Deuteronomy 17:8-12 “If any case is too difficult for you to decide, between one kind of homicide or another, between one kind of lawsuit or another, and between one kind of assault or another, being cases of dispute in your courts, then you shall arise and go up to the place which the LORD your God chooses. 9 “So you shall come to the Levitical priest or the judge who is in office in those days, and you shall inquire of them and they will declare to you the verdict in the case. 10 “You shall do according to the terms of the verdict which they declare to you from that place which the LORD chooses; and you shall be careful to observe according to all that they teach you. 11 “According to the terms of the law which they teach you, and according to the verdict which they tell you, you shall do; you shall not turn aside from the word which they declare to you, to the right or the left. 12 “The man who acts presumptuously by not listening to the priest who stands there to serve the LORD your God, nor to the judge, that man shall die; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel. Deuteronomy 21:6 "All the elders of that city which is nearest to the slain man shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley; wash their hands: Job 9:30 Ps 19:12 26:6 51:2,7,14 73:13 Jer 2:22 Mt 27:24,25 Heb 9:10 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries WASHING HANDS OF ANY GUILT All the elders of that city which is nearest to the slain man shall wash their hands over the heifer whose neck was broken in the valley - To wash their hands was to symbolize they were being washed from guilt. (Pilate did this in Matt. 27:24-25, but he was still guilty!)
Deuteronômio 21
Utley - double portion” The Hebrew idiom (BDB 804, “mouth” and BDB 1040, “double”) is also used of Elisha’s desire related to Elijah in 2 Kgs. 2:9. This is the only place in the OT that this double portion is specifically mentioned. If there were two sons, the older would receive two-thirds and the younger one-third; if three sons, then 50%, 25%, 25%, etc. It is interesting that the historicity of these laws is demonstrated by the archaeological finds of other ancient law codes: 1. Jacob in Genesis 49 gives all his twelve sons equal inheritance. This is reflected in the Code of Hammurabi 2. Here the mention of a double share for the firstborn is paralleled in the Nuzi and Mari tablets. 3. The differences recorded in Scripture reflect the differences in their contemporary culture (see The Old Testament Documents by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., p. 86). This is an interesting passage for clearly Ishmael was born before Isaac but by a different wife (Hagar). Also Jacob was actually not the firstborn but with some conniving was treated as if he were the firstborn over Esau. McIntosh comments "This legislation (IN DEUT 21) does not deny the special circumstances surrounding the experience of Jacob and Esau (What was the story of Jacob and Esau?) or Isaac and Ishmael where God specifically set aside the normal prerogatives of the firstborn. Apart from some such intervention, however, the rights of the firstborn were not to be transferred." (Holman Old Testament Commentary) Firstborn (Lxx in Dt 21:17 = prototokos)(01060) bekor means an offspring who came first in the order of birth (animals Ge 4:4) or persons (Ge 25:13). Swanson adds that bekor means "firstborn, usually, the first male offspring, the oldest son, with the associative meaning of prominence in the clan and privileges pertaining to clan and inheritance (Ge 43:33; Ne 10:37)." The firstborn of clean animals were sacrificed to the Lord (Dt. 12:6, 17), but the firstborn males of unclean animals could be redeemed (Nu 18:15) Currid - Yahweh calls Israel his ‘first-born son’. He uses the language of a family relationship. The status of the first-born in antiquity was one of great privilege. In the laws of Israel, the first-born had the right of headship of the family after the father died, and the right of receiving a double portion of inheritance (Deut. 21:17). It was a position of prominence and pre-eminence. The Septuagint (Lxx) translates bekor with Greek word prototokos (from protos = first, foremost, in place order or time; rank dignity + titko = beget, to bear, bring forth) can mean first-born chronologically (Lk 2:7), but refers primarily to position, rank, priority of position and emphasizes quality or kind, not time with the idea of "preeminence". So in Colossians 1:15+ Paul writes that Christ "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." In this passage the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus' rank as over and above creation. In both Greek and Jewish culture, the first-born was the son who had the right of inheritance. He was not necessarily the first one born chronologically. Vine writes bekor "represents the "firstborn" individual in a family (Gen. 25:13); the word can also represent the "firstborn" of a nation, collectively (Num. 3:46). The plural form of the word appears occasionally (Neh. 10:36); in this passage, the word is applied to animals. In other passages, the singular form of bekôr signifies a single "firstborn" animal (Lev. 27:26; kjv, "firstling") or collectively the "firstborn" of a herd (Exod. 11:5). The "oldest" or "firstborn" son (Exod. 6:14) had special privileges within the family. He received the special family blessing, which meant spiritual and social leadership and a double portion of the father's possessions, or twice what all the other sons received (Deut. 21:17). He could lose his blessing through misdeeds (Gen. 35:22) or by selling it (Gen. 25:29-34). God claimed all Israel and all their possessions as His own. As a token of this claim, Israel was to give Him all its "firstborn" (Exod. 13:1-16). The animals were to be sacrificed, redeemed, or killed, while the male children were redeemed either by being replaced with Levites or by the payment of a redemption price (Num. 3:40ff.). Israel was God's "firstborn"; in an idiom meaning a deadly disease (Job 18:13); the "first-born of the poor" is the poorest class of people (Isa. 14:30). Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words. online) Right (04941) mishpat/mispat from shaphat = to judge, govern) is a masculine noun used over 400x in the OT and has general meanings including a judgment, a legal decision, a legal case, a claim, proper, rectitude. Vine writes that mishpat/mispat "has two main senses; the first deals with the act of sitting as a judge, hearing a case, and rendering a proper verdict. Eccl. 12:14 is one such occurrence. Mishpat can also refer to the “rights” belonging to someone (Ex 23:6). This second sense carries several nuances: the sphere in which things are in proper relationship to one’s claims (Ge 18:19—first occurrence); a judicial verdict (Dt. 17:9); the statement of the case for the accused (Nu 27:5); and an established ordinance (Exod. 21:1). (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words) Why is the birthright so emphasized in the Bible? The birthright is emphasized in the Bible because it honored the rights or privileges of the family’s firstborn son. After the father died, or in the father’s absence, the firstborn son assumed the father’s authority and responsibilities. However, the Bible also shows that the father could rescind the birthright and pass it on to a younger son. A good example of this is the case of Jacob and his twelve sons. Reuben was the eldest, but the birthright was given to Joseph’s sons. Even then, Jacob blessed the younger son, Ephraim, above the elder, Manasseh (Genesis 37:19-22; Genesis 49:1-4; Genesis 49:22-26). In addition to assuming the leadership role in the family, the recipient of the birthright inherited twice that received by the other sons. In cases where a husband might have more than one wife, the birthright always went to the firstborn son of the father and could not be awarded to the son of a favorite wife without proper justification (Deuteronomy 21:15-17) or if the firstborn son’s mother was a concubine or a slave (Genesis 21:9-13; Judges 11:1-2). The birthright of a king’s firstborn son included his succession to the throne (2 Chronicles 21:1-3). King Rehoboam of Judah violated this tradition by passing the birthright to Abijah, his favorite son. However, to avoid trouble with the older sons, the king paid them off (2 Chronicles 11:18-23). As New Testament Christians, we have an inherited “birthright” status through Jesus Christ as the firstborn Son of God (Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15; Revelation 1:5). As God’s only begotten Son, Jesus received the kingdom from His Father and is Lord of all (Acts 2:36; Philippians 2:9-11; Revelation 19:16). Christ promises to share with us His kingdom and inheritance (Romans 4:13; Galatians 3:29; Ephesians 1:18; Hebrews 11:16). Christians are warned not to imitate Esau who, on impulse, gave away his birthright for a bowl of stew (Hebrews 12:16-17; Genesis 25:19-34). Because of his foolishness, Esau lost his birthright and the blessings of his father (Genesis 27). The lesson for us is to respect what is holy. We should never throw away what is important, godly, or honorable for the sake of temporary pleasure. Our focus is to remain on Jesus, the appointed heir of all things (Hebrews 1:2; Psalm 2:7-8; Matthew 28:18). And we, through His grace and our faith in Him, are counted as joint heirs (Romans 8:17; Galatians 3:29; Titus 3:7). GotQuestions.org Why is the firstborn so important in the Bible? In biblical times, the firstborn was given certain unique rights, responsibilities, and privileges. A married couple’s firstborn male child was given priority and preeminence in the family, and the best of the inheritance. The nation of Israel is identified as God’s “firstborn” in the Bible (Exodus 4:22; Jeremiah 31:9); in other words, Israel held a special place of privilege and blessing among the nations. People in ancient cultures attached great value to the eldest son, assigning him distinct benefits and obligations. The firstborn male was important because he was believed to represent the prime of human strength and vitality (Genesis 49:3; Psalm 78:51) as the “opener of the womb” (Exodus 13:2, 12, 15; Numbers 18:15; Luke 2:23). As a result, the firstborn son became the primary heir of the family. The firstborn’s birthright involved a double portion of the household estate and the leadership of the family if his father became incapacitated or was absent for some reason (Deuteronomy 21:17). After his father’s death, the eldest son usually cared for his mother until her death and provided for his unmarried sisters. In the Old Testament, firstborn humans—and animals—were considered sacred to God (Genesis 4:4; Exodus 13:1–2; Leviticus 27:26; Numbers 3:11–13; Deuteronomy 15:19–23). After God rescued Israel from slavery in Egypt, He commanded the people to consecrate every firstborn male human and firstborn animal to Him (Exodus 22:29–30). The dedication was in memory of God’s great deliverance and a sign to their children that God had brought them out of Egypt (Exodus 13:11–16). At the beginning of Israel’s years in the wilderness, God took all the males in the tribe of Levi into service in place of the firstborn males from the other tribes, entrusting the Levites with the work of His tabernacle (Numbers 3). The number of Levite males did not equal the full number of firstborns among the other tribes, so, to make up the difference, some of the firstborn from other tribes were redeemed with a financial offering to the priests (Numbers 13:46–48). After the Israelites settled in Canaan, the firstborn sons of all Israelites were to be redeemed as a sign they they belonged to God (Exodus 34:19; Numbers 18:14–16). Among the clean animals, the firstborn male was to be sacrificed to God eight days after birth (Exodus 13:11–16; 22:39–30). The firstborn males of unclean animals were either redeemed through a financial payment to the temple, replaced on the altar of sacrifice by a clean animal, or killed (Exodus 34:20; Numbers 18:14–16). These symbolic acts represented the Passover. In the final plague against Egypt, God “passed over” the firstborn males of Israel, who were in their homes with the blood of a lamb as a sign on their doors as God had commanded. The firstborn Egyptian males, including the livestock, were struck down (Exodus 11—12:30). The firstborn could sell his rights, as Esau did to Jacob (Genesis 25:29–34). In doing this, “Esau despised his birthright” (Genesis 25:34). The author of Hebrews warned his readers, “See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son. Afterward, as you know, when he wanted to inherit this blessing, he was rejected. Even though he sought the blessing with tears, he could not change what he had done” (Hebrews 12:16–17). In taking his position as firstborn lightly, Esau sinned against God and his family. The rights of the firstborn could also be lost, as was the case for Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn son (Genesis 49:3–4). Reuben slept with Bilhah, his father’s concubine (Genesis 25:22), an act that demonstrated the utmost disrespect for his father and his family. Jacob denied Reuben the blessing of the firstborn because of that sin (Genesis 49:4). In fact, Jacob withheld the blessing of the firstborn from the next two oldest sons, too, due to their violence against the Shechemites (Genesis 49:5–7; cf. Genesis 34). The importance of the firstborn reaches its apex in Scripture in the person of Jesus Christ. All prior implications of the firstborn’s role in the Bible serve to illuminate Christ’s preeminence over all creation and in the family of God. The New Testament describes Christ as the “firstborn” several times. In an earthly sense, Jesus is Mary’s firstborn son (Luke 2:7), and He was dedicated according to the law (Luke 2:22–24). Spiritually, Jesus is the “firstborn among many brothers and sisters” in the body of Christ (Romans 8:29). In Colossians 1:15, the apostle Paul writes, “The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” This use of the title firstborn for Christ echoes the wording of Psalm 89:27–29, where God says of King David, “And I will appoint him to be my firstborn, the most exalted of the kings of the earth. I will maintain my love to him forever, and my covenant with him will never fail. I will establish his line forever, his throne as long as the heavens endure.” In the book of Hebrews, Christ is “heir of all things” (Hebrews 1:2) and God’s “firstborn into the world” (Hebrews 1:6). Just as the firstborn son is head over his earthly family after his father, Jesus Christ is head of the body of Christ—the church—after God the Father (Ephesians 1:20–23; Colossians 1:18, Hebrews 2:10–12). Just as the firstborn son receives the greatest inheritance from his father, Jesus Christ receives the world as His inheritance. God says to His Son, “Only ask, and I will give you the nations as your inheritance, the whole earth as your possession” (Psalm 2:8). As a point of clarification, the term firstborn in relation to Jesus does not suggest that He is a created being. The Son of God has existed for all eternity along with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Jesus is fully God (John 1:1–3). He took on human flesh so that He could become our Savior serve as the Mediator between humankind and God (1 Timothy 2:5). When Scripture refers to Christ as the “firstborn,” the message is that Christ’s supremacy, sovereignty, and priority extend over all things and all other beings. In paying for our sin, Jesus Christ suffered death, but He also became “the firstborn from the dead” (Revelation 1:5); that is, He conquered death and is the first person to ever be “born” to eternal life after dying. By God’s grace, through faith in Jesus, we, too, can receive eternal life (Ephesians 2:1–10; John 3:16–18). Through His death and resurrection, Jesus is the “firstfruits” who guarantees the future resurrection and eternal life of many other sons and daughters of God (1 Corinthians 15:20–23). As He Himself said, “Because I live, you also will live” (John 14:19). GotQuestions.org Deuteronomy 21:18 "If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, have a stubborn: Pr 28:24 Pr 30:11,17 Isa 1:2 obey : De 27:16 Ex 20:12 21:15,17 Lev 19:3 21:9 Pr 15:5 20:20 Eze 22:7 when they: De 8:5 2Sa 7:14 Pr 13:24 19:18 22:15 23:13,14 29:17 Heb 12:9-11 will not: Isa 1:5 Jer 5:3 31:18 Eze 24:13 Am 4:11,12 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Outline Firstborn Inheritance Rights Dt 21:15-17 Miscellaneous Dt 21:22-22:12 Related Passages: Proverbs 30:11; 17 There is a kind of man who curses his father And does not bless his mother. 17 The eye that mocks a father And scorns a mother, The ravens of the valley will pick it out, And the young eagles will eat it. STUBBORN SON If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will (Lxx = ouch = absolutely) not even listen (shama; Lxx = hupakouo - lit "listen under" used in Eph 6:1+) to them - This description suggests the son is recalcitrant to discipline and instruction and the implication is that this is a chronic problem. Stubborn (sarar; Lxx = apeithes one who will not be persuaded to obey some authority - Titus 1:16+) means he is obstinate and unwilling to change (sounds like some of my children!) The word rebellious means openly defiant of authority, in this case the authority God has placed over the son (and so to be disobedient to the parents is in a sense demonstrating disobedience and rebellion against God Himself). Interesting Israel is repeatedly described as rebellious. (Dt 9:24+) Clearly in this context (and in most OT uses) the verb listen (shama) implies heeding (responding to, taking action upon) what is heard, something this son did not do, even after they chastised or instructed him! This is a violation of the fifth commandment, “‘Honor (a command) your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, that your days may be prolonged and that it may go well with you on the land which the LORD your God gives you.” (Dt 5:16+) but was such a striking violation that it was to be punished by death. Stubborn (rebellious)(05637) sarar means to be stubborn or to be obstinate, 16/17x as Qal participle and 4x in parallel with mārāh which means rebellious. A similar verb in Arabic means "to be angry" and in Akkadian "to be deceitful." Patterson - The root is clearly displayed in the case of the wayward and rebellious son who is publicly denounced and executed (Deut. 21:18ff., see under sābāʾ). Most often it portrays Israel's total rebellion against God (Isaiah 1:23; Jeremiah 6:28). Indeed, the "stubborn and rebellious son" may be one who is not merely disobedient to parents, but who has rebelled likewise against their God. In that case, the verses teach that even the parent should condemn the apostate son. Cf. for a similar thought Deut. 13:6-11. It is a rebellious generation (Psalm 78:8) or heifer (Hosea 4:16) which walks in its own way (Isaiah 65:2). It has a stubborn shoulder (Neh. 9:29), a deaf ear (Zech. 7:11), and a stubborn and rebellious heart (Jeremiah 5:23). (Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament) Rebellious (04784) marah means to be contentious, rebellious, and openly defiant to an authority by not obeying commands. Most of the uses of marah refer to rebellion by Israel or Judah against Jehovah (exceptions = Dt 21:18, 20, Job 17:2, Job 23:2, Pr 17:11). There is repeated focus on Israel's rebellion in the wilderness after being set free from slavery in Egypt (Nu 20:10, 24; 27:14; Deut 1:26, 43; 9:7, 23), summed up by the statement "You have been rebellious against the LORD from the day I knew you." (Deut 9:24) Marah is used with similar descriptive words - stubborn (Dt 21:18, 20, Jer 5:23, Ps 78:8), to grieve (Isa 63:10, Ps 78:40), to refuse (Isa 1:20, Neh 9:17), to transgress (Lam 3:42), to sin (Ps 78:17), to test (Ps 78:56), to rebel (marad in Neh 9:26), to reject or profane (Ezek 20:13). Chastise (discipline, instruct) (03256)(yasar) means to chasten, chastise, admonish, discipline. Literally to chasten with blows or figuratively with words (instruct, correct, punish, reform, reprove). To punish, chasten or instruct in order to gain control or enforce obedience. The theological basis for discipline of Israel is grounded in the covenant relationship which Yahweh establishes with His people. It is a good thing to be disciplined by the Lord for as the psalmist says "Blessed is the man whom You chasten, O LORD, And whom You teach out of Your law." (Ps 94:12) Notice there that the discipline is not in a vacuum but is coupled with teaching, a good pattern! (cp similar pattern in Isa 28:26). God chastens individuals, Israel and the nations. The Septuagint translates yasar here with paideuo from país = child) refers primarily to the training or discipline of children to bring them to maturity by teaching, instructing, educating or nurturing and also by utilizing correction and punishment if necessary (which it usually is for children) as a part of the training process. QUESTION - Deuteronomy 21:18–21 Does the Bible really say that parents should have their rebellious children stoned? ANSWER - This is one of those “Yes, but…” questions that require serious explaining. Leviticus 20:9 says, “If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his bloodguiltiness is upon him.” First, a note on the last part of the verse. “His bloodguiltiness is upon him” basically means that he brought this punishment on himself. He knew what he was supposed to do, and he didn’t do it. Also, it is important to remember that the Mosaic Law was for God’s covenant people, Israel, living in a theocracy. The Old Testament Law is not in force today (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23–25; Ephesians 2:15). Deuteronomy 21:18–21 expands on the law: If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear. The context of a passage is crucial to understanding what it means. Taking these two verses by themselves, one could come away with a negative attitude toward God and His Word. In the Leviticus passage, this law is part of a section dealing with egregious sins, sins that would tear a nation and family apart. The trespass in question was not a casual, slip-of-the-tongue curse, but a deep-seated rebellion, an ongoing attitude of hatred that had to be dealt with severely. In other words, the punishment was not for minor infractions but for determined defiance. There are several things to keep in mind about this particular sin and about the law: The sin was ongoing and continuous. Deuteronomy 21:18 indicates that the punishment was only meted out after a persistent refusal to heed both father and mother and after all discipline had failed. The parents have tried to deal with their son in a loving, firm way, but nothing worked. It was deep-seated sin. Verse 20 specifies that the son is stubborn in his rebellion. Not only is he recalcitrant, “he is a glutton and a drunkard.” This is not a case of a child who misses curfew or plays ball in the house. This was a true menace, a child who is causing trouble in society and grieving his parents, possibly to the point of endangering them physically and financially. The punishment was not an impulsive act of anger or vengeance. Verse 19 says that the city elders had to oversee the case and determine the guilt of the child. It is only after the elders pronounced a sentence of death that the execution could take place. The law did not allow an angry parent to arbitrarily stone a child. A modern equivalent of this is when a parent sees news footage of his child committing a crime and subsequently turns the child in to the police. If parents know their child is acting in a way that endangers society, they are responsible to obey the civil authorities and report the crime. The punishment was designed to preserve the nation. As verse 21 explains, the reason for this law was to purge evil from society and act as a deterrent to further rebellion. Israel was a nation chosen by God to be holy (Exodus 20:6). God gave the Israelites three types of laws: judicial, moral, and ceremonial. This is a judicial law. A child who was actively and deliberately rejecting the laws of the land needed to be punished judicially. Which brings us to the last and most important factor: Rebellion against one’s parents is direct rebellion against God. The 5th Command is to honor one’s father and mother (Exodus 20:12). Parents are a God-ordained authority. Disobedience to parents is disobedience to God (Ephesians 6:1-3). Throughout the Bible, there are only a handful of things we are told to fear: God (Proverbs 1:7) and parents (Leviticus 19:3) are among them. The law requiring rebellious children to be stoned to death was meant for extreme cases to protect God’s people. It would have been heartbreaking for parents to bear the responsibility of initiating such severe measures. However, the Bible never records this law being enforced. - GOTQUESTIONS.ORG Deuteronomy 21:19 then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. bring: De 21:2 16:18 25:7 Zec 13:3 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries ELDERS JUDGE STUBBORN SON then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town - The parents could seize the stubborn son but could not stone him. That judgment was left to the elders. Deere - The son was to be taken to the elders at the gate (i.e., the place where the Law was administered; cf. Dt 22:15; Josh. 20:4; Job 29:7). (Bible Knowledge Commentary) Keil - The elders are not regarded here as judges in the strict sense of the word, but as magistrates, who had to uphold the parental authority, and administer the local police. The gate of the town was the forum, where the public affairs of the place were discussed (cf. Deut 22:15; 25:7); (Deuteronomy 21) Seize (08610)(taphas means to lay of of, capture, arrest, grasp, catch. Taphas basically “seize, take hold of,” sometimes preparatory to further action. It is therefore often used of capturing people (2 Kgs 14:13) or towns (Josh 8:8), or of grasping weapons (Amos 2:15) to use them or musical instruments (Gen 4:21) to play them. It also thus has the figurative sense of “being expert/skilled in” the law (Jer 2:8) or warfare (Num 31:27). In fact, the figurative uses of the verb are in many respects the most interesting. In Ps. 10:2, the wicked are said to be caught in their own schemes, while in Ezk 14:5 the Lord expresses his intention to seize or terrorize the hearts of his idol-worshipping people. Prov 30:9 warns against seizing or profaning the name of God and is an excellent example of how OT wisdom literature presupposes the Mosaic legislation (Ex 20:7; Lev 19:12; Deut 5:11). It means to get possession of, to catch in its active usages: to grab hold of something, e.g., a garment (Gen. 39:12); to catch and hold a lizard (Prov. 30:28); to capture or to seize a person (1 Sam. 23:26). It has the sense figuratively of holding on to someone or something for support, e. g., Egypt (Ezek. 29:7). In a general sense, it may describe living in or occupying a hill, an area, or a location (Jer. 49:16). It takes on the sense of holding or wielding a tool or a weapon in a skillful way (Ezek. 21:11[16]; Amos 2:15). By extension, it takes on a figurative sense of handling the Law skillfully or planning strategy in warfare (Num. 31:27: Jer. 34:3). In a passive sense, it means to be seized (Jer. 38:23; 50:24). Swanson - 1. (qal) take hold of, seize, capture, arrest, i.e., take another entity or object into custody, often as a military victory (Dt 20:19); (nif) seized, caught, be captured (Jer 34:3; 38:23; 48:41; 50:24, 46; 51:32, 41; Eze 21:28[EB 23],29[EB 24]+); 2. (qal pass.) covered, i.e., pertaining to placing one object over another, as the feature of an object (Hab 2:19+); 3. (nif) caught in the act., i.e., pertaining to something being clearly known by first hand experience of the speaker or a witness (Nu 5:13+); 4. (qal) control, i.e., be under the considerable influence of another so as to do only what the controller wants, as a figurative extension of being caught in a trap or by the hand (Eze 14:5); (nif) controlled (Ps 10:2+); 5. (qal) seize, take hold of, i.e., grasp and hold an object (Ge 39:12); (nif) be caught (Eze 12:13; 17:20; 19:4, 8+), note: some of the contexts may refer to being seized in custody as a prisoner; (piel) catch, seize with the hand (Pr 30:28+); 6. (qal) play an instrument, formally, grasp, i.e., execute a melody from a musical instrument, as an extension of grasping an object in the hand (Ge 4:21); 7. (qal) deal with, formally, grasp, i.e., behave or conduct oneself with respect to certain means, as a figurative extension of grasping an object with familiarity and some understanding (Jer 2:8); 8. (qal) reap, i.e., cut off and gather the harvest, as an extension of grasping and controlling an object in the hand (Jer 50:16); 9. (qal) dishonor, profane, i.e., cause one to have low status, and so become a contemptible object of loathing, as a figurative extension of having a low status after being captured in a battle or some such event (Pr 30:9); 10. unit: (qal) תָּפַשׂ הַ־ מִלְחָמָה (tā·p̄ǎś hǎ- mil·ḥā·mā(h)) soldier, formally, engaged in battle, i.e., one who is a military fighter (Nu 31:27); 11. unit: תָּפַשׂ הַ־ קֶשֶׁת (tā·p̄ǎś hǎ- qě·šěṯ) archer, bowman, formally, handler of the bow, i.e., a soldier who shoots arrows with a bow (Am 2:15+); 12. unit: (qal) תָּפַשׂ וְ־ שָׁכַב (tā·p̄ǎś w- šā·ḵǎḇ) rape, formally, grasp and lie with, i.e., to attack and force a partner to have sexual intercourse (Dt 22:28+) (Dictionary of Semantic Domains - Hebrew) Taphas - 59v - arrested(2), capture(2), captured(8), caught(5), grasp(1), grasps(1), handle(4), handled(1), hold(1), lay hold(1), lays hold(1), occupy(1), overlaid(1), play(1), profane(1), seize(5), seized(13), seizes(1), surely be captured(1), take(3), taken over(1), took(3), took hold(3), wielding(1), wields(1). Gen. 4:21; Gen. 39:12; Num. 5:13; Deut. 9:17; Deut. 20:19; Deut. 21:19; Deut. 22:28; Jos. 8:8; Jos. 8:23; 1 Sam. 15:8; 1 Sam. 23:26; 1 Ki. 11:30; 1 Ki. 13:4; 1 Ki. 18:40; 1 Ki. 20:18; 2 Ki. 7:12; 2 Ki. 10:14; 2 Ki. 14:7; 2 Ki. 14:13; 2 Ki. 16:9; 2 Ki. 18:13; 2 Ki. 25:6; 2 Chr. 25:23; Ps. 10:2; Ps. 71:11; Prov. 30:9; Prov. 30:28; Isa. 3:6; Isa. 36:1; Jer. 2:8; Jer. 26:8; Jer. 34:3; Jer. 37:13; Jer. 37:14; Jer. 38:23; Jer. 40:10; Jer. 46:9; Jer. 48:41; Jer. 49:16; Jer. 50:16; Jer. 50:24; Jer. 50:46; Jer. 51:32; Jer. 51:41; Jer. 52:9; Ezek. 12:13; Ezek. 14:5; Ezek. 17:20; Ezek. 19:4; Ezek. 19:8; Ezek. 21:11; Ezek. 21:23; Ezek. 21:24; Ezek. 27:29; Ezek. 29:7; Ezek. 30:21; Ezek. 38:4; Amos 2:15; Hab. 2:19 Gateway (08179)(shaar) Basically, this word represents a structure closing and enclosing a large opening through a wall, or a barrier through which people and things pass to an enclosed area. The "gate" of a city often was a fortified structure deeper than the wall. This is especially true of strong, well-fortified cities, as in the case of the first biblical appearance of the word: "And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom…" (Gen. 19:1). Within major cities there were usually strongly fortified citadels with "gates" (Neh. 2:8). Certain "gates" were only the thickness of a curtain: "And for the gate of the court [of the tabernacle] shall be a hanging of twenty cubits …" (Exod. 27:16). Later, the temple had large openings between its various courts: "Stand in the gate of the Lord's house, and proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of the Lord, all ye of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord" (Jer. 7:2). Exod. 32:26 speaks of an opening ("gate") in the barrier surrounding Israel's temporary camp at the foot of Sinai. Such camps often were enclosed with barriers of earth and/or rock. Ancient fortified cities had to find a source of water for periods of siege, and sometimes dams were built. Nah. 2:6 apparently refers to such a dam when it says: "The gates of the rivers shall be opened, and the palace shall be dissolved" (i.e., swept away). Both the underworld (Job 38:17) and heaven, the domain of God (Gen. 28:17), are pictured as cities with "gates." The "gates" of ancient cities sometimes enclosed city squares or were immediately in front of squares (2 Chron. 32:6). The entry way (2 Chron. 23:15) could be secured with heavy doors that were attached to firmly embedded pillars and reinforced by bars (Judg. 16:3; cf. Psa. 147:13; Neh. 3:3). Palaces could be citadels with strongly fortified "gates" large enough to have rooms over them. During siege, such rooms housed warriors. It was such a room into which David climbed and wept over the death of his son Absalom (2 Sam. 18:33). "Gates" had rooms to house guards (Ezek. 40:7). The rooms bordering the "gates" could also be used to store siege supplies (Neh. 12:25). The "gates" were the place where local courts convened: "And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband's brother refuseth …" (Deut. 25:7). The sentence sometimes was executed at the city "gates": "And I will fan them with a fan in the gates of the land; I will bereave them of children, I will destroy my people …" (Jer. 15:7). In this passage, all of the land of Israel is envisioned as a city at whose "gates" God gathers the offenders for trial, judgment, sentence, and punishment. The phrase, "within the gates," means "within the area enclosed." Thus the sojourner who is "in your gates" is the foreigner who permanently lives in one of Israel's towns (Exod. 20:10). In passages such as Deut. 12:15, this phrase means "wherever you live": "Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates…." (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old Testament and New Testament Words) Shaar in Deut - Deut. 6:9; Deut. 11:20; Deut. 12:12; Deut. 12:15; Deut. 12:17; Deut. 12:18; Deut. 12:21; Deut. 14:21; Deut. 14:27; Deut. 14:28; Deut. 14:29; Deut. 15:7; Deut. 15:22; Deut. 16:5; Deut. 16:11; Deut. 16:14; Deut. 16:18; Deut. 17:2; Deut. 17:5; Deut. 17:8; Deut. 18:6; Deut. 21:19; Deut. 22:15; Deut. 22:24; Deut. 23:16; Deut. 24:14; Deut. 25:7; Deut. 26:12; Deut. 28:52; Deut. 28:55; Deut. 28:57; Deut. 31:12; Deuteronomy 21:20 "They shall say to the elders of his city, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.' not: Pr 29:17 glutton: Pr 19:26 20:1 23:19-21,29-35 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries PARENTS ACCUSATIONS AGAINST THEIR SON They shall say to the elders of his city, 'This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey (does not listen to our voice) us, he is a glutton and a drunkard - Note that he is not just a transient issue but is multifaceted - stubborn, rebellious, disobedient, glutton, drunkard. This is not a son that just "talked back to his parents." Deere - The son was ultimately rebelling against the Lord’s authority and therefore attacking the foundations of the covenant community. (Bible Knowledge Commentary) Stubborn (05637)(sarar) means to be stubborn or to be obstinate, 16/17x as Qal participle and 4x in parallel with mārāh which means rebellious. A similar verb in Arabic means "to be angry" and in Akkadian "to be deceitful." סָרַר sārar: A verb meaning to be stubborn, to be rebellious. Israel was said to be stubborn for forming an alliance with Egypt against God’s ordained plan (Isa. 30:1); performing improper sacrifices, eating unclean things, and worshiping ancestors (Isa. 65:2). They were even compared to a stubborn heifer (Hos. 4:16). They stubbornly turned their backs (lit., shoulders) on God and His words (Neh. 9:29; Zech. 7:11). The son who rebelled against his parents could be severely disciplined and was eventually stoned (Deut. 21:18, 21). The term is also used of an immoral woman (Prov. 7:11). Rebellious (04784) marah. מָרָה mārāh: A verb meaning to be rebellious. In one instance, this word spoke of a son’s rebellion against his parents (Deut. 21:18, 20). In all other instances, this word was used of rebellion against God, which provoked Him to action. This word is usually used as an indictment against a nation’s rebellion, whether Israel’s (Deut. 9:23, 24; Ps. 78:8; Jer. 5:23); Samaria’s (Hos. 13:16[14:1]); or David’s enemies (Ps. 5:10[11]). In a few instances, it is used to indict specific people, as Moses (Num. 20:24; 27:14), or a man of God who disobeyed (1 Kgs. 13:21, 26). Glutton - 2151. זָלַל zālal: I. A verb meaning to be vile, frivolous, gluttonous, worthless; to despise. It describes an especially serious corruption of character in a worthless, gluttonous son (Deut. 21:20), closely akin to one who drinks too much (Prov. 23:20, 21). A good son avoids company with this vile, gluttonous person (Prov. 28:7). It is the opposite of what is useful, valuable, and precious (Jer. 15:19). It means to hold up to disdain, to despise (Lam. 1:8). Drunkard 5433. סָבָא sāḇāʾ: A verb meaning to imbibe, to carouse, to get drunk. It means to drink heavily, to drink hard: a drunkard (Deut. 21:20; Prov. 23:20, 21; Ezek. 23:42; Nah. 1:10); those who engage in drinking too much (Isa. 56:12). Deuteronomy 21:21 "Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel will hear of it and fear. all the men: De 13:10-11 Dt 17:5 Lev 24:16 so: De 13:5,11 19:19,20 22:21,24 all Israel: De 13:11 Deuteronomy 21 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Deuteronomy 13:10 “So you shall stone him to death because he has sought to seduce you from the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. “Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and will never again do such a wicked thing among you. Deuteronomy 17:13 “Then all the people will hear and be afraid, and will not act presumptuously again. STONING A STUBBORN SON Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death - NET - "Then all the men of his city must stone him to death. In this way you will purge out wickedness from among you, and all Israel will hear about it and be afraid." Note that it does not say that the parents stoned him but one cannot exclude the father since the text says all the men. Remove is the verb ba'ar (translated purge in some of the other passages).is repeatedly used in this section - Dt. 17:7; Dt. 17:12; Dt. 19:13; Dt. 19:19; Dt. 21:9; Dt. 21:21 NET NOTE adds "The Hebrew term בִּעַרְתָּה (bi’artah), here and elsewhere in such contexts (cf. Deut 13:5; 17:7, 12; 19:19; 21:9), suggests God’s anger which consumes like fire (thus בָעַר, ba’ar, “to burn”). And all Israel will hear of it and fear - Stoning is clearly seen as a deterrent to sin in Israel. What effect might stoning for capital punishment have on crime in America? Just wondering! Fear of this punishment may have been enough to prevent sons extreme rebellion, for there is no record in the Bible or in extra-biblical literature of it ever having been carried out. Morris agrees that "Records indicate no rebellious son was ever put to death under this law. Every father elected to spare his own son, no matter how sinful the son might have been. Only Christ, the perfectly obedient Son (John 8:29;17:4) was not spared (Romans 8:32).