Deuteronomy 21:18-21: The Parent Trap; Stoning and Good Parenting are Mutually Exclusive
Any good Protestant is always confused. It’s how the Reformers wanted us, and they did their job well. As William Marshall admitted in The Principles Of The Westminster [Confession Of Faith] Standards Persecuting, free thought and interpretation was only for Reformed leaders and not the spiritual peasantry. Like their Catholic predecessors, taking the sword to those who disagreed with them was in the confessions of faith, and fully embraced by Reformers like Knox, Calvin, and Luther. All three demanded the freedom to interpret Scriptures according to their own consciences, but this was never meant for the masses.
And obeying the Reformers was not a violation of one’s conscience; they were to assume their consciences did not know better than the Reformers. Likewise, the church state of that era declared by divine royal decree that obeying the state in violation of your conscience was not a violation of your conscience because the state declared it so, and since the state declared such, God would bind it in heaven.
Hence, confusion reigns in the evangelical church (because we are stuck someplace between freedom and orthodoxy), especially in regard to the relationship between the Old Testament and New Testament. Some sort of socio-historical metaphysical dichotomy is assumed. So, when we read Deuteronomy 21:18-21, confusion reigns:
18 “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19 then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20 and they shall say to 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.’ 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
There is nothing strange from another socio-historical reality here, this is merely good counseling for parents. God made a promissory covenant with Abraham, used Egypt to grow his family into a nation, and then formed the nation at Mt. Sinai. They were his chosen nation among the nations, and it was a theocracy. The Law given was the national standard that covered civil, health, and wise living concerns. This also included good parenting. God would know about these things.
Right now, because of Israel’s rebellion, the kingdom is temporarily in heaven and not on earth during the times of the Gentiles. When that time is ended, God will reinstate his chosen nation on earth, and it will be a theocracy with Jesus Christ ruling the nations with an iron rod from upon David’s throne in Jerusalem. You know all of that persecution Israel has suffered from other nations over the years? That won’t be the case. See all of the injustice all around us? Won’t be happening. It will be nations done right. Perhaps that will be the motto: Israel; we do nations right. I think the Millennial Kingdom is the righting of wrongs prior to the new heavens and new earth where righteousness will dwell in perfection.
Now here, God’s counseling for parents to Israel posits some principles in regard to human nature, and specifically of the adolescent variety.
1. Loving parents sometimes had their children put to death. This wasn’t a process to save children from bad parents.
2. This act is not a reflection of poor parenting. In fact, it showed their overall wisdom as parents.
3. Children, once they reach a certain age, are responsible for their own actions. Imperfect parenthood will not save them from culpability before God. Bad parents were not stoned to death, bad children were.
4. Some children are simply stiff-necked, stubborn, rebellious, self-consumed, without conscience, haters of wisdom and wise counsel, and unable to be reasoned with. And they resolutely refuse to change.
5. Accountability in lesser forms brings about positive change away from being uncounselable.
6. Accountability in lesser forms can save a child from death.
7. The possibility of death saves from death. In other words, consequences teach us something about the actions leading up to the end result. Hence, removing consequences is a form of hatred that often feels like love, using some occasional opportunities to teach about mercy notwithstanding.
True, context is important here. We are not in that time or under that Law, so there are some modifications in APPLICATION, but the wisdom in regard to raising children is nonetheless to be drawn out.
In our time, this portion of Scripture is the key to dealing with out of control adolescents. There is hope for out of control adolescents if they understand that they are responsible for their own actions and those actions will increasingly compound and end in a bad way. This will save a child from death, teach about sin, bring peace to homes, and bring about change in thinking and behavior.
Unfortunately, many parents refuse to do two things that save their children from death:
1. Define their children biblically because they think it reflects on their parenting. It must be their fault that their child is uncounselable and cannot be reasoned with. However, God was a perfect parent to Israel; but yet, they rebelled and even murdered His Son.
2. Hence, they bear the blame and refuse to hold their children accountable.
This often results in their own death at the hands of the child (I TIM 1:9), the deaths of others in general, or the death of the child via the state or other circumstances. Parents do not see accountability as a vessel for wisdom and change. How bad can sin be if it has no consequences? Instead, the message is sent that children can always depend on mercy. The following of every desire that enters into their mind can depend on the mercy safety net because after all, God is a God of love.
He is, but He also hates children who don’t honor their parents. That fact can’t go away no matter how much we want it to. Parents think God will always forgive their children if they do. This isn’t so. Consequences in life point to eternal consequences if God is not honored as well. If children will not honor their parents, they will not honor God.
The commandment to honor parents is the “first commandment that has a promise.” By teaching our children to honor us and making this an unnegotiable option with increasing consequences for not obeying, we bring many blessings into their lives. Instead, parents make it about themselves by obeying their own unbiblical bad feelings. This particular issue has even led me to give merit to the idea of “false guilt.” If there is such a thing, this is it. Calling our children what God calls them is an act of love, but telling them they are good when they are rebellious is an act of hate that will lead our children to death. Hence, many of the vile think they are good because mommy told them so. And because they are good and God is so loving, the following of every evil desire will ultimately lead to a soft pat on the head by God. This is a most horrifying thing to put into the minds of children.
Be sure of this: it explains the abominable adolescent behavior that we hear of in today’s media.
Please note, the parents had to take the child to the ruling elders, or judges and state their case. They couldn’t do it on their own judgment or authority. This also pertained to older children still living at home. Apparently, this refers to one who will not listen to counsel, is lazy, and refuses to make their own way in life:
This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.
Please note: here is the case that had to be made and judged by the elders:
and, though they discipline him,
The child would not be stoned to death in cases where the child was provoked to anger by the parents:
Ephesians 6:1 – Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), 3 “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” 4 Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.
Please note: parents don’t punish, they discipline. And they instruct. This is worthy of repeating from a different angle:
Parents don’t punish, they discipline and instruct. Punishment makes it about the parents being inconvenienced. Punishment is what the government does. Punishment is the end of the line in many cases. Discipline has to do with hope, punishment is hopeless, and can also be likened to the final judgment of God. Life disciplines, hell punishes. Consequences as part of the discipline process warns of impending punishment.
The situation we have here in Deuteronomy is a full orbed construct of parental discipline and instruction that warns of an ultimate consequence for refusing to be teachable and insisting on being a perpetual source of sorrow to one’s parents. Here we have sorrowful parents leading their own son to a slaughter that they warned him of continually with tears. We know this because they were instructors, not punishers.
But even here there are certain realities that cannot be dismissed: a pleading along the way, and a change of heart as the stones come pouring in. The end result can discipline. These processes instruct. Perhaps the son finally sees the end of his folly and makes a final appeal to God. Perhaps he becomes like the thief on the cross.
There is also another angle that cannot be dismissed as well: parents are not assigned to a hopeless situation with no end in regard to adolescents who cannot be reasoned with and refuse to change. Even secular authorities understand that this situation will never end well, and as a necessity, offer parents a final solution. In most states, it is against the law for adolescents to be “unruly.”
Sadly, when an adolescent is entered into the program, it begins with a “contract” between the probation officer (the child is convicted and automatically put on probation), the parents, and the child. The contract is really a pretty good discipline plan. A continuum of contract infraction eventually leads to the final end: incarceration. I say this is sad because the secular authorities are way ahead of Christians on this. While we look at Deuteronomy 21:18- 21 as a contemporary metaphysical anomaly, in principle, it would make perfect sense to secular authorities.
Susan and I counsel people to first implement the secular contract (we have obtained a copy of it) in the home, and make the filing of an unruly child complaint the final solution there. The final solution of the secular process that still takes place in the home is incarceration. The parents take the child to be incarcerated rather than stoned. Unfortunately, most parents don’t see these processes as curative discipline/instruction and focus on the possibility of incarceration. This is the utter shame of the parent. Perhaps the children got rejection of wisdom from the parents themselves.
God said that this policy/counsel would have the following effect:
and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
If the government’s policy on unruly adolescents was more known among parents and society in general, would their be far less instances of youth crime and rebellion? I think so.
Fear is a great motivator. Remove fear of consequences, and the flesh will run rampant. The church’s overall ignorance in implementing practical anthropology in the sanctification process is evident. When was the last time you heard of this happening?:
1 Timothy 5:17 – Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” 19 Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 20 As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.
so that the rest may stand in fear.
Making much of consequences, noting the end of sin, has always had a purifying effect on the saints:
Acts 4:10 – Immediately she fell down at his feet and breathed her last. When the young men came in they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 And great fear came upon the whole church and upon all who heard of these things.
Parents must love their children by accessing them truthfully and biblically, and holding them accountable. This is discipline and instruction, not punishment. Paving a road to punishment in this life and the life to come is not love, it is hatred. We assume that loving our children comes naturally; that’s not true. We are commanded to love our children because we can unwittingly hate them by paving for them a road of death.
This is the ultimate parent trap.
paul
More on why New Calvinism Has Massive Appeal
“So what is the appeal of New Calvinism? Basically, five things….”
Mass appeal, rarely commendable in the Bible, is an earmark of New Calvinism. But why? As cited in another post, this quote from a New Calvinist organization reveals one primary reason:
What, then, is the subjective power of this message? Firstly, we find that there is real, objective freedom, the kind that, yes, can be experienced subjectively. We are freed from having to worry about the legitimacy of experiences; our claims of self-improvement are no longer seen as a basis of our witness or faith. In other words, we are freed from ourselves, from the tumultuous ebb and flow of our inner lives and the outward circumstances; anyone in Christ will be saved despite those things. We can observe our own turmoil without identifying with it. We might even find that we have compassion for others who function similarly. These fluctuations, violent as they might be, do not ultimately define us. If anything, they tell us about our need for a savior (David Zahl and Jacob Smith: Mockingbird blog).
This enables New Calvinists to boast an objective, factual gospel, while claiming that the objective gospel functions subjectively. In other words, the gospel (Christ and His works) is factual, but obtaining a deeper and deeper knowledge of those facts imputes those objective facts to our lives subjectively. This enables us to live our Christian lives by faith alone, while leaving the subjective results to God. Our primary goal is to contemplate the two things that saved us (the gospel): God’s holiness and our sinfulness (faith and repentance), and then as we go about living our lives, we don’t have to take anything that happens too seriously because it is all preordained by God.
Tragedy is a good thing because it testifies to our need for Christ; good works give us joy as we “experience” them, but we really don’t know whether they are in “our own efforts” or conducted by God. It’s subjective. According to Martin Luther, if we believe that we did the good work, that’s works salvation. If we attend our good works (as Christians) with fear that it could be us who did it and not God, that’s venial sin and not mortal sin. Hence, part of the New Calvinist daily repentance regiment is asking forgiveness for good works that we have done just in case it was us who did them. All in all, it insulates from responsibility for sin, and enables us to detach ourselves from negative emotions. Joy is a result of God’s goodness and good works. Tragedy reminds us of what we deserve and what God has saved us from—it’s just more good news!
Further appeal can be seen in a recent post by Dr. Ed Welch of CCEF. He starts off with the usual metaphysical curve-ball that seems to come in straight with the idea that our faith is objective truth. Then when he gets us swinging at that pitch, it curves with….
Faith is a way of seeing
Scripture is also fond of describing faith as the way to see God’s realities. ( By: Ed Welch Topics: Faith Published: July 17, 2013 http://www.ccef.org/blog/what-faith).
Welch continues to expound on how the subjective facts of the gospel leads to subjective “reality”:
With the naked eye we can see the physical world, but faith—which comes by hearing the word of God—allows us to “see” the Creator of the physical world (Heb. 11:3). Faith allows us to see that Jesus is the Word, the Son of God, the Rescuer of the world.
With a twisting of 2Corinthians 4:18, Welch, like all New Calvinists, attempts to make the case that the physical world isn’t what really needs to be “seen” because the physical can be seen and therefore is not of faith. Hence, the Bible is to be used to see the Savior only, leading to a faith that enables us to see beyond the physical. In other words, borrowing his terminology, the Bible enables us to “see” beyond creation to the Creator Himself. Of course, this is merely hanging Bible verses on Plato’s Theory of Forms.
Welch then explains, in the same post, a technique that can be added to Bible induced gospel contemplationism:
One way to use this perspective on faith is to pray with another, “Lord, open our eyes. Help us to see what is really happening.” And then ask at the end of your time together, “What did we see?”
Here at the Potter’s House, what we study, what we read, is what you get. To the contrary, in this technique also promoted by John Piper and many other New Calvinists, the Bible speaks to you, presumably through the Spirit, subjectively, following a gospel-centered contemplation of the Scriptures. The plain sense of Scripture can now be traded for subjective experience. Apparently emboldened by the mindlessness of American Christians, Welch further explains this approach with the following:
Another way to use this is to encourage others to live with their eyes closed. Let me explain. The world that is available to our physical senses can dominate our spiritual sight. Physical trials, fiscal uncertainty, the safety of those we love, the intrusion of hard pasts—this whirlwind can blind us to the spiritual realities that are deeper and longer lasting. So in a sense, we need to close our eyes to the circumstances of life, so we can open them to hope. It might happen like this:
“What do you see?” ‘I see the rejection of my spouse.’ “Close your eyes, and keep looking. Look around with eyes of faith. Now what do you see?” ‘I see the rejection of my spouse.’ “Okay, keep your eyes closed and look at the world through the lenses of Ephesians 1, now what do you see?” ‘I see . . . nothing.’ “No problem, we just need help. Let’s pray, which, in itself, is an expression of how we see by faith.”
The important point is that you are closing your eyes—not as a form of denial—but as a way to see more.
Welch then completely mocks discernment by suggesting that people are saved by reading Christian mystics like CS Lewis:
Back to the story, my friend became cynical toward his friend’s beliefs, but he was still a seeker. Soon after he graduated from high school, a co-worker gave him Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis. On the very first page he began to “see.” After taking the next eight hours to read through the book, he knew he wanted to follow Jesus, though he didn’t know what that meant, and he did not know one other Christian he could ask.
So what is the appeal of New Calvinism? Basically, five things:
1. It enables people to deflect the negative emotions of life and trade them for joy by disconnecting from the physical world. This idea is sanctified by eradicating all value of earthly things (and people) for Christ.
2. It gives a simplistic answer for everything. All events in life are to either glorify God or show us our worthlessness.
3. Escape from responsibility and accountability. “I sinned? Well duh, that’s what sinners do.”
4. We already know what every verse in the Scripture is about, and by meditating on that, we can have a subjective result of our own choosing.
5. It eliminates the hard work of studying and wrestling with truth. Every verse is about Jesus, and the results are automatic. Also, hard work in spiritual matters is works salvation. As Calvin and Luther believed, sanctification is represented by the Sabbath rest. If you work, you die; hence, no work is more good news!
6. The Reformed, “power of the keys.” This is the idea that whatever Reformed elders bind on earth will be bound in heaven whether right or wrong. Hence, by merely staying in the good graces of your local neighborhood elders, you’re guaranteed to be in the graces of God. You’re in because the elders say you’re in.
http://apprising.org/2012/01/06/beth-moore-and-john-piper-lead-lectio-divina-lite-at-passion-2012/
Editing George Carlin for TANC 2014 Conference Promotion
Governments [Churches] don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. That is against their interests. They want obedient workers, people who are smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept it.
~ George Carlin
TANC: education on the Reformation myth. Come and learn what you will not learn in churches, seminaries or Bible colleges.
SGM’s House of Horrors and the New Calvinist Theocratic Subculture
The class action law suit brought against SGM has been revised. And with new allegations added, the narrative can now describe SGM as a house of horrors. I will leave the gory details to the Calvinism would be a good thing if not for the Neo-Calvinists crowd and their Reformed versions of the National Enquirer.
In a recent interview, John Piper discussed a few [!] faults that Calvin had; namely, his idea of integrating church and state. Piper then proceeded to propagate the outrageous idea that Reformed Baptists were responsible for reversing that concept. Funny, no matter how many times you read James Madison’s Memorial Remonstrance Against Ecclesiastical Establishments the Reformed Baptists don’t seem to be mentioned. Last year, Piper announced his post-retirement plans to spread “the light” of Calvinism—on location in Geneva as a way of presenting Calvin’s Geneva as a model for the renovation of humanity. If you believe Piper thinks the marriage of Church and state is a bad idea, I have an oceanfront property in Dayton, Ohio I would like to sell you.
CJ Mahaney and company may not think too much of what their pedophile friends have done, but to them, a bigger issue is at hand here: the preservation of their theocratic subculture. Mahaney et al don’t think that they should be subject to civil law. The way they state it: “The church should be free to shepherd their people as they see fit.” And the way they prefer to handle these situations should be evident by now and is directly linked to their Reformed ideology.
I have written on that extensively, and frankly, I am too lazy this morning to rehearse it all. It’s just exhausting: this behavior, though shocking, should not be surprising when their gospel is understood. Calvin and Luther considered the whole concept of Justice to be a joke and part of the “glory story” and not the “cross story.” These are people who function from a total different reality than normative metaphysics. If you believe that you are capable of interpreting your own reality you are living the glory story; if you trust them to interpret your reality for you according to the cross story, you are living in the gospel meta-narrative.
But back to my original point. New Calvinists have simply improvised and built a theocratic subculture. Again, I have written extensively on this and am weary of it. New Calvinist churches are ruled by elder law and have various ways of enforcing that law apart from the state. They would prefer the state, but the likes of James Madison, whom they despise, messed that plan up big-time on this corner of the globe.
Yawn, ugh, let me repeat a few improvisions: in-house security forces; control structure; covenants; church discipline; brainwashing; networking with likeminded government officials willing to operate off the record; etc.
Hence, the New Calvinists see this as an opportunity. If they win this case based on separation of church and state, the implications are staggering. Don’t miss this: that is why the rest of the New Calvinist community is watching this in silent, anxious anticipation. If you think they see this as a bad thing, if you think this puts New Calvinism on the ropes—you are dead wrong—they see this as a grand opportunity to set precedent and further strengthen their theocratic subculture.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
2 comments