Death penalty for reviling parents?

[Dee Dee Warren]

A friend of mine posted this on his blog:

Some have tried to argue that Christ only upholds the continuing validity of the Decalogue; yet this cannot be the case, as the judicial case laws are expositions of the moral law (for example, we need to go to the case laws to understand what constitutes adultery as the seventh commandment does not specifically define it). Moreover, Christ explicitly put the death penalty for reviling one’s parents on a par with the fifth commandment itself (Matt. 15:4). Therefore, the death sentence for stated crimes must be every bit as perpetually binding today as the Decalogue itself.1

1. Reformed Covenanter [↩ back]

source (http://apologus.notsorry.net/2007/03/21/quote-on-theonomy-1/)

Thoughts (Christian only please as required by this forum restrictions)

[Storico]

Jesus was addressing the Pharisees and teachers of the law, all of whom had a law which ordered that all those who did not honour their parents would/should be put to death, because the commandment to honour one's parents must not be broken. He was making the point that they were breaking their own laws by the questions they were asking him and the things they were saying, and they were therefore hypocrites. Jesus seems to have been turning their own argument against them. Do I have that right?

If I do, then my thoughts were this: the laws/commandments Jesus spoke of were Jewish commandments. They applied to that culture, and they PARTICULARLY applied to the Pharisees and the lawmakers themselves, who were the people speaking with Jesus. The question is, then, DO those laws apply now? Ought people to be put to death now for refusing to honour their parents? After all, if we are not Jewish but are Gentile at least in origin, was the law ever directed right at us? If we grew up under different laws, then is whatever bound here bound in heaven, or are the laws from the Old Testament thoroughly applicable to today? If someone/anyone thinks it applies now to all of us, why? I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.

Personally, I have two comments/issues.

First issue:

- Mark 3:31-35 and Matthew 12:46-50 certainly SEEMS to be a case of Jesus ignoring or dishonouring his own biological mother. When told that she was outside and wanted to speak with him, he did not honour her by going to her. It doesn't say that he acknowledged her presence by speaking with her. In fact, it says that Jesus asked (in a paraphrase) "who is my family?" and pointing to his disciples, Jesus said that anyone who did the will of His Father was his mother or brother or sister.

Why would Jesus have pointed to his disciples, leaving his own biological mother outside? Would this have been insulting to her, or dishonouring her in some way? How would the consequences of the fifth commandment and Matthew 15:4 apply to Jesus? Anyone have an idea? It's always puzzled me. Honestly. Not trying to be facetious.

Second issue:

- On a personal level, I don't understand why dishonouring your parents WOULD make you worthy of death. If your biological parents are human and just as apt to sin as you are, then how does disobeying them (or at least, failing to show them respect) make someone worthy of death if their own parents are not in fact right in what they ask their children to do, or are not in fact worthy of respect? Even if parents WERE wonderful and just and perfect (which no parent is), then dishonouring them would be unkind and unfair, yes. Worthy of death, though? Why? That's the other question I've always had.

Thanks for starting the thread, DX. It opened up a few things that have been rolling around in my mind.

[Abelard]

"Dishonor' in the biblical context means to make subject to public humiliation.

Honor was a family asset built up over generations. The meaning of the terms is several degrees of magnitude different than insulting your parents.

[themuzicman]

Jesus was only pointing out the Pharisees' hypocrisy regarding the 10 commandments and their tradition. He wasn't instituting anything for anyone outside of the Old Covenant.

I'm in the New Covenant, not the Old one.

Michael

[Dee Dee Warren]

Jesus was only pointing out the Pharisees' hypocrisy regarding the 10 commandments and their tradition. He wasn't instituting anything for anyone outside of the Old Covenant.

I'm in the New Covenant, not the Old one.

Michael

That doesn't follow. Jesus said that he came not to destroy the law. Simply by stating that you're in the New Covenant and not the old one does not really speak at all as to whether or not this moral commandment is binding upon us today or not. Jesus certainly upheld as a standard but whether or not it is applicable today is that which must be proven and not assumed.

[Dee Dee Warren]

"Dishonor' in the biblical context means to make subject to public humiliation.

Honor was a family asset built up over generations. The meaning of the terms is several degrees of magnitude different than insulting your parents.


Yes and I think the article pointed that out. This is the incorrigible son, not the occasionally snotty son.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Jesus was addressing the Pharisees and teachers of the law, all of whom had a law which ordered that all those who did not honour their parents would/should be put to death, because the commandment to honour one's parents must not be broken. He was making the point that they were breaking their own laws by the questions they were asking him and the things they were saying, and they were therefore hypocrites. Jesus seems to have been turning their own argument against them. Do I have that right?

Yes you are correct, and it appears he was affirming that commandment.


If I do, then my thoughts were this: the laws/commandments Jesus spoke of were Jewish commandments. They applied to that culture, and they PARTICULARLY applied to the Pharisees and the lawmakers themselves, who were the people speaking with Jesus. The question is, then, DO those laws apply now?

Yes that is the question. However I do not hold to "two peoples of God." There is just one. He is a Jew who is one inwardly. Christians are grafted into the olive tree of Israel and therefore are true Jews.


Ought people to be put to death now for refusing to honour their parents? After all, if we are not Jewish but are Gentile at least in origin, was the law ever directed right at us?

Gentile nations in the Old Testament were judged for their failure to obey God's moral law. This is not a ceremonial law but a moral one. The burden is upon the one who would assume that God's moral law has been abrogated.


If we grew up under different laws, then is whatever bound here bound in heaven, or are the laws from the Old Testament thoroughly applicable to today? If someone/anyone thinks it applies now to all of us, why? I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.

Again I would think that the presumption is that it does in fact apply to us today and that we Christians make the mistake of presuming the opposite.



Personally, I have two comments/issues.

First issue:

- Mark 3:31-35 and Matthew 12:46-50 certainly SEEMS to be a case of Jesus ignoring or dishonouring his own biological mother. When told that she was outside and wanted to speak with him, he did not honour her by going to her. It doesn't say that he acknowledged her presence by speaking with her. In fact, it says that Jesus asked (in a paraphrase) "who is my family?" and pointing to his disciples, Jesus said that anyone who did the will of His Father was his mother or brother or sister.

Then you know that such is not with the law is speaking to since we know that Jesus fulfilled the law completely and there was no sin in him. Therefore the option that Jesus dishonored his parents in the sense that is referred to by that law is not open to us.


- On a personal level, I don't understand why dishonouring your parents WOULD make you worthy of death. If your biological parents are human and just as apt to sin as you are, then how does disobeying them (or at least, failing to show them respect) make someone worthy of death if their own parents are not in fact right in what they ask their children to do, or are not in fact worthy of respect? Even if parents WERE wonderful and just and perfect (which no parent is), then dishonouring them would be unkind and unfair, yes. Worthy of death, though? Why? That's the other question I've always had.

I will find a quote for you from a book that I am reading that deals with this issue. The heart of the issue is that we are to submit to the authority that God has placed in our life which is a sign of how we submit to God and thus failure to submit to God and to fight his authority is a punishment worthy of death. Further, sometimes we just don't know what the why but we do know that God commanded it even if he didn't tell us why.

[Glenn P]

Jesus was only pointing out the Pharisees' hypocrisy regarding the 10 commandments and their tradition. He wasn't instituting anything for anyone outside of the Old Covenant.He was contrasting obedience to God's laws with obedience to man's traditions. The only way to find an old covenant/n ew covenant distinction here is to insert it. It's not even on that subject.
quote]I'm in the New Covenant, not the Old one.

Michael[/quote]Would that be the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31? What's written on your heart?