Dennis Tuuri

sang a couple of minutes ago is known as the Lorica, St. Patrick’s Breastplate. A lorica was a mythical garment that would be used to protect oneself, particularly in times of danger or harm. And St. Patrick’s was no mythical garment. It was a profession of faith in the triune God. And that is his confession that he wrote as a Christian man somewhat versified and put to music and so rearranged a bit. It’s a wonderful song.

We’ll sing it again next Lord’s Day so that we can kind of get it down by singing it a couple of times. Those of you who weren’t at camp, that’s where we learned it and that’s why we know it as well as we do. It’s a wonderful song of understanding that when for instance the three girls that’ll be baptized today are ushered into union and communion with the Lord Jesus Christ, then all things work together for their good.

And when people are baptized and reaffirm that baptism by taking communion, we’re affirmed in the belief and knowledge that indeed bound to us are all things because of God’s word forever fixed in heaven. That word is sure. That word assures us that as Jesus was in the wilderness with the wild animals, so all of creation indeed, as we just sang, ministers to us as saints of his.

Now, we’re considering the law of God.

Remember the context for this is that God’s people have been brought up to the mountain by way of their representatives and received God’s word, the Ten Commandments. They’re told to not have any idols before them. And then they’re given a series of what some have referred to as civil statutes, the law of the covenant. And then following this, they enter into covenant with God and enter into his worship.

So essentially, this law of the covenant tells us how to live in the context of the presence of God. By way of St. Patrick’s lorica, we sang our profession of God’s presence with us and all things through Christ our savior. And now we turn to his law to tell us how we should live in terms of abiding in the presence of God.

Sermon text today is found then in Exodus 21:15-17. Please stand for the reading of God’s word.

Exodus 21:15-17. Although we won’t be talking on verse 16, we’ll be dealing with verses 15 and 17, but in full context, verses 15-17. “And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He who kidnaps a man and sells him or if he is found in his hand shall surely be put to death. And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.”

Let’s pray. Father, we thank you for your most holy word. Thank you for the gift of the Spirit and pray that he would illumine this text for understanding. Write this word upon our hearts, Lord God. Give us open ears, circumcised ears, that we might be your household servants who hear your word in delight to do it as good sons. We ask this in Christ’s name and for the sake of his kingdom and its manifestation. Amen.

Please be seated. Nursery people may be dismissed to go there.

I saw an interview with Neil Simon on TV last week or so. He was talking about The Odd Couple, that movie that was so funny starring Walter Matthau and Jack Lemmon. And he said it was one of the few times where he wrote a play. It was a play first before it became a movie where he wrote the character of Oscar for Walter Matthau. He had seen him as an actor. Oscar’s very much like Walter Matthau. And Felix was a different sort of character.

Well, he wrote the play and sent it to Walter Matthau. And Matthau called him up and said, “Yeah, I love the play. I want to play Felix.” And Neil Simon said, “Well, why do you want to play Felix?” He says, “Oscar, I can phone in. Felix would require acting.” And Neil Simon said, “Well, you practice acting on your own time. You’re playing Oscar.”

When I looked at this sermon for this week, this particular text, I thought it was a sermon I could phone in, so to speak, just walk through it because it seems so much a part of what we understand the scriptures to say. It seems so obvious what it means in terms of children honoring their parents. But then I remembered what this would have seemed like to me 10 or 15 years ago and my wife reminded me that this is a very difficult text to many people and so I can’t really phone this text in as it were.

In my study for this sermon I came across an article in the Journal of Evangelical Theological Society some years back on anachronisms in the scriptures and specifically in this portion he was talking about anachronistic proverbs. Anachronistic is something that used to apply to some other cultural situation but not to today. So it has no usefulness to us. And this fellow was talking specifically as an example of an anachronistic proverb was Proverbs 20:20 which says “whoever curses his father or his mother his lamp will be put out in deep darkness.” Sort of a reiteration of what we just read from the law of the covenant.

And this writer said, well, you know, this is anachronistic because in our day of children’s authorities and police and juvenile detention and high school counselors and all this stuff, the authority of the parent is pretty well reduced. And so these kind of anachronistic laws talking about how the child who dishonors their parent or curses or hits them should be put to death. Anachronistic.

Along with this he said another anachronistic proverb is found in chapter 19:18 which says “discipline your son for in that there is hope. Do not be a willing party to his death.” Discipline your son. Don’t be a willing party to his death.

See the writer of this article understood that also is a reference back to these case laws of Exodus 21. If you don’t discipline your son, then he grows up cursing you and hitting you. And if he does that, he is put to death. But these are anachronistic, we’re told, because they just don’t apply because we don’t live in that kind of culture anymore.

Well, these proverbs and case laws were not anachronistic in the forming of this country. In the Massachusetts civil code when it was first formed as a colony, they wrote into that civil code Exodus 21:15 and 17, anyone that any child who strikes his father or mother or curses his father or mother shall be put to death. And we have no instances of them executing anyone. But we do have instances of very severe whippings being given to sons who cursed or struck out at their parents in Massachusetts colony.

So these were not anachronistic at one time in our culture’s history. And of course we would say that these are prophetic because we would say that as surely as the gospel goes out to convert men and nations, so surely those men and nations are discipled to the law of God. And that means every bit of it, including this portion we just read.

Now, I wanted to read that anachronistic proverb about parents disciplining their children and not being a willing party to their death for another reason. And that is to say that while today’s sermon is primarily geared to the children of the congregation, to those who are the direct recipients of the command, understand parents that you’re not off the hook by this. You’re to train your children in the proper way. And the Proverbs tell us that part of the way you preserve them from these sins is by your consistent discipline of your children while they are young. Teach them while their heart is tender.

Now, the other thing I want to say here again, I’ll probably remind us of this very often in the next few months as we go through these case laws is the context for these sermons on the law of God is the worship service of God in which he assures us of our forgiveness. And the conclusion of the worship service is his benediction to us. It’s very easy as these laws are expounded and taught the full implication of them to come under great conviction for sin.

Last week we talked about violence and hatred and how it really represents a hatred of God and we’ll see that manifested in the hatred of parents today as well with children striking out at parents. We talked a little bit about the case laws relative that are very pertinent to our lack of civil laws against abortion, treating abortion as murder. And while at the communion table, I encouraged any of you who had engaged in acts that may have accidentally killed someone to come and find refuge at the Lord Jesus Christ through his death of the high priest that releases us from our guilt.

I should have also said that as we go through these series of laws, God wants our hearts to break over our failure to keep his law. But he also wants us to know that our hearts are mended through the work of the Lord Jesus Christ. And we’re forgiven of our sins. And every Lord’s day, we have the Lord’s supper at this church because that’s the place really where that blood of Christ is administered to us and we have full assurance of the forgiveness of our sins.

And I just want to say that the context for the giving of God’s law is a saved people who will be brought to conviction through that law, but brought to correction and brought to forgiveness as well. So I want to say that at the beginning of this sermon, if children, if you despair today because you do not meet the requirements of God’s law. Turn to the Lord Jesus Christ. Recognize that as you are administered the elements of communion today, you’re given forgiveness by Christ for those sins ultimately against him and then against his representatives and your parents.

So I don’t want you to grieve. I want your hearts to break over your sinful failure to walk in obedience to this law. I want my heart to break, but I don’t want us to despair. Not to sorrow as the ungodly sorrow because we know that Christ has made full atonement for these sins.

Okay. So, this is in some ways a difficult text. The evangelical community in the past does not like this text. They used it to make fun of God’s law. I remember many years ago, the early 80s I think sitting I think what it might have been at Bill Seismour’s carpet store. I’m not sure. We were having one of the original discussions with various people from the Portland area about Christian reconstruction and the law of God. And I don’t remember if I gave a presentation or not. I might have.

And there was a man there who said that, “Well, you know, if the law of God says we have to execute homosexuals, I find that so personally offensive, I simply could not believe it. I will not accept it.” He said, “Well, it’s an astonishing statement for someone to make, but at least it was honest.” And there are laws. We look at the law that we just read here about if a child strikes his parents or curses them, mother or father, father or mother, they’re to be put to death. And we say, “Well, you know, if that’s what the word of God says I’m going to have to find another way of interpreting my Christian faith because it just is so offensive to me personally that it can’t be true.”

Well, what I want us to agree with at the beginning of this time together is that if that’s what the word of God says, then we want to say amen to the word of God and we want to say what God’s word states is good and proper. It doesn’t do any good to say that well that was for them and this is for us and we can’t imagine something so terrible now because this was the same God. And these were real people’s lives that were being affected by this God in the giving of the case law in Exodus and then as they went into Israel, the promised land to live out their lives in relationship to this law.

These proverbs are there. We’ll see a lot of other scriptures that affirm this same thing. What was God thinking back then? And if we indict him today that this can’t be for us today, then we indict God somehow for back then giving him laws which were onerous or bad or evil somehow. So I want us to agree that whatever this law says, we want to obey it. We want to submit to it. And if our hackles get raised because of the truth of God’s word, then the problem is not the word of God.

The problem is our estimation of what’s proper, fair, just, good, improper. What we try to do when we come to the law of God is change how we think to get our thinking straight again as to what’s good and bad. Remember that Adam and Eve, the first sin of our forefathers and our Adam nature is to determine for ourselves good or evil. So this can be somewhat difficult text but let’s understand it before we jump to conclusions about what it says.

So I want to go through three steps here. First of all, what is the original meaning of these laws? You have to understand that in order to understand how it’s applied today. Secondly, how does this relate to the Lord Jesus Christ? How does this relate to the Son and his honoring of his Father? And third, then what does it mean to us and how should we apply it both in terms of the laws of the nation as well as in terms of our personal apprehension of this law.

Okay. First then the original meaning of these laws. What is proscribed? Remember it’s a word you should be knowing by now. I’m going to continue to use it. Proscribed means there’s a circle drawn around something and you’re not to do it. It’s forbidden. Prescribed means what you’re supposed to do. So what is proscribed? What were they to put off? You know, Ephesians says that the one short picture of Christian sanctification is putting off the old man and putting on the new man.

What were they to put off? And I want us—want you to listen now as I read some correlary texts that help us to understand a little better what these case laws about children striking and cursing parents are all about.

First of all, this is an obvious comment on the fifth commandment which in Exodus 20:12 says, “Honor your father and your mother that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.” And again, the restatement of that in Deuteronomy 5:16, “Honor your father and mother as the Lord your God has commanded you, that your days may be long and that it may be well with you in the land which the Lord your God is giving you.”

You see, it’s a commandment with a promise. But understand that the promise is because if you don’t honor your parents and if your dishonor becomes so bad as where you strike out or curse them in some particular way that this law gives us, then you won’t live long in the land because you’re to be executed.

Now let’s read a few other texts that are correlary as well. In Leviticus 20:1-10, there’s a section of scriptures that begin first with requirements of the parents not to consecrate their children to Molech or state worship. Molech is another form of Milcom—king, it means king worship. And so they weren’t supposed to give their children over to king worship. And then in verse 6, they’re supposed to turn to mediums. And then in verse 7, it says to be holy. “I am the Lord your God.” And then in verse 8, “You shall keep my statutes and perform them. I am the Lord who sanctifies you.”

So from him telling us to be holy and that he’s sanctifying us, he goes right on to say, “For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, his blood shall be upon him.” Reiteration of the same truth.

Deuteronomy 27:16. Now Deuteronomy 27 has the dodecalogue, the 12 statements of curses. And then there were blessings. Remember they set up the tribes on either half of this mountain area and upon one mountain the curses were placed and upon the other the blessings of the law. And the second of the curses is “Cursed is the one who treats his father or his mother with contempt.” And all the people shall say amen.

In other words, these are not just isolated statutes in Exodus 21. They reverberate throughout the Pentateuch.

Now let’s turn, however, to the extended commentary of this. Deuteronomy 21:18-21. Please turn there in your scriptures. And as you’re turning, I’ll explain this. What we have in Exodus 21:15-23 is a short synopsis of the law of the covenant. It’s the summary form. And what we have in Deuteronomy is the second giving of the law. Deuteronomium—deuteros nomos—second law. And again, it seems like essentially a long sermon preached by Moses on the content of the law of the covenant. That’s much of what’s found in Deuteronomy. So he meditates upon this law and then expounds it to us as an inspired commentary in the book of Deuteronomy. It’s one way to look at it. So it really helps us to understand the content the way God wants us to understand it.

And in Deuteronomy 21 beginning at verse 18, we read this: “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and who when they have chastened him will not heed them. Then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city to the gate of his city and they shall say to the elders of this city this son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voices. He is a glutton and a drunkard. Then all the men of this city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall put away the evil from among you and all Israel shall hear and fear.”

Okay. So now we have an inspired commentary on these two case laws in Exodus 21 about striking and cursing a parent. If we don’t look at these carefully, we’re liable to put whatever meaning we want to into the text in Exodus 21. But this tells us in a little fuller fashion what’s being addressed and how they were to apply it.

And notice first of all that this is not some young petulant child who in his anger sort of slaps his mom. Nor is this, you know, some young boy or girl who in a fit of rage one time swears at his parents or tells them that they’re terrible. No, what we have demonstrated in Deuteronomy 21:18-21 is a well-established pattern of rebellion against one’s parents.

And what we know for certain is that this is not a young child but an adult child. How do we know that? Because this child, the parents declare, is a glutton and a drunkard. Now, you can’t be a drunkard if you’re six years of age. A drunkard implies an adult child who’s come to maturity. While they’re a child still in relationship to their parents, they have now grown to adulthood, they’re now treating their parents very poorly.

Now, remember, as I said before, much of the Old Testament posits an extended household living in close proximity one to the other. The child is in the house of the parents, but he’s an adult child. Adult children living in the parental household. That was not unusual at the time.

So, first of all, the case law, the exposition of the case law in Deuteronomy 21 tells us these are older children, an older son or a daughter. Secondly, it says that this child has a settled disposition to rebellion, not an occasional flying off the handle. “A man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father, voice of his mother, who when they are chastened, when they chasten him, he will not heed them.” You see, there’s a series of statements here that demonstrate someone who is really fixed in their rebellion against mother and father.

In fact, he’s so fixed in his rebellion that the judges of the gate in hearing the evidence from the parents, the implication seems to be they know this kid is bad and they know the parents are coming. They know what the parents are saying is true because they’ve seen it demonstrated somehow. Remember that there are the laws of witness required here and the elders seem to be able to hear these statements of the parents. “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey our voice. Glutton and a drunkard.” And then they properly or promptly rather execute the young son.

Notice also the requirement of the parent here to bring him to the judges.

Okay. So the point here of this inspired commentary is that while we may at first read Exodus 21:15-17 as speaking of young children, such is not the case. I have seen in the last couple of weeks little boys, little, you know, toddler boys strike parents. I’ve seen what some would consider a violation of Exodus 21:15, but that’s not what it’s talking about. I didn’t tell that person that son should be executed because what Deuteronomy tells us in its fuller exposition of the text is we’re talking about an older child capable of drunkenness and gluttony who is in a fixed pattern of rebellion against his parents.

That’s the child who is the subject of the death penalty in Exodus 21:15 and 17.

Now let me just quickly note we could talk about the implications of this beyond the family. The case law is talking about the authority of God mediated through the parents in the family. Just as we said last week that when we strike out in violence against God’s image in man, we’re ultimately striking out against God. The child who strikes out against the parent is rebelling against the authority of the parent.

Read Psalm 2 last week. They try to break off the cords of God’s authority over them. And they do that by striking out at the parents. So ultimately, this is hatred of God reflected in the Adamic nature and the hatred of one’s parents that gets unrestrained for some particular reason in the life of the child.

Now, we could also relate this to the church and to the state. In Deuteronomy 17:12, we read this: “The man who acts presumptuously will not heed the priest who stands to minister there before the Lord your God or the judge. That man shall die. You shall put away the evil from Israel.” This is the law for contempt of court, church court or civil court. And in the scriptures, a settled determination of contempt for church court, the elders of the church or for the civil court, the judges. These are capital offenses subject to excommunication in the church and death penalty in the state.

You see, it’s all of a piece, isn’t it? Exodus 21:15-17 says, “The one who has a steady rebellious attitude toward God reflected in his hatred of his parents.” Deuteronomy 17 says that rebellion and contumacy of the government of Christ mediated either through the church or the state. All of these are subject to the death penalty. Family, church, state, all bases are covered. But here we have the extension to the family.

And while I have said that this does not apply to young children, I don’t want you young people who may have become angry at your parents, cursed them in your hearts, made light of them in your speech, perhaps even struck out against them, or desired to strike out against them. I don’t want you to feel like you’re off the hook now because you’re young still and this is not a settled disposition.

There is a transition here from striking parents to kidnapping someone a physical action and then this cursing a spoken action against the parents all requiring the death penalty. This means that all manifestations of hatred or violence against parents whether it’s verbal or physical is placed at a very high level of hatred by God. We are to hate these kinds of actions, we are to try to get rid of them in the context of our home. And when children speak angrily to their parents, make light of their parents, or strike out at their parents, the children of this congregation do that, I’m praying the Holy Spirit will bring this sermon to mind that God says if that’s the course of your life, you’re going to end up executed for that sin and that sin alone.

The Bible says parental authority in the home is of exceedingly high importance and your parents are disciplining you to bring you into life to train you away from death. In Adam, you will walk in the paths of rebellion to the father as Adam rebelled against his father and you will walk in the paths of death and your parent is to drive you into the paths of life.

Okay. So what does the text tell us? What does it mean in the context to that particular people? Well, it says that you cannot strike your father or your mother. In the context, I think of Exodus 21 and the laws against violence and physical fights that break out amongst men, murder of people, etc., this word for strike, I think, should be interpreted to mean to strike with great force, with a determination to really do harm to somebody else. Something close to attempted murder, beating your parents up. That’s the idea here.

Now usually if you get in a fight with somebody, we’ll see this in the case laws in a couple of weeks, next week actually, it’s not death if you get in a fist fight with somebody, but you get in a fist fight with your parents and you’re an older child, it’s the death penalty for you. You see, there’s a class of people that are given special privileges or rights or protection here, and that is parents.

Okay? Out of all the classes—we have class legislation today protecting other sorts of people. Special rights to homosexuals for instance. And really what a marked contrast. There is class legislation in the scriptures. It’s to protect the role of the authority of God as represented in the family. And specifically then the law says that if they struck out as a child, if he tried to beat up his father or his mother, then he was subject to the death penalty.

Bible tells us of the extreme importance of the family here.

Let me also well let’s go on. Okay and then the second thing it tells us is to curse father or mother. Now the word curse here means the opposite of to bless. It can mean to utter an imprecation in the name of God to enlist God in your cause against someone. And you can see how terrible that would be to enlist God in trying to fight your parents. That’s a very bad and wicked thing. But it can also mean to make light of someone.

In 1 Samuel 2:30 we read this: “The God of Israel says, now he’s talking to Eli, I am indeed, I said indeed that your house and the house of your father would walk before me forever. But now the Lord says, far be it from me, for those who honor me, I will honor. Those who despise me shall be lightly esteemed.”

Okay. So the defining element of curse is blessing. To curse is to treat lightly. To bless or to honor the specific subject of the fifth commandment is to treat with regard heaviness to give weight or consideration to. So its opposite in this case law what’s being proscribed now is to make light of one’s parents to treat them lightly to utter reviling things against them to speak disparagingly of one’s parents.

Now remember Deuteronomy 27 indicates this is a fixed pattern under your life. It’s not a one-time flare up sort of deal. But nonetheless if the one time flare up sort of deal are allowed to continue that’s going to become a steady a settled habit in the life of that child and it leads them to the death penalty that God tells us of in these laws.

So to curse means to not treat with heaviness. It means to lightly esteem one’s parents. That’s what the word means here. So what they were prohibited from doing was to have a lifestyle of rebellion against their parents that found its proof in words of reviling or speaking lightly or disparagingly of one’s parents in a fixed way as an adult child or an older child or to actually physically beat up one’s parents or to strike out at one’s parents.

That’s the subject of the particular case law then as told us in further detail in Deuteronomy 21.

Well, what’s prescribed here? Well, obviously this is an exposition of the fifth commandment and what they’re supposed to be doing is to support their father and mother to honor them and to obey them.

In Matthew 15:1-9 well actually let’s read Mark 7:9-13. These are parallel passages. Well let’s stay with Matthew. Turn to Matthew 15:1-9. Now we’re going to look at our savior’s attitude toward this particular case law. And it tells us something about the application of it as well to us.

Matthew 15:1-9. “Then the scribes and the Pharisees were from Jerusalem came to Jesus saying, ‘Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands when they eat bread.’ He answered and said to them, ‘Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? God commanded, saying, honor your father and mother, fifth commandment, and he who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ Deuteronomy 21:17, the law we’re considering.

Notice that he doesn’t use verse 15, the more obvious, the clearer thing. ‘If a child strikes out at his father and mother, attempts to kill him when he’s put to death.’ He uses the worst possible one in terms of how people react to it. ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, whatever profit you might have received from me as a gift to God, then he need not honor his father or mother, you have made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition, hypocrites.’

‘Well, did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying, “This people draws near to me with your mouths, and they honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.”‘

Notice that our savior here does a couple of things. One, he reaffirms the validity of Exodus 21:17 as a legitimate and necessary application of the fifth commandment. So now, if you talk about, you know, the law of God in Exodus 21:15-17, and somebody tells you, well, that’s Old Testament. No, no, it’s New Testament. Our savior actually repeated that command. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be? If he repeats it in the New Testament, it’s okay.

Well, here it is. It’s repeated for us as an exposition of the fifth commandment. I’m sure there’ll be more fancy ways to rebut that on the part of some dispensationalists. “Well, Jesus is talking to Jews. So, now whatever he says in the Gospels isn’t for us either.” And on and on we go. But the point is, of course, that our savior reaffirms the case law as a proper application of the fifth commandment. And he also tells us what it meant in a particular setting in which he found himself.

He was telling the Pharisees that they were guilty of a capital offense. They were guilty of a death penalty offense. Why? Because they didn’t support their parents with money. With money. So one implication of this is that older children are to support their parents in their old age. Remember we see that in the Pauline epistles. “Honor widows.” Another implication—

So one implication, what are they supposed to do? They were supposed to honor their parents. And by honoring their parents, they were supposed to support their parents in their old age. They were also to obey them. As Ephesians 6 tells us, “Children obey your parents in the Lord.” The first commandment with promise is an exposition of the fifth commandment. To honor is also to obey. I’ve listed a couple of verses there in 1 Timothy 5:3 and 16-18. We won’t turn to them, but they do tell us that widows are to be honored and elders are to be honored and specifically what it’s talking about is money.

The worker is worthy of his wages in the case of the elder and the need to support one’s parents in the case of the widow. So when we read to honor your parents in the fifth commandment, it has an implication of support in their old age, but it of course has this specific application of obedience to them and being respectful in our speech to our parents. And then finally, what civil sanctions are attached to this particular law.

Trying to understand its original application. I just need to make a comment here. I talked last week about how many of these death penalty offenses in Exodus 21 have attached to them the penalty clause. Some don’t, but this one does. “The child who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” Dying, he shall die is what the phrase means. It’s a double reinforcement of the sureness of the penalty. It’s called a pleonasm. P L E O N A S M. And there’s a lot of discussion amongst people who study God’s law about what this pleonasm means. It means something. But what does it mean?

Remember last week I said that in Numbers chapter 35:31 we are specifically commanded to take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, he shall surely be put to death. Dying, he shall die. But in Numbers, that is the only capital offense that specifically says you shall take no ransom for the life of the murderer. In other words, you got to execute him. Someone who is guilty of premeditated murder, you have to execute. That’s what Numbers 35 seems to be saying. And many people infer that since Numbers 35 tells us in case of murder, you have to do it. That the implication is that for other sins that are capital offenses, you don’t have to put them to death.

What we’re given here is the maximum allowable penalty by the judge to put upon the person, which would mean that these case laws about striking parents and cursing parents are not necessarily capital offenses. Maybe that couple in Deuteronomy 21 have brought their children to the judge before and the judge has whipped them because they’ve struck out at their parents. And it’s the incorrigible juvenile delinquent, older delinquent. It’s the incorrigible rebellious son who then is executed in Deuteronomy 21. The idea of incorrigibility seems to be implied in Deuteronomy 21. Meaning that if you’ve got older children or their first violation of Exodus 21:15 and 17, maybe the parent can impose a lighter sentence.

But then you’re stuck with the phrase, “Surely dying he shall die.” What does it mean? Well, Gary North’s explanation is that dying he shall die means that only the parent can vary the punishment to the child. The civil magistrate, if the parent wants death, cannot set that aside. But I think that maybe another way to look at this is that is, as I said last week, the reiteration of the phrase of God’s curse upon Adam in the day you eat of it you shall surely die dying you shall die.

So what we have reiterated in these capital offenses is the reiteration that what we are now seeing is the work of Adam in his original sin and throwing off the authority of God and moving in terms of rebellion against parents, church or state. Dying you shall die. You’re suffering the curse of Adam because you’re walking in the footsteps of old Adam. I don’t know for sure. I can’t tell you what the civil sanction should be.

I know that the ultimate sanction is death. But whether that’s required in every case of a juvenile or older child, a drunkard and glutton striking out against its parents or cursing them, I don’t know if it’s the only if it’s always required in such a case or if it’s the maximum allowable offense. But we do know that our civil statute should at least reflect some degree at some point someone who actually physically attacks their parents and tries to do great damage to them should be subject to the death penalty.

Okay, so that’s what the law meant in its original context. What does it mean as it speaks to us about the Lord Jesus Christ? And what I suggest to you in Roman numeral 2 is that the law relates to two sons. Adam was the son of God. We’re told that in Luke 3:38. And doing with the descent or the lineage rather portrayed there in Luke chapter 3, we come to the end of it. The son of Adam, the son of God. Adam is specifically called the son of God.

Adam’s the one who rebelled against his father, God. He was the son of God. His father was God as it were by throwing off God’s gracious commands to him and going for the forbidden fruit. Adam is the one who shows disrespect violence against God by moving in terms of obeying his own particular lust. So it’s Adam who surely dying he should die and who suffered the curse of God for his disobedience.

But Jesus comes along as the second Adam and Jesus comes along and says indeed that he is the son who delights to do the father’s will. In Psalm 40:8 Jesus says, “I delight to do your will, oh my God. Your law is within my heart.” In John 4:34, Jesus said, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.” In Job 23, we read of eventually the greater Job. “My foot has held fast to his steps. I have kept his way and not turned aside. I have not departed from the commandment of his lips. I have treasured the words of his mouth more than my necessary food.”

That’s what Jesus ultimately says of himself ultimately as the greater Job, the greater righteous man. He is the one who’s treasured the words of his father’s mouth and obedience to the father’s will in terms of his functional submission to the will of the father more than his necessary food, more than life itself, so to speak, his necessary food. Our savior said that his food was to do the will of him that sent him and to finish his work. Jesus is the picture of what the law positively commands us to do. The one who honored his father. The one who fulfilled the requirement of his father. The one who saw in his father’s words the thing that his heart delighted to do. Jesus is the one to pay the curse for the failure of this.

It’s interesting that in the exposition of this case law in Deuteronomy 21 that we were looking at dealing with the incorrigible son, immediately after the description there of the son being executed, we have in verses 22 and 23 of Deuteronomy 21 the statement that whoever convinces sin deserving of death and is put to death. And if you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. For he who is hanged is a cursed of God.

Obviously, this points to the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ who dies and hangs on the tree. And as Galatians says, he became a curse for us. Jesus took upon himself the curse due to the rebellious son who had thrown off the will of the father. The curse due to Adam is carried by the Lord Jesus Christ whose all of his life is a picture of obedience and honoring his father in heaven. And yet he takes upon himself the curse of us who in our Adamic nature throw off the gracious submission that we are required to have to God our father.

The law pictures then the death penalty to Adam. The incursion the taking upon himself of that death penalty of our savior and it pictures to us the perfect son who delights to do his father will father’s will more than his necessary food more than life itself. He desires to obey the father.

What’s the meaning then for us? Well, it’s as I said in a way this is a phone in sort of a sermon. Once you deal with the difficulties of the text and recognize that as God’s word says that the incorrigible son who strikes or curses his father in a settled determined way who strikes out in a serious way doing violence to his parents and who is a settled lifestyle of slandering his parents reviling them and invoking God’s curse against them that this child is to be executed. Once we deal with that problem the implications for our life are rather obvious, isn’t it?

We have an accurate indictment in the law before us of our hearts, of our Adamic natures that hate God, desire to throw off his government and do so by pointing our rebellion against church, state, and preeminently in this law, the family. This fallen nature is pictured for us quite radically in Proverbs 30:11-17.

Turn there if you will. Proverbs 30:11-17. There’s a climax here in the first portions of this verse. “There’s a generation that curses its father and does not bless its mother.” Notice how that puts it. It curses his father and doesn’t bless his mother. You see, in the way the scriptures treat of our relationship to our parents, you are either cursing or blessing. There’s no neutral ground pictured for us in our relationship to our parents. It’s equatable to not bless your mother. It’s equated here in this proverb with cursing your father. It’s the same thing. See, it’s other two sides of the same coin.

So, this indictment is that we do not honor our parents, but actually we curse them. “And there’s a generation that curses his father, doesn’t bless his mother. There’s a generation that is pure in its own eyes, yet is not washed from its filthiness.” The basis, the underlying motivation for one who curses father or mother or doesn’t bless them, who treats them lightly, who calls them the old man and the old lady, who treats them with derision and disrespect. The basis for that is that they have a self-esteem that is much higher than what it should be. They are pure in their own eyes, not washed from filthiness.

“There’s a generation, oh, how lofty are their eyes, and their eyelids are lifted up.” Supposedly noble goals, but really a representation of the pride in the heart of the child who fails to honor his parents and who instead strikes out or curses at his parents. And then verse 14 rather is the climactic conclusion to these sets of verse. “There’s a generation whose teeth are like swords, whose fangs are like knives to devour the poor from off the earth and the needy from among men.”

This is the end result. Children, if your parents, if the word of God ministered to you by your parents and by the church does not stop you from being filled up with a sense of your own importance which finds its outlet then in failing to honor your parents and in actually cursing your parents and striking out at them. If that’s allowed to continue, the scriptures say that what you bring to the earth, what your legacy will be after you depart from this earth is that you were someone whose teeth was like swords, whose fangs were like knives to devour the poor from off the earth and the needy from among men.

You bring death and destruction in your path. This is an accurate picture of the 60s generation and of the rebellion of the youth culture. It seems like rebellion always starts with the youth proud in their own eyes despising the honor and authority of the parents because of their despising the honor and authority of God himself in his word. And the end result of that youth rebellion of the 60s is the destruction that comes in the context of our culture today. Massive amounts of abortion, the poverty programs that are simply there to puff up the self-esteem of those people involved in them and mean perpetual poverty, the breakdown of the family units in the inner cities, all the violence that has accompanied them.

They all have rushed forth from the simple pride of youth left unchecked in their rebellion, their lack of esteem toward their own parents.

Now, that’s who we are in Adam. Doesn’t do any good, boys and girls, to say, “Well, I’m not going to be like that again.” In your Adamic nature, that’s who you are. You hate God, the scriptures tell us, and you hate your parents in your Adamic nature. God, Bible says, “Put that off.” This is an accurate statement of who you are, but put those things off and put on the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is an accurate indictment, the law is of who we are in our fallen nature. But the law also provides us a means of sanctification to move ahead into the future. Now, I’m not saying that sanctification comes by the law. I know that sanctification comes by the Holy Spirit of God. But the spirit of God speaks in terms of his word. And this word is to us a means of sanctification. It’s the word that comes alongside of us and tells us what we’re to be like. Both what we’re to put off in the application of doing away with the dishonoring of parents and putting on as Ephesians 6:1-4 says, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother, which is the first commandment with promise that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.”

Now, that verse, by the way, parents, goes on to say, “Fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.” And it shows the parents’ job in this.