-
8/12/2019 1996 Issue 6 - Thou Shalt Not Destroy the Family - Counsel of Chalcedon
1/4
Our God is a God of the family_
At the heart of God's plans for
man
lies the family.
t
is the oldest and
most basic institution God has
created among men. In this study
we come to a text that has two laws
related to
th
e family. According to
the outline of Deuteronomy this
passage is located in the section
which gives
an
exposition of the
Sixth Commandment,
Thou
shalt
not hill . It follows Moses' expan
sion of the Sixth Commandment in
regards to capital punishment and
war laws. These very obviously fit
the pattern. But in light of that, the
passage before us would seem at
first glance to be misplaced.
These laws would appear to
Let us consider these family
protection laws. Let us do so by
consideration of their covenantal
purpose. How do these laws
protect the covenant family? Let
us
begin
with
the first one: 1. Cov
enantal Succession and
the
Godly
Child.
First, before
we
actually get
into the express
purpose
of the first
law, an important point needs to
be briefly made regarding verse
ISa: If a man have two wives".
Some have wrongly assumed that
this law (and others like it) estab
lished polygamy. Such is not the
case. They often use this type of
law to discredit the continuing
here command it Its presence in
the Law does
not
ipso facto
invalidate God's Holy Word
Second, as we prepare to consider
this law,
it
needs also to
be noted
t)-lat this law does
not
have as its
intention
the
establishing of
the
right of primogeniture.
That
is, it is
not given for the purpose
of
establishing the' legal rights of
the
first-born to receive a double
portion of
the
inheritance. This is
so in light of at least three factors:
(1) This had long been the practice
of the
pa
tliarchs, at least since the
time of Abraham over 500 years
previous to the giving of the Law.
be more relevant were they
in the previous section
dealing with the Fifth
Commandment, "Honor thy
father and mother". After
all, this section deals with a
W rou
~ I r a l t
~ t
~ e 5 t r O y tIr e
Jlf
amil l
The way
in
which the first
born is
mentioned here
shows that
the
law of
the
first-born is assumed as in
existence already.
t
is
assumed that a double
portion inheritance will go
matter obviously concerned
with family relations.
But as is so often the case,
the laws of God overlap
and
intertwine themsel
ves
around one
another as a seamless garment.
The two laws that we will
consider in this study do, of
course, relate to the Fifth Com
mandment. But
in
the form in
which they appear in our text, they
consider the family in terms of its
protection and succession. These,
then, are laws designed to protect
the family from destruction, from
moral
and
spiritual death. As such,
they expand on the Sixth Com
mandment: they fo rbid that which
would kill or destroy the family
line. The first law is a purely moral
law.
t is not
a civil law backed by
governmental authority. t con
tains no criminal sanctions. There
is no punishment mentioned for
breaking the law. The second
law
differs from first
in
that it is
not
only a moral but a civil law.
~ e u t r o 1 t o m 1 ; 1 21:15-21
Rev. Kenneth L Gentry,Jr;
validity of God's Law
today_
It
must be noted th at the law simply
says,
If a
man have
two
wives". It
does
not
say,
"A
man
should have
two wives." In the Old Testament
era, God tolerated polygamy. He
did not command it.
By
this
statement we
do
not mean that
God tolerated moral evil. Obvi
ously, polygamy is
not
intrinsically
immor
al for, after all, God did
allow it
in
that day. And He never
allows moral evil: The
Lord
is of
purer
eyes
than
to
behold
evil,
and
canst not
look
on iniquity" (Hab.
1:13a). In the New
Te
stame
nt
era,
however, polygamy is forbidden.
Due to the specific purpose of this
case law, we will
not
delve into the
whys and wherefores of its toler
ance of polygamy in the Old
Testament era. That is an interest
ing and important study in itself.
Suffice it to say, for our present
purposes, that the Law does not
to the first-horn. This law
exists to establish which
of
the first-born in this
unusu l situ tion h s
th
right.
(2)
The phraSing
of the
passage makes it clear that the
specific purpose of the case law is
to protect
the
legal rights of
the son
of the hated wife: If a l11an have
two wives,
one beloved, and another
hated,
and they
have
bam
him
children,
botlt the beloved and the
hated; and
if
he first-bam son be
her
s
that was
hated:
then
it
shall be, when
he maketh
his
sons to
i1111e ;t
that
whi
ch he hath,
that
he
may
not l11ake
the son of the beloved first-bam before
the son of the hated, which is indeed
the first-bam. The
reference
to
the
double inheritance
of
the first-bo
rn
is brought in by way of illustration
to set up a set of circumstances. To
illustrate the importance of the
protection of family inher itance
rights,
the
law cites
the
case
hypothetically.
The point
of the
case law is that family inheritance
rights are so important that even
the wishes of the father may
not
July/August, 1996
t THE
COUNSEL of Chalcedon t
29
-
8/12/2019 1996 Issue 6 - Thou Shalt Not Destroy the Family - Counsel of Chalcedon
2/4
supersede
the standing right
of
the
first-born son. (We w ll deal
with
this more shortly.) (3)
The
place of
this passage in the structure
of
Deuteronomy is helpful to the
proper understanding
of
its
purpose
. t is
found in the portion
of De1.jteronomy
which
is applying
the
Sixth Commandment
which
teaches, "Thou shalt not kill or
"destroy". In the larger context,
then, this isgiven to
prohibit
the
destruction, the disinheritance,
or
the
economic
death of the innocent
child. The well-known
right
to a
double portion is mentioned so
that the particular issue can be
dealt with: The right is maintained
even if the
father does not like the
child This law, then, has a singular
purpose: To
teach
"Thou shalt not
disinherit the godly child." Taken
for granted in the case law situa
tion is the obvious assumption that
the child protected is a godly son.
By
way
of
contrast
the very
next
passage speaks of the
ungodly
child
and how
to
deal
with
him.
The moral
lesson we must learn is
this: The family
is
under
the
headship
of
the father, by
creational order and Biblical Law.
But the father is not God. He
cannot be a tyrant. He
cannot
autonomously
determine anything
he chooses in regard to his family.
He is obligated to follow the
pattern
of
God's Law. The male
headship of
the home is legitimate
and
right only i f the father righ
teously reflects God's rule. This
law insures
that
this is understood.
e live in
an
age characterized by
superficiality
and
emotionalism.
What strikes our fancy.... What
makes
us feel good....
Such
things
determine how
we
conduct
our
affairs. This is rtagic.
The
godly
father is one who acts toward his
children, not
in
terms of emotional
feeling or some such thing. He is
one who governs his family in
terms of God's holy Law. Even
though emotionally he may love
his second wife
and
her fust-born
child more than the other, he may
not selfishly choose to honor that
child over the other. Rights are
God-given and must be maintained
in terms
of
a godly order. The basic
principle
of
this law is
that
the
godly child cannot be disinherited.
Not emotional feeling, but moral
law was to determine
the
father's
conduct toward his family. God's
Law governs in the family life.
God is concerned with the continu
ance and succession
of
His cov
enant
in family generations. Man
cannot interrupt them with impu-
nity. The ideas of covenantal
succession and leaving an inherit
ance are very
important to
the
Christian. Covenantal succession
ties family generations together. It
stresses the labors
of
the past shall
be sent via covenantal inheritance
into the future to our children.
"Children (godly children) are an
heritage of the Lord" (Psa. 127:3)
2. Covetlatltal Cessation and the
Ungodly Child. In the second case
law we have presented to us an
opposite situation. Rather
than
the
insuring
of
covenantal succession,
we have the call to covenantal
cessation. This law is just as
important as thepreceding one;
they lOgically occur together to
govern against extremes.
Deuteronomy 21:18-22 reads: If a
man have a
stubborn
and rebellious
son, which will
not
obey
the voiceof
his father
or
the voice of
his
mother,
and
that
when
they have chastened
him, will
not hearken unto
them:
Then shall his
father and
his
mother
lay hold Otl him and bring him out
unto
the elders of his city,
and unto
the
gate
of his place; and they
shall
say
unto the
elders
his city, This our
son is stubborn and
rebellious,
he will
not obey
our
voice; he is
a
glutton,
and
a drunkard. And
all
the men of
his
city
shall stone him with
stones,
that he die: so shalt
thou
put evil
3 TH COUNSEL of Chalcedon
t
July/August, 1996
away
from amOtlg
you;
and
all
Israel
shall hear, and
fear.
"Again, oppo
nents
of
God's Law try to make this
law something that
it
is not. They
try to disestablish God's Law
by
appealing to the alleged cruelty
of
this passage. But let us notice a few
things
in
response to such allega
tions: First, this law does
not
apply
to
a
young
child. The text clearly
presents the actions
of
an older
child,
not
an adolescent: He is one
who is a "drunkard" and uncon
trollable. This
is
not calling for
capital punishment
of
a ten year
old . Second, this law does not call
for capital
punishment
for mere
drunkenness (as evil as drunken
ness is). What is presented here is
a complex
of
evil characteristics
inhering
in
one person: He is
"stubborn", "rebellious", a "drunk
ard", and a "glutton." These are
expressive of dangerous unruliness
and
incorrigible criminality. This is
not one act or occasional acts.
t
is
a settled lifestyle of dangerous
behavior. s a matter of fact, it is
public misconduct that is provable
in court: Then shall
his father
and
his mother lay
hold
on
him and
bring
him
out unto the elders of his
city
,
and
unto the
gate
of his place....
"
The
parents have tried to chasten and
correct him, but to no avail: And
they shall
say unto the elders ofhis
city
This
our son is
stubborn
and
rebellious, he
will
not obey
our voice
(v. 20a). Third, the opponent of
this law who alleges that it is
immoral has
put
himself in an
uncomfortable situation. Not only
is it God's Law, but Jesus Christ
affirms it in New Testarnent.
Matthew 15:1-4 has Jesus citing
this law as it is recorded in
Leviticus 20:9: Then came to esus
scribes
and
Pharisees, which were of
Jerusalem, saying, Why do
thy
disciples transgress
the
tradition
of the
elders? for they wash
not
their
hands
when they
eat
bread
.
But he answered
and said
unto
them, Why
do ye
also
-
8/12/2019 1996 Issue 6 - Thou Shalt Not Destroy the Family - Counsel of Chalcedon
3/4
transgress the commandment ojGod
by your tradition? For God
com
manded, saying, Honor thy Jather and
mother: and, He
that cursetll Jather or
mother,
let
him
die
the death .... Ye
hypocrites, well
did I
saiah prophesy
oj
your, saying
This
people draweth
nigh
unto me with their
mouth,
and
honoreth
me
with
t
heir
lips;
but their
heart is
Jar from me.
But in vain they
do
worship me, teaching Jar
doctrines
the commandm ents oj men. The
.fundamental teaching of this law is
that the family must align itself
with God and His
Law
, rather than
with blood ties or emotional
attachment, as is so often the
case. God and His
Law
must
have priority over feelings and
sympathies. Jesus spoke of the
overriding of natural sympathies
in the family in Matthew 10:34-
38:
Think
not that I am come to
send peace on earth: I came not to
send
peace, but a
sword.
For I
am
come to set a man at Valiance
against
his Jather, and
the
daughter against
her mother,
and
the daughter-in-law
against
her
mother-in-law. And a
man
's
Joes shall be
they
oJ his
own
household. He
that
loveth
Jather
or
mother more
than
me is not worthy oj
me:
and
he
that
loveth son or daugh
ter more
than
me is
not
worthy oj
me. " Obviously our Lord is not
demanding the undermining or the
destruction of the home. He is
calling for a
reCOgnit
ion of a
fundamental priority: The Lord
must be first in
life.
That is the
whole idea of His being "Lord"
How often in the news do we read
of mothers and fathers calling for
mercy for their sons that have
committed murd
er
This sets them
directly contrary to God and His
Law for man. Every man has a
mother and father Shall every
murderer be set free? The godly
parent
is
the parent who follows
God and His
Law
wherever they
may lead. This
is
what is meant by
"the fear of God" which is so often
spoken of in both the Old
nd
New
Testaments. The godly parent is
one who will cut off his child when
he is in dangerous, settled rebellion
aga inst God and man. Not blood,
but
faith should rule us. Not pity,
but God's
La
w must govern o
ur
conduct towa rd those who ha
ve
set
themsel
ves
against God even
if
they are our own children. A
humanistic refusal to follow such a
concept as here found in God's
Law
has caused serious problems
of national consequence in the
past. How often have the mon
archs in Europe been scoundrels
afflicting the citizenry with barbari
ties and neighboring nations with
unp
rovoked war. And the monar
chies were established along family
lines. Almost invariably the bad
kings and queens were known to
be evil before they were crowned.
They could have been cut off by
godly parents. They could have
been disinherited and the nation
would have been spared much
grief. Consider also God's actions
toward His firstborn, Israel.
Exodus 4:22 says, "Is rael is my son,
even my firstborn. " Yet Jesus
teaches in Matthew 8: 10-12 that
Israel will be cast ou
t: "Ve
rily I say
unto you, I have not found so great
faith, no, not in Israel. And I say
unto you, That
m n
y shall come
from the east and west, and shall
sit in the kingdom of heaven. But
the children of the kingdom shall
be cast out into outer darkness:
there shall be weeping and gnash
ing of teeth. God cut off His
firstborn son, Israel, because Israel
rejected and crucified Jesus Christ.
And He then
dopted us
There are
several conclusions that
m
y be
drawn from this law of our God.
Some are conclusions related to the
family; some are conclusions
related to the government: (1) The
family
is
under a moral obligation
to cut off the ungodly child
by
disinheriting him.
f
God's Law
urges the parent to
tum
the evil
child over to civil authOrity, clearly
it would encourage the refusal to
subsidize the godless child in life
Any wealth that we have comes
from God. It must be used for God
and His kingdom work.
It mu
st
not
be allowed to pass into the hands
of the ungodly, even if they are
our own children. 2) In the
rare cases where parents are
faced with a situation wherein
one of their children has been
proven to be a criminal, the
parents should st nd for
righteousness. They should
not
side with the evil child against
law and order by pleading for
mercy. This is may be h rd
to
do
emotionally,
but
it is proper to do
in light of God's holy
Law.
(3) The
law endorses a high view of the .
home and of parental control in the
home. The godly parent disciplines
th
e child. And where the discipline
does
not
work, and when the child
becomes dangerous, the godly
parent turns him in to the authori
ties. (4) There are limits to parental
authority. In Roman law the father
had the right to slay his own
children if he saw
fit.
But in
Biblical law the parent 's disciplin
ary authOrity is limited to chastise
ment. He cannot slay the child .
That authOrity is vested in civil
government. (5) An obvious
application of this law would
be
that the civil government should
have laws that call for capital
punishment for the incorrigible
criminal. In the case presented the
unruly son
is
clearly incorrigible.
He is
a menace to
SOCiety
who
constantly is involved in criminal
conduct. Instead of housing nd
July/August, 1996 t TH COUNSEL of Chalcedon t 31
-
8/12/2019 1996 Issue 6 - Thou Shalt Not Destroy the Family - Counsel of Chalcedon
4/4
feeding the debased criminal at
taxpayer's expense , the government
should put the criminal to death.
oncIjlSion
Our God loves the family. The
godly parent cannot disinherit
godly children. He must provide an
inheritance for his godly children.
However, our
family s not
our
God God's
Law must rule
in
all of
life, even in the difficult situations
where parent s set against child.
We
should let our children know
how much they mean to us. We
should let them know that our love
is
governed by God's Law. They
must rest assured in the knowledge
that we will do all that God
requires of us. We will leave them
an inheritance if they are godly.
But we will also disinherit them i f
they do
not
follow after
God.n
.
class
syllabus;
2
textbookS;
an.d
editorial
oversight for $175 (some
.SASE assignments
required.)
:
Write
for
more
information:
. Kenneth L Gentry Jr.
46
Mairi St., Conestee, SC 29636
32 t
THE
COUNSEL of Chalcedon t July/August,
1996
Non-Profit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
BULK RATE
Permit No. 1553
Greenville 5C
29602