Lessons from the law of the rebellious son and the death penalty

As we have seen in Hosea 11, the background to God’s reluctance to eliminate Israel for their rebellion is the law of the rebellious son (Deut 21:18-21). It legislates that parents who have such a son take him to the elders and have him stoned. It is a horrifyingly cold-bloodied idea, especially from our permissive Western context. There are several aspects to it that we may find objectionable. First, how could any parent contemplate such a thing? Second, from our modern cultures, the death penalty sounds much too harsh for the kind of behaviour that many parents routinely see in their children today. Third, how could God give such a barbaric law?

Man-made laws and Old Testament brutality?

Many at this point would try to safeguard at least God’s reputation and treat this as a man-made law given by Moses. Alternatively, they may dismiss it as simply one of those brutal regulations that is part of the Old Testament world, something we have outgrown once Jesus introduced God’s forgiving love. Such an explanation, however, will not do. The Old Testament law was given by God, and it is this same God who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Instead of standing over God’s Word and critiquing it from our modern vantage point, we need to stand under Scripture and consider how it may critique our cultural perspective.

The subversion of authority – then and now

First, we should note that the question of subverting authority in any society is a serious issue because it undermines the existing order. If there is no consensus around respecting authorities, a society disintegrates into chaos. We see signs of it in a Western context, where traditional authority figures are repulsed, whether it is parents at home or teachers at school. As moderns, we have grown up with the cultural message that bucking the trends, going against what ‘authorities’ say, making our own way in the world is the ideal we should aim for. Since modern identity is often defined in opposition to authority, teenage rebellion has become an inevitable phase of a child’s development, a phenomenon unknown in premodern societies. No doubt, there were rebels in any age, but it was the exception, not the norm and was condemned as a trait that weakens the foundations of a society. Since identity in ancient societies (and traditional ones even today) was defined in terms of following in the footsteps of one’s elders, such rebellion was not elevated into a positive, even desirable quality. Rather, it was denounced as unacceptable behaviour.

The death penalty

This is evident not only in the legislation about the rebellious son but also in the law about cursing or reviling God, a ruler or parents (Exod 21:17; 22:28; Lev 20:9; 24:13-16). These all undermine God and the authorities He put in place. Ruler here refers not only to a king but to any official in leadership roles such as judges, elders or the high priest. Although the penalty is not spelt out for cursing a ruler, the punishment can be assumed to be the same as for the other cases, based on the principle of analogy. That these laws were in practice is evident from the story of Naboth’s vineyard, where he is stoned to death on false charges summarised as ‘he cursed God and king’ (1 Kings 21:9-10). The death penalty indicates the severity of the issue.

Re-thinking Old Testament laws – our Christian context

However, we should be cautious about lifting such laws from their ancient context and thinking that they can be or intended to be applied in our modern context as they stand. For one thing, this was Israel’s law to regulate their life as a theocracy (a society under God’s rule), which does not straightforwardly translate into a Christian context, since the Church is not equivalent to a whole society with its own judicial bodies. Neither are we under the Law as Christians (Rom 7:4-6; Gal 5:18) or expected to keep all its intricate details. Nevertheless, the Old Testament laws provide principles for living. Thus, the principle of being subject to authorities because God has put them in place is still valid, as Paul explains (Rom 13:1-7). This then is ultimately about submission to God.

Re-thinking Old Testament laws – the death penalty

We also need to reflect on the issue of the death penalty. In the ancient world, life was harsh and pain and death were a more common reality due to child mortality, illness, accidents and wars. Medical knowledge and care would also have been more limited. In such a context, penalties for crimes had to be more severe if they were to have any restraining effect. Thus, many of the most serious cases of sin carried the death penalty (e.g. murder, adultery, etc. – Num 35:31; Lev 20:10). However, even by the time of the New Testament, there is increasingly a re-interpretation of these laws where the death penalty is called into question (see the woman caught in adultery in John 8:5). The fact that the Pharisees raise the question to Jesus in the first place indicates the wider debate going on about this. We see a similar case when Paul inadvertently insults the high priest not realising his status and acknowledges his wrongdoing by citing Exodus 22:28 (Acts 23:1-5). The fact that this leads to no immediate prosecution suggests that the law’s application may have undergone some re-interpretation especially regarding the penalty. The takeaway from this is that laws evolve because life situations and larger contexts change over time, so that an effective application of the law requires recontextualization to new settings.

Re-thinking Old Testament laws – submission

Understanding these broader issues should help put our questions into perspective. We have no evidence that this law was ever put into practice by any parent, though this is an argument from silence. It is clear that the behaviour it condemns is not a one-off act but demonstrates a consistent and ongoing pattern that refuses all efforts at correction. Establishing when this stage of no return is reached is not straightforward and, given the death penalty, no parent could have taken such a decision lightly. Ultimately, the point of such a law with its harsh punishment is to be a deterrent, to underline the absolute importance of acknowledging the authority of God and, by extension, those He put in place. It is a principle that we can still recognise as essential in a well-functioning society. However, submission will look somewhat different in our modern context. For instance, parent-child relationships have changed over time, so that submission may incorporate a lot more lee-way and negotiation over issues. Likewise, in modern democracies, citizens have legal means to have a say in who their elected leaders are or what policies they implement, and we are not expected to forego these in the name of submission.

Lessons from the law of the rebellious son

As should be clear from this discussion, we need not fear that acknowledging the principle in this law makes parents duty bound to apply the law and its penalty in rigid ways as if our context were the same as the Israelites’. Rather, the Old Testament laws are meant to shape our thinking about what matters to God and what weight we should give various matters. Even making allowances for our different cultural context in understanding the issues and the penalty, the law of the rebellious son highlights how far our modern world has moved from respect and acknowledgement of authorities. Ultimately, the problem goes back to rejecting God’s authority over us as Western societies. There is also symbolism in the death penalty prescribed for the rebellious son in that rebellion against God leads to death even if no human court condemns us. When we cut ourselves off from the Lord, the source of life, we choose death and, but for the mercy of God, we have no way out. Thanks be to the Lord Jesus who made a way for us through His death!

If you enjoyed this post, please share it with others.