Reconciling OT cruelty


#1

For example: -

Deuteronomy 17:1-5 “And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heavens, which I have not commanded. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing and shalt stone them with stones, till they die”. Deuteronomy 14:6-10, “If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is of thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God." Exodus 22:20 “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed”. New Testament punishment - Mark 16:16 “He that believeth not, shall be damned”.

How do we ratify this sort of violence in the Bible? Do we still believe this?


#2

[size=2]From the NT;[/size]

[size=2]Romans 1 :29-32 “Those filled with unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, hate for god, despite, proud, boasters, inventions of evil things, disobedience to parents, without understanding, covenant breakers, unnatural affection, implacable or unmerciful nature: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death”.

[/size]Can anyone of us say that, according to this list, are NOT worthy of death. How many of us feel envy, wish to fornicate, boast or gossip? How many Christians are guilty of debating? Why every day some Christian is debating the word of god on this very forum.


#3

[quote=FightingFat]How many Christians are guilty of debating? Why every day some Christian is debating the word of god on this very forum.
[/quote]

Actually, the Greek in the passage is of the root eris, which in context means “strife-causing”. Charitable debate is not a sin, but contention and quarreling is.

Don’t meant to distract the thread, just clearing something up.:slight_smile:


#4

[quote=FightingFat]For example: -

Deuteronomy 17:1-5 “And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heavens, which I have not commanded. Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing and shalt stone them with stones, till they die”. Deuteronomy 14:6-10, “If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is of thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God." Exodus 22:20 “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed”. New Testament punishment - Mark 16:16 “He that believeth not, shall be damned”.

How do we ratify this sort of violence in the Bible? Do we still believe this?
[/quote]

Are you saying God didn’t say what the Bible says He said?


#5

No, he’s just trying to understand why He did what He did.


#6

[quote=FuzzyBunny116]No, he’s just trying to understand why He did what He did.
[/quote]

Exactly, thank you! :slight_smile:


#7

well, like a parent who threatens their child with a spanking doesnt WANT to spank their child, so God wishes for all of us to make good decisions and not need to suffer punishment. however, we know the punishment and consequence of sin. God is loving like a parent and wants us all to be well, but God is also just, especially before the perfect sacrifice of the Lamb and as such people were punished for their transgressions according unto the law.


#8

So stoning is the correct form of punishment for these crimes?


#9

[quote=FightingFat]So stoning is the correct form of punishment for these crimes?
[/quote]

[font=Arial]The problem with your question is that it assumes that whatever we choose, we have the right to exist on this earth. It is essential to remember that God is not obligated to us for anything short of what he gives us out of his mercy and love. We exist solely because He loves us. Is it wrong of God to take away what He has given out of pure love, when we choose to anger him with sin? Consider that He graciously allows us to continue to exist when we reject Him by choosing sin.

[/font][font=Arial]I’d say God is justified in these punishments. Consider the culture and history of the Jewish people. Their national identity revolved around being the “people of YHWH”. To be a Jew was equivalent with worshipping the one God, who had hand-picked them as His people. He gave them these laws after He had miraculously parted the Red Sea, provided them with water and manna, and promised them the land of Canaan as “their land”. He had appeared to them as a pillar of fire and cloud, leading them through the desert. He had shown them firsthand His awesome power and love for them; to reject Him for another god would be to reject everything the Jewish nation as a whole held dear. It would essentially be treason.[/font]


#10

It seems to me, though, that Jesus’ admonition that only the sinless may cast the first stone negates any OT law requiring stoning, unless G-d himself chooses to return to Earth to cast that stone. I am strictly a beginner in terms of Bible study, but it seems to me that the OT was much more rigid in terms of rules, proscribed punishments, etc. - much like a parent with a very young child setting very firm boundaries.

In the NT, Christ seems to convey a slightly different - or maybe not different, but modified - message with regard to such rules. Of course, rules are required, but the overriding commandment is to love one another. Adherence to many of the other “rules” can flow naturally from that, as can compassion for those who sin, the ability to separate the sin from the sinner, and awareness of one’s own faults (i.e., the log in my own eye). This seems more to me like the message of a loving parent to a child who is becoming capable of a deeper level of understanding.

Again, this is just my general impression after very limited study.


#11

So in the OT we have a sketch and Jesus came and coloured it in- with love?


#12

[quote=FightingFat]So in the OT we have a sketch and Jesus came and coloured it in- with love?
[/quote]

I love the sound of that! I tend to think of it as a progression of parenting just because that makes sense to me personally - note that I am not knowledgeable enough to cite doctrinal support for this :o ; as I have said, it is just my impression, and I would be interested to hear other thoughts on it or references to refute or support the notion.

One thing that struck me today after I wrote my earlier post is that my notion of progressive parenting might require some increased readiness on the part of the child for advancement. Which brings me to the question of whether God chose to become flesh and present the New Covenant at the time he did because there were hearts more ready to freely accept his gift and teachings (or more hearts ready to accept them) than previously or for other reasons not knowable to us - or maybe just not known to me yet because I haven’t studied enough.


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.