Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Deuteronomy 21:18
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
18. If a man have ] See introd. to Deu 21:15-17.
stubborn and rebellious ] Jer 5:23, Psa 78:8.
father or mother ] Mark the equality of the parents, as in the next v., the Fifth Comm. and in E, Exo 21:15; Exo 21:17; also in the Babylonian laws cited above.
chasten ] see on Deu 8:5.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
18 21. Of a Disobedient Son
If a man have a son, who, in spite of his parents’ rebuke, fails to obey them (Deu 21:18), they shall bring him forth to the gate, and state the case to the elders of the town (Deu 21:19 f.), and the townsmen shall stone him to death, so shall evil be put out of Israel and all take warning (21). Except for the closing formula this law is not in the form of address to Israel, and the term for stoning is other than D’s. Therefore probably another of the laws incorporated by D.
The power of parents over their children (E, Exo 21:7, Gen 31:15), even to putting them to death, which prevailed in early Israel also to this degree (Gen 38:24; cp. Buhl, Soc. Verkltn. d. Isr. 29), as among the Greeks and Romans, is here enforced and controlled by public authority. See further introd. to previous law. Cp. Deu 27:16; E, Exo 21:15; Exo 21:17, H, Lev 20:9 (death for smiting or cursing parents); Pro 30:17, Code of ammurabi 195, and two Sumerian laws cited by Johns, op. cit. p. 41. For Herod’s abuse of this law see Josephus, xvi. Antt. xi. 2.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The formal accusation of parents against a child was to be received without inquiry, as being its own proof. Thus the just authority of the parents is recognized and effectually upheld (compare Exo 20:12; Exo 21:15, Exo 21:17; Lev 20:9); but the extreme and irresponsible power of life and death, conceded by the law of Rome and other pagan nations, is withheld from the Israelite father. In this, as in the last law, provision is made against the abuses of a necessary authority.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 18. – 21. The stubborn, rebellious, gluttonous, and drunken son is to be stoned to death. – This law, severe as it may seem, must have acted as a powerful preventive of crime. If such a law were in force now, and duly executed, how many deaths of disobedient and profligate children would there be in all corners of the land!
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
18-21. If a man have a stubborn andrebellious sonA severe law was enacted in this case. But theconsent of both parents was required as a prevention of any abuse ofit; for it was reasonable to suppose that they would not both agreeto a criminal information against their son except from absolutenecessity, arising from his inveterate and hopeless wickedness; and,in that view, the law was wise and salutary, as such a person wouldbe a pest and nuisance to society. The punishment was that to whichblasphemers were doomed [Le 24:23];for parents are considered God’s representatives and invested with aportion of his authority over their children.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son,…. It is observed w that this law quickly follows, and is subjoined to that which relates to the marriage of a woman taken captive, because often from such marriages wicked and refractory children have sprung, and which they exemplify in the case of Absalom, whose mother they say David took in war and married: the character of such a son follows, and by which it may be known that he is stubborn and rebellious; stubborn in his nature, and rebellious in his actions; behaves contrary to the laws of God, and the instructions of his parents; what he should do, that he does not; and what he should not do, that he does; will not do what is commanded him, and will do what is forbidden him, notwithstanding all counsels, admonitions, and corrections given him;
which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother; is disobedient to the commands of either of them; see
Pr 30:17 and, when they have chastened him, will not hearken to them; when they have reproved him by words, and corrected him with blows; the Jews understand this of scourging or beating by the order of the sanhedrim, after admonition given; it is said x,
“they admonish him before three (a court of judicature consisting of three judges), and they beat him; but it seems rather to respect private corrections of their own by words and stripes, which having no effect, they were to proceed as follows.”
w Moses Kotensis Mitzvot Torah, pr. affirm. 122. Kimchi in 2 Sam. 3. 3. x Misn. Sandedrin, c. 8. sect. 4.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Punishment of a Refractory Son. – The laws upon this point aim not only at the defence, but also at the limitation, of parental authority. If any one’s son was unmanageable and refractory, not hearkening to the voice of his parents, even when they chastised him, his father and mother were to take him and lead him out to the elders of the town into the gate of the place. The elders are not regarded here as judges in the strict sense of the word, but as magistrates, who had to uphold the parental authority, and administer the local police. The gate of the town was the forum, where the public affairs of the place were discussed (cf. Deu 22:15; Deu 25:7); as it is in the present day in Syria ( Seetzen, R. ii. p. 88), and among the Moors ( Hst, Nachrichten v. Marokkos, p. 239).
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
| Punishment of a Rebellious Son; Burial of Malefactors. | B. C. 1451. |
18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 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; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. 22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: 23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.
Here is, I. A law for the punishing of a rebellious son. Having in the former law provided that parents should not deprive their children of their right, it was fit that it should next be provided that children withdraw not the honour and duty which are owing to their parents, for there is no partiality in the divine law. Observe,
1. How the criminal is here described. He is a stubborn and rebellious son, v. 18. No child was to fare the worse for the weakness of his capacity, the slowness or dulness of his understanding, but for his wilfulness and obstinacy. If he carry himself proudly and insolently towards his parents, contemn their authority, slight their reproofs and admonitions, disobey the express commands they give him for his own good, hate to be reformed by the correction they give him, shame their family, grieve their hearts, waste their substance, and threaten to ruin their estate by riotous living–this is a stubborn and rebellious son. He is particularly supposed (v. 20) to be a glutton or a drunkard. This intimates either, (1.) That these were sins which his parents did in a particular manner warn him against, and therefore that in these instances there was a plain evidence that he did not obey their voice. Lemuel had this charge from his mother, Prov. xxxi. 4. Note, In the education of children, great care should be taken to suppress all inclinations to drunkenness, and to keep them out of the way of temptations to it; in order hereunto they should be possessed betimes with a dread and detestation of that beastly sin, and taught betimes to deny themselves. Or, (2.) That his being a glutton and a drunkard was the cause of his insolence and obstinacy towards his parents. Note, There is nothing that draws men into all manner of wickedness, and hardens them in it, more certainly and fatally than drunkenness does. When men take to drink they forget the law, they forget all law (Prov. xxxi. 5), even that fundamental law of honouring parents.
2. How this criminal is to be proceeded against. His own father and mother are to be his prosecutors, Deu 21:19; Deu 21:20. They might not put him to death themselves, but they must complain of him to the elders of the city, and the complaint must needs be made with a sad heart: This our son is stubborn and rebellious. Note, Those that give up themselves to vice and wickedness, and will not be reclaimed, forfeit their interest in the natural affections of the nearest relations; the instruments of their being justly become the instruments of their destruction. The children that forget their duty must thank themselves and not blame their parents if they are regarded with less and less affection. And, how difficult soever tender parents now find it to reconcile themselves to the just punishment of their rebellious children, in the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God all natural affection will be so entirely swallowed up in divine love that they will acquiesce even in the condemnation of those children, because God will be therein for ever glorified.
3. What judgment is to be executed upon him: he must publicly stoned to death by the men of his city, v. 21. And thus, (1.) The paternal authority was supported, and God, our common Father, showed himself jealous for it, it being one of the first and most ancient streams derived from him that is the fountain of all power. (2.) This law, if duly executed, would early destroy the wicked of the land. (Ps. ci. 8), and prevent the spreading of the gangrene, by cutting off the corrupt part betimes; for those that were bad members of families would never make good members of the commonwealth. (3.) It would strike an awe upon children, and frighten them into obedience to their parents, if they would not otherwise be brought to their duty and kept in it: All Israel shall hear. The Jews say, “The elders that condemned him were to send notice of it in writing all the nation over, In such a court, such a day, we stoned such a one, because he was a stubborn and rebellious son.” And I have sometimes wished that as in all our courts there is an exact record kept of the condemnation of criminals, in perpetuam rei memoriam–that the memorial may never be lost, so there might be public and authentic notice given in print to the kingdom of such condemnations, and the executions upon them, by the elders themselves, in terrorem–that all may hear and fear.
II. A law for the burying of the bodies of malefactors that were hanged, v. 22. The hanging of them by the neck till the body was dead was not used at all among the Jews, as with us; but of such as were stoned to death, if it were for blasphemy, or some other very execrable crime, it was usual, by order of the judges, to hang up the dead bodies upon a post for some time, as a spectacle to the world, to express the ignominy of the crime, and to strike the greater terror upon others, that they might not only hear and fear, but see and fear. Now it is here provided that, whatever time of the day they were thus hanged up, at sun-set they should be taken down and buried, and not left to hang out all night; sufficient (says the law) to such a man is this punishment; hitherto let it go, but no further. Let the malefactor and his crime be hidden in the grave. Now, 1. God would thus preserve the honour of human bodies and tenderness towards the worst of criminals. The time of exposing dead bodies thus is limited for the same reason that the number of stripes was limited by another law: Lest thy brother seem vile unto thee. Punishing beyond death God reserves to himself; as for man, there is no more that he can do. Whether therefore the hanging of malefactors in chains, and setting up their heads and quarters, be decent among Christians that look for the resurrection of the body, may perhaps be worth considering. 2. Yet it is plain there was something ceremonial in it; by the law of Moses the touch of a dead body was defiling, and therefore dead bodies must not be left hanging up in the country, because, by the same rule, this would defile the land. But, 3. There is one reason here given which has reference to Christ. He that is hanged is accursed of God, that is, it is the highest degree of disgrace and reproach that can be done to a man, and proclaims him under the curse of God as much as any external punishment can. Those that see him thus hang between heaven and earth will conclude him abandoned of both and unworthy of either; and therefore let him not hang all night, for that would carry it too far. Now the apostle, showing how Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by being himself made a curse for us, illustrates it by comparing the brand here put on him that was hanged on a tree with the death of Christ, Gal. iii. 13. Moses, by the Spirit, uses this phrase of being accursed of God, when he means no more than being treated most ignominiously, that it might afterwards be applied to the death of Christ, and might show that in it he underwent the curse of the law for us, which is a great enhancement of his love and a great encouragement to our faith in him. And (as the excellent bishop Patrick well observes) this passage is applied to the death of Christ, not only because he bore our sins and was exposed to shame, as these malefactors were that were accursed of God, but because he was in the evening taken down from the cursed tree and buried (and that by the particular care of the Jews, with an eye to this law, John xix. 31), in token that now, the guilt being removed, the law was satisfied, as it was when the malefactor had hanged till sun-set; it demanded no more. Then he ceased to be a curse, and those that were his. And, as the land of Israel was pure and clean when the dead body was buried, so the church is washed and cleansed by the complete satisfaction which thus Christ made.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Verses 18-21:
This law concerns an incorrigible son who was given to sensual indulgence, and who would not yield to the chastening and correction of his parents. The father and mother of this son were to bring him before the magistrates of the city where they lived, and prefer charges against him.
“Glutton,” zalal, “vile, lightly esteemed, gluttonous.” The term includes all kinds of excesses.
“Drunkard,” saba, “suck up, be satiated.”
When the charges were confirmed, it became the duty of the court and the community to put the incorrigible son to death, by stoning.
Among the Greeks and the Romans, the father inflicted the death penalty. But in Israel, this was a community affair. Disobedience to parental authority struck at the very heart of the community, and must be speedily dealt with.
A father might chastise his son severely, but he must not do so to the extent that he takes the child’s life, Pro 19:18.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
18. If a man have a stubborn. What God had previously adverted to in two clauses, tie now embraces in a general law, for it cannot be doubted but that by rebellious children all are designated who are abusive or insulting to their father and mother. For if it be a capital crime to be disobedient to parents, much more is it to strike, or beat them, and to assail them with reproachful words. In sum, Moses declares that those are deserving of death who are of such a stubborn and intractable disposition as to reject the authority of their father and mother, and to hold them in contempt. Whence also we infer what it is to honor our father and mother, for the punishment is only denounced for the transgression of the Commandment. When, therefore, the law delivers over to death all who contumaciously rebel against the discipline of their parents, it follows that they have refused them their due honor. An admirable means, however, of moderating the severity of the law is introduced, when God requires the case to be decided on the evidence of the father and mother; and commands that it should be publicly heard, so that none may be condemned at the will of private individuals. By the Roman law the power of life and death over his children (11) was given to the father, because it was not probable that fathers would be carried away by such senseless inhumanity as to deal cruelly with their own bowels; but, since sometimes fathers are found who are not unlike wild beasts, and examples show us that many, blinded by hate or avarice, have not spared their own children, this concession of the Roman law is justly to be repudiated. I allow, indeed, that those who desired to inflict punishment on their children called their friends into council; but, whereas, the walls of a private dwelling conceal many disgraceful things, God imposed a much better restraint on parents when He did not suffer them to go further than to lay the information and to give their testimony. For, although he would have credit given to their testimony, still, when the children were brought to the tribunal of the judges, a legal trim undoubtedly ensued; and this form of proceeding is prescribed, viz., that the father and mother should bring their son and make their complaint before the judges of his incorrigible stubbornness. It is true that the sentence is immediately subjoined; yet we must infer, nevertheless, that the judges pronounced it before the criminal was stoned, else it would have been ridiculous that they should sit there like cyphers. The very mention of a trial, therefore, implies that the son was heard in his defense, so as to clear himself of the crime, if he was not guilty of it: for, suppose the moroseness of the father and mother were notorious; or that the father accused the son by the instigation of a stepmother; or that any unworthy spite were discovered; or that the father and mother had conspired to destroy their son in a fit of passion: the defense of the cause is, therefore, implied in the adverb then, (12) for it would have been more than absurd that the son should be condemned without being heard. Especially, when he was to be stoned by the whole people, it was necessary that he should be first convicted; and on this ground he was brought forth publicly, that he might be allowed to plead his cause. But although those were condemned who were addicted to other vices also, yet Moses expressly mentions gluttons and drunkards, to show that, although no capital crime were alleged, still, dissolute profligacy was sufficient, if the son could not be corrected by his parents; for it is plain that those are in a desperate state who have so east away submissiveness and shame as to receive no profit from the admonitions of their parents. From the end of the verse we gather what was the twofold object of the punishment — that the earth should be purged of the sins whereby it was in a manner, polluted, and that the death of him who had transgressed might be an example to all.
(11) “A father among the Romans had the power of life and death over his children. He could not only expose them when infants, but, even when his children were grown up, he might imprison, scourge, send them bound to work in the country, and also put them to death by any punishment he pleased, if they deserved it. Sall. Cat., 39.; Liv., 2:41; 8:7; Dionys., 8:79.” — Adam’s Rom. Antiq.
(12) The particle ו sometimes has this force, but is here translated in A V and
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(2) THE TREATMENT OF STUBBORN SONS (Deu. 21:18-21)
18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, that will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and though they chasten him, will not hearken unto them; 19 then shall his father and mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 and they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones: so shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 21:1821
355.
Here is parental discipline with a vengeance! Why was this necessary? Do you imagine it was practiced?
356.
Notice the preventative measures taken before the corrective discipline was administered.
AMPLIFIED TRANSLATION 21:1821
18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son, who will not obey the voice of his father or his mother, and though they chasten him, will not listen to them;
19 Then his father and his mother shall take hold of him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives,
20 And they shall say to the elders of his city, This our son is rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard. [Pro. 23:20-22.]
21 Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall cleanse out the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and (reverently) fear.
COMMENT 21:1821
See also Deu. 5:16, Deu. 27:16 (and notes on both these passages), Exo. 21:15; Exo. 21:17; Lev. 20:9, Pro. 30:17.
This case appears to deal especially with a son who had gained a reputation of gluttony and drunkeness (Deu. 21:20), and who would not be deterred from such a life in spite of his parents exhortations. Their advice and chastisements were only met with stubbornness and rebellion. This son has not simply slipped, or made a mistakehe has been defiant, unruly, and recalcitrant. The severe punishment given to him is illustrative of Gods hatred for such sin.
AND ALL ISREAL SHALL HEAR, AND FEAR (Deu. 21:21)One cannot imagine other young people witnessing such an event without being deeply sobered. When Ananias and Sapphira were struck down by God, great fear came upon the whole church, and upon all that heard these things (Act. 5:11). Some object lessons are too vivid and real to forget. This was to be a lesson for all Israel as well as punishment for one individual.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
Deu. 21:18-21. THE INCORRIGIBLE SON.
(18) If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son.Here we are again reminded that the Law of Jehovah was also the civil and criminal law of Israel. The systematic breach of the first commandment of the second table of the Law, no less than of the first commandment of the first table, entailed the penalty of death. Manifestly this enactment, if carried out, would be a great protection to the country against lawless and abandoned characters, and would rid it of one very large element in the dangerous classes.
(20) Stubborn and rebellious.The Hebrew words became proverbial as the worst form of reproach, srr -mreh. This word mreh was the one employed by Moses, when, speaking unadvisedly (Num. 20:10), he said to the people, Hear now, ye rebels, must we fetch you water out of this rock? It appears in the Revised New Testament, in the margin of St. Mat. 5:22, for thou fool. But the Greek word there employed is true Greek, and has its own affinities in the New Testament. And the word mreh is true Hebrew. They may be idiomatically synonymous. They are not etymologically identical.
A glutton and a drunkard.The same two words are found in Pro. 23:20-22, Be not among wine bibbers; among riotous eaters of flesh: For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty: and drowsiness shall clothe a man with rags. Hearken unto thy father that begat thee; and despise not thy mother when she is old. The context of this quotation seems to make it a distinct reference to the law in Deuteronomy 21
(21) Shall stone him with stones.Rashi says that the Law cuts short the mans career, anticipating what its close will be. When he has spent all his fathers money, he will take to the road, and become a public robber. It is better that he die innocent of such crimes than guilty. We can hardly adopt this view of the case; but it contains one feature that is terribly true.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
THE PUNISHMENT OF AN INCORRIGIBLE SON, Deu 21:18-21.
18. A stubborn and rebellious son The directions given are intended to assert and also limit the authority of the parents. If the son was refractory no longer obedient provision was made for his punishment. From our point of view the law seems severe. But it must be borne in mind that in some ancient nations the power over the life of the child was absolutely in the father’s hand. Moses provides that both parents should consent to the infliction of the penalty, the matter having first been brought before the whole community. In the Gemara, Rabbi Simon is represented as saving that the law concerning a stubborn and rebellious son has never been, and never can be, practically applied.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rebellion Against Parental Authority ( Deu 21:18-21 ).
Parental concern for the son as revealed in Deu 21:15-17 now leads on to the case where a son is a rebellious troublemaker. Again the desire is to maintain the harmony of the family. In Deu 21:15-17 the father was seen as behaving badly towards his son, and was forbidden by law to do so. Here the son was seen as behaving badly towards his father and mother to such an extent that they could no longer guarantee to control him.
In a patriarchal society like Israel this was tantamount to anarchy. Control in such a society was maintained by the father of the family, the father of the wider family, the father of the clan and finally the father of the tribe. Thus if the fatherhood could not control someone there was nowhere else to go.
Analysis using the words of Moses:
a 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, though they chasten him, will not take any notice of them,
b Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place,
b And they shall say to the elders of his city, “This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.”
a And all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones. So shall you put away the evil from the midst of you, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.
Note that in ‘a’ the son is rebellious and will not respond to discipline, and in the parallel he is toned to death for his rebelliousness. In ‘b’ he is brought to the elders of the city and in the parallel the tell the elders of his crimes.
Deu 21:18-20
‘ 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, though they chasten him, will not take any notice of them, then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out to the elders of his city, and to the gate of his place, and they shall say to the elders of his city, “This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.” ’
This does not refer to the normal rows that can occur in the best of families. If necessary that could have been dealt with by a severe beating. There was no limit to a father’s right to have his son beaten as long as he did not die. This refers to a son who had broken all the rules of society laid down by his parents, who was destroying the family name, and making constant problems for them in their relationships with the tribe. He had become wild and indisciplined, and broken the covenant constantly, becoming a menace to society and uncontrollable. Though they had chastened him, and such chastening could be pretty severe (Pro 23:13-14 suggests such a severity of beating that the parents backed away from it; compare Pro 13:24; Pro 19:18), it had not worked. All efforts to control him had proved useless. He had stubbornly gone on in his rebellious way causing trouble and concern not only for his parents but for the society in which he lived. He was a menace to all.
For a father and mother to agree together to hand their son over to the authorities in those days (note that the witness of both was required) was the sign of how bad things were. They themselves would be publicly admitting their inability to control their own son. They would do it in this case for the sake of society. He could no longer be allowed to wreak havoc on everyone, and they could no longer act as his guarantee. They were left without any options.
They took him by force and brought him to the gate of the city where the judges and elders met, testifying to his behaviour before them. ‘Glutton’ and ‘drunkard’ were two abusive terms which together signified his total depravity. His greed expressed by his crimes and his totally disorderly behaviour putting everyone at risk could only be described in this way. The facts, if not already widely known, would be sought before sentence was passed. Few elders and judges would have wanted to act in such a case without good reason. Without good reason every father among them would have drawn back from it.
Deu 21:21
‘ And all the men of his city shall stone him to death with stones. So shall you put away the evil from the midst of you, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.’
To rebel in this way against parents was to rebel against God. It was to be out of control in society. (All means had been tried to persuade him to be otherwise). The punishment was therefore stoning, possibly because as the equivalent of a blasphemer the son was seen as ‘unclean’ and none would want to touch him. Compare here Exo 21:15; Exo 21:17; Lev 20:9. It was also a method of execution in which all could partake and thus share out among them any feelings of guilt that might arise. The whole city was called on to perform the execution (had they been in any doubt they would simply have refused). It is possible that the father and mother were not obliged to take part. It put the onus on all. It had now passed out of their hands. This serves to demonstrate that all would be aware of the justice of the sentence.
There is in fact no known case where this actually took place, which means hopefully that it was a warning that was mainly heeded. We must always remember that in the end severe sentences were at least partly intended to prevent crimes from happening. But human nature is such that it must have happened at some time.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Punishment of a Rebellious Child
v. 18. If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, v. 19. then shall his father-and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, v. 20. and they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice, v. 21. And all the men of his city,
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Ver. 18, &c. If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son Ample provision having been made for the security of private rights between neighbour and neighbour, Moses made another law for the regulation of families, by giving to parents a well-tempered power over incorrigible children: which was not to put the lives of their children absolutely into their hands, as the laws of some other countries did; but to direct them,when all means of admonition and correction were lost upon a son, and when they saw nothing but ruin to the estate and family likely to result from his lewdness and debauchery,to bring him out unto the gate of his place; i.e. to make complaint to the magistracy in court; joint complaint, ver. 20 both father and mother uniting in the accusation, which could hardly happen but in the case of the most deplorable disobedience; and which union in accusation entirely prevented all passion and prejudice. Upon this accusation of the parents, the magistrates were to condemn him to death, as a terrible example of disobedience to the laws of God and man. The Roman laws gave to parents an exorbitant authority over their children: so did the Persians and the Gauls. But with the Romans, a father could not exercise this right which the laws gave him over a disobedient child, without assembling his relations and friends, and taking their advice. See Puffendorff’s Law of Nature and Nations, b. vi. c. ii. sect. 11 with Barbeyrac’s note upon the place.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
It is very worthy observation; how exceedingly jealous the LORD hath manifested himself for the honor of his law. The ties of nature were all to give way when the honour of GOD stood in competition. See Zec 13:3 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Deu 21:18-21
18If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, 19then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. 20They shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel will hear of it and fear.
Deu 21:18-21 This section deals with rebellious sons and how parents were to treat them (cf. Exo 21:15; Exo 21:17; Lev 20:9). Parents did not have the right of life or death over a child, but the courts did. This concerned (1) the violation of Deu 5:16; (2) the inheritance within a family; and (3) community solidarity.
Deu 21:18 This type of antisocial youth was characterized as:
1. stubborn – BDB 710, KB 770, Qal ACTIVE PARTICIPLE
2. rebellious – BDB 598, KB 632, Qal ACTIVE PARTICIPLE
3. both of these things are used together in Psa 78:8 and Jer 5:23
The five PARTICIPLES in this verse show continuous action. The rest of the verse describes their actions:
1. who will not obey parents, Deu 21:18; Deu 21:20
2. he will not even listen to them, Deu 21:18
3. glutton, Deu 21:20 – BDB 272 II
4. drunkard, Deu 21:20 – BDB 684
See Hard Sayings of the Bible, pp.174-175.
Deu 21:19 father and mother shall seize him This means either (1) both mutually restrain (BDB 1074, KB 1779, Qal PREFECT) or (2) the need for two witnesses (cf. Deu 17:6; Deu 19:15; Num 35:10).
at the gateway The local place of justice was the city gate, where the elders sat (e.g., Deu 19:12; Deu 22:15; Deu 25:7).
Deu 21:21 all the men of his city shall stone him to death Notice the humanitarian aspect that the parents did not have to stone their own son. The community (cf. Lev 20:2; Lev 20:27; Lev 24:14-23; Num 15:35) acted to rid itself of evil, willfully recalcitrant members.
SPECIAL TOPIC: THE DEATH PENALTY IN ISRAEL
NASByou shall remove
NKJVyou shall put away
NRSVyou shall purge
TEVyou will get rid of
NJByou must banish
The Hebrew VERB (BDB 128, KB 145, Piel PERFECT) means to burn in the sense of utterly remove (cf. Deu 13:5; Deu 17:7; Deu 17:12; Deu 19:13; Deu 19:19; Deu 21:9; Deu 21:21; Deu 22:21-22; Deu 22:24; Deu 24:7).
and all Israel will hear of it and fear Societal punishment functions as a deterrent. See note at Deu 13:11.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
stubborn = rebellious.
rebellious = refractory.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
have a stubborn: Pro 28:24, Pro 30:11, Pro 30:17, Isa 1:2
obey the voice: Deu 27:16, Exo 20:12, Exo 21:15, Exo 21:17, Lev 19:3, Lev 21:9, Pro 15:5, Pro 20:20, Eze 22:7
when they: Deu 8:5, 2Sa 7:14, Pro 13:24, Pro 19:18, Pro 22:15, Pro 23:13, Pro 23:14, Pro 29:17, Heb 12:9-11
will not: Isa 1:5, Jer 5:3, Jer 31:18, Eze 24:13, Amo 4:11, Amo 4:12
Reciprocal: 2Sa 18:5 – Deal gently Pro 1:8 – hear Pro 6:20 – General Pro 15:32 – heareth Pro 19:26 – wasteth Pro 23:22 – Hearken Mat 15:4 – He Rom 1:30 – disobedient Eph 6:1 – obey Col 3:20 – obey
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Deu 21:18-21. Peculiar to D. Here respect for both parents is enforced (see Exo 20:12; Exo 21:15); cf. CH. 195, The sons hand which has smitten his father shall be cut off (see Deu 15:12-18*).
Deu 21:22 f. This law (peculiar to D) rests upon the early belief that the soul of a dead person wanders about, often working mischief.
Deu 21:22. hang: render impale, a common form of punishment in the ancient East. In the present case the criminal would be first stoned, the only Hebrew mode of capital punishmenthis body being then spiked and exposed as a disgrace and a warning (see Deu 13:10*, Gal 3:13, and Cent.B on Ezr 6:11).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his {k} mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
(k) For it is the mother’s duty also to instruct her children.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The punishment of an incorrigible child 21:18-21
The previous ordinance guarded a son from a capricious father. This one maintained the rights of parents whose son (or daughter, presumably) was incorrigible. While the problem in view was one of lack of respect for parents (the fifth commandment), the offense could result in the death of the child (the sixth commandment).
This case presupposes a long history of rebelliousness. The son had become a glutton and a drunkard (Deu 21:20). That is, he had developed a lifestyle of deviant behavior. Before loving parents would take the step available to them in this law they would doubtless try every other measure to secure their son’s correction. This was the last resort for the parents. This law withheld the right of parents to slay their children for rebelliousness while at the same time preserving parental authority fully.
Commenting on the terms "stubborn" and "rebellious," David Marcus wrote the following.
"Both terms form a hendiadys to indicate a juvenile delinquent. Now when one examines how these terms are used in the Hebrew Bible one sees that they belong to the didactic vocabulary of biblical literature. [Note: Weinfeld, p. 303.] They generally connote disobedience, in particular in Israel’s relationship to God. (The pertinent references may be found in Bellefontaine’s article [see below] from which the present author has greatly profited.) For example, in Psa 78:8 the generation of the desert is termed sorer umoreh [stubborn rebellious]. Isaiah castigates the people for being sorer and following its own way (Isa 65:2). Jeremiah proclaims that Israel has a heart which is sorer umoreh (Jer 5:23). Israel is portrayed as rebellious and disloyal, and in so doing repudiating its God and its relationship with him. [Note: Elizabeth Bellefontaine, "Deuteronomy 21:18-21: Reviewing the Case of the Rebellious Son," Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 13 (July 1979):18.] In like manner, the son, by being rebellious and disloyal, has repudiated his parents and his relationship with them. The authority of the parents has been rejected by the son since he has refused to obey them. The son, in renouncing his relationship with his parents, has effectively declared, if not by his words, then certainly by his deeds, what the adopted son in the Mesopotamian adoption contracts says when he abrogates his contract, ’I am not your son; you are not my parents’ (Ibid., 17)." [Note: David Marcus, "Juvenile Delinquency in the Bible and the Ancient Near East," Journal of the Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 13 (1981):47.]
It may appear at first that God was commanding the Israelites to exercise less grace with their own children than He showed the whole nation. However, God had previously promised never to cut off His people (Gen 12:1-3). The Israelites were to be God’s instruments of judgment in many specific situations, as we have already seen in Deuteronomy. The punishment of sinners, be they Canaanites or Israelites, for specific types of sin, was imperative for Israel to fulfill God’s purpose for her in the world (Exo 19:5-6).
This legislation teaches us that parents should put their love for God above their love for their children.