I got involved with a discussion on-line where someone was criticizing Rick Warren because of his "unbiblical" view of homosexuality. Apparently, not equating homosexuality with rape, incest and pedophilia is unbiblical. Anyway, in response, one man wrote "If our country had just laws they would put to death people who practiced any of the three." He goes on to say that if we don't support such laws, then we don't believe that God's law is just. So I decided to put Deuteronomy 21:18-21 to the test, and (surprisingly) he agreed that the government should put the "bad cases" of rebellious children to death.
So if the OT Law is meant to be the norm for every government, what does that mean? Well, dietary restrictions should be enforced (meaning you're in BIG trouble if you like bacon). Oh and the sacrificial system should be restored, for after all, it is God's law, and it is just. Basically, if you've ever sinned, you're screwed.
Paul tells the Galatians: "I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law" (Galatians 5:3). Paul's point is that, by embracing as ideal and required one element of the law, you must then embrace it all. But the whole message to the Galatians is that in Christ we are free from the law!
So then who are we to impose those same laws as the norm for government? Our founding fathers were right to call for the separation of Church and State. How many millions of people would have to be executed each year because they are unable to keep the Law? And we're supposed to say that they deserve to die? I'm having a huge problem with this line of thinking.
Should our government have just laws? Yes. Should our government have laws that protect the weak and punish the criminal? Yes. But should the death penalty be applied to everything?
When the religious law enforcement of Jesus' time brought him a woman caught in adultery, what did Jesus say should happen to her? They were ready to stone her. But did Jesus give them a green light? Not hardly. "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7). Jesus takes us to the heart of the matter: yes sin is horrible and grievous (notice that he didn't say she deserved to live...), but in our fallen and broken state, all of us deserve death and therefore don't have the right to pass such judgment on others.
How long would you survive if the Old Testament Law was in place as the law of the land? How do we balance the need for justice with the need for grace? Should we support the death of anyone?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
that's clever. i shave periodically. apparently that's an abomination. Lev 19:27
ReplyDeleteLOL...well line up for your punishment, you sinner!
ReplyDeleteI would've been stoned to death already. Thank God for non-harsh laws!
The founders did not outline separation of church and state. In fact, in some states, church membership was required of office holders. The founding and Constitutional intent was/is keeping the state out of the church--not keeping religion out of state politics. This is a critically important distinction, as the Constitution would allow the posting of the 10 Commandments, prayer before public gatherings, and even prayer in schools.
ReplyDeleteEver hear of the Crusades? That's what happens when the church takes too much power and control in government. And since many of the founding fathers were deists (God is not involved with human history) I find it very difficult to believe that they thought religion needed to be in politics.
ReplyDeleteThe point is this: we are to respect the government, as the government is from God (Romans 13). But the Law and al of it's prescribed punishments only damns us all. It is impossible to legislate morality.
ALso, on a side note, who would you like to lead those prayers in schools? A Muslim? Jew? Christian? Buddhist?