Question from an outsider

[Keith Martin]

Please do your best to put aside any previous interactions you have had with me. I am not a Hebrew Roots person. I've been gradually seeing some wisdom in that orientation, but it's safe to say that I'm never going to go full Torah Keeper, as well as that the following question is being asked of those in the know by an outsider:

I'm looking for where y'all draw the line between strict obedience to the Laws of the Torah and attempting to tailor fit those Laws in order to adjust them to line up with our modern-day culture. Specifically, I'm concerned with the aspects of the Law that target raising children and dealing with their misbehavior. Here are a couple verses in question:

• Perhaps the passage that has always perplexed me the most that I am fairly certain I've never seen a Torah Keeper enforce is Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
• A close second to that are Exodus 21:17 and Leviticus 20:9.

The times are countless in which I've heard believers approvingly quote Leviticus 20:13 to justify condemning male homosexuality by pointing out that, in their way of seeing things, that is behavior that justifies being struck down by God -- and yet just 4 verses earlier Torah commands a very similar punishment for a child cursing hir parent.

I really want your perspective here, and it's not some kind of Trojan Horse trap. Does one have the luxury of picking and choosing among which Torah to keep? Or does one have the luxury of attempting to follow those Laws and the simultaneous freedom to refrain from accepting or assigning the punishments in Torah for those same infractions?

My bias is that I happen to believe that male homosexuality is, at the very least, no worse than children who curse their parents, or even than, as in Deuteronomy 5:16, children who refuse to honor or obey their parents while still children in their household. However, while I know many parents who have seriously condemned and even estranged themselves from children who have come out as homosexuals, I have never known a parent who has taken that strong of a stand simply because of an instance or two of a child of theirs cursing them or even for demonstrating a significant pattern of disobedience or disrespect.

Is it biblical to alter the punishments if Torah says stone a gay man and also stone a child who curses his parents or demonstrates stubborn rebellion?

*************

Edit: I'm not restricting non-Torah-Keepers (non-Hebrew-Roots; non-Messianics) people from posting here, but I started this thread in the Hebrew Roots section very purposefully, because I'm specifically looking for the perspective of those who believe in keeping Torah and want their perspective. So, if you aren't TK, then please indicate that. Thanks.

Edit two: It is also my intention to have this thread entirely refrain from generating a debate between Torah Keepers and non-Torah-Keepers. All that would do is prevent me from learning what I want to learn.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Tough questions, I for one am estranged from a daughter that I won’t compromise towards. Because of it I’ve never met my grandson.

I would point out a few things about Deuteronomy 21, it only applies to sons and is more of an indication of how far you can go not necessarily what you have to do.

The other two passages are more to what you’re talking about. I would say that Jesus raised the bar pretty high on executions when He dealt with the woman caught in adultery. The passages you talk about are some of the few where execution doesn’t seem optional.

We need to figure out what the exact definition of “cursing” is in the context I think.

 

[Bartato]

Kind of tangential thought,

Homosexuality is a very serious violation of God's Law.

It is in fact way worse than any of us realize.

Dishonoring and cursing father or mother is also a very serious offense against God.

It is also far more serious than we realize.

 

[NeoPatriarch]

Jeffrey Dahmer was someone's child. If only they had dealt with him.

 

[Keith Martin]

Thank you for these thoughts.

Bartato and NeoPatriarch, are either of you Torah Keepers?

I would point out a few things about Deuteronomy 21, it only applies to sons and is more of an indication of how far you can go not necessarily what you have to do.

Does Scripture provide any indication of what the reason would be for not having the same level of expectations for a daughter?

The other two passages are more to what you’re talking about. I would say that Jesus raised the bar pretty high on executions when He dealt with the woman caught in adultery. The passages you talk about are some of the few where execution doesn’t seem optional.

You're saying that Christ predominantly prohibited execution due to the standard of, only one who is without sin has that in hir quiver. That then begs the question, if not execution, then what? What is the next most severe punishment permitted for particularly egregious cases? What, also, would be the minimum consequence for such infractions in order to be synchronous with Torah (keeping in mind that one needs to be consistent between (a) male homosexual behavior, and (b) cursing and being disrespectfully rebellious)?

We need to figure out what the exact definition of “cursing” is in the context I think.

I am in the depths of being in the process of moving from storage and a hotel into our new home. When I come across the box in which I packed my Concordant and other Literal Translation Bibles (not to mention Strongs), I will look up Leviticus 20:9 and the others to glean more insight into the essence of 'cursing' and the other phrases. Even before I've done that, though, I think we all know of children in our midst who have met pretty much any definition of 'cursing' that would be available to the human race -- and if they are even confronted for it, their consequences have generally, at best, amounted to being actual rewards for such behavior, much less not coming within a mile of anything remotely similar to execution.

 

[steve]

I would point out a few things about Deuteronomy 21, it only applies to sons and is more of an indication of how far you can go not necessarily what you have to do.

Does Scripture provide any indication of what the reason would be for not having the same level of expectations for a daughter?

I accept all commands, unless specified, to be directed to males.
In this case, a rebellious male has the potential to go on and raise a family in rebellion/with rebellious spirits. So for the sake of the community rebellious spirits had to be dealt with strongly, ala @NeoPatriarch ’s point.
A female would always be under male authority and it would be his job to bring her spirit to heel.

I would say that Jesus raised the bar pretty high on executions when He dealt with the woman caught in adultery. The passages you talk about are some of the few where execution doesn’t seem optional.

Yah Himself raised the bar when He didn’t require King David’s life.
I am of the mind that the original penalty was set so that nobody could claim that any of these things weren’t all that big of a deal. Legalism would require them to be carried out in all instances. A lesser punishment could claimed or perceived to be, quite frankly, merciful.
The nation of Israel would have not experienced some of the things that they did if David would have dealt decisively with a rebellious son, but he didn’t and they suffered the consequences of his inaction.
Do we ever see recorded an instance of stoning for any of these offenses? I am not aware of any. Doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.

 

[steve]

Further thought:
What about rebellious wives?
If the law applies to both genders (or all 51 genders) , why aren’t rebellious wives addressed similarly?

Unless I am missing something, her spirit is her husband’s to contend with, not extinguish.

Edit: If her rebelliousness extended to actual, or even accused, adultery, there were courses of action that didn’t remain within the family.

 

[Bartato]

Thank you for these thoughts.

Bartato and NeoPatriarch, are either of you Torah Keepers?

I am not a "Torah keeper", but am open and trying to learn as much as possible. I am more of a regular conservative Evangelical Christian, who tries to take God's Law as revealed in the Bible very seriously.

I kinda get the impression that the primary difference between where I currently am and the Torah observant guys are mainly has to do with the Sabbath, the dietary laws, and festivals observance.

Then again, I am not very knowledgeable about it

 

[NeoPatriarch]

@Keith Martin I would not use that nomenclature, no. I like to say that I am undenominational.

My bad. I apologize for posting in this room. I will try to be more careful in the future.

 

[steve]

My bad. I apologize for posting in this room. I will try to be more careful in the future.

There is no problem with your posting in this section, it is not limited to Torah-minded people. It is for Torah-minded discussion.
I think that Keith’s question was just to find where you were coming from, not your qualifications for posting here. But I am assuming.

 

[Keith Martin]

I accept all commands, unless specified, to be directed to males.

A female would always be under male authority and it would be his job to bring her spirit to heel.

Where in Torah is a list of potential expectations and their consequences for instances of disobedience among females provided? Alternatively, where in Torah is authority over the females in his house so clearly articulated that a man can be confident that he can administer punishments or withdraw privileges from those females, short, of course, of execution?

 

[Keith Martin]

Further thought:
What about rebellious wives?
If the law applies to both genders (or all 51 genders) , why aren’t rebellious wives addressed similarly?

Unless I am missing something, her spirit is her husband’s to contend with, not extinguish.

Edit: If her rebelliousness extended to actual, or even accused, adultery, there were courses of action that didn’t remain within the family.

Let's be clear:

• I'm seeking some general information here, but
• I also have no desire (nor any thoughts heading in that direction) to extinguish my wife, my daughters, or any other female in my life or any other person's life.

So my question (still focused on seeing these issues through the eyes of Torah Keepers, because it's not as if I'm unfamiliar with these Scriptures) related to this response of yours, @steve, is this: if these commands are only directed toward males (am I to assume this is also the case for the Decalogue?), short of adultery, is a woman's spirit just something her man has to contend with but cannot punish. Again, I'm not at all interested in any kind of full extinguishing (execution), but isn't it appropriate, righteous and godly to extinguish malbehavior? And, as with my question in the previous post, if a man can be directed to Torah to learn what all of his 632 commandments are, what in Scripture can we provide the women in our lives that will articulate to them what their commandments and restrictions are (according to Torah Keepers)?

 

[Keith Martin]

@Keith Martin I would not use that nomenclature, no. I like to say that I am undenominational.

My bad. I apologize for posting in this room. I will try to be more careful in the future.

No reason whatsoever to apologize, @NeoPatriarch. I just want to know where the opinions/positions/statements are coming from. Write away, but I will assume you are undenominational from here on out, just as I will assume that @Bartato is coming from an Evangelical-with-intensity position.

 

[Bartato]

No reason whatsoever to apologize, #NeoPatriarch. I just want to know where the opinions/positions/statements are coming from. Write away, but I will assume you are undenominational from here on out, just as I will assume that @Bartato is coming from an Evangelical-with-intensity position.

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have replied since I'm not really in the group you asked about. It does seem like a lot of folks in the Biblical polygyny affirming world lean towards Torah observance (or are curious like myself).

Taking the Law of God seriously leads to the acceptance of polygyny.

 

[steve]

Where in Torah is a list of potential expectations and their consequences for instances of disobedience among females provided?

Anyone is welcome to correct me because I am shooting from memory, but mostly none.
With the exception of adultery, which affects the community IMO.

Alternatively, where in Torah is authority over the females in his house so clearly articulated that a man can be confident that he can administer punishments or withdraw privileges from those females, short, of course, of execution?

And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

To me, it’s just that simple. He didn’t bring them together, it was one-directional, He brought her to him.
Yah created every living creature and brought them to Adam and he named them. Then He made her and brought her to Adam and he named her. To me, the pattern is obvious.
We aren’t given rules for micromanaging the relationship. But the absence of standards given does not imply that there should be no standards, no rules that he should not make and enforce. We aren’t given instructions on how to enforce our own rules.
We are left to figuring out a way to lead without just becoming the suggester-in-chief.
But we are required to lead.
That is inescapable.

 

[Keith Martin]

It does seem like a lot of folks in the Biblical polygyny affirming world lean towards Torah observance (or are curious like myself).

Taking the Law of God seriously leads to the acceptance of polygyny.

Seems to be the case with many people.

And don't feel like you can't post in here.

 

[steve]

what in Scripture can we provide the women in our lives that will articulate to them what their commandments and restrictions are (according to Torah Keepers)?

Simply that there are no Scriptures that support the idea that women are not under headship.

 

[steve]

It does seem like a lot of folks in the Biblical polygyny affirming world lean towards Torah observance (or are curious like myself).

Taking the Law of God seriously leads to the acceptance of polygyny.

It seems that the idea of polygyny starts breaking down the artificial barrier between the OT and the NT.

 

[steve]

I just want to point out that in the instance of the first sin, Adam failed to lead.
He had one job.

 

[Keith Martin]

Simply that there are no Scriptures that support the idea that women are not under headship.

And, just as in the other threads where we've been discussing this general issue lately (I'm most specifically thinking of the one about whether women have the right to veto their husbands' choice of additional wives), it would seem that the only way for women to pretend that they aren't under male headship is to also pretend that God doesn't exist and find or make up some alternative set of standards to go by.