1997 issue 2 - forms of theft: deuteronomy 23:15-25 - counsel of chalcedon

8/12/2019 1997 Issue 2 - Forms of Theft: Deuteronomy 23:15-25 - Counsel of Chalcedon

1/4

In this message we skip ahead

a little in Deuteronomy The

verses. found

in

the first portion of

Deuteronomy

23

deal largely

with

ceremonial laws. Our concern in

this series is to consider the more

practical

and

abiding aspects of

God's Law. Thus,

we

move ahead

to consideration of the beginning

of Moses' exposition of the Eighth

Commandment: Thou shalt

not

steal. This exposition,

it would

seem, runs from Deut. 23: 15

through 24:7. In most of the

situations presented

i t

is obvious

that the idea of theft lies in the

background of the case laws. In

some cases, however, it

will require some careful

scrutiny to see the connec-

tion.

One

fact we should

notice at the outset is what

the Eighth Commandment

does not specify. That is, it

does not say what is not to

become enslaved in Israel.

We

noted then that this was actually a

form either of indentured servi

tude

in order to

payoff

a debt,

or

governmentally enforced punish

ment which was to last until the

cost

of

one's criminal activity was

.

paid

off. If this law dealt with the

Jewish slave in such circumstances

it would either deter debt repay

ment

or thwart justice. Neither of

these outcomes are acceptable in

biblical Law. But this case law

does not deal with the Jewish

slave. t does not present the case

of any slave tha t has fled his

master. Rather, it presents a

from another nation, Slavery in

pagan nations was nothing more

than

kidnapping and governmen

lally enduced tyranny. In God's

Law there were laws regUlating

how

slaves were to be treated.

Slaves in Israel had funclamental

rights. Biblical slavery is very

humane and

divinely regulated.

(This is why

in

the NewTesta-

ment there is no command to

cease

such

slavery. Even

though

there are numerous references

calling

upon

masters and slaves to

honor

God in their stations.)

Several important principles

relative to theft are established by

this case law. First, this

law provided that refugees

q-I 'orms

of

from pagan dominion

2J] could find shelter in Israel,

'Th

"'fit a land of true freedom

\ J..,

- under God. The Jew was

1 c: '5 to understand that to

llcuicrouont1

;Z3:w- ;

harbor

such a slave was

be stolen. Understanding

this will make our task a

little easier.

Rev. Kenneth

L.

Gentry ]r. not a form of theft. To

~ = = = = = = = = = = = = ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; = = = ; J harbor someone's else

1. Theft and Freedom, The

first case law prohibiting theft is

one of those that does

not

imme

diately strike us as relating to

theft. But as we consider it more

closely, hopefully we will discover

the connection Deut. 23:15-25

commands: Thou shalt

not deliver

unto his master

the

servant which is

escaped Jrom

his

master unto

thee:

He

shall

dwell

with thee, even among

you, in that place which

he shall

choose in one oj thy

gates,

where

it

liketh him best: thou

shalt

not

oppress him. To properly under-

stand this case law,

we must

recognize aright the situation

presented.

We

should note that:

In the first place, this case law

does

not

deal with domestic

slavery in Israel. Remember, as

we studied earlier, a Jew could

situation

of

a foreign slave who

flees to Israel from his foreign

enslavement. Verse 16 clearly

speaks

of

someone coming into

Israel from outside. In the second

place, this law was unique

in

all of

ancient culture. Pagan laws in the

Ancient Near East always de

manded the return of runaway

slaves. The Code of Hammurabi,

for instance, decreed death for one

who would harbor a runaway

slave. As a matter of fact, the

nations sur rounding Israel

had

extradition treaties with one

another that insured the return of

such runaways. As usual, despite

the secular humanist's disparaging

of the Mosaic Law, God's Law is

distinctively different from its

contemporaries. Thus, the situa

tion presented is the protection

of

the runaway slave who escapes

legitimate property was a

form of theft. But paganslavery

was illegitimate

and

immoral

and

could

not

be

condoned

in

biblical

law. Indeed, it was nothing less

than

forced kidnapping which

was a form of theft. And even the

term steal is used of kidnapping

in

some places:

If man be Jound

stealing

any

oj his-brethren oj the

children oj Israel, and

maketh

merchandise

oj

him,

or selleth him;

then

that

thieJ

shall die; and thou

shalt put evil away Jrom among

you.

Second, liberty and freedom

are property rights God grants to

men: Freedom is not owned by

government and granted as a

favor. Thus, freedom rights may

not be stolen , as it ,ere, from

men. The slave held in foreign

captivity was the victim

of

tyran

nical governmental policy. The

February 1 9 9 1 . ~ . THE COUNSEL

of

Chalcedon 2


2/4

government that allowed and

encouraged such slavery was

stealing a God-given right from

men.

Today communism is remark

able in the totality of its depravity:

it breaks every law of God. One

of the many laws of God that it

breaks is theft. And it breaches

this law on every level. t steals

the rights of

men

to be free

citizens under God. It prohibits

men

from exercising dominion in

the earth with the liberty God

grants. s God-fearing, Christian

citizens, we must resist any trend

in

government which would rob

us of God-given rights.

We ought to remember the

freedoms we have been allowed to

keep in our Christian land, and

pray that they not be stolen from

us

by

tyrants. Third, this law

demonstrates again that the godly

nation is

not

to become involved

in entangling alliances with pagan

nations. Remember that in Deut.

17: 17 the king in Israel was

forbidden to mult iply wives

to

himself. We saw that this was a

prohibition against establishing

entangling treaties with surround

ing pagan nations. It was com

mon

practice in those days for

kings to give their daughters to

foreign kings in order to cement a

treaty. Many of Solomon's wives

were gained this way, which

resulted in Solomon's demise.

This law nullifies the mutual

treaties shared by Israel's sur

rounding neighbors. Such

"community" treaties were not

binding upon Israel. Israel was

not to engage in such treaties that

guaranteed slave trade and slave

extradition between rrations. The

rationale behind this law principle

is

extremely important:

To

become involved in an entangling

alliance with pagan enemies puts

the godly nation in a situation

where it must breach covenant

with God. Such is intolerable.

Fourth, this law demonstrates the

propriety of our nation's granting

political asylum to those

who

escape to

our

country from

communistic slavery. God would

not allow us to send them back

into slavery (unless, of course,

they were criminals

and

rebels,

such

as

those that Castro sent to

our

shores a

few

years ago.) If we

would do so, we would be guilty

of stealing freedom from the

refugees.

2. Theft and Religion. The next

case law is presented in two parts.

Verse 17 reads: There shall

be

no

whore

of

the

daughters of

Israel, nor

sodomite

of

the

sons of Israel.

Unfortunately the

KJV

has

not

properly translated a

few

of the

important terms in verse 17. A

better translation would read:

"None of the daughters of Israel

shall be a cult prostitute, nor shall

any of the sons of Israel buy a cult

prostitute." The references to the

abominable practices mentioned

in verse 17 are to pagan fertility

cult practices common

in

nations

surrounding Israel. Prominent

fertility goddesses worshiped

by

temple prostitution in that era

were Ishtar and Astarte. Israel

was forbidden to tolerate the

debauchery and idolatry of the

fertility cults in the nations

surrounding them. (InCidentally, .

the Roman Catholic Church

adopted paganism into the

Church when it tried to reach out

to worshipers ofIshtar, the

goddess of fertility. They re

named Resurrection Sunday

Easter, and began celebrating it by

use of eggs and rabbits which

were representative of fertility.)

22

THE COUNSEL

of

Chalcedon

t

February

997

The reason the law flatly states

"there shall be none" who practice

such activity is because God's Law

meted out capital punishment for

both

idolatry and prostitution.

And the fertility cults were guilty

of

both

crimes. Thus it was to

literally be the case (if God's laws

of capital punishment were

enforced) that there would be

none who practice such.

Though

not

obvious at first

glance, there is a connection

between the preceding law

regarding the fugitive slave and

this one In the preceding law

God was commanding that they

should not allow freedom to

be

stolen, even in the situation of a

foreign slave seeking refuge.

In

the second law He was command

ing that they should

not

let the

glory of God in worship be stolen

by

cult prostitution, even if

committed

by

an Israelite. In the

one case, mercy is given even to a

foreign slave of pagan descent. In;

the other case, Israel was

not

to

tolerate misdirected religious

devotion, even by her own

citizens. Israel demanded a king

in

1 Samuel 9 in order to be like

other nations. But.she must never

demand to worship her God like

the other nations did A very

important principle arises from

this: Even though someone may

be doing some activity out of an

alleged religiOUS devotion

--even

if that one be a member of the

covenant -- that does

not

justify

that action. God has a holy glory

that he will not share with another

Isaiah 42:8 says. He has ordained

the way

in

which we are to

approach him. We cannot create

our own approaches to God. We

may

not

simply worship God

in

spirit; we must also worship Him

in truth

Gohn 4:24). If we attempt


3/4

to do

so

we are stealing from

Him, by robbing Him of His

glory. We would then be wor

shiping God on our terms, rather

than on His. Although the particu_

lars of the situation presented

might sound extreme to our

modeI'n ears, it may not be

as

extreme as we might initially

think. For instance, in "Dear

Abby" there was a

ktter

from a

lady who claimed to be a good

Christian. She pointed

out

that

in

order to support her children as a

good Christian should, she found

'it necessary to be a topless dancer.

This occupation provided her

with good pay and good hours.

In her typical pagan fashion, Abby

snpported

her

right to

be

consid

ered a fine Christian. Worse

than

this, in 1971 there was a book

published which was Wlitten

by

Pauline Tabor entitled Pauline's.

In depression Pauline, who

claimed to be a Christian, became

a prostitute and even ran a brothel

for 40 years after that. In her

memoirs she condemned the

Church for excommunicating her.

She argued "we are no different

than the rest of God's children."

(Cited in Rushdoony, Institutes of

Biblical

Law, n:l02.

She even

wrote: "The most sOlll-shattering

snub came a week or so after I

had opened

my

first house on

Smallhouse Road. All ily life I

had been a faithful churchgoer,

from Sunday school classes as a

child

to

adult worship and the

teaching of Sunday school. I was

a good friend of the minister and

'

hiswife, and an admirer of his

sermonizing

on

the ne,ed for

Christian tolerance and forgive

ness. One day I met the pastor

and his wife on the street ... They

looked the other way.... I hurried

home and wept bitterly.... I still

have

my faith,

but

I cannot

tolerate the hypocritical attitudes

of so many of the churches and

the pastors who rarely practice

what they preach." In one place

she even pointed out that she had

strict standards for her customers

and her prostitntes. But then she

indicted the church for having

strict standards -- standards

directly based on God's

Law

Brothers and sisters, there are

professing Christians today who

justify evil actions before God,

even adultery. More often

than

not, they simply shrug their

shoulders and say, "God will

forgive me." They have a warped

perception about God's forgive

ness. They have accepted the

secular humanistic notion of

"forgive and forget", "let bygones

be bygones", or "easy forgivism",

They do

not

understand the

biblical notion of repentance.

They are tryi.ng, as it were, to steal

forgiveness from God by plotted

action. They have stolen from

God the right to determine what

is

an acceptable situation for g ~ n t ~

ing forgiveness. They have

established theirown law instead

of God's. Others have even said

that

such things

as

adultery,

reading of pornography, abortion,

and sO forth, have helped them

maintain their marriages. And

they have said this

as

Christians

They are no better than the]ews

who would start temple prostitu

tion as a means of worshiping

God, The second portion of the

law deals with giving to the

Church, Verse 18 says:

Thou

shalt not bling the hire of a whore, or

the price of a

dog,

into the house of

the Lord thy odfor any, vow: for

even both

these

are qbomination

unto the Lord thy God. First, we

must notice the fundamental

teaching here.' And that is that

even though God commands us to

tithe to Him and ordains free-will

offerings as a means of worship, '

He will not tolerate or accept gifts

earned in criminal or immoral

activities. God does not accept, as

it were, "dirty money." Obliga

tions paid to God -- here particu

larly vowed obligations .- are to

be

given

in

heartfelt gratitude for

His holy

and

gracious rule over

us. We do not express heartfelt

gratitude to our Most Holy God

by continuing

in

sin and giving a

portion of the wages of sin to

Him We cannot buy the favor of

God by giving Him a portion of

"dirty money."

And

how often

have we seen Jolks tha t

had just

that sOrt of idea

in

mind

in

giving

to the Church. This law shows

that God will never accept the

wages of such sinners as accept

able gifts, Such sinners were not

simply sinners before the Law, -

as

we ourselves are They were'

outlaws, representatives of

an

alien law-order. Sinners are

commanded to

bring an offering

to God;

but

enemies are not.

The Roman Catholic

Church

has

been notorious for seeking income

from any source.

t has been

reported

in

published articles

and

books that most mafia members

are devout Roman Catholics who

give to the Church. The Roman

Catholic Church raises money by

entertaining pagans

with

gambling

and bingo games. Such is despi

cable To avoid all appearance of

evil, our denomination insists that

only money voluntarily given to

the Church is to be sought

by

the

Church. We do not sponsor

God's Acre Yard Sales or even

youth car washes, as a

church

activity. Although these are not

evil in and of themselves --unlike

February

1997 fTHE

CbUNSEL

of

ChalcedOJi

t

23


4/4

the mafia

and

gambling activities

mentioned

earlier --, they do

not

reflect the fundamental rationale

of

giving to the Kingdom of God:

love

of

God. Second, were God's

Law to accept money gained

in

immoral

practices, this would give

tacit approval to those activities.

For the

Church

to accept money

stolen

by

immoral or criminal

activity

would be

for the Church

to accept the activity as legitimate.

Such 'must never be the case in the

Church of our Lord Jesus Christ.

This prOvides us with a basic

principle

that

should

be

held in

the civil order. Contrary to this

biblical Law, the Internal Revenue

Service taxes crime. To

tax

an

enterprise is to give legitimacy

to

it. To tax crime gives a certain

legitimacy and legal standing to it.

Tax income supports the law

order of the nation. In our

current tax laws in America, crime

is actually taxed and becomes a

finanCial supporter of the law

order of our land Third another

prlncipie

that

may be r ~ w n froin

this law is the principle of exclu"

sive citizenship. Since God's Law

order would not accept criminally

gained tithes

and

offerings.... And

since to do so would be a tacit

approval of criminal activity .. .In

biblical Law the criminal is

considered an outlaw. He is not

allowed, o S1 \pport the law-system

by giving On the case of he

Church)

or

paying taxes (in the

case of civil government). Thus, in

biblical Law the criminal, in effect,

loses citizenship rights. Our

government may not tax foreign

citizens in foreign lands. They are

not our citizens; they have not the

protections of

our

rights.

like-

wise is it the case, that criminals

should lose their civil rights

privileges . They will, of course,

maintain their human rights. But

they should lose their civil rights.

Conclusion

Th,ese two case laws are

important for establishing a

fundamental, biblical Law order.

The truths contained in them

are

to direc,t us in our personai lives,

in

our

ownself-government. God

does nqt accept immoral or

criminal activity, or its fruits. The

truths contained in them are to

direct us

in our

spiritual lives,

in

our

e c c l e s i a ~ t i c a l

government.

Our vows

a ~ ~

obligations are to

be

paid to God from a position of

trust l o ~ e the truths con

tained in them are to direct u in .

our

civil lives,

in

our

political

government. God's Law does not

accept criminals as full rights

bear ing Citizens.

n

24

l' THE COUNSEL

of

Chalcedon

l'

February

997

Non-Profit Org.

U.S. Postage

PAlD

BULK RATE

Permit No

1553

Greenville, SC

29602

THE

PAULINE

DOCTRINE

OF M LE

HEADSHIP

;

THE APOSTLE VERSUS

BIBUC L

'FEMINISTS

by

Dr

aines ordwine

The

common

historical

and tMological

t h e m ~

nmning through

Paul s r.marks

The relation of the

economical Trinity

to

human

hierarchiallsm

The authority

of

men in

the home the

church, and

society

The

i ~ p o r t 2 m c c

of

physical

distinctions

between men and

women

The silence ofwomen

n

the

church

The exclusion ofwomen (rom

ordained

office

The

Christ-church model for

marriage

The mistake of

Eve

The

onty ministry assigned to

women

in

the

NewTestament

1997 issue 2 - forms of theft: deuteronomy 23:15-25 - counsel of chalcedon

Documents