Putting To Death The Law Breaker

[SeaBass]

Heb 10:28 "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:"


What some commentaries have to say on Heb 10:28:


"He that rejected it, threw it aside, and denied its Divine authority by presumptuous sinning, died without mercy - without any extenuation or mitigation of punishment; Numbers 15:30."
Clarke's Comm.

"The fact stated here is exemplified by many instances in the history of Israel. There was the case of the man stoned for picking up sticks on the sabbath (Numbers 15:36), to name only one;..."
Coffman Comm.

" for if any one, of whatever order and dignity, who set at nought the law of Moses, by any presumptuous transgression of it, died without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses,..."
Coke's Comm.

"Now one that transgressed that law, either in whole, or in part, by denying it entirely, or by breaking any particular precept of it presumptuously, died without mercy; a corporeal death; there was no atonement nor sacrifice for him, nor pity to be shown him, Deuteronomy 13:8. "
Gill's Comm.


Will those that think the OT laws are still valid, active and enforceable follow that OT law and put to death those that refuse to follow it, who 'set it at nought', that 'presumptuously' transgress the Sabbath, working on the Sabbath (Num 15:32,36)?

 

[Joidevivre]

And then along came Jesus who said to the women caught in adultery (and deserving of stoning), "Neither do I condemn you."

 

[SeaBass]

And then along came Jesus who said to the women caught in adultery (and deserving of stoning), "Neither do I condemn you."

Jn 8:5,6 "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him."

They were not following the law of Moses in prosecuting this woman and they were trying to tempt Jesus into breaking the law, but Jesus knew better therefore would not condemn her to death. Yet the OT law of Moses says to put to death those that willfully, purposely, presumptuously set aside and transgress that law under two or three witnesses.

 

[posthuman]

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you:
sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.
On account of these the wrath of God is coming.
(Colossians 3:5-6)

​

the Spirit in me witnesses it; i witness it -- that's two.

'killing the old man' - crucified with Him. the transgressor is in parts in my own heart.

((thank God, the Regenerator)) -- it's called, "to repent"

 

[Biblelogic01]

Heb 10:28 "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:"


What some commentaries have to say on Heb 10:28:


"He that rejected it, threw it aside, and denied its Divine authority by presumptuous sinning, died without mercy - without any extenuation or mitigation of punishment; Numbers 15:30."
Clarke's Comm.

"The fact stated here is exemplified by many instances in the history of Israel. There was the case of the man stoned for picking up sticks on the sabbath (Numbers 15:36), to name only one;..."
Coffman Comm.

" for if any one, of whatever order and dignity, who set at nought the law of Moses, by any presumptuous transgression of it, died without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses,..."
Coke's Comm.

"Now one that transgressed that law, either in whole, or in part, by denying it entirely, or by breaking any particular precept of it presumptuously, died without mercy; a corporeal death; there was no atonement nor sacrifice for him, nor pity to be shown him, Deuteronomy 13:8. "
Gill's Comm.


Will those that think the OT laws are still valid, active and enforceable follow that OT law and put to death those that refuse to follow it, who 'set it at nought', that 'presumptuously' transgress the Sabbath, working on the Sabbath (Num 15:32,36)?

That is a pretty good discussion to put up. Now when I say what I'm about to say I am not saying you have to believe or follow it, this is just my understanding on this topic.

I recently learned as far as all the "death" parts of Torah, it's very similar to today's courthouse process.
There is the offender and the accuser (the one accusing of someone breaking sabbath).
We'll start from the very top, I'll go in a list on how this is not valid in today's society.

1. There has to be "courthouse setting", the only courthouse setting for this offense is a tabernacle, or a temple. Neither of these exist today, so there is no way to hold this court session, case is closed. Now this goes to part 2.
2. There has to be a priesthood as the judges, Levites (my final point will come back to this point). So again there is no Levitical priesthood to be judges in today's society, so yet again case is closed.
3. Like it states there has to be a minimum of 2 witnesses, if there is no 2 witnesses, case closed.
4. This where there was grace shown in the OT, there weren't really cases per say in the OT, but the rabbi (I can't remember exactly where he did the study) who did this teaching explained it very well. Basically, even if there are 2 witnesses the "judge" would ask, "did you know this would get you killed?" If the accused says no, well then case is closed and issue a warning.
5. This is where we who follow Torah, see Messiah in Torah, and see His grace and mercy. This goes into 1 what I said for part 2, and also into what Joidevivre stated. With Yeshua dying on the cross and His blood covering our transgression, Yeshua is our ultimate judge, He is the one who has the final say in what happens when we are judged. This is why Yeshua, knowing who He was said to the men who brought the adultress forward, "let the one without sin cast the first stone." With this, the men left. Therefor there was noone else there to accuse the adultress, and Yeshua told the adultress to repent and turn from her sins.

It is not man's place anymore to judge other's on how others walk in their faith, that is ultimately left to Yeshua. Also this is what Paul means that Yeshua got rid of the death in the law (Torah). Yeshua was the sacrifice tha had to be brought forward for sin, and His blood has covered that sin.

Hopefully that is a good explaination.

Blessings

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Will those that think the OT laws are still valid, active and enforceable follow that OT law and put to death those that refuse to follow it, who 'set it at nought', that 'presumptuously' transgress the Sabbath, working on the Sabbath (Num 15:32,36)?

there are some people on this forum who would love to do just that...

 

[DesiredHaven]

Here is an example of what the Pharisees would do with what Moses said

Jesus said of them,

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me,
teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God,
ye hold the tradition of men,
as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them,
Full well ye reject the commandment of God,
that ye may keep your own tradition. (Gal 1:14)

The difference between what Moses said and what they said

Mark 7:10 For Moses said,
Honour thy father and thy mother;
and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death****

Mark 7:11 But ye say,
If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban,
that is to say, a gift,
by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free****

Mark 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition,
which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

So we have...

For Moses said, as it is written along with ..."let him die the death"

But ye say not as it is written in Jesus example
(but rather violating that which is written) and stating contrarily saying... "he shall be free" (in that?)

And then that followed by

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through (the "it is Corban" deal) which is your tradition,

So I was always like, how are they as those who quote the scripture according to Moses (which is equated by Jesus as the word of God) when they are shown by him to be remaking the commandment into their own twist, making the word of God of none effect. He said, ye full well reject the commandment of God (which come by Moses) to keep their own traditions

Because Jesus said,

and many such like things do ye.

Seems to show they twisted Moses up and even where Moses said let him die the death they would say something by their tradition that he shall be free (rather then die the death) there. Which was sort of a move away from condemnation there.

I was always fascinated with this portion of scripture here

 

[DesiredHaven]

Here is an example of what the Pharisees would do with what Moses said

Jesus said of them,

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me,
teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God,
ye hold the tradition of men,
as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Mark 7:9 And he said unto them,
Full well ye reject the commandment of God,
that ye may keep your own tradition. (Gal 1:14)

The difference between what Moses said and what they said

Mark 7:10 For Moses said,
Honour thy father and thy mother;
and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death****

Mark 7:11 But ye say,
If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban,
that is to say, a gift,
by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free****

Mark 7:12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition,
which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

So we have...

For Moses said, as it is written along with ..."let him die the death"

But ye say not as it is written in Jesus example
(but rather violating that which is written) and stating contrarily saying... "he shall be free" (in that?)

And then that followed by

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through (the "it is Corban" deal) which is your tradition,

So I was always like, how are they as those who quote the scripture according to Moses (which is equated by Jesus as the word of God) when they are shown by him to be remaking the commandment into their own twist, making the word of God of none effect. He said, ye full well reject the commandment of God (which come by Moses) to keep their own traditions

Because Jesus said,

and many such like things do ye.

Seems to show they twisted Moses up and even where Moses said let him die the death they would say something by their tradition that he shall be free (rather then die the death) there. Which was sort of a move away from condemnation there.

I was always fascinated with this portion of scripture here

I should have quoted this in with the above but it would probably be better separate (i turned the colors black when I quoted the above). But Im including this in with the above in contrast to the Pharisees and showing the same commandment with Paul (without their tradition).

Pauls says,

Ephes 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

And quotes the same commandment Jesus does

Ephes 6:2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise)

Ephes 6:3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

And if any parent be a widow the message is to the children (even nephews) is

1Ti 5:4 But if any widow have children or nephews,
let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents:
for that is good and acceptable before God.

And in contrast to Mark 7:12 (in the above post) where their tradition made void the word of God and they full well rejected the commandment of God to keep the same which suffered him no more to do ought for his father or his mother;

Paul continues in verse 8 saying,

1 Ti 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house,
he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

So he has denied the faith in not doing this. And since even sinners love their own being worse than an infidel in rejecting to do this.

At least we can see a comparison between what Paul taught losing those vain traditions in comparison to one similarly pointed out by Jesus which allowed not for one to do for his mother or father (accordingly). But he said they did many such like things

 

[Vernon]

If we could obey the law then Christ died for nothing.

You desire to be under the Law and not under Grace ?

I plead with you accept God's Grace , it is the only way to salvation.

Christ be with you always.

 

[atwhatcost]

Jn 8:5,6 "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him."

They were not following the law of Moses in prosecuting this woman and they were trying to tempt Jesus into breaking the law, but Jesus knew better therefore would not condemn her to death. Yet the OT law of Moses says to put to death those that willfully, purposely, presumptuously set aside and transgress that law under two or three witnesses.

Oh, yeah! Absolutely. They were following the law. That was the point!
20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

 

[SeaBass]

That is a pretty good discussion to put up. Now when I say what I'm about to say I am not saying you have to believe or follow it, this is just my understanding on this topic.

I recently learned as far as all the "death" parts of Torah, it's very similar to today's courthouse process.
There is the offender and the accuser (the one accusing of someone breaking sabbath).
We'll start from the very top, I'll go in a list on how this is not valid in today's society.

1. There has to be "courthouse setting", the only courthouse setting for this offense is a tabernacle, or a temple. Neither of these exist today, so there is no way to hold this court session, case is closed. Now this goes to part 2.
2. There has to be a priesthood as the judges, Levites (my final point will come back to this point). So again there is no Levitical priesthood to be judges in today's society, so yet again case is closed.
3. Like it states there has to be a minimum of 2 witnesses, if there is no 2 witnesses, case closed.
4. This where there was grace shown in the OT, there weren't really cases per say in the OT, but the rabbi (I can't remember exactly where he did the study) who did this teaching explained it very well. Basically, even if there are 2 witnesses the "judge" would ask, "did you know this would get you killed?" If the accused says no, well then case is closed and issue a warning.
5. This is where we who follow Torah, see Messiah in Torah, and see His grace and mercy. This goes into 1 what I said for part 2, and also into what Joidevivre stated. With Yeshua dying on the cross and His blood covering our transgression, Yeshua is our ultimate judge, He is the one who has the final say in what happens when we are judged. This is why Yeshua, knowing who He was said to the men who brought the adultress forward, "let the one without sin cast the first stone." With this, the men left. Therefor there was noone else there to accuse the adultress, and Yeshua told the adultress to repent and turn from her sins.

It is not man's place anymore to judge other's on how others walk in their faith, that is ultimately left to Yeshua. Also this is what Paul means that Yeshua got rid of the death in the law (Torah). Yeshua was the sacrifice tha had to be brought forward for sin, and His blood has covered that sin.

Hopefully that is a good explaination.

Blessings

There is hypocritical judging and righteous judgment yet this is for those that think the OT laws are still in effect and why they are not following that law (as they claim they are) in putting to death (as the OT law required) law breakers.

 

[KohenMatt]

Heb 10:28 "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:"


What some commentaries have to say on Heb 10:28:


"He that rejected it, threw it aside, and denied its Divine authority by presumptuous sinning, died without mercy - without any extenuation or mitigation of punishment; Numbers 15:30."
Clarke's Comm.

"The fact stated here is exemplified by many instances in the history of Israel. There was the case of the man stoned for picking up sticks on the sabbath (Numbers 15:36), to name only one;..."
Coffman Comm.

" for if any one, of whatever order and dignity, who set at nought the law of Moses, by any presumptuous transgression of it, died without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses,..."
Coke's Comm.

"Now one that transgressed that law, either in whole, or in part, by denying it entirely, or by breaking any particular precept of it presumptuously, died without mercy; a corporeal death; there was no atonement nor sacrifice for him, nor pity to be shown him, Deuteronomy 13:8. "
Gill's Comm.


Will those that think the OT laws are still valid, active and enforceable follow that OT law and put to death those that refuse to follow it, who 'set it at nought', that 'presumptuously' transgress the Sabbath, working on the Sabbath (Num 15:32,36)?

I think the laws are still valid and active, but I do not believe they are ours to enforce.

So no, I do not advocate punishing those who break the law.

Otherwise, I would be first in line.

 

[psychomom]

I think the laws are still valid and active, but I do not believe they are ours to enforce.

So no, I do not advocate punishing those who break the law.

Otherwise, I would be first in line.

lol! you make it sound as though you'd be first in line to punish law breakers.

(i know that isn't what you meant, though...but thanks for the chuckle )

 

[KohenMatt]

lol! you make it sound as though you'd be first in line to punish law breakers.

(i know that isn't what you meant, though...but thanks for the chuckle )

Lol, I can see how that could be misunderstood. So to clarify.....

If lawbreakers are to be punished, I would be among the first to be punished.

 

[SeaBass]

I think the laws are still valid and active, but I do not believe they are ours to enforce.

So no, I do not advocate punishing those who break the law.

Otherwise, I would be first in line.

If those OT laws are still active and in force they would be yours to obey. If you follow the laws that say to remember the Sabbath then follow the laws that say put to death the law breaker, no cherry picking among laws. If your not going to obey and enforce ALL those OT laws then no reason to obey or try to enforce the Sabbath. (Telling others they are not biblically correct for failing to keep the Sabbath is an attempt to enforce upon them the Sabbath by trying to enforce the idea that keeping the Sabbath is current law that is to be obeyed) The Jew under the law had no choice but to carry out the law, and under that law you would be put to death for setting it aside and not following it

 

[KohenMatt]

If those OT laws are still active and in force they would be yours to obey. If you follow the laws that say to remember the Sabbath then follow the laws that say put to death the law breaker, no cherry picking among laws. If your not going to obey and enforce ALL those OT laws then no reason to obey or try to enforce the Sabbath. (Telling others they are not biblically correct for failing to keep the Sabbath is an attempt to enforce upon them the Sabbath by trying to enforce the idea that keeping the Sabbath is current law that is to be obeyed) The Jew under the law had no choice but to carry out the law, and under that law you would be put to death for setting it aside and not following it

Remember, it wasn't the place any ordinary Israelite to dish out the discipline and punishment for their fellow Israelites. That belonged to the priests, the High Priest in particular. Who is our High Priest? Hasn't He already punished the lawbreaker?

Be careful with the "no cherry picking" theory, brother. Otherwise, all of Christianity would need to be cutting off their hands and cutting out their eyes (Matt 5), hating their children, wife, husband, mother and father (Luke 14), giving away every bit of money they earn (Matt 19) and sharing everything single and every one of their meals with one another (Acts 4).

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Oh, yeah! Absolutely. They were following the law. That was the point!

If they were indeed following the Law, they would have had the man there with her, too, to be stoned. The Law did not allow for one of the parties in an adultery to escape. The Pharisees claimed she had been "caught in the act of adultery." So where was her lover? "In the act" means he was there when she was "caught," but the ones who "caught" her didn't bother to bring him along. Ask yourself why.

Now, as to the OP, in the Law of Sin and Death, it is God who makes judgment, through Christ Jesus. The stones have been taken from men's hands.

 

[SeaBass]

Remember, it wasn't the place any ordinary Israelite to dish out the discipline and punishment for their fellow Israelites. That belonged to the priests, the High Priest in particular. Who is our High Priest? Hasn't He already punished the lawbreaker?

Be careful with the "no cherry picking" theory, brother. Otherwise, all of Christianity would need to be cutting off their hands and cutting out their eyes (Matt 5), hating their children, wife, husband, mother and father (Luke 14), giving away every bit of money they earn (Matt 19) and sharing everything single and every one of their meals with one another (Acts 4).

If the OT law is still in effect then those from the tribe of Levi would be the priests NOT Christ for He was from the wrong tribe Heb 7:12-14 to be a priest. So your not carrying out the death sentences and have no priesthood either. Cherry picking galore going on.


(The word 'hate' in biblical language carries the idea of love less, less favor, not the emotional hate we think of in our modern English. Nothing inMT 19 requires one to give away all his money/assests nor does Acts 4 require all disciples to eat every meal together. But the fact you bring this up is proof there is cherry picking going on by those that think the OT law is still in effect)

 

[posthuman]

put to death the lawbreaker?

done

For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin — because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.
Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.
(Romans 6:6-11)
​

by the testimony of two witnesses: the Spirit that convicts the world of sin, and myself, who confesses my own sin.
now i ought to count it as done, so to be wise, and not act like a fool!

 

[SeaBass]

put to death the lawbreaker?

done

For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin — because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.
Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.
(Romans 6:6-11)
​

by the testimony of two witnesses: the Spirit that convicts the world of sin, and myself, who confesses my own sin.
now i ought to count it as done, so to be wise, and not act like a fool!

I am referring to the literal PHYSICAL death of those that willfully, presumptuously broke the OT law.