Rehoboam, Asa, and Sodomy

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

1 Kings 14:21-24

And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the Lord did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Judah did evil in the sight of the Lord, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they had committed, above all that their fathers had done. For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord cast out before the children of Israel.

vs.

1 Kings 15:9-12

And in the twentieth year of Jeroboam king of Israel reigned Asa over Judah. And forty and one years reigned he in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom. And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, as did David his father. And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I'm not understanding... What's your point?

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Do I need to "have a point"? I was just struck in my general regular reading of the juxtaposition of these two passages and thought I would share it.

 

[SolaScriptura]

Ok, I thought there was a point. Because the version you've cited makes it seem like the passage is simply saying there were homosexuals in the land, whereas the Hebrew clearly refers to male cult prostitutes - homosexuality included (but they also "supported" females in their "worship") but distinctly religious in nature.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Sometimes a ham sandwich is just a ham sandwich.

 

[Miss Marple]

I wonder how the sodomites were "put out."

Should we "put out" sodomites similarly in the USA? Or just the church?

How would we define "sodomite?"

These are the questions I have.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Gill says this:

------

And he took away the Sodomites out of the land
Which were in the times of Rehoboam, (1 Kings 14:24) , and continued in his father's reign; those he took away, either by driving them out of the land, or by putting them to death according to the law of God, (Leviticus 20:13) even as many of them as he had knowledge of, for some remained, see (1 Kings 22:46) ,

------

According to the Gospel, today they would be put out of the church. Theonomists would put them out of the world.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

Ok, I thought there was a point. Because the version you've cited makes it seem like the passage is simply saying there were homosexuals in the land, whereas the Hebrew clearly refers to male cult prostitutes - homosexuality included (but they also "supported" females in their "worship") but distinctly religious in nature.

I read the KJV for personal devotion time, so I quoted what I read. Still not sure what the bugaboo is all about.

 

[Bill The Baptist]

I understand your point, sexual deviance in any form should not be tolerated by the church

 

[Pergamum]

Gill says this:

------

And he took away the Sodomites out of the land
Which were in the times of Rehoboam, (1 Kings 14:24) , and continued in his father's reign; those he took away, either by driving them out of the land, or by putting them to death according to the law of God, (Leviticus 20:13) even as many of them as he had knowledge of, for some remained, see (1 Kings 22:46) ,

------

According to the Gospel, today they would be put out of the church. Theonomists would put them out of the world.

According to the Gospel, today they would be put out of the church. Theonomists would put them out of the world.

 

[Backwoods Presbyterian]

I understand your point, sexual deviance in any form should not be tolerated by the church

While true, that was not the motivation behind the post, in fact there was no motive or "point", ulterior or otherwise, behind the posting of these two sets of verses. I just thought the juxtaposition of these two sets of verses was interesting and I shared it with the board. Like I said everything doesn't have to have some kind of "agenda" behind it.

Sometimes it just is what it is and that's that. Not sure why the original responder was seeking a motivation for the posting in the first place.

 

[Edward]

Not sure why the original responder was seeking a motivation for the posting in the first place.

The use of 'versus' suggested that you were identifying a contrast or conflict between the two posted verses and looking for discussion on that.

 

[Peairtach]

Clearly those who practise or promote sodomy should face church sanctions in the modern day Israel, the Church.

Re the state, these things should be illegal as they once were in Christian countries, and as incest, paedophilia, beastialism and polygamy are still illegal in Britain and the US.

Christian or secular states are not bound to the Mosaic penalties of death, or ransom in lieu of death, as the death penalty was part of the OT administration of the Covenant of Grace and was being used in a particular way in connection with the typological and sacrificial system.

The use of the death penalty under Moses was a picture of what happens to those who despise the Covenant of Grace, are without an atoning sacrifice and thus face God's judgment under the Covenant of Works which they broke in Adam. That wasn't a Republication of the Covenant of Works, but it was graciously given teaching about the already broken Covenant of Works.

 

[TylerRay]

According to the Gospel, today they would be put out of the church. Theonomists would put them out of the world.

I am not a theonomist, and I believe that a faithful Christian magistrate would punish sodomy. He would also punish murder, theft, blasphemy, and all other public sins. This is his duty as the "minister of God" in the civil realm (Rom 16). See WCF XXIII. i. and XXIX. i, ii, and v.

Remember that Asa was not an ecclesiastical leader, but a civil leader. The NT holds forth (see above) that the magistrate as well as the church (and the family, for that matter) is to administer God's moral law in its respective sphere.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Tyler, if your magistrate would also punish blasphemy, incorrigible children, adultery, and Sabbath-breaking, the population of the U.S. might be reduced by 50% or more.

 

[TylerRay]

Yes, sir. May God grant us repentance.

 

[Peairtach]

I don't know if Tyler is calling for the death penalty to be followed in the instances he mentions. Just as the OT people were taught by temporal blessings in the Land about Heaven, so were they taught by temporal curses, including the death penalty about Hell.

Gal 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

Those who were executed under the Mosaic law sometimes had their bodies hung from a tree. They were deemed to be under God's curse, having died without an animal sacrifice. Of course some of them - those who had true faith in Christ - went straight to Heaven, but this was the typological kingdom.

Sodomy, gross public blasphemy and certain forms of Sabbath-breaking were illegal in Britain until recent times, but it didn't lead to a decline in the population.

Incorrigible children were dealt with by corporal punishment or by the local police giving them something to remember and adultery had severe social and financial consequences for the guilty party.

The general equity of the judicial law still applies, or should, but there's little of that in the godless West.

 

[TylerRay]

Thank you, Richard. Indeed, I was not implying that the death penalty should be used in all of those instances. I think that the wise magistrate will know what punishments to attach to various crimes.

Steve, just what is the magistrate supposed to do, if not enforce God's moral law?

 

[Pergamum]

I think that the wise magistrate will know what punishments to attach to various crimes.

How would modern penalties differ from the OT ones? Theonomists can tinker with the severity of the penalties?

 

[Miss Marple]

"Steve, just what is the magistrate supposed to do, if not enforce God's moral law?"

Great question, I hope to read responses.

One thing that pops to mind is, enforce the border. Oh also, make treaties. Sanction war.

Everything else seems to have a moral law component.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

No, Perg, these comments above are not made by "theonomists".

It's an interesting thing, the state of our nation – and the West in general; in other times, Tyler and Richard, the civil magistrate could have applied severe penalties, and some would have given the death penalty for sodomy (what alternatives would you have suggested, jail time?). But now, such magistrates in the U.S. would be picketed, impeached, or assassinated. Now there is such lawlessness – with accompanying disdain (that is perhaps too mild a word) for God's holy laws of life and love, there would be instant outrage from all quarters were a godly magistrate to judge according to righteousness.

Some pollyanna theologists imagine a coming golden age (some thinking it will be built on the wreckage of our civilization – more pollyannaism of a sort!), but the flood of lawlessness and iniquity will soon enough carry away all these foolish eschatological dreams and we will be left with the stark realities lambs face when surrounded by ravenous wolves. In other parts of the world this is already the case with our brethren.

The time for magistrates upholding God's law is finished; now the time is for the people of God bearing witness to God's law and the coming judgment upon all unrighteousness, and the salvation from that terrible judgment being found only at Christ's hand. This will result in outrage from the world against us, and the determination to silence us at any cost (of course we will pay that cost); this will result in cries going up to Heaven, to Him who sits on the throne, who shall then mete increasing judgments against the wicked idolaters and the persecutors of His people.

But most in the church think things will go on as usual. They are not mentally prepared. It will be a shock to many. It will be hard to worship, to find sound places to worship, for these will be bold in witness, and they will be silenced first.

Guns won't help, you Americans. The use of them will only engender immensely fierce responses. You don't have to be a prophet to see and say these things, just discerning the times. We have no Asa, no godly kings or rulers (for the people won't have it), but a world in which satan is – or is about to be – loosed for a little season, and he will inflame the earthlings with passions that wipe out sanity and all reason. You knew it was coming, you have been told often enough, but there are so many who say, Peace, peace, when there really is no peace.

 

[TylerRay]

Steve,

Thank you, first of all, for pointing out that I am not a theonomist. As I'm sure you know, what I have expressed is the classical Reformed view.

Second, I agree--our people don't want a godly ruler. Furthermore, I believe persecution and judgment are coming.

But I'm not a pragmatist. I'm a CHRISTIAN. Neither my eschatology nor my view on what a godly ruler is to do is determined by my circumstances. Your assertion that postmillennialism or optimistic amillennialism will be done away with due to difficult circumstances is frankly astounding to me. I expected better from you. I know that neither of those is your eschatological position, but that you would be so uncharitable to your brothers and sisters who are convinced of these things from the Word of God (and not our circumstances) is hard for me to wrap my head around.

By the way, you didn't answer my question.

 

[Peairtach]

No, Perg, these comments above are not made by "theonomists".

It's an interesting thing, the state of our nation – and the West in general; in other times, Tyler and Richard, the civil magistrate could have applied severe penalties, and some would have given the death penalty for sodomy (what alternatives would you have suggested, jail time?). But now, such magistrates in the U.S. would be picketed, impeached, or assassinated. Now there is such lawlessness – with accompanying disdain (that is perhaps too mild a word) for God's holy laws of life and love, there would be instant outrage from all quarters were a godly magistrate to judge according to righteousness.

Some pollyanna theologists imagine a coming golden age (some thinking it will be built on the wreckage of our civilization – more pollyannaism of a sort!), but the flood of lawlessness and iniquity will soon enough carry away all these foolish eschatological dreams and we will be left with the stark realities lambs face when surrounded by ravenous wolves. In other parts of the world this is already the case with our brethren.

The time for magistrates upholding God's law is finished; now the time is for the people of God bearing witness to God's law and the coming judgment upon all unrighteousness, and the salvation from that terrible judgment being found only at Christ's hand. This will result in outrage from the world against us, and the determination to silence us at any cost (of course we will pay that cost); this will result in cries going up to Heaven, to Him who sits on the throne, who shall then mete increasing judgments against the wicked idolaters and the persecutors of His people.

But most in the church think things will go on as usual. They are not mentally prepared. It will be a shock to many. It will be hard to worship, to find sound places to worship, for these will be bold in witness, and they will be silenced first.

Guns won't help, you Americans. The use of them will only engender immensely fierce responses. You don't have to be a prophet to see and say these things, just discerning the times. We have no Asa, no godly kings or rulers (for the people won't have it), but a world in which satan is – or is about to be – loosed for a little season, and he will inflame the earthlings with passions that wipe out sanity and all reason. You knew it was coming, you have been told often enough, but there are so many who say, Peace, peace, when there really is no peace.

I agree with much of what you are saying Steve, and am spiritually and mentally preparing for persecution by the state. Christians are already losing their jobs in Britain for refusing to register homosexual civil partnerships, or for refusing to counsel homosexuals, for keeping the Sabbath Day, etc.

Any Christian person can see the direction things are going in.

But I'm still a postmillennialist.

 

[Peairtach]

I think that the wise magistrate will know what punishments to attach to various crimes.

How would modern penalties differ from the OT ones? Theonomists can tinker with the severity of the penalties?

It's a general equitable fulfillment, so we would expect non-theonomists to tinker with them. Theonomists on the other hand are committed to the abiding validity of every jot and tittle.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

I believe there are three divine spheres of authority: the family bearing the power of the rod, the church bearing the power of the keys, and the civil magistrate wielding the power of the sword. For the Christian, how these three institutions execute the power given them can only be judged according to the Word of God and the light of nature.

And to the extent that God in his providence affords us the opportunity to exert any influence in the sphere of government, the "general equity" of the civic laws of Israel may certainly be acknowledged as springing from the moral law of God and providing a great deal of wisdom to the Christian in the execution of his civic duties.

But indeed all three spheres of authority are to be employed in the task of judgment according to the power given them. Their can be no doubting that at the present hour, sodomy and sexual deviancy are the scourge of the the United States and the West. And why? Because the family, government, and church have surrendered to secular atheism on these matters.

 

[Miss Marple]

" Theonomists on the other hand are committed to the abiding validity of every jot and tittle. "

I am not sure that's true. Some perhaps. But there is a variety of opinion about certain jots and certain tittles among theonomists.

I consider myself a theonomist. But I am not dead certain about the application of every law in every circumstance. Israel was a church AND a state. Unique. Discerning which laws are for the church, which are for the state, and which are for both; and how to best apply them in various circumstances; is tough.

I am committed to the belief that God's law is superior to man's, and applies to all mankind. But the application of this belief can be a stumper. I am searching for a great overarching principle that I can apply, a matrix of some sort, to get it laid out in my own mind how things should be. Some laws are rather obviously for the church; some are rather obviously for the state. But some seem sort of both, and those are hard to figure out.

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Tyler, I am sorry, for I think I have offended you. This may be what I said that did:

“Some pollyanna theologists imagine a coming golden age . . . but the flood of lawlessness and iniquity will soon enough carry away all these foolish eschatological dreams”​

And you said this:

“Your assertion that postmillennialism or optimistic amillennialism will be done away with due to difficult circumstances is frankly astounding to me. I expected better from you. I know that neither of those is your eschatological position, but that you would be so uncharitable to your brothers and sisters who are convinced of these things from the Word of God (and not our circumstances) is hard for me to wrap my head around.”​

I remember something that was said of Spurgeon, how that when he was in the pulpit and expounding the word of God he pulled no punches, though when he was in personal interaction with people he was gentle and respectful.

I am not pastoring now, but when I was, and was in the pulpit, I would simply speak the truth of God’s word as I understood it (after study and prayer). I think “pollyanna theologists” and “foolish eschatological dreams” are relatively mild expressions, especially given the plight of our brethren in many lands around the world. North Korea, Eritrea, China, most Islamic nations (and there are many of them!), India, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, Columbia, Myanmar (Burma), and I could go on a good while more with country names.

The “better” you “expected” of me – would be what? That concerning vital pastoral (and doctrinal) matters – for I still shepherd souls – I would be mealy-mouthed and pussyfoot around impending dangers because some of my brethren are “convinced” things will get better and we need not prepare for such dangers? Is it uncharitable to speak forthrightly when addressing a topic generally – however controversial – if when addressing individuals I tone it down and speak more gently?

I appreciate your tenderheartedness, Tyler – and it is a fine quality – in its rightful place. I don’t think it charitable to countenance error that will lead to grief and shock in the tenderhearted of the flock. If you are aware of my eschatological views (as you seem to be) you will understand my seeking to prepare Christ’s little flock for the coming “war with the saints” (Rev 13:7) that will climax this “present evil world[’s]” hatred of God (Gal 1:4). And you will understand my principled and fervent opposition to the post-mil schema. Still and all, I do not wish to offend, and I’m sorry that I have.

It is not “circumstances” that guide my view, but Scripture that guides my view of circumstances. It guides my view regardless of circumstances, but gives me discernment of the times nonetheless. There aren’t many that vigorously hold forth the amil position and its practical pastoral implications for these times. Part of that holding forth is the refutation of contrary errant positions.

You asked, “Steve, just what is the magistrate supposed to do, if not enforce God's moral law?” Tyler, that’s a really good question. There are a few, maybe in Texas, or down south, that seek to do this. But many – most? – are not Christian, and they but seek to enforce the laws of the land, which are increasingly opposed to God’s law. The laws are now outlawing the law of God, so godly civil magistrates will have to violate civil laws to remain godly. Some say, “Oh, it will get better, just be patient and hang in there.”

I don’t believe it will. I don’t believe the Scripture even hints that it will, but rather uniformly indicates the opposite (this is not the thread to pursue this). Meanwhile our laws, our educational institutions, our courts, our arts and entertainment industries – our very culture – “justifies the wicked, and condemns the just” (Prov 17:15), and on top of that we kill babies like they were lice – and the people love to have it so.

If we are not to expect persecution and internal national calamity, then at the very least we should expect the fierce judgments of outraged Justice to fall on us from on high. (I expect both.)

Part of the problem is the widespread corruption of the church in the West, and my focus is on America. Just as Israel of old was judged for its idolatry, disdain of the law of God, and persecution of the godly – through the instrumentality of barbarians – I think something similar is in store for us. Of old, the faithful remnant suffered with the hypocrites and the wicked, and so it shall be in our time.

Godly magistrates? They’ve had their day. Now they are such a small and beleaguered remnant that their voice cannot long be lifted up in the courts of law, but rather in the open air, in the media – wherever they can speak – to bear witness, along with all the church (not just the pastors and elders), to the everlasting gospel, the sovereignty of God, and the judgment of “wrath to come” upon the world of wickedness.

Odd as it may seem to some, I think the ends of the world are nigh upon us. (How nigh? I couldn’t say. But too close for comfort.)

 

[TylerRay]

Steve, thank you for your thoughtful response.

Perhaps I misread you, but your post seemed to say that those "pollyanna theologists" with their "foolish eschatalogical dreams" included all postmillennialists and optimistic amillennialists.

My view is that Christ will triumph over the nations in a visible manifestation, through His Church, in history. I don't believe that we're anywhere close to the end of that. In the midst of the battle there will be times of great distress, persecution, sin, judgment, and apostasy. I believe we're heading toward just such a time. My eschatological view does not cause me to shut my eyes and pretend everything is about to get better.

If I read you wrongly, I apologize.

 

[Peairtach]

I consider myself a theonomist. But I am not dead certain about the application of every law in every circumstance. Israel was a church AND a state. Unique. Discerning which laws are for the church, which are for the state, and which are for both; and how to best apply them in various circumstances; is tough.

Exactly. The elders were involved in executing justice in the OT, including capital punishment, which was an extreme form of excommunication (cutting off).

I think you might find some help from Christopher J.H. Wright's book " An Eye for an Eye", published in Britain as "Living as the People of God".

An Eye for an Eye: The Place of Old Testament Ethics Today: Christopher J. H. Wright: 9780877848219: Amazon.com: Books

Living as the People of God: Relevance of Old Testament Ethics: Christopher J. H. Wright: 9780851113203: Amazon.com: Books

Wright sees the judicial laws as fulfilled in Christ in at least three ways, ecclesiastically, civilly and eschatalogically.

Such lack of straightline application, is what you would expect from the unique typological kingdom of OT Israel, in which elders of the Church, which was OT Israel, not only exercised excommunication, or cutting-off (kareth), as it was then called, but also did so - occasionally - by execution in conjunction with the congregation.

In Theonomy, Bahnsen unsuccessfully tries to disentangle church and state in OT Israel, but only manages to distinguish between the priestly (cultic) aspects of the OT Church and the royal (kingdom-rule) aspects of the OT Church.

In the NT Church we have the priesthood of all believers and the kingdom-rule of all believers. We also have elders in our Israel, which correspond to the elders of OT Israel. Christ rules in His Church as Priest and King.

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: (I Pet 2:9)

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

I’m afraid you didn’t read me wrong, Tyler! But you will note that in referring to the post-millennarians as pollyanna-types in their eschatological doctrines, I did not make reference to their characters – only their views. Likewise with the term “foolish eschatological dreams” – characterizing their doctrines, not characters. I think that’s a fair characterization, especially in that it leaves their characters untouched. When you said of me I was “uncharitable” for saying such, you referenced my character, which I do not think was fair.

I see your post-mil view is nuanced, like Richard’s, which allows for significant persecution and suffering for the church before a supposed “golden” (or “silver”) age.

I think “optimistic amil” is almost an oxymoron; can you name any major 20[SUP]th[/SUP] or 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century amillennarians (this would exclude Wm Milligan and BB Warfield – although the latter of these is not really amil, or necessarily “optimistic”) which are such?

I had seen Tim Challies in a review name Cornelius P. Venema as one, but when I went through his, The Promise of the Future, I found it not so, but the classic amil view.

Though I think we’re getting off-topic the way we’re going with this. This looks like grist for another thread, though I really don’t have time for that. Good talking with you, Tyler – thanks for the spirited exchange!

-----

P.S. Perhaps I should make clear – for the benefit of those who do not know what "optimistic amil" is – that this term means the cultures and the nations will become "Christianized". i.e., at least outwardly conformed to the law of God, and the church will thrive in this atmosphere, having peace and prosperity before the Lord's return. The standard amil takes the view – on the basis of Scripture – that iniquity and lawlessness will increase throughout the church age, eventuating (at the very end) in the nations attacking the church through the whole world in an attempt to eradicate it (at the devil's instigation). The church itself – the faithful remnant in it – will be purified and glorious, rejoicing even in tribulation, even as our Saviour endured the cross for the joy that was set before Him – and through death triumphing over death.