and they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is unmanageable and rebellious, he hearkeneth not unto our voice; he is a profligate and a drunkard.
The parents themselves must stand at the city gate and accuse their own child. Why does a private family quarrel end as a public charge of gluttony and drunkenness?
The charge ends with drink. But drink is not why the son is condemned:
The sin of disobedience and rebellion is dealt with here alongside drunkenness. This is not because drunkenness was the capital sin. It is because such stubbornness and disobedience to parents is so unnatural and cowardly a crime that only the maddening influence of drink can explain it. At the same time, this shows that drunkenness cannot excuse such a crime before God — just as it ought not to excuse it, and usually does not excuse it, before human judges.
Where does such rebellion come from, and who must deal with it?
One son might think that being the firstborn gave him a right to rebel. Another might rebel because he was not the firstborn. But God does not tolerate rebellion. It springs from the pride of thinking that only your own opinions are worth considering. God has set up parental authority. Parents were to bring a stubborn, rebellious son to the elders of the city — the gate, the place of judgment.
A family matter becomes the city's business:
What an appalling scene! The Lord Himself, who "is Love" as He "is Light," commands the parents to take hold of their own child and bring him before the elders and the congregation, to be stoned! It was a private affair — a family matter. What had the elders and the congregation to do with it? God had something to say to it, and to see to it! In His sight nothing is more horrible and unbearable than a rebellious child, except the abomination of an idol. His existence was a stain on the camp where God dwelt.
The parents' word settled the case. The punishment that followed reached beyond the son:
His parents' witness was then enough to prove the charge: their son was stubborn and rebellious, a glutton and a drunkard. In this case he had become unmanageable, and the sentence was to follow at once — stoning the young man to death. This was the law, judgment without mercy. Rebellion is no less evil today in God's eyes. Yet in this day of grace God holds back judgment, wanting men to repent and be saved. But under law, judgment fell, to make others fear the consequences of rebellion.
One writer sets this law beside the story Jesus told of a son who came home. The same words describe both young men:
The law said, "Lay hold on him" — the gospel said, "Embrace him." The law said, "Stone him" — the gospel said, "Kiss him." And yet, remember, we meet the same God in both... True, the prodigal had nothing to commend him. He had proved himself to be everything the law condemned — he had been "a glutton and a drunkard," the rags of the far country were on him. If the law had taken its course, he would have met the stern grasp of justice instead of the affectionate embrace of love. Instead of the father's kiss he would have met the stone of judgment from the men of his city, in front of the elders.
Kelly reads the case as a picture of a whole nation:
There is the case of the stubborn and rebellious son. To whom does this apply? To the people of Israel in their stubborn self-will and irreverence toward the Lord their God... The end of this age will not see united hearts among the Jews. It will see a people divided and broken. Some will have hearts truly touched by grace. Most will fight to the last against God. This is the stubborn son... And such has Israel been.
The two labels also stand on their own as a warning about the body:
The glory of God should be our highest aim in keeping the body alive: "whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God." On the other hand, a lack of self-control and the abuse of the appetites are real sins. God sternly condemns the glutton and the drunkard alike.
- Root — He dies for rebellion, not for appetite. Drink explains the madness of his conduct; it does not excuse it.
- Pride — Rebellion grows from thinking only your own opinion counts. It strikes at an authority God Himself set up.
- Reach — The family had to carry the case to the gate. A rebel left unjudged was a stain on the camp where God lived.
- Result — Under law the outcome was judgment without mercy, meant to make others fear what rebellion costs.
- Reversal — The same God who said "Lay hold on him" says in the gospel "Embrace him." The prodigal was everything this verse describes, yet he met a kiss instead of a stone.
And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. And thou shalt put evil away from thy midst; and all Israel shall hear and fear.
The law about a stubborn and rebellious son ends in the town square, where the whole city carries out the sentence. Commentators ask why a family matter became public business, why drink is named in the charge, and where this sentence was finally carried out.
The case starts inside a home, yet the whole city carries out the sentence. One writer asks why God would not leave the matter private:
What an appalling scene! The LORD Himself, who "is Love" as He "is Light," commands parents to lay hold of their own child and bring him before the elders and the congregation, to be stoned! It was a private affair — a family matter. What did the elders and the congregation have to do with it? God had something to say about it, and He had to see to it! In His sight, next to the abomination of an idol, there is nothing more horrible and unbearable than a rebellious child. His existence was a stain on the camp where God lived. The congregation had to purge itself of his presence. Otherwise his continued presence would have defiled the whole congregation of Israel, along with the family he belonged to.
The parents' charge ends with gluttony and drunkenness. Is the son dying for drink? The same writer says no:
This law deals with the sin of disobedience and rebellion alongside drunkenness. That is not because drunkenness was the capital sin (compare v. 18). It is because the crime of such stubbornness and disobedience to parents is so unnatural and cowardly that it can only be put down to the maddening influence of drink. At the same time it shows that God will not accept drunkenness as an excuse for such a crime. Human judges should not accept it either, and in general they do not.
What should a home do now, when the law of Moses no longer applies? Von Poseck answers plainly:
But what about a stubborn and rebellious son in a Christian family? Is grace to prevail, and is he to stay in the house, because the law of Moses no longer applies? Is he to stay until he has infected all the children with his wickedness? If the word of love and grace, and the rod of correction, have both failed, the family ought to purge itself without further delay of the defiling presence of the rebellious child. God's blessing cannot rest on a household where He is dishonoured by tolerating such an abomination in His sight. Then their prayers for the wanderer will go up to the throne of grace, and in God's own time bring the cry of repentance: "Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you."
One writer reads the law as a picture of the nation itself:
There is the case of the stubborn and rebellious son. Who does this apply to? To the people of Israel in their obstinate self-will and irreverence toward the LORD their God… The end of this age will not see united hearts among the Jews, but a people split and broken. The divisions among them will be as wide as possible. Some have hearts truly touched by grace, as we have seen, and they are destined for the place of the firstborn on the earth. Most, on the other hand, will fight to the last against God, and reject His testimony to their own ruin. This is the stubborn son.
Set this law beside the story in Luke 15 of the son who came home:
Striking contrast! In Deuteronomy we see the hand of God, in righteous government, carrying out judgement on the rebellious. In Luke 15 we see the heart of God pouring itself out, in soul-subduing tenderness, on the poor repentant one. He gives him the sweet assurance that it is His own deep joy to get His lost one back. The persistent rebel meets the stone of judgement; the returning penitent meets the kiss of love.
How can God pardon the guilty and still deal with the evil? Mackintosh points to the cross:
How can He pardon the sinner steeped to the lips in sin, and yet not "clear the guilty"?… In the cross of Calvary… Was this not a vindication of the law? Did the words "So you shall purge the evil" ever fall on the ear with such solemn force as at Golgotha, when the blessed Son of God cried out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Oh! never, never.
- Evil defiles. The rebellious son stained the camp where God lived, so the whole congregation had to purge itself of him.
- Evil excuses nothing. Drink could madden a child into such rebellion, but it is no defence before God or human judges.
- Evil must be put out. Where love and correction have both failed, a home that shelters open rebellion loses God's blessing.
- Evil marked the nation. One writer reads the stubborn son as Israel itself: self-willed toward God, and at the end of the age split between those whose hearts grace has touched and the mass who fight on against Him.
- Evil met its stone at Calvary. The rebel meets judgement, the returning son meets the kiss of love, and the cross answered the law's demand in full.