Showing posts with label ordinance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ordinance. Show all posts

Saturday, November 08, 2014

Kidnapping Is Nothing New To The Bible -- Exodus 21:16


“And he who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.”
 
Way back in Genesis (chapters 37), we read about Joseph’s older brothers pulling off the first recorded kidnapping when they plotted against him and then sold him to a group of  Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver, supposedly for him to become a slave.
And now many years later, God is telling the Israelites that kidnapping is punishable by death. We note that God does not differentiate between “stealing someone” (kidnapping) or “stealing them with another end in mind” (selling, sex trade, other forms of slavery, terrorist training, etc.).  We are not to have any control over another person’s life save and except the control God ordains as godly parents over our children, as godly spouses over each other, or as godly employers over our employees.  Any other control over and above that against an individual’s will is not God-ordained.
Some readers may wonder whether I missed one more type of control allowed by God and that is through church leadership.  I did not.  Contrary to what a good number of church or other religious leaders do, there is no room for control over others in a faith-based organization in God’s economy.  If you are being controlled by your religious leader against your free will, against your better judgment, and/or against what you believe the Scriptures say about something, then my strong advice to you is to pray for wisdom, discretion, and courage to rely fully on God and get out of that church as quickly as possible.  If you do not, consider yourself kidnapped – and you now know from the verses we are studying here that God is against that.  I encourage you to move on.  More on that below.
As I reflected on the story of Joseph and his brothers and tried to relate it to our verses here, another question came to mind.  “Who is to do the punishing and when?”  Clearly at the time of Joseph’s kidnapping, God had not yet given the people of Israel His ordinance against kidnapping as He did here in Exodus 21.  So we could not expect some other relatives of Joseph’s father Jacob to have implemented the punishment even when they found out who was responsible many years later.  But now that we have this ‘law’, what are we to do in the case of kidnapping?
The best place to look for answers to difficult questions is in Scripture itself.  When the plan of God for mankind is taken in its entirety, we can come closer to answering the question, “How then shall we live?”  With that in mind, first, we have to realize that in the New Testament Jesus Christ introduces a new variable that must be considered.  When true repentance is made, when forgiveness is sought sincerely, and when behavior is changed, then grace must be extended, even with respect to kidnapping.  Second, the legal penalty (the consequences assigned by the law of the land) must still be met.
Another issue that often arises with respect to kidnapping is whether or not a family should pay any ransom demanded by the kidnappers, or whether a nation should pay the ransom demanded by terrorist or other enemy kidnappers?  As you know countries around the world differ on that matter.  You can read more about that here: Meeting Ransom Demands.
Let us take this to the personal level in two ways.  First, would you or I pay ransom money to get our loved one back, or expect our government to do so if one of our loved ones had been kidnapped?  Personally, I cannot answer the question unequivocally.  I suppose that much depends on the circumstances.  The Bible talks about the punishment of kidnapping, it does not make comment on negotiating with kidnappers.  So, there is no morally correct answer here to my way of thinking.  In the adult courses that I teach, I advise participants to simply say, “it depends” whenever they are stumped by one of my questions.  Also, it often does indeed “depend”.  In the issue at hand here, I believe I would weigh whether paying ransom would simply encourage more kidnapping of the loved ones of others who may not be able to pay and thus result in the deaths of those kidnapped or whether this is a one-off situation where the kidnappers simply were after my specific loved one, in which case I would push for the paying of the ransom.
The second way I would take this matter to the personal level is by asking whether or not you or I actually “kidnap” anyone in one form or another?
Dictionary.com commences its definition of the verb ‘kidnap’ as follows: “to steal, carry off, or abduct by force or fraud.”  I thought of how some of us may have done or are doing that in our lives right now.  Here are some examples:
1.     In our cosmopolitan cities or world that we live in, there are more and more cases of “child brides/grooms” or “arranged marriages” for very young individuals.  If our spouse is with us still, but not out of his/her own volition but because our culture or one’s parents forced him/her on us, then it is possible for him/her to be a victim of kidnapping.
2.     If we enticed our spouse to marry us with lies of what we were or owned, etc., and once told, she/he could well feel kidnapped by the world’s definition as fraud was involved.
3.     And then there is the issue of how we deal with children of divorce with respect to visitation.  Are we forcing them to join one parent or another, be it permanently or periodically, against their will because of our own ‘right to do so’?  If so, could this be a form of ‘kidnapping’?  The age of the child is a major factor here.  You cannot allow a toddler to say, “No, I won’t visit with . . .”.  [Clearly there are laws and practices that have been established in our society to address this, but are they right?]
4.     And finally, any abduction or kidnapping either by force or enticement or lies for the purposes of any type of sex trade is indeed atrocious, an action for which there is absolutely no excuse.
I am not in any way promoting divorce as being the remedy in the case of the first two examples above -- far from it.  I am however suggesting that the forced marriage, the enticing lies, etc., need to be admitted to and the couple involved need to move towards a godly relationship that has dealt with the action or words that caused the problem and becomes one where grace abounds, making room for the relationship to grow in love and understanding.
In our third example involving visitation rights, what is best for the child should always be the priority concern of both parents.  In addition, a child’s own preference can sometimes be altered by an honest change in behavior of the parent they would otherwise prefer to avoid.  And a loving parent would make those adjustments in his/her life for the sake of their child. When all that is in place, the parents can be united in how the visiting is to be undertaken and encouraged.
We cannot leave this passage without returning to the “kidnapping” that often occurs by Christian leaders, be they pastors or leaders of a religious organization.  This kind of ‘kidnapping’ can come in many forms.  Some examples are:
1.     Ideological kidnapping where a pastor or leader insists all members of his/her following prescribe to a specific way of thinking or behaving that is “extra-scriptural” – that is, while perhaps not detrimental to one’s life (although it often is – be it psychologically or emotionally or physically), it is certainly not a requirement made by the Word of God.  And if one does not go along with his/her request, he/she is ex-communicated from the body (reverse kidnapping) or held prisoner (in one form or another).  Some examples that come to mind include: what constitutes true repentance and forgiveness from God (demanding a person go through a man-ordained process vs. dealing with God); not trusting in medicine or science for medical treatment; or not breaking bread or having fellowship with certain people/groups/etc.
2.     Financial kidnapping where a pastor or leader convinces all of his/her flock to become sacrificially committed (to the point of living in poverty or not being able to provide for their families) to one of his/her projects and actually causing people to feel guilty if they are not “all in”.  All the time, this same leader may be living comfortably and even extravagantly.  Another example here may be demanding that a person tithe strictly to the leader’s church and nowhere else.
3.     Influential kidnapping where one Christian leader who is a superior in a church or an organization goes on a campaign against others and in the process influences younger leaders or workers under their care to join him/her when in reality the problem is not between the younger workers and those whom the more senior worker is fighting.
In all of these examples, people get hurt, the name of Jesus is tarnished, and the work of the church or the organization is set back or completely destroyed some times.  In all cases, the Enemy sneers and rubs his hands with glee.
Woe to those Christian pastors and leaders who kidnap their sheep.  Woe to a husband or wife who kidnaps their spouse.  Woe to a parent who kidnaps his/her children.  Any form of kidnapping is something God hates or He never would have established this ordinance.
We can and must extend forgiveness to another person.  But only God can and does extend forgiveness to both the person and the sin.

[Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.  And while you’re here, why not check out some more of our recent blogs shown in the right hand column.  Ken.
________________________________________________________________________

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.

Friday, June 28, 2013

God Makes Another Request and Moses Has To Prepare the People for It -- Exodus 13:1-10


Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Sanctify to Me every firstborn, the first offspring of every womb among the sons of Israel, both of man and beast; it belongs to Me.”  Moses said to the people, “Remember this day in which you went out from Egypt, from the house of slavery; for by a powerful hand the Lord brought you out from this place. And nothing leavened shall be eaten.  On this day in the month of Abib, you are about to go forth.  It shall be when the Lord brings you to the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, which He swore to your fathers to give you, a land flowing with milk and honey, that you shall observe this rite in this month.  For seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there shall be a feast to the Lord.  Unleavened bread shall be eaten throughout the seven days; and nothing leavened shall be seen among you, nor shall any leaven be seen among you in all your borders.  You shall tell your son on that day, saying, ‘It is because of what the Lord did for me when I came out of Egypt.’  And it shall serve as a sign to you on your hand, and as a reminder on your forehead, that the law of the Lord may be in your mouth; for with a powerful hand the Lord brought you out of Egypt.  Therefore, you shall keep this ordinance at its appointed time from year to year.”
 
Exodus chapter 12 ends with God bringing the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.  And chapter 13 begins with God speaking only to Moses this time with another request (if that’s the right word) of the children of Israel.  This time, a request that perhaps requires a personal sacrifice of the Israelites and it involves their own “first-borns”.

I find it interesting that this whole account sometimes has God speaking to Moses alone and sometimes to Moses and Aaron together.  This is one of the former occasions when this rather ‘big ask’ from God comes to Moses alone because of its sensitivity.  We must remember it was Moses that God chose to be His instrument at this time and that Aaron his brother was appointed to help him because of Moses’ stuttering.  The vessel that God was using to accomplish His will was Moses and the responsibility and onus of getting God’s message across to the people of Israel were indeed his and no one else’s.  As Christian leaders, we can delegate a lot to others but not everything.  We have a responsibility to be in close communication and relationship with God ourselves.  It is our job to make sure we are getting the message right and then to seek His guidance and direction as to how we are to communicate to, and implement it for, those we are responsible for.

And what was it that God was asking for this time?  Simply this – each Israelite would be required to take steps in dedicating and offering each of their first-borns (both their own and the first-borns of their animals) to God.  That is, they would belong to Him and He could do with them as He liked.  The word “sanctify” is used to describe what that really means.  Each parent was to “set apart” these firstborns and to “declare them holy” for God’s use.  There was, however, no immediate loss or other consequence required except the realization that this newborn baby (in the case of firstborns still to come) or this oldest child (in the case of firstborns already born) was really God’s to do with as He liked and all the parents could do is provide this firstborn with the right care and nurturing so that he (later we see this applied only to sons) would be best available to serve the Lord.  This is a much less demanding sacrifice then what the Egyptians had to undergo when they lost their firstborns to the angel of death.  For the Israelite parent who truly believed in what God had done for the children of Israel in releasing them from their bondage, this was very doable.  All Moses had to do was to figure out a way of how to present it to them.  And he did.

His chosen words and his actions exhibit further his true leadership abilities and why God had chosen him for the role that he was given.  He commences his talk to the people of Israel, supposedly now some distance from “downtown Egypt” by telling them to “Remember this day that they left Egypt and slavery by God’s mighty hand.”  Clearly, there was no denying that.

Then he repeats again what God expects the Israelites to do during the month of Abib, the month in which they were led out of Egypt. This is the beginning of the “biblical” year when the first New Moon is seen after the barley in Israel reaches the stage of ripeness call “Abib” (literally, Hebrew for ‘ear of grain’).  And Moses tells them that they are to observe the rite of not eating anything leavened during this time once they get to the Promised Land that God swore to give to their fathers.  He very carefully and intentionally points out that this would be their land and they have a right to it as per God’s granting.  He adds that it will be a land of “milk and honey” making reference to the agricultural abundance of the land of Israel.  And finally, as they celebrate this feast for seven days, they are to tell their “sons” (and one presumes ‘daughters’ as well although not mentioned here) that all that they are (or would be) enjoying is “because of what God did when He brought us out of Egypt”.

At this point in the text, Moses instructs the Israelites to commemorate this event in what appears to be a very physically demonstrated way by signs on their hand and forehead, as well as by continuously talking about it and God’s Law.  Commentators, however, struggle with this idea.  David Guzik writes the following, “The Jews used this passage to institute the practice (of) the wearing of phylacteries – small boxes holding parchment with scriptures on them, held to the forehead or hand with leather straps . . ..”  But then in reference to the phrase “That the Lord’s law may be in your mouth” he writes, “This shows that God did not command for literal boxes to be tied to the hands and forehand, because to take (it) in this way means that there should also be a phylactery box to put in the mouth.”  Which there is not, being his point.

Another commentator, Robert Jamieson, adds to this interpretation:  Nor is it probable that either this practice or the phylacteries of the Pharisees--parchment scrolls, which were worn on their wrists and foreheads--had so early an existence. The words are to be considered only as a figurative mode of expression.”  And with reference to the phrase about “the Lord’s law may be in thy mouth”, he adds: “that is, that it may be the subject of frequent conversation and familiar knowledge among the people.”

I will leave it up to the reader to discern and decide for themselves what God intended for the Israelites with reference to this section.  What we do know for sure though is this:
i.  The Jews did at one point or another commence the practice of wearing phylacteries on their forehead and arms;
ii.  Jesus did, much later, condemn the abuse of (not necessarily the actual wearing) of phylacteries among the Pharisees (see Matthew 23:5) for they were making their phylactery boxes larger and more pretentious as, we assume, a demonstration of their greater spirituality;
iii.  In the end times, as David Guzik points out, using Revelation 13:16, “
there will be a Satanic imitation of this practice when the number of the Antichrist will be applied to either the hand or forehead of all who will take it.”  Whether or not that is a coincidence (I doubt it) or an ‘imitation’ as Guzik calls it, one does not know for sure.  Some Jews may well have used (and still do use) the phylacteries as they thought or think God intended them to be used; and
iv.  Finally, we do know that God wants us to remember, obey, and keep His Law in our minds (forehead), our deeds (hands), and in our witness (mouth), whether or not we choose to display that requirement physically.

This section of Scripture ends with “Therefore, you shall keep this ordinance at its appointed time from year to year.”  So while we started with God’s new requirement of the Israelites concerning their firstborns, we end the portion with Moses still reminding them of the requirement for them to celebrate what God has done for them.  Only in that context is he ready to share God’s new request of them as we will soon see.  The lesson for us is simply this: We need to always remember, when God is asking us to obey Him, what God has done for us through His Son Jesus Christ and what we were saved from.  It is with that in mind that we choose to obey Him under all circumstances, serve Him better, love Him more, and accept His will for our lives.  I pray it is so with you and me.
________________________________________________________________________

[Are you looking for a speaker at your church, your club, school, or organization? Ken is available to preach, teach, challenge, and/or motivate. Please contact us.]

Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive free updates. We bring you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe for free to this blog or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. And please share this blog with your friends. Ken Godevenos, Church and Management Consultant, Accord Consulting.  And while you’re here, why not check out some more of our recent blogs shown in the right hand column.  Ken.
________________________________________________________________________

It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.