“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son, who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and though they chasten him, will not listen to them;”
— WEB
Deuteronomy 21:18
Cited in 2 topics on this site.
Translations sourced from the public-domain WEB, KJV, and ASV. See all sources.
“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:”
— KJV
“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, that will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and, though they chasten him, will not hearken unto them;”
— ASV
Topics that cite this verse
Commentary
Here is, I. A law for the punishing of a rebellious son. Having in the former law provided that parents should not deprive their children of their right, it was fit that it should next be provided that children withdraw not the honour and duty which are owing to their parents, for there is no partiality in the divine law. Observe, 1. How the criminal is here described. He is a stubborn and rebellious son, Deu 21:18. No child was to fare the worse for the weakness of his capacity, the slowness or dulness of his understanding, but for his wilfulness and obstinacy. If he carry himself proudly and insolently towards his parents, contemn their authority, slight their reproofs and admonitions, disobey the express commands they give him for his own good, hate to be reformed by the correction they give him, shame their family, grieve their hearts, waste their substance, and threaten to ruin their estate by riotous living - this is a stubborn and rebellious son. He is particularly supposed (Deu 21:20) to be a glutton or a drunkard. This intimates either, (1.) That these were sins which his parents did in a particular manner warn him against, and therefore that in these instances there was a plain evidence that he did not obey their voice. Lemuel had this charge from his mother, Pro 31:4.
— Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary (public domain)
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son--A severe law was enacted in this case. But the consent of both parents was required as a prevention of any abuse of it; for it was reasonable to suppose that they would not both agree to a criminal information against their son except from absolute necessity, arising from his inveterate and hopeless wickedness; and, in that view, the law was wise and salutary, as such a person would be a pest and nuisance to society. The punishment was that to which blasphemers were doomed [Lev 24:23]; for parents are considered God's representatives and invested with a portion of his authority over their children.
— Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary (public domain)
Newsletter
One verse, every Tuesday.
A short reflection, a single passage, three articles to read. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.