Rulers must be Christians, not Pagan Idolaters (Joshua 24:1, 14, 15)

Joshua 24

King James Version (KJV)

1 And Joshua gathered all the tribes of Israel to Shechem, and called for the elders of Israel, and for their heads, and for their judges, and for their officers; and they presented themselves before God. ...

14 Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the Lord.

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Comments:

One serious error today held by many Christians is that a civil ruler doesn't necessarily have to be a Christian. One of the most outrageous examples is the recent support by Christians for the Mormon idolater Mitt Romney. 

But Joshua would have none of this nonsense; instead, he calls forth Israel's leaders, including judges and their officers, who then "presented themselves before God"—of which Matthew Henry writes:

They presented themselves not only before Joshua, but before God, in this assembly, that is, they came together in a solemn religious manner, as into the special presence of God, and with an eye to his speaking to them by Joshua; and it is probable the service began with prayer. (Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible, Joshua 24)

Apparently, Joshua considered the office of civil ruler so important that in his solemn charge to Israel before his death, he implores civil rulers to serve God and forsake idolatry—apparently with Israel's benefit in mind. 

We see here, then, that rulers play an important role in national reform. And it won't do to say that this charge was just given to Israel, but that rulers today are not obligated to serve God. Not everything that God required of Israel was unique to Israel. Moreover, I doubt we want to say that God—Who shares His glory with no other—is no longer to be honored by rulers.  

In fact, Scripture says "He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God" (2 Samuel 23:3b). Note that this text does not specify ruling over Israelites in particular, but all men in general. And as Psalm 2 requires of every ruler of the earth:

Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 

Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. (Psalm 2:10-12)

The church of course can still function without godly rulers, but this doesn't mean that rulers (whether godly rulers, or at least those with a pro-Christian policy) cannot be a means to help the church. Isaiah 49 prophesies favorably of rulers assisting the church in the New Covenant era:

And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me. (Isaiah 49:23)

On this text, Matthew Henry writes:

Some of the princes of the nations shall become patrons and protectors to the church: King shall be thy nursing fathers, to carry thy sons in their arms (as Moses, Num. 11:12 ); and, because women are the most proper nurses, their queens shall be thy nursing mothers. This promise was in part fulfilled to the Jews, after their return out of captivity. Several of the kings of Persia were very tender of their interests, countenanced and encouraged them, as Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes; Esther the queen was a nursing mother to the Jews that remained in their captivity, putting her life in her hand to snatch the child out of the flames. The Christian church, after a long captivity, was happy in some such kings and queens as Constantine and his mother Helena, and afterwards Theodosius, and others, who nursed the church with all possible care and tenderness. Whenever the sceptre of government is put into the hands of religious princes, then this promise is fulfilled. The church in this world is in an infant state, and it is in the power of princes and magistrates to do it a great deal of service; it is happy when they do so, when their power is a praise to those that do well. 2. Others of them, who stand it out against the church’s interests, will be forced to yield and to repent of their opposition: They shall bow down to thee and lick the dust. The promise to the church of Philadelphia seems to be borrowed from this (Rev. 3:9 ): I will make those of the synagogue of Satan to come and worship before thy feet. Or it may be meant of the willing subjection which kings and kingdoms shall pay to Christ the church’s King, as he manifests himself in the church (Ps. 72:11 ): All kings shall fall down before him. And by all this it shall be made to appear, (1.) That God is the Lord, the sovereign Lord of all, against whom there is no standing out nor rising up. (2.) That those who wait for him, in a dependence upon his promise and a resignation to his will, shall not be made ashamed of their hope; for the vision of peace is for an appointed time, and at the end it shall speak and shall not lie. (Matthew Henry Commentary on the Whole Bible, Isaiah 49)

God Fights For and Chastens His People (Joshua 23:3, 9-13)

Joshua 23

King James Version (KJV)

3 And ye have seen all that the Lord your God hath done unto all these nations because of you; for the Lord your God is he that hath fought for you. ...

9 For the Lord hath driven out from before you great nations and strong: but as for you, no man hath been able to stand before you unto this day.
10 One man of you shall chase a thousand: for the Lord your God, he it is that fighteth for you, as he hath promised you.
11 Take good heed therefore unto yourselves, that ye love the Lord your God.
12 Else if ye do in any wise go back, and cleave unto the remnant of these nations, even these that remain among you, and shall make marriages with them, and go in unto them, and they to you:
13 Know for a certainty that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the Lord your God hath given you.

Comments:

When God is on a nation's side, the odds are insignificant; if God so wills, one man can chase down a thousand. This is because God has all power, and He controls all things, including things on this earth. While it is often the case that numerical advantage has its benefits, it is not always the case; strength in numbers is not the ultimate advantage—but God's strength is. 

As the book of Hebrews says,

And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions. Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. (Hebrews 11:32-34)

David, of course, slew the mighty giant Goliath by the power of God, Who delivered Goliath into David's hand (1 Samuel 17:49-51). As David says before slaying Goliath:

Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied. 

This day will the Lord deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel. 

And all this assembly shall know that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the Lord's, and he will give you into our hands. (1 Samuel 17:45b-47)

Gideon and his mere 300 men set to flight the host of Midian after God turned the swords of the Midianites against one another (Judges 7:18-22). Then there is Samson—who, after the Spirit of God came upon him, became a one-man army who slew a thousand Philistines with simply the jawbone of an ass (Judges 15:14, 15). 

The great military commander Oliver Cromwell understood this great truth that God—not numbers—is the ultimate military advantage. Writing about Cromwell and the English Civil Wars, Cromwellian scholar Blair Worden states:

Repeatedly after his victories Cromwell urged parliament to 'give God all the glory' for them. Repeatedly he lamented man's tendency to attribute military success not to the Lord himself but to his 'weak instrument', a sin which robbed God of the 'glory' and 'praise' which were his due.[1] 'God is not enough owned' in parliament's victories, complained Cromwell in 1645; 'we look too much to men and visible helps: this hath much hindered our success'.[2] Man's vanity and ingratitude in triumph might incite the Lord to limit, even to withdraw, his favour. Jeremiah 17:5, 'Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord', was a favourite text of Puritan and Cromwellian politics. It was God that gave courage and skill to his troops, who were helpless without him. It was God who pierced the enemy's counsels, God who 'infatuated' the royalists and hardened their hearts and lulled them into overconfidence. During the siege of York in 1644, parliamentarians, though invited to be grateful to God for giving their forces there, 'as a meanes', a numerical advantage, were simultaneously warned to 'put not confidence' in it, an error that would 'provoke God'.[3] Sometimes the Lord pointedly placed his forces at an initial disadvantage, in numbers or in the site of battle. After the victory at Preston in 1648, Cromwell requested the Commons to reflect on 'the disparity of forces on both sides; that so you may see, and all the world acknowledge, the great hand of God in this business'.[4] The triumphs of 'our armies' in that year, achieved against all the odds, persuaded John Owen that 'their work was done in heaven before they began it. ... The work might have been done by children, though he was pleased to employ such worthy instruments. They see, I doubt not, their own nothingness in his all-sufficiency.'[5] Soldiers who won after staring defeat in the face liked to observe that 'our extremity was God's opportunity to magnify his power'.[6] Dunbar, where triumph was snatched from defeat, prompted a spate of such reflections. The Lord, exclaimed the minister Sidrach Simpson to Cromwell, 

hath stepped out of heaven to raise those who were even as dead, and to judge his adversaries ... he is a God mighty in battell, in wisedome going beyond the subtility of man ... he hath by a few, weake, weaned ones, that the mighty might not glory in their might, but in himself alone. ... You were before too many, too vigorous when you smote your adversaries. Till you had felt all that the colde earth, and want of provisions in a strange countrey, could doe to you (wherein [the enemy] so much trusted for a conquest) it was not tyme for God to put to his hand.[7]

Cromwell's intimate ally Oliver St John agreed: God had delayed the battle until the enemy, 'relying uppon and bosting in the arme of flesh, [had become too] confident ... therefore hath the Lord soe ordered the busines, that wee may see it was not our owne sword, nor our owne bow, but his right hand, and his holy arme that hath gotten us the victory.[8]

However, disobedience can easily lead to the chastisement of God's people at the hand of other nations. For instance, in Judges 2 we read:

And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim:

And they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the Lord to anger.

And they forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.

And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel, and he delivered them into the hands of spoilers that spoiled them, and he sold them into the hands of their enemies round about, so that they could not any longer stand before their enemies.

Whithersoever they went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for evil, as the Lord had said, and as the Lord had sworn unto them: and they were greatly distressed. (Judges 2:11-15)

Judges 3 describes how God strengthened Eglon, king of Moab against Israel:

And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord: and the Lord strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done evil in the sight of the Lord.

And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and possessed the city of palm trees. (Judges 3:12, 13)

After the South was defeated in the War Between the States, Robert Lewis Dabney said that "A righteous God, for our sins towards Him, has permitted us to be overthrown by our enemies and His."[9] 

During the War Between the States, James H. Thornwell submitted a paper in December 1861 to the first General Assembly of the Southern Presbyterian Church at Augusta, Georgia, to petition the Congress of the Confederate States of America to recognize in its constitution Jesus Christ as the highest political authority. 

But while the Confederate Constitution acknowledged God, it would never specifically acknowledge the name of Jesus Christ. And, while only God knows the reason why He didn't grant the South victory, perhaps it was for this reason; a refusal to "Kiss the Son," per Psalm 2. As Thornwell's paper states:

God is the ruler among the nations; and the people who refuse Him their allegiance shall be broken with a rod of iron, or dashed in pieces like a potter's vessel. Our republic will perish like the Pagan republics of Greece and Rome, unless we baptize it into the name of Christ. "Be wise now, therefore, 0 ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth; kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little."[10] [editor's note: from Psalm 2:10, 12a; verse 11 is omitted]

Notes

____________________________

[1] W. C. Abbott, ed., Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, 4 vols (Cambridge, MA: 1937-47), i. 360, 365, 505-6, ii. 38, 124-5, 127, 143, 144, 160, 171, 235, 261, 262, 325, 330, 377, iii. 54, 71, iv. 871. Cited in Blair Worden, God's Instruments: Political Conduct in the England of Oliver Cromwell (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012, 2013), 40.

[2] Abbott, Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, i. 340. Cited Worden, God's Instruments, 40.

[3] The Scottish Dove 17 May 1644, 246. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[4] Abbott, i. 637-8. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.
[5] W. H. Goold, ed., The Works of John Owen, 24 vols (1850-5), viii. 97-8. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[6] The Parliamentary or Constitutional History of England, 24 vols (1752-63) ('Old Parliamentary History'), xiii. 286. Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.
[7] Cited in Worden, God's Instruments, 41.

[8] Cited in Ibid.
[9] Robert Lewis Dabney, A Defence of Virginia: And Through Her, of the South, in Recent and Pending Contests Against the Sectional Party (NY: E. J. Hale & Son, 1867), 356.
[10] Dr. James H. Thornwell, "Relation of the State to Christ," Christian Nation, 19 February 1902, 3.

God Versus Religious Pluralism (Joshua 23:7, 8)

Joshua 23

King James Version (KJV)

7 That ye come not among these nations, these that remain among you; neither make mention of the name of their gods, nor cause to swear by them, neither serve them, nor bow yourselves unto them:

8 But cleave unto the Lord your God, as ye have done unto this day.

Comments:

Unlike the religiously pluralistic society that considers all gods equal and a viable option for worship, the Christian society opposes all false religions as evil and unworthy of respect. Civil rulers are to oppose public worship of false gods and attempts to seduce others to do the same. So-called holy books that promote the worship of false gods are to be burned—not to be protected under the pretext of free speech. Idols are to be annihilated—not to be valued under the pretext of artistic expression. False gods are not to be revered in daily conversion.

Some thoughts by commentators:

Adam Clarke:

Have no civil or social contracts with them, (see Joshua 23:12), as these will infallibly lead to spiritual affinities, in consequence of which ye will make honorable mention of the name of their gods, swear by them as the judges of your motives and actions, serve them in their abominable rites, and bow yourselves unto them as your creators and preservers; thus giving the whole worship of God to idols: and all this will follow from simply coming among them. He who walks in the counsel of the ungodly will soon stand in the way of sinners, and shortly sit in the seat of the scornful. Nemo repente fuit turpissimus. “No man rises to the highest stages of iniquity but by degrees.” Nero himself, under the instructions of Seneca, was a promising youth.

Disclaimer: we do not endorse Clarke's Arminianism

Matthew Poole: 

Come not among these nations, i. e. avoid all familiar converse and contracts, but especially marriages, with them, as it is explained, ver. 12, and as the Hebrew word intimates, being oft used of coming or going in to a woman. Neither make mention of the name of their gods, to wit, unnecessarily and familiarly, lest the mention of them breed discourse about them, and so by degrees bring a man to the approbation and worship of them. Compare Exod. xxiii. 13; Deut. xii. 3; Psal. xvi. 4 ; Eph. v. 3. Nor cause to swear by them; nor require nor compel the Gentiles to swear by them, as they used to do; especially in leagues and contracts, which therefore the Israelites are here implicitly fordidden to make with them. Neither serve them, nor bow yourselves unto them; neither give them any inward reverence, or outward adoration. Here is an observable gradation, whereby he shows what notable progress sin usually makes, and what reason there is to look to the beginnings of it, forasmuch as a civil and common conversation with their persons was likely to bring them, and indeed did actually bring them, by insensible steps, to the worship of their gods. So it is no wonder if some things not simply and in themselves evil be forbidden by God, as here the naming of their gods is, because they are occasions and introductions to evil.

John Calvin: 

That you come not among these nations, etc

He distinctly admonishes them that it will be impossible rightly to discharge their duty if they be not carefully on their guard against all sources of corruption. This it was very necessary to enforce upon them. For they were surrounded on all sides by the snares of Satan, and we know how great their proneness to superstition was, or rather how headlong their eagerness for it. First, then, he warns them that intimate intercourse with the nations may involve them in fellowship in crime; for the term mingling used in this passage is equivalent to what is termed by St. Paul, being yoked. (2 Corinthians 6:14) In short, he first removes the incitements or allurements to idolatry, and then declares his detestation of idolatry itself. It is to be observed, however, that he does not expressly mention either bending of the knee, or sacrifices, or other rites, but designates all perverse modes of worship by the terms naming them and swearing by them. Whence we infer that God is defrauded of his honor when ever any particle, however small, of all the things which he claims for himself is transferred to idols. He accordingly concludes that they are to adhere to God alone; in other words, they are to be bound to him out and out.

John Gill:

Ver. 7. That ye come not among these nations, those that remain among you,.... That remained unsubdued, or that were suffered to dwell among them, being tributaries to them; with these they were not to converse freely and familiarly, nor to carry on trade and commerce with them, nor enter into any alliances or marriages with them, and not even attend any of their feasts, and especially their idolatrous ones:

neither make mention of the name of their gods; not in common conversation, and still less in any religious matters; never with any reverence of them, or in any respectable manner; but always with indignation and contempt, calling them dunghill gods, and the like, as they often are in Scripture:

nor cause to swear [by them]; neither swear by them themselves, nor cause others to swear by them, as Abarbinel; or a man his neighbour, as Kimchi; no, not a Gentile, as Ben Melech; so it is said in the Misnah {p},

"he that vows in the name of an idol, and confirms in his name, (which Bartenora interprets, swears by his name,) transgresses a negative precept.''

Maimonides {q} also says,

"he that vows in the name of an idol, and swears by it, is to be beaten--he that swears by it himself, or causes a Gentile to swear by it; for it is forbidden to cause a Gentile to swear by his fear (or idol), and even to cause him to make mention of it, though not in the way of an oath, it is forbidden:''

neither serve them; by offering any sacrifice or incense to them, or by praying to them, or offering them praises on any account, or by performing any religious service in any instance or form whatever:

nor bow yourselves unto them; give them any adoration or worship, external or internal.

Matthew Henry:

They must especially take heed of all approaches towards idolatry, the sin to which they were first inclined and would be most tempted,v. 7. [1.] They must not acquaint themselves with idolaters, nor come among them to visit them or be present at any of their feasts or entertainments, for they could not contract any intimacy nor keep up any conversation with them, without danger of infection. [2.] They must not show the least respect to any idol, nor make mention of the name of their gods, but endeavour to bury the remembrance of them in perpetual oblivion, that the worship of them may never be revived. "Let the very name of them be forgotten. Look upon idols as filthy detestable things, not to be named without the utmost loathing and detestation.’’ The Jews would not suffer their children to name swine’s flesh, because it was forbidden, lest the name of it should occasion their desiring it; but, if they had occasion to speak of it, they must call it that strange thing. It is a pity that among Christians the names of the heathen gods are so commonly used, and made so familiar as they are, especially in plays and poems: let those names which have been set up in rivalship with God be for ever loathed and lost. [3.] They must not countenance others in showing respect to them. They must not only not swear by them themselves, but they must not cause others to swear by them, which supposes that they must not make any covenants with idolaters, because they, in the confirming of their covenants, would swear by their idols; never let Israelites admit such an oath. [4.] They must take heed of these occasions of idolatry, lest by degrees they should arrive at the highest step of it, which was serving false gods, and bowing down to them, against the letter of the second commandment.(3.) 

Preserving Peace Within a Nation (Joshua 22:26-28)

Joshua 22

King James Version (KJV)

26 Therefore we said, Let us now prepare to build us an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice:

27 But that it may be a witness between us, and you, and our generations after us, that we might do the service of the Lord before him with our burnt offerings, and with our sacrifices, and with our peace offerings; that your children may not say to our children in time to come, Ye have no part in the Lord.

28 Therefore said we, that it shall be, when they should so say to us or to our generations in time to come, that we may say again, Behold the pattern of the altar of the Lord, which our fathers made, not for burnt offerings, nor for sacrifices; but it is a witness between us and you.

Comments:

The actions of the children of Reuben, the children of Gad and the half tribe of Manasseh are something that all nations should consider. When tensions between groups of people within a nation are anticipated, actions should be taken (so long as they are lawful according to God's word) to prevent them from being realized. This might be done in the form of a contract, a covenant, a monument, etc. 

As history tells us, tensions are very possible between Christians of different denominational perspectives, who, while disagreeing on such matters as church government, agree on foundational doctrines of the faith, such as the Trinity and justification by faith alone. All orthodox Christian groups within a nation should strive to live together in peace; as Scripture says, "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men" (Romans 12:18).  
   
      

Rebelling Against God is Rebelling against His People (Joshua 22:15-20)

Joshua 22

King James Version (KJV)

15 And they came unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead, and they spake with them, saying,

16 Thus saith the whole congregation of the Lord, What trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from following the Lord, in that ye have builded you an altar, that ye might rebel this day against the Lord?

17 Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, from which we are not cleansed until this day, although there was a plague in the congregation of the Lord,

18 But that ye must turn away this day from following the Lord? and it will be, seeing ye rebel to day against the Lord, that to morrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel.

19 Notwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us: but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God.

20 Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? and that man perished not alone in his iniquity.

Comments:

When the Israelites mistake their brethren (the children of Reuben, the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh) for rebelling against God, they say in verse 19 that rebelling against God is also rebelling against them: "but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God."

How could this be the case? There are at least two possible ways in which the Israelites would have seen rebellion against God as rebellion against them as well. 

First, in a nation that is committed to God, such an act is subversive of the God-centered social order. Rebellion to God—especially by such a large group—would be an act of high treason that could threaten the culture and laws of a godly society. As Scripture says,  "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (Galatians 5:9). It could be destructive to the goal of God's people to live "a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty" (1 Timothy 2:2b).

Second, such an act could lead to God's judgment. As we've noted, God deals with nations corporately, so that the sins of others might bring God's judgment on a nation as a whole. In fact, prior to and following Joshua 22:19, the Israelites warn about God's judgment for acts of rebellion, and thus say, "and it will be, seeing ye rebel to day against the Lord, that to morrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel."
  

   

Civil Penalties and Leniency (Joshua 22:15-20)

Joshua 22

King James Version (KJV)

15 And they came unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead, and they spake with them, saying,

16 Thus saith the whole congregation of the Lord, What trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from following the Lord, in that ye have builded you an altar, that ye might rebel this day against the Lord?

17 Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, from which we are not cleansed until this day, although there was a plague in the congregation of the Lord,

18 But that ye must turn away this day from following the Lord? and it will be, seeing ye rebel to day against the Lord, that to morrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel.

19 Notwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us: but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God.

20 Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? and that man perished not alone in his iniquity.

Comments:

What is interesting about this situation is that the Israelites are willing to forgo putting their brethren to the sword if they repent of what is perceived to be rebellion against God (verse 19). This could have implications for civil punishments in general. Henry Bullinger includes this text while arguing for the flexiblity of at least some penalties:

Moreover, godly and wise magistrates have many times pardoned unwitting offenders, whom they saw ready to repent upon giving of warning. The Lord in the gospel biddeth us admonish a sinner; then, if he repent, to pardon his fault; but if he rejects a fair warning once given him, then to punish him so much the sharper. [Matt. 18:15-17] And Joshu [Joshua], before he made open war to be proclaimed upon the children of Reuben, did first by embassage command them to dig down the altar, which they seemed to have made contrary to the law of the Lord. [Josh. 22.] ... Moreover, Josias did not utterly kill all them that were wrapped in error and idolatry, but those especially that were incurable, and would not recant. The magistrate therefore must wisely moderate the matter, and be very circumspect in punishing offenders.[1] 

While we don't find Bullinger's argument from Matthew 18 compelling—since it is an instruction for the church, and not the state—we see his overall logic in pardoning unwitting offenders. 

After all, Scripture itself makes a distinction between murder and accidental manslaughter. While murderers must be punished with death, a lesser punishment is required of those who commit accidental manslaughter (in Israel, it was confinement to a city of refuge until the death of the high priest). 

And we see no reason not to extend this principle of leniency to other crimes. A somewhat parallel situation to physical murder would be to promote damnable heresy, which is attempted spiritual murder. This also warrants the death penalty.[2] But what about a case where one accidentally promotes damnable heresy? For instance, one may unwittingly promote damnable heresy by using a bad choice of words in describing a particular doctrine. These words may not have been used had this person had given them more careful thought.

Another example of unwittingly committing a crime is when one purchases stolen goods in good faith that they were not stolen. Or, when a man marries a woman whom he believes to be single, but is actually married to someone else. In these and other situations where a crime is committed unwittingly, leniency seems to be the best course. 

Regarding Joshua 22, however, it seems likely that the crime that is mistakenly believed to have occurred was not committed unwittingly, but knowingly. Since the Israelites take for granted that setting up an altar for sacrificing to God was wrong other than at a place of God's choosing (per Deuteronomy 12:5-7), then they might have thought that it was likewise taken for granted by their brethren—the children of Reuben, the children of Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh.

And yet, despite their readiness to put their brethren to the sword for this, they were willing to offer leniency upon repentance. 

If this example of offering leniency in the case of repentance is meant to be a pattern to follow in civil matters, then we must consider to what extent. It certainly cannot be applied in all situations—at least not in the case of murder:

31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death. (Numbers 35) 

33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.34 Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I the Lord dwell among the children of Israel. (Numbers 35) 

There is much in Scripture to consider when working out the idea of offering leniency for repentance. This is not a simple matter, and different points of view should be consulted. 

For a perspective in support of the flexibility of capital punishments (save murder), see pages 16-27 of Is the Death Penalty Just? by Phillip G. Kayser. For a perspective against the flexibity of capital punishments, see pages 251-254 and 258-261 of No Other Standard: Theonomy and its Critics by Greg L. Bahnsen.

Notes

____________________________

[1] Henry Bullinger, "The Second Decade: The Sixth Precept in the Ten Commandments," in The Decades of Henry Bullinger: The First and Second Decades, ed. Thomas Harding, trans. H. I. (Cambridge: The University Press, 1849), 362.

[2] According to Deuteronomy 13, enticing others to serve false gods warrants the death penalty because it promotes rebellion against God: "And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage," verse 10. While not all damnable heresies directly promote serving false gods (such as denying justification by faith alone), they too promote rebellion against God. As such, it seems that promoting damnable heresies should likewise be punished with death.  

   

Deterring God's Wrath Against the Nation (Joshua 22:15-20)

Joshua 22

King James Version (KJV)

15 And they came unto the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half tribe of Manasseh, unto the land of Gilead, and they spake with them, saying,

16 Thus saith the whole congregation of the Lord, What trespass is this that ye have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from following the Lord, in that ye have builded you an altar, that ye might rebel this day against the Lord?

17 Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, from which we are not cleansed until this day, although there was a plague in the congregation of the Lord,

18 But that ye must turn away this day from following the Lord? and it will be, seeing ye rebel to day against the Lord, that to morrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel.

19 Notwithstanding, if the land of your possession be unclean, then pass ye over unto the land of the possession of the Lord, wherein the Lord's tabernacle dwelleth, and take possession among us: but rebel not against the Lord, nor rebel against us, in building you an altar beside the altar of the Lord our God.

20 Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? and that man perished not alone in his iniquity.

Comments:

When the Israelites mistakenly perceive their brethren to be in rebellion against God, they give examples of God's judgments for previous iniquities—judgments that affected the entire nation. 

God deals with nations corporately, so that even the sin of an individual, such as Achan, might bring God's judgment on a nation as a whole. And so the Israelites say, "Did not Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel?"

While wrong in assuming that their brethren was guilty, the Israelites understood that they could suffer for the sins of others. Thus they say, "and it will be, seeing ye rebel to day against the Lord, that to morrow he will be wroth with the whole congregation of Israel."

This should give us pause to consider the deterrent effect of biblical civil punishments. While political conservatives emphasize the importance of deterring criminals, this should be a secondary concern. The greatest concern should not be deterring the wrath of the criminal, but the wrath of God. As Gary North states:

Whenever we speak of deterring crime, we must speak first of the deterrence of God’s wrath against the community because of the courts’ unwillingness to impose God’s justice within the community. The civil government is required by God to seek to deter crimes because all crimes are above all crimes against God. An unwillingness on the part of civil magistrates to enforce God’s specified sanctions against certain specified public acts calls forth God’s specified covenantal cursings against the community. … Only when we clearly recognize the theocentric nature of deterrence—and when we are ready to seek to have it recognized publicly in our civil and ecclesiastical statute books—can we legitimately begin to speak about deterring criminal behavior for the protection of the community.[1]

Notes
___________________________________

Gary North, Victim’s Rights: The Biblical View of Civil Justice (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1990), 220, 221.