6 In case your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or your cherished wife or your companion who is like your own soul, should try to allure you in secrecy, saying, 'Let us go and serve
other gods,' whom you have not known, neither you nor your forefathers
7 some of the gods of the peoples who are all around you, the ones near you or those far away from you, from one end of the land to the other end of the land
8 you must not accede to his wish or listen to him, nor should your eye feel sorry for him, nor must you feel compassion, nor cover him [protectively]
9 but you should kill him without fail. Your hand first of all should come upon him to put him to death, and the hand of all the people afterward
10 And you must stone him with stones, and he must die, because he has sought to turn you away from Jehovah your God, who has brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaves. (Deuteronomy 13 NWT)
So a tweeter called Maximum Atheist posted saying:
Max Atheist: Christians are the nicest people: God said: "If any of you family members of friends try to persuade you to worship other Gods stone them to death" (Deu 13:6-10).
Gordon: Jesus died to end the penalties of the law. Your criticism which on the face of it has merit, applies to Mosaic Judaism not Christianity. Isaiah says:
Any weapon whatever that will be formed against you will have no success, and any tongue at all that will rise up against you in the judgment you will condemn. This is the hereditary possession of the servants of Jehovah, and their righteousness is from me, is the utterance of Jehovah (Isa 54:17).
So it seems to me at present that a person under law should have the debate which they would win against someone attempting to get them to worship Baal. Not launch a lethal ad hominem attack followed by a mob assassination, which are the kind of tactics used by someone who fears losing the debate.
This is a long way from the parable of the lost sheep. And if Baal worshippers could not evangelise their false religion to God's people back then without being killed why is it commanded that God's people should evanglise to Baal worshippers today?
I have evangelised to Baal worshippers (status junkies).
Well done Max Atheist. You have got me on this one at present. The law at Deu 13:6-10 does not seem righteous in my eyes. I cannot see the justice in it. If you say it was self defence, then in self defence you are not bloodguilty if you kill - but you do not have to kill. And your self defence should be proportionate. So if you have solid faith, no response is necessary because you are not at risk.
The modern day equivalent would be excommunicating an apostate who was pulling people out of the church from the inside. That I have actually done to a person in the church. But he can come back after 7 months if repentant. However it was done with due process and a judicial hearing with 3 people present. I do not like the idea of one person being judge jury and executioner. And where is the 2nd witness here in order that the matter may be established? Can anyone see it more clearly?
Gordon: Not easy to see the justice here. But in my experience in the church, the real enemies stay in the church and try and pull people out of it from inside. It would be far more honourable after you have decided that the church is not for you, to leave it and pull people out from the outside. You have the right to do that if you think it important. But you should not pretend to be faithful, pretend to follow the law of the church and USE THAT
PRETENCE to pervert your brother in the church.
For by doing that (if you are in a true church) you are effectively attempting to deceive not only your brother but also the Holy Spirit which is within and without the church. And attempting to deceive the Holy Spirit is instant death even in new testament Christianity as Peter demonstrated with Ananias and Sapphira.
So it would not have been punishable by death for a prophet of Baal to try and persuade a Jew that really he was worshipping the wrong deity. Because the prophet of Baal had not signed up to the Law of Moses and because he was doing it without deception.
The sin of the brother in Mosaic Judaism who tried to convert his brother under law to Baalism, was abusing membership of the true religion and the trust of his brother under law as a cover and to deceive him into idolatry which was a capital sin under law.
It was not a sin for a prophet of Baal to do that because he was not under law.
"So the sin was using the true religion as a murder weapon (physical and spiritual)."
That quite obviously would upset God and demand a death sentence. If it was just attempted murder, then the law of self defence would apply. You could kill him with impunity if proportionate, but you did not have to kill him. Whereas if you see a true religion being used as a spiritual + physical murder weapon you could not under law stay silent. You had to report it to the elders. They should make the decision (DEFINITELY ONLY at the mouth of 3 witnesses for a death penalty - i.e. he had to try it on 3 people - the first two of which would act as warnings) and you should cast the first stone.