The name of the Lord is protected with death in v. 16, and the Lord moves right to v. 17 to protect the life of man with And. The connection between the two passages is clearly established. Obviously, the Lord cannot be killed by man as can be the one guilty of murder, Lev 24:17. So His name is protected.

Pro 22:1, one's good name is about the most important thing he owns, so the Lord holds that defaming someone's name is a very serious offence against both God and man. See 1 Cor 5:9-13.

Sadly, modern society sees the name of the Lord God almighty as little more than a name whereby to express anger or frustration. However, until those professing Christ show godly honor and respect (not obedience when authorities violate God's Word) due to all authority, we cannot expect the nonChristians to respect the name of the Biblical Lord and God.

Paul, as though answering the argument, "But that's Old Testament," told Timothy, Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity, 2 Tim 2:19. Iniquity is defined by the Old Testament, 1 Jn 3:4. Paul continues his instruction to Timothy by telling him to study the Old Testament (v. 15) so he might be a clean vessel, usable by God and able to properly instruct others that they might recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will, v. 26. V. 26 indeed contains an important statement, who are taken captive by him (Satan) at his will.

1 Tim 1:18-22, This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare; Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

to speak reproachfully... Spec. of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things... (Thayer, p 102.)

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Those who intentionally refuse to glorify God as God are, accordingly, blasphemers. And delivered the two blasphemers of 1 Tim 1 to Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Commenting on Daniel 5:25 (And he shall speak great words against the most High), Albert Barns said:

This would be fulfilled in one who would blaspheme God directly; or who would be rebellious against his government and authority; or who would complain of his administration and laws; or who would give utterance to harsh and reproachful words against his real claims. It would find a fulfillment obviously in an open opposer of the claims and the authority of the true God; or in one the whole spirit and bearing of whose pretensions might be fairly construed as in fact utterance of great words against him. (g) This would be a persecuting power;þ"and shall wear out the saints of the Most High," ver. 25. That is, it would be characterized by a persecution of the real saintsþof those who were truly the friends of God, and who served him. (h) It would claim legislative power, the power of changing established customs and laws: "and think to change times and laws," ver. 25. (Barn's Notes, II.72.)

The blasphemer... speaks irreverently of God, of his works, his perfection, his providence, &c, (and he, ed.) is destitute of every moral feeling and of every religious principle, and consequently so dangerous to society that it would be criminal to suffer him to be at large, though the longsuffering of God may lead him to repentance, and therefore it may be consistent with mercy to preserve his life." (Clark's Commentary, I.589.)

If Paul, with apostolic authority, delivered two men to Satan for blasphemy, what do we suppose the Lord, with all authority, does with those who blaspheme? Did not Paul say that the foundation of God standeth sure? Thus the Word of God is in action whether man wants to believe it or not.

Paul warns Christians of all ages: Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. For if they do not, they are taken captive by Satan at his will. Satan is permitted by God to do as he pleases, and he does it slowly lest he waken the sleeping saints to their peril, 1 Cor 15:34. God issues His warning about the small, seemingly insignificant seed of blasphemy, Hosea 8:7:

For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up.

It only takes one seed to reap up to 100 fold. God's people today are reaping what they have sown over the last 150-175 years. The prevailing thought today is blaspheme. Very few of His people glorify God as God over every area of life and thought. Very few of His people even glorify God as Lord over the local church that claims to belong to Him, let alone glorify God as God over civil authority; rather, they have chosen to be slaves of "Caesar" so they might claim "Caesar's benefits."

Certainly, the Old Testament penalty for blasphemy, stoning, is no longer in effect. Rather, the New Testament penalty for blasphemy is in effectþdelivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme. Only those who refuse to face reality cannot see what in society has been delivered unto Satan.

However, Hosea does not leave us hopeless:

Hosea 14:4-7, I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him. I will be as the dew unto Israel (To spiritual Israel, Gill. Ed.) : he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon. His branches shall spread, and his beauty shall be as the olive tree, and his smell as Lebanon. They that dwell under his shadow shall return; they shall revive as the corn, and grow as the vine: the scent thereof shall be as the wine of Lebanon.

He shows that contrary to the doctrine of the scribes, that the sum of the second table must be so understood, that we may in no wise render evil for evil, but rather suffer double injury, and do well to them that are our deadly enemies. (Geneva)

Moreover, lex talionis was given to civil authority, not to individuals nor to the church, Rom 13:3. Examples:

If an individual is robbed of $1,000, he is not given the right to break into the thief's house and take $1,000, nor to go after the thief with a gun. If he is injured by the carelessness of another, he is not permitted to do likewise against the careless.

If a drunk driver kills a child with his car, the parents of that child are not permitted to run down the child of the drunk. No matter how tempting it might be, no matter how indifferent civil authority is to the murder committed by the drunk driver, the individual must not seek his own vengeance against the driver.

The insurance industry is built upon the failure to enforce lex talionis- the individual must pay substantial rates to cover himself from the failure of the civil authority to make the offender pay the one he wronged for the wrong he did.

The Lord, in Mat 5:38-42, is dealing with the religious leader's corruption of the Mosaic law, permitting personal vengeance against an evil doer. He forbids His people from that vengeance.

The next Ye have heard in Matthew confirms the point: The corruption of the Mosaic law in v. 43 was just that, a corruption, for the law never said love your neighbour, and hate thine enemy,

Exo 23:4, 5, If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again. If thou see the ass of him that hateth thee lying under his burden, and wouldest forbear to help him, thou shalt surely help with him. Le 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD. (The parable of the Good Samaritan defined who is the neighbour.)

Commenting on Lev 24:20, Adam Clark said:

Equal laws, where each individual receives the same protection and the same privileges, are the boast only of a sound political constitution. He who respects and obeys the laws has a right to protection and support, and his person and property are as sacred in the sight of justice as the person and property of the prince. He who does not obey the laws of his country forfeits all right and title to protection and privilege; his own actions condemn him, and justice takes him up on the evidence of his own transgressions. (Clark's Commentary, I.590.)

Observe:

First, our God and King rules over all:

Ps 66:7 He ruleth by his power for ever; his eyes behold the nations: let not the rebellious exalt themselves. Selah. Ps 103:19 The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all. Pr 16:32 He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that ruleth his spirit than he that taketh a city.

Second, His rule is just:

Lev 24:22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God.

Third, the Lord cares as much about man's safety as He does His own name, vv. 16 & 17.

I am afraid we are far more interested in our own well-being and protection than we are for the well-being and protection of others. However, the Lord has the same high fence around His own name and around mans's safety.

Note the close connection between the name of the Lord, v. 16, and man's safety, v. 17. Also notice the order in which they are given: first, the safety of the Lord's name, then the safety of man. Clearly, man's disregard for the life of others is a direct result of a disregard of the name of the Lord.

In other words, there can be no justice among men, vv. 17-22, without proper regard for the very name of the Lord God, vv. 14-16. When men, society in general, disregard the holy name of God, the natural result is injustice among men.

Fourth, differences between men are to be settled by fixed rules, not by emotions, circumstances nor race. God establishes the laws and everyone is held accountable, v. 22.

Fifth, v. 16 gives the penalty for injuring the name of the Lord. This section gives the penalty for injuring one's fellow man. In fact, in the same breath as the Lord protected His name, He protected man.

Sixth, the Breach for breach law reveals God's grace toward men. He builds a fence around life. This law follows the death of someone who blasphemed His name. Thus He shows the same concern for man's life as He does for His own name. The penalty of violating both is death.

Obviously, the institution of lex talionis by civil authorities would solve 90% of our crime problems. This law saw to it that crime did not pay. Life is precious to the Lord: Twice He says the penalty for killing another is death.

The only time this penalty is not in effect is accidental killing (for which the cities of refuge were provided, Ex 12:13), self-defence and military action (see 1 Ki 2:5). Actually, righteous military action is in self-defence.

Killeth especially means premeditated murder, and also includes killing by carelessness and drunkenness. See Ex 21:12-36.

Matthew 5:38 did not do away with lex talionis. Rather, it forbad seeking vengeance or using the law for one's own purpose. The Lord was very firm in saying that the same law applied to everyone who was in the land.

When Mat 5:38-42 is misused to void God's lex talionis, an "unsound political constitution" must develop regardless of what is written down on paper. The resulting unstable judicial system will turn loose the most wicked people on technicalities. But the general population will not tolerate the political and judicial instability forever. Unless Christians unite in saying and acting like the Lord God meant what He said in His lex talionis, the next step is anarchy followed by tyranny.

What happened? I believe the situation can best be summed up with some illustrations:

First, some time ago, this pastor attended a wedding where the bride dressed in white, and thus presented herself as being pure to the groom and the onlookers. Be that as it may, children born out of wedlock to the bride and groom participated in the wedding.

"My, how bad that is," some might say, "but what can you expect from the unsaved? Christians would not do such a thing."

Second, about 25 years ago, I worked for some time for a man who sold used school busses to churches, picking up and delivering new and used busses over a many state area to the tune of over 100,000 miles a year. At times, I would deliver busses to churches, and being single at the time, I would spend the weekends. How well I remember in another state going to breakfast with a very well known pastor and some other Christian leaders. When the waitress came to our table, the pastor who had bought the busses made such extremely lewd remarks to the waitress that I was embarrassed to be identified with the group of men.

Third, there is an extremely well known pastor who has traveled the country for years promoting "soul-winning" and church growth. He, with the aid of his pastor friends, is currently involved in "rallies" all over America in an attempt to "rescue America" from the ungodly. For the last several years as this pastor has traveled the country, the husband of one of his secretaries has also traveled the country trying to warn others that this pastor has an ongoing, ungodly relationship with the man's wife. In fact, the husband has published a book documenting the secret, ongoing wicked relationship between the pastor and the man's wife.

It is becoming all too common to hear of well-known, "hell-fire and damnation" pastors/teachers being involved in wickedness while retaining their positions, yet their followers overlook the evil with, "Well, he is seeking counselling," or "He has been working too hard" (as was said when a world renowned "Christian" educator became involved in adultery).

The point is that very seldom do even Christians make a distinction between private actions and public appearances. How can Christians, accordingly, complain when those who make no profession of Christ obviously vote their consciences that private actions have no public consequences? Do they not vote the same toward "Christian" leaders by continuing to follow them? Is it any wonder that reprobates can be placed in public civil offices as long as they maintain a good public image when reprobates are left in places of "Christian" leadership as long as they can maintain their followings and incomes for their "ministries?"

Nehemiah 9 tells us that God gave to His people a good land; His people became fat, and delighted themselves in God's goodness. However, they turned their backs upon the clear teachings of God's Word, and the Lord Himself delivered them into the hands of their enemies, who vexed them. The Lord deferred His judgment against them, but they would not change their ways. Finally, however, the Lord, in His righteousness, gave them into the hands of the anti-God people of the land. Because the people refused to be the servants of the Lord God, God made them servants of their enemies in their own land.

"That's Old Testament," will be the cry of the antinomian who desires to be assured of heaven while pursuing his own carnal lusts and covetousness. 1 Timothy 3:2, 8, and Titus 1:6, clearly tell us that Christian leaders MUST be blameless, and all the pious platitudes the ungodly can muster to their defense will not change the fact that their works deny God, and they are abominable, disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate, Titus 1:16. Neither the "Christian" leader nor his/her followers should be deceived, for God is not mocked: Those who sow to the flesh will reap of the flesh destruction, Gal 6:7. In fact, fornication, covetousness and uncleanness of all kinds will bring the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience, Eph 5:3. The warning is that those who desire to please the Lord must not be identified with the wicked, no matter what name the wicked go under, "Christian" or civil leaders, v. 7.

God gives us many illustrations in His Word about how His people will reap what they sow, e.g., when they mocked God by casting His Word behind their backs, He made His people servants of the ungodly in their own land, Neh 9:26.

When the character issue in "Christian" leaders is shamelessly ignored by professed Christians, we cannot begin to expect the nonChristians to respect the character issue in civil leaders.

Hypocrites hold others to standards they are unwilling to meet, or that they see no need to meet.

Finally, the answer is, obviously, godly civil leaders who will institute godly civil laws. But such godly civil leaders are impossible without a godly consensus among the people. Whether a republic, democracy or monarchy, godly rule comes from the bottom, not from the top down.

Eph 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

All authority belongs to God/Christ, Mat. 28:18. Every person, whether in authority or under authority, will answer to God: How well did they obey God's law, 2 Cor. 5:10? This means that all obedience to any authority must be within the confines of or in relationship to God's Law-Word. God, in His law, has given the principles of life, Pro 7:1-3. All obedience must be within the boundaries of His lawful precepts. His Law-Word alone defines righteous, i.e., right, activity, 2 Tim. 3:16. Man's word can never be allowed to define instruction in righteousness.

Thus if anyone tells us to do anything contrary to God's law, we have a much higher law to obey, God's instruction in righteousnessþright living. God gives no person the rightþthough He may see fit to give the powerþto tell another person to disobey the law of God as found in Rom 13:9, 10. The one in authority may have the POWER to demand that another disobey God, but this is far different from having the Biblical right to make such a demand. When authority departs from God's law, they have also forfeited all claim for obedience from those under them.

Godly submission is always to God, never to man: Our bodies are presented to God, not to man, Rom 12:1. It is God's will that is good and perfect, not man's, Rom 12:2. Human authorities' proper (lawful) demand for obedience is based in their obedience to God's law. Our submission is based in submission to the law of God.

God has not given husband's the right to forbid his wife to obey God nor to demand that she sin, Eph 5:22, as unto the Lord, Col 3:18 as it is fit in the Lord. God has given no parent the right to forbid a child to obey God nor to demand a child to commit sin (such as to steal, murder, fornication), Eph 6:1, in the Lord. Obedience or disobedience is always in relationship to the Lord God and His Word. Obedience or disobedience is never in terms of man made laws. Those in authority may have the temporal power to make demand contrary to God's Law-Word, but God's Word instructs those under that authority how to respond, 1 Peter, especially chapter three.

There is no condemnation of Abraham for trying to stay alive: rather, God judged Pharaoh strongly (Gen. 12:17) and brought Abraham out greatly enriched by way of restitution (Gen. 12:16; 13:2). God similarly intervened to judge Abimelech (Gen. 20:3-6), even though Abimelech could plead his own integrity; nonetheless, because he headed a lawless order, God held Abimelech responsible, and restitution ensued (Gen. 20:14-18). In both instances, there is not the slightest hint of any condemnation of Abraham, every indication of God's judgment on monarchs for maintaining lawless orders in which Abraham dared not move honestly and openly.
In all these cases, there is not only judgment by God against the offender but restitution to the offended. (The Institutes of Biblical Law, I.462.)

Conclusion:

1. All authority and power belongs to God. He alone has the right to make laws and place requirements on people.

2. He raises up whom He will, and He gives authority to whomever He wants to give it, Daniel 4:17.

3. All rebellion is in relationship to God's law. Rebellion can never be in terms of what man considers right or wrong, 1 Sam.15:22. It does not matter if the person is a parent, a pastor, an employer or a "civil servant," God never gives any person the right to determine what is proper instruction in righteousness. However, God many times sees fit to give temporal power to ungodly people to enforce wrong over right, e.g., Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel 4. Nor does He give any person, child or parent, the option of which of His laws to follow and which ones to disregard.

Just because a person is in authority does not mean he has the God given right to sin, and requiring another to depart from God's Word is the worse of sins. The Scriptures in no way teach the divine right of kings (the king can do no wrong). Even the king must rule in terms of the Law-Word of God or forfeits his mandate from God for the people to obey him. Never does God require any person to submit to ungodly laws. (See LEX REX or THE LAW AND THE PRINCE, by Samuel Rutherford, 1644. Sprinkle Publications, 1982.)

Anytime the requirements of any person in authority departs from the requirements of the Lord God as revealed in His total word, the choice is made for us, WE MUST OBEY GOD RATHER THAN MEN, Acts 5:29. At all times, we are to fear God rather than man, Mat. 10:25-28. Godly fear obeys God over man when the two conflict, for it fears God more than man. And there is no age limit on God's requirements. No place does the Lord say that if the authority over us disagrees with the law of God, we are to obey that authority: The Word of God militates against such nonsense.

How about when the authority over us requires us to disobey God? The godly appeal fits in here. Any resistance to authority over us must be grounded in submission to God or it is rebellion, Rom. 12:1,2, 2 Tim 2:25. Thus the resistance will be with the meek and quiet spirit as was displayed by the three Hebrew children, Dan 1:8. But in the appeal to authority, there is no room to even consider that Daniel would have eaten the meat if his appeal had been rejected.

When the laws and requirements of men (or any individual in authority) hinder the Christian's obedience to the King, appeal them; if appeal fails, amend them; if amending fails, treat them as did the three Hebrew children and Daniel ignore them and proceed on with our obedience to God. It is a higher, holier allegiance which must draw our obedience.

(For a complete treatment of the general principle of proper submission to authority, see our little booklet on Romans 13:1-5.)