In response to a horrific murder, La Shawn Barber invites us to agree that the death penalty is warranted. I beg to differ, which will be no surprise.
What I wanted to pick up on is a commenter’s surprise that “some Christians don’t support the death penalty”.
Read Romans 13. Paul is fairly clear in his diatribe on “evil doersâ€, they should “fear the sword bearer†of the government that was put into place by God.
It is not hypocrisy to be pro-life, yet support the use of capitol punnishment. It is perfectly reasonable and is supported by the Word.
I’ll begin with agreement. Of course it is possible to defend the death penalty using scripture. The same can (and was) said of slavery. I’d hope that the opposite might also be conceded.
I’ve heard Romans 13 used as a justification for capital punishment before, and it strikes me as rather odd. What Paul says is, “For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad.” Sometimes, though, they are - as Paul well knew! Whatever Paul means in this chapter, it cannot be its face value. (I’m sure Her Majesty will be glad to receive the apologies and oath of obedience of any Americans who do decide it means exactly what it appears to mean)
I’m pretty much convinced that there is more than a measure of irony in Paul’s words to the Roman Church. Be honest. Can you say “Do what is good and you will receive its approval” of any government, let alone one headed by a Nero or Caligula? Or a Pol Pot, Pinochet, Stalin, Hitler, Saddam, Mugabe… The list is too long.
A conversation between Christians about the use of the death penalty ought to reference Romans 13, maybe. But to claim it as a conclusive, no-getting-out-of-this-one argument is stretching it too far.
{ 33 comments… read them below or add one }
jeff east 05.12.05 at 6:48 pm
Bringing the despots argument into the debate is dishonest to a degree. We are not talking about despotic governments, like Englands in the 16th century leading to America’s cry for independance.
If the death penalty is wrong in God’s eye, how could Christ have been put to death for my sins? Thank God that it was possible for this to happen, or I would be without recourse from sin.
I think the Bible is very clear about the role of capitol punishment and justice served by men on men. (read humanity)
rhys 05.12.05 at 7:23 pm
yup and put so concisely - thanks Richard
Dave Warnock 05.12.05 at 7:37 pm
I have written more in “Against conservative ethics” but trackback did not work. So see http://42.blogs.warnock.me.uk/2005/05/against_conserv.html
John 05.12.05 at 9:43 pm
Leaving theology aside, I oppose the death penalty because too many people have been exhonerated from Death Row, and I loathe the idea of executing a potentially innocent person.
We can do without it.
Bene Diction 05.12.05 at 10:43 pm
I went over and had a look.
The commenter was surprised.
LaShawn’s psycho dad killer theme was meant to provoke.
Some of the commenters are opposed to the death penalty. Good for them for having the courage to say so. at a post themed that way. Looks like Romans 13 so far is the only scripture pro-death penalty commenters leaned on.
As for a christian discussion pro or con, I don’t think LaShawn’s post was meant to encourage debate.
Joel 05.13.05 at 2:48 am
I think the most inane defense of the death penalty is the comment that we couldn’t have been saved but for the death penalty given Christ. For me the crucifixion was a vehicle God used for the atonement. It wasn’t something he considered just, however. Crucifixion was cruel and ghastly, the opposite of love of God and love of neighbor.
Bene Diction 05.13.05 at 3:27 am
LaShawn extended Richard the courtesy of a link back.
Hopefully some of her commenters will come over and understand they are free to speak without censorship, recrimination or put downs. I suspect some commenters may not have had ths kind of opportunity before.
jenney 05.13.05 at 4:49 am
Well, I do believe in the death penalty. It seems just. Justice is one purpose of government on this earth. Man is sinful and the Lord gave us authorities in this life as a restraining factor. That isn’t to say all gov’ts are good! I’m only saying that it seems just.
So, that said, I think governments have the right to impose justice and it is hard for me to understand what is unjust about executing a man who has admitted multiple times to having brutally murdered two young girls. It is one thing to say “look at all the innocent people who have been wrongly executed!” but can anyone argue that case here? Even the accused is saying he’s guilty.
Someone help me understand the theory as well as the practical outworking. I probably am too convinced in my own mind to come to agree with you, quite honestly, but I want to understand your perspective on the issue. (by saying “honestly” i don’t mean normally I’m lying. I mean “this is the truth when it would be easy to just lie and a lie would make me look better so the truth is harder to tell.”)
the_methotaku 05.13.05 at 7:43 am
It was my opposition to the death penalty that led me into opposing all forms of war and abortion on demand. I think that Leslie Weatherhead’s The Will of God does a good job of explaining why even though God works through tragedies, that does not make them good, or part of God’s will for the world.
Wood 05.13.05 at 8:21 am
Even if - and I say this in the event that the world turns out to be a place where I would not want to live - even if the death penalty is justified, can any government really be trusted to administer it with 100% certainty every time?
I can’t imagine how that could be possible.
Richard 05.13.05 at 9:46 am
Since we seem to have a consensus, let’s move the conversation on…
What would you giive as the main planks of a *Biblical* argument against the use of the death penalty?
jeff east 05.13.05 at 6:28 pm
Gen: 38
Ex: 21
Matt: 15
Mrk: 7
Romans: 8
Just some of the scripture dealing with said subject. I think we can agree that certainly God is mandating dp in the OT. (maybe not, but it sure seems obvious to me) The fact that Christ fulfills the ultimate sacrificial lamb to garner our redemption, and never once denies the Governments right to mete out punishment, yes, even capitol punnishment…seems to lead one to believe that the dp is a legitimate right of Government even in the NT.
DH 05.13.05 at 7:46 pm
I’m sure there are Scriptures supporting the death penalty. What would those be?
Something to consider Joel, how are we to judge the motives of God being just or unjust? I think there is a problem if we feel that we consider what Gods motives are and determine if they are just or injust because God is just even when it appears in our human finite mind that it isn’t. To me the sacrifices of the OT was prophecy and part of the law used as part of the forgiveness of sin. Since Jesus fulfilled (not do away with the law from Paul’s epistles) the law the only way He could redeem people was by the blood sacrifice of the perfect lamb Jesus. It sure does seem to me the crusificion was the Sacrifice needed for atonement? It might be semantics if so we agree. On the surface it seemed otherwise.
Joel 05.13.05 at 7:47 pm
Once of the best arguments against the death penalty is that Paul himself was a murderer. The idea of the major writings of a murderer spared the death penalty as justifying that very penalty strikes me as very odd.
Another argument against the death penalty is that Jesus is presently ushering in the Kingdom. It is not a Kingdom merely waiting Christ’s return. The current Kingdom requires community. Community is built by restoration, not by removing people from the community. It is quite true that someone locked up for life without possibility of parole has a lesser ability to be an effective part of the gathered community. But they may still be offered the redeeming grace of Christ for the Kingdom we have already entered and may still be offered limited opportunities for worship, sometimes for education, work and interaction with other human beings.
jeff east 05.13.05 at 8:49 pm
I hope I am not taking this too out of context. Sometimes I think any excerpt from the Bible, by itself, must be out of context. Anyway, here it is. From Matthew 10
32 “Therefore, everyone who will acknowledge Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven. 34 Don’t assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to turn A man against his father , a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36 and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.
In vs. 34 Jesus somewhat rebukes your theory here Mr. Joel. What else is a sword used for? Spanking bottoms? I think not. No, in Jesus’ time a sword was used for death. I understand what you are saying, but I don’t understand why. If someone wishes to break law, whether is is mans or Gods, there is substantial penalty. Some are spared the sword, like Paul, but even he said he deserved death, as we all do…but in Christ I am sanctified. Maybe I have it all wrong too. I am nothing but filthy rags.
Richard 05.13.05 at 11:19 pm
Forget what i said about consensus!
Jeff - Are you seriously suggesting that by “I came not to bring peace but a sword” Jesus means that he has come to bring death? You have to ignore an awful lot of the rest of Jesus’ teaching to make that one stand.
Zidib 05.13.05 at 11:22 pm
Jeff & Joel,
I propose we put the bible aside when deciding the death penalty. It wasn’t made for that. As you two have demonstrated, the bible can and will be used to justify whatever conviction the speaker wishes. Here’s one I have not seen… yet! Perhaps Ms.LaShawn can give it a go. POLYANDRY
Dave Warnock 05.13.05 at 11:46 pm
Richard, I started on your challenge. But it turned into something more basic. See “The Bible and Ethics” at http://42.blogs.warnock.me.uk/2005/05/some_of_what_th.html
Joel 05.14.05 at 3:09 am
If the Bible wasn’t written to address the death penalty, then it wasn’t written to address anything at all.
Bene Diction 05.14.05 at 4:12 pm
A government has the right in principle. The role of government in punishment is rehabilitation, society’s defense against the criminal, deterrence to crime and retribution.
What about biblical passages about the greater good of society? Since the death penalty does not deter crime, it isn’t difficult to find modern day examples where killing people that killed people fed a cycle of violence.
In a democracy, government is in place to serve the popular will and the popular good. In the past rulers were seen to have symbolically act for God as protectors from evil.
But democracy changes that. Permitting a democratic government to
someone to death caters to collective anger. That is not divine judgement on evil.
You want it both ways. You want democracy, which makes government the instrument of the people and government being a superior institution over the people.
And if you wish to put a biblical spin on this, James 2:10-12. Paul addresses this in Galatians - if you wish to hold on to OT law, then be consistant and keep the whole law.
I oppose the death penalty because:
1) Reality - Justice systems are flawed.
2) Moral - No human being has the right to take another life.
3) I am called as a Christian to believe in and extend mercy and grace, I don’t believe any person is beyond redemption
4) Human rights. In many countries scriptures are used to justify hands being cut off, rape victims being stoned. In the US the state executes child offenders and the mentally ill.
There is an OT code for justice and retribution. Right along with it is an OT code for forgiveness and reconciliation. I’m not a Mennonite, but I think their statement on capital punishment presents both sides from a ‘biblical’ perspective.
http://www.mhsc.ca/index.asp?content=http://www.mhsc.ca/encyclopedia/contents/C423ME.html
DH 05.15.05 at 10:26 pm
I was asking for Scriptures which support the death penalty not against it.
Richard 05.15.05 at 11:16 pm
You’ve had some of those, surely?
Joel 05.15.05 at 11:51 pm
DH,
The atonement means (the cross) was God using someone’s else’s injustice to accomplish his purposes. To me, it is similar to God using the betrayal of Joseph to accomplish his goals. That doesn’t mean God approved of how Joseph’s brothers acted.
There is obviously much in the OT to justify capital punishment. In the NT, the recognition of civil government authority ives that entity the right to enact such laws. However, the NT calling for respect for civil laws and governmment is not the same as approving of them or opposing any change. At one time, it might have been that the order of civilized society could not be kept without capital punishment. But most governments are constituted today in ways in which order can be maintained without that penalty.
jeff east 05.16.05 at 1:56 pm
Richard, of course not! Again, I feel that any SINGLE quote from the Bible is out of context. But you must admit, Christ’s death on the cross was the dividing line. “No one can come to the Father except through ME!” is probably the single most devisive thing Christ could have said. It ultimately ensures death for some. Yes? Quite possibly death for most!?
And in the end, we Christians will be persecuted beyond pale for this one defining moment of our Faith. Sorry this has gotten off of the dp.
I must admit, after reading the responses, I am again wavering on my support of the dp.
Richard 05.16.05 at 2:09 pm
I wouldn’t deny that Jesus is the dividing line in history. The interpretation of “No one can come to the Father except through me†will keep for another time!
DH 05.16.05 at 5:13 pm
Great point Jeff East. I’ll also add “If you deny me you have denied the Father”. or John 3:18. “Without Faith it is impossible to please Him.” (in light of these passages and the passages around this one and others to have Faith understood as being in Christ).
DH 05.16.05 at 5:16 pm
Great point Jenney.
Christopher K. Leavitt 05.17.05 at 9:50 am
This is a post from LEAVWORLD that applies here:
Sunday, May 01, 2005
WHY IT’S NOT HYPOCRITICAL FOR CHRISTIANS TO SUPPORT THE DEATH PENALTY
Doug Giles makes a compelling case for Christians to support the death penalty. Here are two relevant paragraphs:
If I were the toad that took the life of the Lundsford or the Lunde girl, the right “Christian” thing to do to show that I “love myself” would be to confess to the crime, give myself up to the police, seek forgiveness from Almighty God (and beg it from all family members of my victim) and then ask to be deleted. I’m not part of the Kool-Aid drinkers who think “loving your enemy as one loves himself” excludes punishing to death the perpetrator—whether it’s someone else or me.
If I did such a damnable act and really loved myself, then I would dutifully subject my person to punishment—in particular to death. Yes, if I really loved myself, I would bear responsibility for my actions, which means that I would insist on taking one for the team by leaving this planet, via execution, because I have just violently offended the sensibility of the entire human collective.
AMEN.
Joel 05.18.05 at 2:17 am
If death is the only way one can accept responsiblility for the death of another, then the Apostle Paul should have deleted himself. To me the question is not one of whether one should accept responsibility for their actions, it is whether society has settled on the correct punsihment for a particular violation deemed by civil society to be a criminal matter. Anyway, it is not self-love that is involved but love of others and God’s loving grace toward us. Punishment should not be raised to a higher level or value than redemption.
Fayth Whitehead 07.18.05 at 6:33 pm
I think that we have allowed society to shape our beliefs on life and death. We have grown to think that what others think is far more important than what we believe for our selves. Who are we to put people to death. Killings those who are guilty will not solve anything. Killing the innocent primarily on what the majority thinks is not justice. The constitution has failed society and as we continue to evolutionize we fail to to change our legal system to fit the economy. Society is going to continue to lose if we dont learn to change as well.
Jeff Nilson 09.06.05 at 10:35 pm
Jesus says it is wrong to kill. Period. Why is it that so many “Christians” are so inclined to kill? Start with George W. Bush and don’t forget Pat Robertson. The war in Iraq does not meet the criteria for a just Christian war. Hence the war violates Jesus’ teachings about the evil of killing.
Meet the grandest Christian hypocrite of the 21st century so far: GW Bush.
Don’t you posters with spelling mistakes have spell checkers? Spelling mistakes make you appear stupid.
Christopher K. Leavitt 02.03.06 at 11:41 am
In response to Fayth Whitehead: Killing violent criminals who are guilty will keep them from killing again, inside of the jail. You are looking for reform in the legal and corrections system. I’m with you on that. I don’t want to see any innocent person imprisoned, much less executed.
Further, the quotes I excerpted only expressed one aspect of this issue, which I still stand by. I know that most murderers don’t have the same psychological makeup as Mr. Giles.
I was only speaking to the punishment aspect, in cases with overwhelming evidence of guilt, as I look back on my previous comment. I apologize for not making that clear.
Lance Landall 01.17.07 at 12:39 am
Hi,
I’ve been looking through the comments and I wondered if you might like to read my poem ‘The Death Penalty’. My web address is http://www.poetrywithamission.co.nz
Regards,
Lance Landall
P.S.
Regarding comments Romans. The “sword” is simply symbolic of the ruler’s authority to carry out rightful punishment. It is not sanctioning the taking of life. The sword simply represents authority, judgment.