turn in your Bibles to Genesis
chapter 9. We've spent the last couple of weeks looking at capital
punishment, the death penalty. It's taught here in chapter 9
at verse 6. We remember that after the ark,
God institutes this Noahic covenant, this covenant with creation.
and thus far we've seen the protection of life, or rather the propagation
of life, verses 1 and 7, the provision for life in verses
2b to 4, and then the protection of life in verses 5 to 6. We
traced through a biblical theology of capital punishment, and then
last week dealt with some objections to capital punishment. I want
to finish up that sort of an excursus on criminal punishment
tonight with some lesser forms of punishment. In other words,
what else does the Bible speak to? I've said that it's not necessary
or absolutely crucial that the government or the magistrate
punish with death every criminal offender, so I think it's helpful
for us to understand what Scripture says concerning the subject as
a whole. But I do want to read beginning
in Genesis chapter 9 at verse 1. to verse 17. So God blessed Noah and his sons
and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.
And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast
of the earth, on every bird of the air, on all that move on
the earth, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into
your hand. Every moving thing that lives
shall be food for you. I have given you all things,
even as the green herbs. But you shall not eat flesh with
its life, that is, its blood. Surely for your lifeblood I will
demand a reckoning. From the hand of every beast
I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of
every man's brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds
man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image
of God he made man. And as for you, be fruitful and
multiply, and bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply in
it.' Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying,
And as for me, behold, I establish my covenant with you and with
your descendants after you. and with every living creature
that is with you, the birds, the cattle, and every beast of
the earth with you, of all that go out of the ark, every beast
of the earth. Thus I establish my covenant
with you. Never again shall all flesh be
cut off by the waters of the flood. Never again shall there
be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is the sign
of the covenant which I make between me and you, and every
living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations. I set my rainbow in the cloud,
and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between me and
the earth. It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the earth,
that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud. And I will remember
my covenant which is between me and you and every living creature
of all flesh. The water shall never again become
a flood to destroy all flesh. The rainbow shall be in the cloud,
and I will look on it to remember the everlasting covenant between
God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.
And God said to Noah, this is the sign of the covenant which
I have established between me and all flesh that is on the
earth. Amen. So again, as they exit the ark,
God makes this covenant with creation as a whole. It is universal
in its scope, and it is perpetual. It's not just Noah, but it's
Noah, his family, and all his descendants. It is the created
order. And so it's a common grace covenant. It provides stability to the
created order for the preaching of God's special grace. And as
I said, that focuses in on the protection of life in verses
4 and 5. Verse 4, he indicates that meat is now an added item
to man's diet. It says, but you shall not eat
flesh with its life, that is, its blood. You'll see that later
in the law that it is prohibited to ingest blood. Here it is specified
as well, and it highlights the dignity even of animal blood,
but beyond that we see the dignity of man's blood in verse 5. Surely
for your life, blood, I will demand a reckoning from the hand
of every beast, I will require it. So if a beast kills a man,
then that beast must be executed. But it continues, and from the
hand of man, from the hand of every man's brother, I will require
the life of man. And then 9.6, as we've seen,
is the mandate for capital punishment or the death penalty. for the
crime of murder. We saw that that's not confined
to the Old Testament. We see it in Romans chapter 13,
verses 1 to 4. And so I want to continue with
that theme of the necessity for criminal punishment. If the Noahic
Covenant is a common grace covenant, and it provides sort of the parameters
of the stability for the created order, the rest of God's Word
highlights that it's not only capital punishment, but the magistrate
has a particular task in terms of punishing lesser crimes. Remember,
Luther said, with reference to Genesis 9.6, this was the first
command having reference to the temporal sword. By these words,
temporal government was established and the sword placed in its hands
by God. I don't think any of us would
have any difficulty recognizing that this is a subject that needs
to be revisited by modern politicians and magistrates and governing
authorities today. Crime needs to be punished. That
is God's provision. in the Noahic Covenant for the
protection of life. It should not be the case that
person's lives are held with such little regard and with such
little concern. So I want to look at the necessity
for criminal punishment under three considerations tonight.
First, the mandate, and that's just a bit of a review. Secondly,
the necessity. And then thirdly, lesser forms
of punishment that the Bible speaks to. But in terms of the
mandate for criminal punishment, it's right here in Genesis 9.
Whoever sheds man's blood by man, his blood shall be shed. And the theological rationale
is for in the image of God he made man. This isn't a suggestion,
it's not a recommendation, it's not sort of a provision for a
better way of life, but rather it is mandated by God. In this
post-flood situation where Noah is functioning as a type of Adam
or as a second Adam, Noah is supposed to institute this law
for the good or for the protection of mankind. We saw it upheld
throughout the Mosaic economy or what's called the Old Covenant.
We see it also in the New Covenant in Romans 13. Paul recognizes
that the civil government inflicts this or uses the sword. He is
a minister of God to execute vengeance upon criminal offenders. So it is a biblical mandate. It's not something that is simply
suggested, but it is rather mandated. Now, in terms of the necessity,
I want you to turn with me to Ecclesiastes chapter 8. I referred
to this text last week. I think it deserves a bit of
amplification. Ecclesiastes chapter 8, we'll
read verses 11 to 13. Ecclesiastes 8, 11. says, because the sentence against
an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart
of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Though a
sinner does evil a hundred times and his days are prolonged, yet
I surely know that it will be well with those who fear God,
who fear before him. But it will not be well with
the wicked, nor will he prolong his days, which are as a shadow,
because he does not fear before God. Now, many commentators see,
obviously, the spiritual application involved in this particular text. It refers to the judgment of
God. Notice, because the sentence
against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart
of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. The Bible
everywhere emphasizes God's patience or God's long-suffering, and
there's a particular reason why God exercises that long-suffering. In Romans 2.4, the Apostle says,
"...or do you despise the riches of his goodness, forbearance,
and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads
you to repentance?" In other words, God's forbearance or patience
or long-suffering is a means of, or rather a reason for, sinners
to repent and to flee to the Lord God. Peter highlights this
in 2 Peter 3.15. And consider that the long-suffering
of our Lord is salvation. Now, according to this particular
text, because the sentence against an evil work is not executed
speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set
in them to do evil. In other words, God's long-suffering
is to provide a reason for repentance on the part of sinners, but rather
it oftentimes works in the opposite direction. Because he doesn't,
you know, deal with sinners the way he does with Nadab and Abihu,
or the way he did with Ananias and Sapphira, sinners begin to
think that there is no judgment to come, and therefore their
hearts are given over to the sorts of things that sinners
engage in. It says, therefore, the heart
of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. He goes on
to highlight the promise of good for those who fear God. Verse
12, and then the promise of woe for those who do not fear God
in verse 13. So there's an obvious spiritual
application of this text with reference to sinful man. Matthew
Henry says, sinners herein deceive themselves, for though the sentence
be not executed speedily, it will be executed the more severely
at last. Vengeance comes slowly, but it
comes surely, and wrath is in the meantime treasured up against
the day of wrath. Again, I don't think anybody
would have any trouble seeing the spiritual application, but
I would argue that there's a temporal application as well. In fact,
the context seems to indicate that we ought to think in terms
of kings and to their reign on earth in Ecclesiastes chapter
8. If you look at verses 2 to 6
specifically, it's man's responsibility to the king. Notice in verse
2, I say, keep the king's commandment for the sake of your oath to
God. Do not be hasty to go from his presence. Do not take your
stand for an evil thing, for he does whatever pleases him.
Where the word of a king is, there is power. And who may say
to him, what are you doing? He who keeps his command will
experience nothing harmful. And a wise man's heart discerns
both time and judgment. Because for every matter there
is a time and judgment, though the misery of man increases greatly."
So at least at the beginning of the chapter, there is this
orientation toward the earthly king. And then at the end of
the chapter, in verses 14 and following, we see this emphasis
concerning life on the earth. So while verses 11 to 13 definitely
apply spiritually with reference to the judgment of God or the
forbearance of God and thus man not repenting and man engaging
in wickedness, there's also this temporal or this earthly application. And we can see this principle
at play. When the civil magistrate does
not execute judgment speedily, therefore the heart of the sons
of men is fully set in them to do evil. In other words, if the
authorities don't punish criminal offenders, we get the sort of
society that we are looking at today. And this is a principle
that the scripture stipulates and mandates for man in this
particular generation. The failure to work speedily
creates further lawlessness and increases societal crime. If
the Noahic Covenant provides as one of the provisions for
the protection of life, the sword in the hand of the civil government,
then the civil government must enact that sword. It must execute
judgment against criminal activity in a speedy manner so that the
heart of the sons of men is not fully set in them to do evil. Now, the failure to punish at
all has the same outcome. In other words, if the civil
government turns a blind eye to the sorts of crimes that are
typical today, then it's not going to lend itself to a reduction
in crime, but rather it's going to lend itself to an increase
in crime. And I think that's the principle
that Solomon sets forth very clearly here in verse 11. Because
the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily,
therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to
do evil. Now, for the Noahic covenant
to work, now I speak as a man because obviously God has put
it in place, He has promised never to again flood the earth,
we must do our part in terms of the created order. In other
words, God makes this covenant with Noah for all of creation,
it's universal, it is perpetual, so we as people ought to demand
or ought to at least pray that civil government functions in
a manner that is consistent with the law of God. And if the civil
government's specific duties are outlined in the Bible, then
it's good for us as God's people to know that so that it will
inform us on how to pray and that it will inform us as well
on how to vote. Now, I'm going to move through
some material tonight that I have no doubt is going to make some
of you a little bit uncomfortable. When we look at the Old Testament
specifically and some of the things that were implemented
in terms of criminal offenders, we get a bit squeamish on this
side of the cross because Certainly, our government does not function
the way the Old Covenant government did. Our government seems very,
very far removed from that. But I simply ask you to have
an open mind tonight and just understand what the rationale
of Scripture is. I think we perish for lack of
knowledge in the sense that we have no concept whatsoever of
what the Old Testament even teaches when it comes to these sorts
of things. So if this is a new experience
for you, please save your tomatoes and dead cats for the end of
the study tonight. If you don't know the history
of dead cats and tomatoes, George Whitefield used to be pelted
by, or persons would throw dead cats and tomatoes at him in his
preaching of the gospel. So that's the reference Isaac
had mentioned the other day that he was a bit puzzled by my reference
to dead cats. Well, it's from Dalamore's biography
on George Whitefield. But I just want you to see that,
first of all, the Bible isn't barbaric. Second of all, that
it's far more humanitarian, if I could use that language, than
what we presently witness. And paradoxically, those who
would attack scripture as being so antiquated and so outdated
and so barbaric, the reality is that if we saw such things
implemented, it would probably fix a whole lot of things going
on in our own generation. Now, if we weren't being taped
or we weren't being live-fed, I would ask the question right
now, what are the three uses of God's law? And I would expect
that someone would be able to say, first of all, there is the
civil use, second, there is the pedagogical use, and thirdly,
there is the normative use. Imagine all of you would have
rattled those off without any problems whatsoever. Is that
right? Give me a great big nod. Yes, Pastor Butler. We would
have all got that. Those are the three ways that
we use God's law. The civil use, more on that in
just a moment. The pedagogical use. Pedagogue
means child tutor. A pedagogue is somebody who leads
us to a particular truth. We preach the law of God as a
pedagogue pedagogically, to show sinners their need for Jesus
Christ. In other words, it's that Romans
3.20 reality. For by the deeds of the law,
no flesh will be justified, for by the law is the knowledge of
sin. We preach God's law to show men
their sin, and thus their need for the Savior King. That's the
second use of the law. The third use is the normative.
And the normative use is what we do as Christians. In other
words, we take God's law by the power of the Spirit, we seek
to obey and comply with it. It's used normatively for the
people of God. As the pedagogue, the law points
us to the cross. We come to the cross by the grace
of God, we believe in the gospel of our Lord Jesus, and then the
Lord Jesus points us to the law as a pattern of or as a rule
for our lives. It's not the means by which we're
saved, the law has no power to justify, but rather it is the
means by which we are supposed to live as saved men and women. Normatively, we seek by the grace
and the power of the Holy Spirit to obey the law of God. So that's
the second and the third. The first use is called the civil.
or it's also called the political use. And Richard Muller, in his
very helpful book, Dictionary of Latin and Great Theological
Terms, a book I highly recommend to everybody, he says, the political
or civil use according to which the law serves the commonwealth
or body politic as a force for the restraint of sin. In other
words, it's God's law given to man as creature. Not necessarily
to point him to Christ, and not necessarily to dictate or to
provide that rule of life for the regenerated believer, but
it's that which is imposed on society by God for the restraint
of evildoers. It's that which keeps us from
being hell on earth. And we need that civil use of
the law, that political use of the law, and we ought to hope
and pray that our civil officials will engage in the application
of such things. Now, when we consider God's law,
and we consider the civil use of God's law, and we consider
criminal punishment as a whole, I think we can make a few implications
or inferences. First, the punishment of criminals
is God's will for governing authorities. I would suggest that a lot of
the platforms that political parties run on today are filled
with things that God's Word never speaks to for that political
party. The two primary emphases that
we find when we ask the Bible, what is the function of civil
government? The primary function is that
the civil government punishes criminal doers within a body
politic and protects innocent persons from foreign invaders.
Now again, can civil government do other things? Yes, but I'd
be very inclined to say it ought to be delimited, it ought to
be narrowly defined. But for our purposes tonight,
they must do what God says in terms of the wielding of the
sword. Again, this is like, I might as well speak Japanese because
we're so far removed from this. We don't even think about this
function for civil government. We think about civil government
giving us cell phones, or civil government giving us healthcare,
or civil government teaching our kids, or civil government
providing everything from cradle to grave except the specific
thing God mandates in terms of wielding the sword. You see,
we're very far removed from what Scripture even begins to speak
to, so that when we get a dose of what Scripture says concerning
crime and punishment, it just blows us away. I mean, the Bible
speaks concerning corporal punishment, and we hear about that, and we
think, well, that only happens in Singapore. That only happens
in sort of these backward nations. Well, Singapore is not a backward
nation, and it's a very safe place, probably owing to the
fact that they use corporal punishment. I've shared before, when I was
first saved, and this is just a little autobiography to illustrate
the point. When I was first saved, we didn't
really know how to raise our children. As Mr. Harms would
say, you raise cattle, you rear children. We didn't know how
to rear our children, so I had a good pastor friend who taught
me about spanking your kids. You know, he gave me proverbs
or told me about bridges on proverbs. And if you read bridges on proverbs,
there's a lot of good stuff in there about raising children
or rearing children. And I remember my mom happened
to be over one night, and she found out that we spanked our
kids. And she just flipped out on me. And, yeah, I can't believe
you beat your kids. You beat my kids. You know, it just knocked me
back for a moment, and I got a little bit shaken. And then
I dug in. I said, wait a minute. No, God's
word says that we need to do this. Withhold, not correction.
And then I asked my mom, I said, mom, what happened to you when
you were a kid and you got out alive? And without a hesitation,
she said, we got belted. So how is it that I'm beating
my children? When you were a girl, you got
belted, as you've admitted, and then I went one step further
and I said, look at society then, when people like you got belted. The biggest problems in high
school was running in the hallways, chewing gum, you know, maybe
talking in class and passing notes. What are the biggest problems
facing high schools today? Gun violence, drugs, rape, pregnancy,
all manner of sexual indiscret- Is there a correlation between
the belting that one generation got versus the non-belting another
generation got? I don't know that I developed
it that far with her, but I think she did see the wisdom of what
I was trying to convey at that particular point. My point here
is that many will come to Old Testament passages, and they
get shocked, or they get freaked out, and they don't ponder the
text. Don't be the kind of person that
doesn't ponder the text. Ponder texts. Think through what
God's Word says. As well, the punishment of criminals
is necessary to protect non-criminals. Again, that's what your government
is ultimately supposed to do for you. Not give you things,
but make sure no one murders you. Make sure nobody bombs you. Make sure nobody, you know, guns
you down in the street. That's their primary job. You
only had one job, and that's to keep us alive. That's their
function. And I don't mean by keeping us
alive with cell phones and all the other accouterments that
they want to hand out. The punishment of criminals serves
as a deterrent for would-be criminals. This text. You can add this text
as a proof text with reference to a deterrent. Because the sentence
against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart
of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. What's the
converse? The converse is, is if the sentence
against an evil work is executed speedily, therefore the heart
of the sons of men will not be fully set in them to do evil. As well in the book of Deuteronomy,
on two instances at least, and there are others as well. What's
one of the take-home lessons when punishment was carried out
among the nation of Israel? then you shall hear and fear. Let all Israel hear and fear. What say the word? Stone him
and everybody fears once they see that. There is a deterrent
built in. We need to remember as well,
the punishment of criminals is to be consistent with the crime
committed. You can turn to the book of Hebrews
too. I want everybody to see something before we embark on
this sort of overview of crime and punishment. The principle
I want to bring out here is the punishment of criminals is to
be consistent with the crime committed. It is to be according
to his guilt, according to Deuteronomy 25.2. It's summarized in the
Lex Talionis, I for I, tooth for tooth, burn for burn, life
for life. You see that in Exodus 21, 23
to 25, which by the way is a passage that really ought to be known
by every pro-life advocate because it is the protection of babies
in their mother's wombs in Exodus 21, 23 to 25. As well, that Lex
Talionis is seen in Leviticus 24 and in Deuteronomy. And now notice in Hebrews chapter
2 at verse 1. It says, Therefore we must give
the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we
drift away. For if the words spoken through
angels prove steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience
received, notice, a just reward. The New Covenant author here
to the book of Hebrews, which I would argue is the Apostle
Paul, doesn't say the Old Testament is barbaric. He doesn't say that
the sorts of punishments that you see there are antiquated
and outdated and should have no place in civil society. But
he refers to those transgressions punished under Old Covenant polity
and obviously spiritually by God. He refers to it as a just
reward. It is just when governments function
in the way that God has prescribed. Now, in terms of some lesser
forms of punishment, you can turn to the book of Exodus. Exodus chapter 22. Probably one of the primary lesser
forms of punishment was what was called restitution. Again,
I realize this is an antiquated concept. I mean, the thought
that anybody who was caught breaking the windows at a church should
actually have to pay for said windows? We don't even think
about that. That just doesn't even come to
play. Hope you have insurance. Hope you got some money saved.
Because even if we catch somebody who's got a rock in their hand
who broke a window, we'll never make them pay for that window.
What happened to that? You know, perhaps when your kids
were little or you were little and you did something wrong,
your parents grabbed you by the hand and made you make things
right. There's no more making things
right. There's no more restitution.
But the Bible is about restitution because the Bible, let me just
encourage you to get this, is pro-victim. It's not pro-criminal,
it's pro-victim. Notice in Exodus 22, 1, if a
man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he
shall restore four an ox and four sheep for a sheep. If the
thief is found breaking in and he is struck so that he dies,
there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed, a passage that teaches
self-defense. If the son is risen on him, there
shall be guilt for his bloodshed. He should make full restitution. Again, this is not an isolated
place in scripture. The concept of restitution. If I deprive you, somebody should
make me pay you back. Whether it's a parent, or whether
it's a policeman, or whether it's a lawful magistrate. Restitution
is the basic form of criminal punishment in the Bible. And
it's a no-brainer. It should be self-evident that
if somebody is caught damaging property, they pay to fix the
property. It should be self-evident that
if somebody steals from somebody else, they not only pay it back,
but they pay it with interest. This is what God's Word says.
Now, the second form follows here in 3B. And it's called indentured
servitude. Now again, it's about here that
everybody loses it and flips out and says, are you actually
advocating that? I'm not actually advocating this,
by the way. However, I would suggest those
who find it to be a horrific thing to understand what the
Bible says concerning indentured servitude ought to see it as
an equally horrific thing to think about the modern prison
system. Because that is servitude, that is slavery, and there's
no remedial end involved whatsoever. In indentured servitude, there
is. The man who cannot pay back his
debt becomes a servant to the family that he owes. This is
a very beneficial thing, first of all, for the victim, because
they get paid back. See, again, we just don't even
think that way. We don't ever stop to think the victim first. Make sure he's happy and he's
taken care of. Our minds immediately go to indentured
servitude. Well, that's not right. You can't
advocate that a man actually be a slave. What about the guy
he stole from? He just loses? He's gone, he's deprived? He
woke up one day and everything's gone and that's somehow okay? But if you think about indentured
servitude, and again, don't leave tonight and blog about me and
say Butler wants to live in a theocracy. No, I'm simply sketching for
us. the contours of crime and punishment
in the Bible, and hopefully suggesting some lines of thought for us
in our own current situation. And even later, I'm going to
ask you to ponder something that we've accepted as valid, that
you cannot find in the Bible, that's actually an atrocity. It's an atrocity on a whole host
of levels, but we'll get to that in a few moments. But this idea
of indentured servitude, it's addressed in Exodus 21. It wasn't
supposed to exceed six years. And again, the idea being that
this man is stolen, he has nothing with which to pay back, so he
now serves that particular family. It has a positive effect. Typically,
somebody who steals or typically somebody who deprives somebody
is somebody who perhaps didn't have the best upbringing. So
while he's engaged in indentured servitude, he's with a good family,
and he's learning skills, and he's contributing positively,
and there is remedial ends, or there is remedy to it, and there's
redemptive ends in all of it. He becomes a better person when
he does what he's supposed to in terms of paying back. I remember
years ago, Steve and I used to go to Union Gospel Mission, and
for the most part, you think about people that are going there
for free food, and they got to sit through a sermon, and then
they get their meal. You think about the sorts of
people there on East Hastings, and you're not typically thinking
these are persons that really want to work hard, and they really
are diligent. They've just gotten a lot of
bad luck. No, that's not the first thing you're struck with.
But every now and then, you'd meet a guy or you'd meet a girl
there that did want to work. And I remember this one guy specifically
saying, I just want to work for the dignity of it. You know,
the dignity involved in work. We've lost that. Work's just
this pain, this thing we have to do to get to the weekend,
or this thing we have to do to get to retirement. Work's a blessing. Work's a gift. Work is a good
thing. And we ought to embrace work
and delight in work. But I remember that guy highlighting
the dignity associated with work. And we need to recapture that,
and this whole concept of indentured servitude lends itself to that
appreciation. A third form is corporal punishment. You can turn to Deuteronomy 25.
And for those of you keeping track, we're not even going to
deal with the incorrigible son tonight. I don't want to blow
you off into, you know, irrecoverable places. But the incorrigible
son in Deuteronomy 21 is another passage that we could have looked
at, but for time's sake and just to sketch the broad outline,
notice the reality of corporal punishment. Deuteronomy 25, 1
to 3. Now again, this seems horrific
to us. It seems barbaric. It seems,
you know, just just terrible. The thought that somebody would
be able to punish another person in this fashion is abhorrent
to the modern mind. And again, I'm not telling you
we need to make sure that any judges or any civil government
officials be committed to this. I'm not saying that. You know,
we need to think through a lot of this stuff, but I just want
to highlight that it's not just this sort of a thing that says,
okay, go out and beat that. There's due process involved.
Never forget that. Deuteronomy 17, Deuteronomy 19
specifically deal with due process. Deals with laws concerning witnesses. You didn't just act willy-nilly. There were things built into
the law that would inhibit sue-crazy sort of a society. In Deuteronomy 17, the witnesses
would be the first to stone the one that was found guilty. Now,
we hear that, we think about that. Consider that you live
in the same community. You better be really sure if
you're going to pick up a stone and throw it at your neighbor,
that your neighbor's actually committed the crime that you
have said that they've committed. And then in Deuteronomy 19, I
think I've pointed this out. If I were, I picked on Dawn before,
I'll pick on her again. If I took Dawn to the magistrate
or to the judge, and I said that Dawn committed murder, and the
judge heard the case and found out that Dawn was innocent, I
would be executed. Not because I committed murder,
but because I wrongfully accused her. Do you know how that would
reduce the amounts of frivolous lawsuits on the books? If I knew
that I go to this judge and I allege that so-and-so did such-and-such,
and so-and-so is innocent, I'm going to get the punishments.
I guarantee you're going to think twice. There's no doubt about
it that you'll think twice. But there's none of that today,
because there's no repercussions. You can just say, oh yeah, this
guy this, or this guy that, and nothing happens to you. You can
ruin people's lives and reputations. You can ruin their livelihood,
and there's no sanction. It's just OK. Fine. Yeah, that's the price of doing
business in this nation. But if you look at Deuteronomy
25, there are several things in place. Again, this is the
point that I'm trying to stress, is that there is a rationale. Whether you agree with corporal
punishment or not, you need to see that it's done in a way that
is consistent with rule, consistent with authority, consistent with
God's design. Notice first, there must be a
trial. There must be a trial, verse
1, if there is a dispute between men and they come to court that
the judges may judge them and they justify the righteous and
condemn the wicked. Brethren, if we sacrifice due
process, we are no better than animals. We as God's people ought
to be about due process. It's right here. In other words,
we don't get to the place where we punish people until we've
had a trial, until we've determined guilt or innocence. This isn't
a totalitarian state. It's not communism. This ain't,
you know, take them out to Siberia and put a few in their head.
You cannot operate that way and expect things to go well. Notice
there must be supervision. If it is the case that he is
found guilty, then it shall be, verse 2, if the wicked man deserves
to be beaten, that the judge will cause him to lie down and
be beaten in his presence. Again, this isn't mob rule. Take
him out back and thrash him. No, there's supervision. Craigie,
commentary on the book of Deuteronomy, said if the judges declared that
corporal punishment was in order, then the flogging was to be carried
out in his presence. In this way, the judge was able
to see that the sentence was properly executed and that the
offender was not treated too leniently or too harshly by the
officer of the law entrusted with the task. Again, whether
you come down on the side of yes for corporal punishment or
not, just appreciate that there's process, there's strictures,
there's parameters, there's definition, there's marching orders. It's
not a free-for-all. You don't jump back into the
theocracy and people are wandering around gouging everybody's eyes
out or chipping out people's teeth or, you know, lopping off
arms in the name of the Lex Taliotis. There were law courts, there
were judges, there was adjudication, there was due process, there
were witnesses, and when punishment was made it out, there was supervision. Notice as well there must be
proportion. If the wicked man deserves to
be beaten, that the judge will cause him to lie down and be
beaten in his presence according to his guilt with a certain number
of blows. It's not arbitrary. It's not
the case that the guy who's delivering the blows can go into a temporary
bout of insanity and go into a frenzy and beat the guy with
an... No! It's specified. There's a sentence rendered and
there's a verdict handed over and that is what they operate
according to. Notice that there must be a limit. Verse 3, 40 blows he may give
him and no more, lest he should exceed this and beat him with
many blows above these. So you see there's a cap on this.
Again, whether you come down on the side of pro or against
corporal punishment, please appreciate the process. That's my point. Appreciate the rigors. Appreciate
the strictures. Appreciate the parameters. Appreciate
the reality. that the theocracy wasn't a bunch
of mayhem and chaos where people just wandered around engaged
in vigilante justice. It just wasn't that way. But
notice before we leave this section, there must be a concern for dignity. And note here, it's the dignity
of the criminal. Because the criminal still bears
the image of God, doesn't he? Notice what the text says in
verse 3, 40 blows he may give him and no more lest he should
exceed this and beat him with many blows above these and your
brother be humiliated in your sight. He doesn't stop being
a part of the covenant community. He doesn't stop being a brother.
He doesn't stop being somebody that no longer bears the image
of God. So even in the punishment inflicted
upon these persons, there was to be a respect for him as an
image bearer of God, which I think lends itself to our understanding
today that if there is a system in place that strips men of every
shred of dignity, Can it really be consistent with God's rule
or God's will with reference to crime and punishment? The
criminal is still a brother and thus part of the covenant community.
The criminal is to be spared from a punishment that would
be degrading and humiliating. We don't think that way. He deserves
what he's supposed to have. If he deserves capital punishment,
then by all means, give him capital punishment. But that doesn't
mean you have to poke his eyes out first, and burn him first,
and engage him. No! You carry things out according
to the will and mind of God. It's not animalistic. It's not
barbarism. Klein said the just punishment
of the guilty was to be dispensed in such a way that his individual
human dignity was honored. And then Wright, Christopher
Wright says, it is sad that in the popular perception, the Old
Testament is so often vilified for the severity of its punishments,
whereas this law with its careful limitations and its explicit
protection of the rights and dignity of criminals is overlooked. See, that's the point. We get
this concept in the Old Testament that it was just this barbarism.
Did you know? Did you appreciate? Did you ever
think? I'm not asking for a show of hands, but did you think in
terms of the fact that God actually demands that dignity be given
to a criminal offender who's being corporately punished? I
mean, that sounds not barbaric to me at all. It sounds consistent
with the fact that man bears the image of God. And man who
bears the image of God at times does horrible criminal activities,
and he should be punished for those criminal activities, but
he doesn't resign or renege on the image of God. He's still
an image bearer and should be treated thus. Now, the thing
that I wanted to bring up, just again, not to say, you know,
go stand outside of Kent and Mountain and say no more prisons,
but have you ever thought through the prison system? Have you ever
really considered the prison system? The concept of restitution,
if that's fundamental to jurisprudence, the prison system completely
works against that. And, you know, if I rob from
Kurt or I steal from Kurt, I'm put in jail to pay my debt to
the state. Why would I pay my debt to the
state when I stole from Kurt? That's not fair. And especially
now that Kurt's got to pay taxes so that I can eat. He gets it
twice in terms of having to foot the bill for me. Now, if the
lex talionis is fair and equitable, which I think everybody would
admit, whether you're into the eye for eye, tooth for tooth,
we all appreciate it in its modern sense of the punishment must
fit the crime. That's all lex talionis. The
law of retribution, it's that punishment must fit the crime.
So, you know, the scripture uses the eye for eye, tooth for tooth,
burn for burn, stripe for stripe. All of that just underscores
the principle that the punishment must fit the crime. Well, what
would be the punishment that would be appropriate for prison
if I imprison somebody else? That doesn't happen a lot. I
realize it does happen. There's some sick people out
there that kidnap and they imprison people and they do all kinds
of untoward things for them. But it's really not an appropriate
punishment for most of the sorts of crimes that are out there.
The imprisonment of a criminal thwarts always the principle
of restitution. For the example I just made,
if I steal from Kurt, I steal from Chris, I steal from any
of you, and I'm put in jail, I have to pay my debt to the
state, or my debt to society. You've all heard that, right?
You're looking at me like I'm nuts. This is the common parlance.
He's paying his debt to society, but he robbed me. Why should
he pay his debt to the rest of you? I want mine. He took it from me. You see,
the idea of imprisonment thwarts the principle of restitution.
Now, there is slavery involved in the modern prison system.
The man is deprived of meaningful work. He's deprived of any right
to privacy. He's deprived of the ability
to spend time with family. I think indentured servitude,
as it's outlined in the book of Exodus, is a whole lot more
appropriate and a whole lot better than it would be to be in prison.
You're either in a family's house, perhaps with your family nearby,
and you're able to see your family, or you're in a prison cell with
somebody that really doesn't like you. The prison system doesn't
remove crime, it only relocates crime. Do you think that there's
crime in prison? There's absolutely crime in prison. It does nothing to fix the crime
problem, it just removes it from our sort of view. It's a terrible thought to me,
brethren, that a guy can be sentenced to however long in prison and
go into prison and be raped. That is a common occurrence for
men when they go to prison. That's not good punishment. Nobody
should wish that on anybody. That is horrific. And the thought
that, well, you know, prison fixes everything. Again, I'm
not saying go out and, you know, argue against prisons, but there's
no prison in the Old Testament. I mean, there were holding cells,
there were, you know, temporary custody for those awaiting trial,
perhaps. Joseph was in prison, but that
was in Egypt. You just don't get the vibe that
there was this penitentiary system in Old Covenant Israel. No, because
restitution, corporal punishment, and capital punishment would
have taken care of it. You've got a punishment fit for
just about every type of criminal. Send them away for 20, 30, 40
years on the taxpayer's dime. The prison system does not promote
effective rehabilitation. There's a man by the name of
Verne Poythress. Those of you who are perhaps
thinking that I'm speaking like a theonomist or a reconstructionist,
I'm not. I'm simply trying to point out
what scripture says. Poythress, who's not a theonomist,
makes this observation concerning prisons. He says, have the most
hope for rehabilitation if they feel the justice of their punishment.
Now brethren, I believe that with every fiber of my being
because I believe that man is created in the image of God.
I'm not for this, just throw that guy in there and you know,
too bad for him. Now, I have that in me, to be
sure, but when I stop and think biblically and rationally, we
really want rehabilitation, don't we? Don't we want somebody to
be fixed? Don't we want them to stop criminal
activity and become productive members of society? Isn't that
the goal or the hope? I mean, somebody that's worthy
of capital punishment, by all means, execute the criminal offender. But these other forms of punishment,
when you impose restitution, the goal was he pays back the
money and he no longer steals. Because he knows that if he steals
again, he's going to have to pay it back. You've taught him a
good lesson. Corporal punishment. You give
the guy 39 whacks. The goal is, when he gets up
and he rubs himself off, he thinks to himself, I'm not going to
do that again because I don't want 39 whacks. You see, the
goal of punishment is to rehabilitate the offender. Prison doesn't
do that. Prison typically makes them a
whole lot worse than what they were when they went there. But
back to Poitras. Criminals have the most hope
for rehabilitation if they feel the justice of their punishment.
In addition, criminals have a greater chance to reform if they are
in normal contact with normal society. Again, brethren, think
image bearer. Think social interaction. What's more profitable for a
fellow? If he's socially interacting
with a covenant family that he's paying back through faithful,
diligent, hard work, or he's in the prison yard talking about
how they're going to hurt somebody else. That's just not good for
a man's psyche. He says, they then have opportunity
immediately to engage in just, socially profitable work and
contributions to others. The abnormalities of prison life
can never become a viable environment for training in righteousness.
Again, I believe that with every fiber of my being, and I don't
know how in the world we could ever get to the point where we
could return to a more humanitarian way of punishing people, when
we've just accepted that these are the ways we deal with people,
these are the ways that are antiquated and barbaric, and modern social
engineers have it all figured out better than God. Again, I
would ask that you don't go home and blog or post that Butler
wants corporal punishment. I'm just asking you to think.
Think about what Scripture says. Think about the rationale behind
each of these particular punishments, that there is a rehabilitative
sort of goal with each one. So that each one after he is
punished, except of course with capital punishment, that's just
retributive justice, which is fitting and appropriate for the
crimes that are broken or the crimes engaged in by such persons.
But for these lesser forms of punishment, the end result is
that they don't go out and do these things again. And the structure
that we have inculcated and the structure that we presently have
does not lend itself to rehabilitation. All right. Well, there's a brief
sketch of some lesser forms of punishment. As I said, you've
been spared from the incorrigible son. The incorrigible son, actually
we could deal with it very quickly in Deuteronomy 21. Everybody
freaks out about that. because the son is being brought
and delivered over to the elders, and he's stoned to death. This
isn't a two-year-old. He's a glutton and a drunkard.
He's an adult rebel son that the parents have exercised a
great deal of influence on, the parents have exercised a great
deal of restraint on, the parents have exercised love, and that
parental pressure, and the son is incorrigible. So it gets to
the point where he is delivered up as a result of his sin and
depravity. Well, let's close in a word of
prayer. Father, thank you for your word and help us to think
clearly concerning these various texts. Help us, God, to have
an understanding of what God's will is with reference to crime
and punishment. We thank you for this Noahic
covenant. We thank you for the civil government.
and for the civil magistrate. We can thank you for that office,
even though at times some of the officers perplex us and disturb
us. We do thank you, God, for the
fact that you have put in place a structure designed to hopefully
protect body politic. And we do pray for our governing
officials. We pray for those newly elected
ones that they would exercise their roles in a responsible
and in a decent manner. We pray with reference to the
federal level that your will would be done in the election
of a good man that would exercise the the kind of government that
we should hope to see in a situation like ours. Be merciful throughout
the earth. We know there are many oppressive
regimes, those built on totalitarianism, those built on no due process. God have mercy upon such things,
and be gracious and merciful to your people that are living
in such situations. Go with us now, we pray, and
we ask through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
