Romans chapter 12, I'll begin reading in verse 17, and we'll read to chapter 13 at verse 7. Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men. If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men.
Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath. For it is written, vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord. Therefore, if your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink.
For in so doing, you will heap coals of fire on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. for he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain.
For he is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God's ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due, taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.
Amen. Well, let us pray. Father, again, we thank you for your word. We pray for your blessing and for your grace to be upon us now.
We pray that you would forgive us, that you would fill us with your spirit, that you would cause us to think properly about these issues facing us in our generation. God help us to understand what the Bible does in fact teach concerning the death penalty or capital punishment. Help us God not to shrink back over emotion but help us to embrace the truth. Help us to see that this is a reflection of the glory of God in his justice and as well it is grounded upon the reality that you put a premium on human life and those who would take it, those who would murder are to be punished accordingly.
We ask now that you would bless our time together and we pray through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Introduction
Well, this morning when I referred to the sixth commandment, it says, you shall not murder. And I said that there are three instances in the Bible where it is appropriate for men to kill other men. I'm not saying go out and kill people. I'm saying we ought not to ever murder.
But there are three instances where people can take the lives of others and not face judicial punishment in terms of the civil government, or they will not face punishment in terms of God's government. And those three particularly are self-defense, legitimate war, and capital punishment. Now we will spend our time tonight on the doctrine of capital punishment or the death penalty, but
Self-Defense as Lawful Killing
just briefly I want you to see where the Bible does teach that self-defense is legitimate. You can turn to the book of Exodus for just a moment. The book of Exodus, specifically in chapter 22, it is right for a man to protect himself. It is right for a man to defend himself, to defend his family.
And specifically in Exodus 22 at verse 2 we read, If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed." It's pretty straightforward. It's pretty cut and dry. It's pretty simple. If a thief breaks into your house, and in the course of his activity, you strike him and he dies, the Scripture says there will be no guilt for his bloodshed.
It goes on further in verse 3 to say, if the sun has risen on him, there shall be guilt for his bloodshed. The idea being this, that if a man breaks in at night, you have no idea what he is doing there. You don't know if he's there simply to rob you or steal from you, or if he is there to murder you. So in the nighttime hours, when you strike out at him and you defend your life, and he dies in the exchange, there's no guilt upon you.
But if the sun has risen, the idea is that you are better able to assess the situation. You are better able to discover whether he is there to commit murder, or to commit rape, or some other ungodly act, or whether he's there simply to steal. Now if he is there in the daylight, he's there to murder and rape and all that sort of thing. Certainly you have the right to defend yourself, but self-defense is legitimate.
Self-defense is assumed by our Lord Jesus Christ in Luke chapter 12. In Luke chapter 12, very specifically at verse 39, our Lord assumes that men will in fact defend themselves. In 12.38 it says, "...and if he should come, in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not allowed his house to be broken into." Jesus assumes that we're not going to invite criminals into our homes to wreak mayhem on our persons or on our property.
Self-defense is legitimate.
Lawful War
So, of course, is war. Now, when we get into what is a legitimate war or a just and necessary war, that's a whole other debate or a whole other subject or another topic. But you cannot disregard the reality that God Most High advocates in seasons war. In Deuteronomy 7 verses 1 to 5, the nation of Israel is told to go in and utterly destroy the Canaanite cities.
They are to go in and dispossess the land. They are not to dispossess the land by having group sessions. They are not to dispossess the land by having group therapy. They are to go in and dispossess the land by killing the inhabitants, getting rid of them, and then taking their property.
When we come to the New Testament Scriptures, soldiers and centurions are always looked at in a favorable light. Well, maybe not always, but they're not shown to be evil men simply for their particular trade or their occupation. Remember in Luke chapter 3 when John the Baptist is preaching, he's preaching repentance and various people groups ask him specific questions on how that repentance would be manifest. And the soldiers come to him, according to 3.14 in the Gospel of Luke.
Likewise, the soldiers asked him, saying, And what shall we do? So he said to them, Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages. If warfare was improper, if warfare was unbiblical, if warfare in itself was condemned by God, wouldn't the Baptist's instructions have been, you need to leave military service? You need to get out.
You need to go hug trees. You need to go do something that is based on nature and love and harmony and peace. He doesn't say that to these soldiers. He doesn't tell them to reject their office.
He tells them how to conduct themselves as soldiers in that particular office. Soldiers in the Roman Empire had a specific task. They didn't go around delivering groceries to the downtrodden and poor. They didn't go around helping people cross the street.
Soldiers in that day, just like soldiers in this day, are tasked with killing people. Again, some of this may sound a bit crass and a bit brutal, but we need to think God's thoughts after Him. He does not condemn self-defense, He does not condemn just and necessary war, and He does not condemn, in fact, as I'll argue in the course of this message, he demands that the civil magistrate execute criminal offenders, the death penalty or capital punishment.
Biblical Theology of Capital Punishment
Now I just want to first of all trace a biblical theology of capital punishment. We'll start in the Old Testament and we'll end in the new. Then I want to treat some common objections, the biblical objections, to the death penalty and then finally look at some pragmatic objections or practical objections.
The Noahic Covenant Foundation
The first text we ought to consider is in Genesis chapter 9 at verse 6. You may turn there. Genesis chapter 9, Martin Luther said of this chapter, This was the first command having reference to the temporal sword. By these words, temporal government was established and the sword placed in its hand by God.
You remember the particular context. Noah and his family are now out of the ark. So God gives them commands, God gives them instructions, very specifically, for the propagation of life, for the sustenance of life. It is here, of course, that God says, eat meat.
God says to enjoy meat. Taste them, burn them, cook them, eat them, enjoy them. This is a life-giving necessity for you. And as well, this particular chapter deals with the protection of life.
What was one of the marks of the pre-flood age? One of the marks of the pre-flood age is that God looked down upon the earth and it was corrupt. it was filled with violence. In other words, it was a place where people were brutalized. And so post-flood, in this new setting, God tells Noah very specifically that there is going to be an agency that is given the sword to render punishment upon those who would threaten the lives of others.
So that's The context, note specifically verse 6, whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood will be shed, for in the image of God he made man. The offense is laid out in the first part of verse 6. whoever sheds man's blood." Again, prior to the flood. This was happening in the nations of the earth. This was happening throughout the globe.
This was something that was indicative of the people prior to the flood. It is the unlawful taking of another person's life, very specifically here, addressed. Notice the punishment that is to be meted out to one that engages in this. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed.
You see, this is the first instance of the eye for an eye, the life for a life. the law of retaliation, the lex talionis. That's the Latin term for the law of retribution. And this is what God says should be the case for those who murder, for those who unlawfully take the life of another. But notice as well the agency.
The agency. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood will be shed. So you see, we cannot in principle say it's wrong for the governing authorities to bear the sword to execute criminal offenders. God has established it.
God has commanded it. God has mandated it. And this isn't something we can finagle our way out of with reference to covenant theology. Some of the Mosaic legislation was peculiar to the people in the land that they went in to live in.
It is peculiar with reference to that theocratic nation. It is peculiar with reference to that covenantal setting. But this is the Noahic covenant. This is the covenant made with Noah that is normative for all man, everywhere, in all times.
So we ought to admit and readily acknowledge that at the very minimum, the crime of murder is punishable by death. I happen to be someone who believes that there are more crimes that ought to be punishable by death, but if the civil government actually started punishing people with death for those who commit murder, that would be a happy day. You say, you sound like one sick, sorry man. No, it is about the law of God.
When a nation or a people group reject God's word, When they continue to rebel against His ordinances, we cannot expect the blessing of God upon the people. In Numbers 35 we are told very specifically that with reference to murder, there is no ransom that can be paid. There is no monetary fine that can be assigned. The penalty involved for murder is always capital punishment.
It is always the death penalty. It is grounded here, it is rooted here, it has its origin here. Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed. Calvin said, God so threatens and denounces vengeance against the murderer that he even arms the magistrate with the sword for the avenging of slaughter in order that the blood of men may not be shed with impunity.
In other words, in this post-flood setting, for the world not to degenerate right back into what it was before Noah, or before the flood, when it was exceedingly corrupt and filled with violence, there would be in place a particular arm, a particular arm of judgment instituted by God for the restriction of such things. And then note the theological reason for this command. This is why I suggest and this is why I maintain that the death penalty, paradoxically, it's not a paradox in my mind but some may think so, that the death penalty is actually an argument for the sanctity of human life. In other words, God so regards His image-bearers that when one unlawfully murders another, God demands that that murderer's blood be shed.
And by so doing, He dignifies humanity, He shows the fact that they are indeed image-bearers, and that He holds forth to us the particular rationale. Notice. for in the image of God he made man." Now I should tell you there are two ways that we could take this statement. For in the image of God he made man. Some persons like Meredith Klein and Greg Bonson argue that this is the reason for man being the agency of execution.
In other words, by man his blood shall be shed, for that man who sheds the blood of murderers is in the image of God. But I take it the other way. This is a theological justification or rationale or reason for the execution of those who would murder. Because if I murder you, I have, as Vos said, assaulted the divine majesty.
Because you are an image-bearer of God, if I unlawfully take your life, God says, by man his blood will be shed. So that's the first passage we ought to consider in the Old Testament.
Capital Punishment in the Mosaic Economy
In the Old Testament, as we continue, we find ourselves in the mosaic economy, or the old covenant setting or situation. There we find a distinction concerning accidental homicide and murder. I showed you that this morning. The idea is if I take an axe and I premeditatedly go and bury it in your head because I don't like you, or because your kid leaves his toys on my driveway, and I wait in a bush, and I have malice aforethought, and I take you out, that is murder.
But if I go into my backyard, and I'm chopping wood, and I don't realize that my axe head isn't securely faceted, and I swing that axe, and it flies over your fence, and finds its way into your head, that is accidental homicide. The cities of refuge are given at that point. If my axe head flies off, and finds its way into your head, then I run to the city of refuge before that kinsman-redeemer can take me out." That is what God says. There is a difference between accidental homicide and murder, and the Mosaic legislation indicates that distinction very clearly.
There are additional capital crimes mentioned in the Mosaic economy. Just read some of them. Of course we know murder, adultery and rape, bestiality, homosexuality, incest, the incorrigible son, Sabbath-breaking, kidnapping, solicitation to apostasy, witchcraft, sorcery and false pretension, two-prophecy and blasphemy. Imagine if this was imposed upon Canada tomorrow.
The rivers would run with blood. There would be a lot of executions because all of us find ourselves as having broken one or some of these at some time in our life. But as I mentioned earlier, the Mosaic legislation also tells us of the necessity of the death penalty for the crime of murder. Turn to Numbers 35.
Numbers 35. Verse 31. Moreover, you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death. And you shall take no ransom for him who has fled to his city of refuge, that he may return to dwell in the land before the death of the priest.
So you shall not pollute the land where you are, for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it. There is no financial recompense that can be paid in the crime of murder. Life imprisonment without parole is not a sufficient punishment. As harsh as that may sound and as brutal as that may appear, the Bible mandates clearly that the murderer shall die.
Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood will be shed. For in the image of God, he made man.
Capital Punishment in the New Testament
Now, let's move to the New Testament as we sketch this biblical theology of capital punishment. Several lines of evidence suggest that this isn't simply an Old Testament convention. First and foremost, we have the crucifixion of Jesus. First and foremost, we have the crucifixion of our Lord.
Now, it was an atoning sacrifice, ordained by God for the salvation of all those whom the Father had given Him. But when the Roman magistrate delivered up Jesus to die, Jesus never, ever argued about the legitimacy of the death penalty. Same with Paul in the book of Acts, in chapter 25. In Acts 25, as Paul appeals to Caesar, There's an interesting instance in Acts 25 at verse 10.
Paul said, I stand at Caesar's judgment seat where I ought to be judged. To the Jews, I have done no wrong, as you very well know. Now notice what he says in verse 11, for if I am an offender or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying. He doesn't say I'll have a vigil, we'll light candles, we'll argue that the death penalty is inappropriate.
We'll say that this is a brutal act by a brutal state that should never be conducted. He says just the opposite. If I have done something or anything. It's a plurality of crimes there.
Notice he says, and say, if I have murdered, I don't object to dying. Paul understands there's a plurality of crimes for which he could legitimately be put to death. And he indicates that by saying, if I have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying. But if there is nothing in these things of which these men accuse me, no one can deliver me to them.
I appeal to Caesar. And then, of course, Romans 13.
Romans 13 and the Magistrate's Sword
You may turn there. Romans chapter 13 verses 1 to 4. Hopefully in the reading of that section you'll see that it does indeed uphold the role of the civil government, specifically the judicial authority in the land, to execute criminal offenders. what the sword means. Now there are lesser punishments for lesser crimes.
It doesn't mean the civil government walks around town and cuts the heads off of people that steal Snickers bars. There are lesser punishments for lesser crimes. But to deny what a sword is ultimately used for The inflicting of fatal injury is to deny the scripture itself. We need to understand that Romans 13, 1 to 4, is part of a larger context, you see.
The versification and the chapter numbers, the verse numbers, all that came later. If you'll notice the way that chapter 13 begins, there's no but, there's no new argument going on, there's no new disjunction. but rather he continues in the same vein that he's already been addressing. Notice, chapter 12, verse 17, he says, Repay no one evil for evil. Have regard for good things in the sight of all men.
If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. I will tell you right now, one of the biblical objections to capital punishment is Matthew 5, 38-42. We will look at that later. But right now, understand that what Paul is doing in these few verses is parallel to Matthew 5, 38-42.
He is arguing concerning our personal ethics. He is arguing concerning our personal disposition. He is arguing about the way that we are to conduct ourselves. He is not arguing, and neither is Jesus in Matthew 5, that the civil government shouldn't be equipped with the sword to execute criminal offenders.
That's apples and oranges. Personal ethics, at times, have nothing to do with governmental action. And this is something we need to understand. So he says, Repay no one evil for evil.
Verse 17, Have regard for good things in the sight of all men, if it is possible. As much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves. That's what Jesus is speaking to. in Matthew 5, 38-42.
This is not to be an instance where you engage in personal vengeance or personal retaliation. The children of God are never to do that sort of thing. Probably the religious leaders of Jesus' day were these kinds of men that would return evil for evil, that would seek to vindicate their name at all costs, that would bring judgment in the personal ethical realm. But then as well, notice, he says in verse 19, Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath.
This always puzzles me. When we express a desire for God to actually judge the wicked in this current evangelical and sometimes reformed climate, we're looked at as odd. How could you read Psalm 94? That talks about God bringing vengeance and judgment and justice upon the wicked.
Exactly! Notice what Paul says, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath. He doesn't say that wrath against evil is bad. He doesn't say that wrath against wickedness is bad.
He says you are not to avenge yourselves, but rather you are to give place to wrath. Who is God, the monopoly on wrath? God. In other words, when we give place to wrath, it is legitimate to pray those psalms.
It is legitimate to sing those psalms. It is legitimate to consider that there are abortionists out there who have bloody hands, and if you will not save them, God, stop them from this murderous rampage that they continue on for money and for convenience. That is giving place to wrath. And why does Paul say this?
He cites The word, because or for it is written, vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord. Therefore, if your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink. For in so doing, you will heap coals of fire on his head." You see the demarcation there.
I am not supposed to go out and avenge myself. If somebody wrongs me on my way home tonight, I don't go to dart and tackle tomorrow, buy a shotgun, find the guy and shoot him. That is wrong. It is wicked.
You are not supposed to do that. That is murder. You have not been given that particular right to engage in that sort of justice. You as private Christians, you and your personal ethics, Rather, you are to conduct yourselves in this manner.
In verse 20, if your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him a drink. For in so doing, you will heat coals of fire on his head. God is going to deal with this particular man.
How much the more when he's wicked and a criminal and you've been good to him in your conduct. And the overarching principle is in verse 21, do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Now notice, chapter 13, as I said, continues. Give place to wrath, Paul says.
God says, vengeance is mine, I will repay. Do not miss the verbal links between the two sections. When it says in verse 4 that the civil magistrate, armed with the sword, is God's minister to execute wrath, what should we remember? Chapter 12.
I'm not to go out and engage in personal retaliation. I'm not to go out and engage in personal vengeance. But I am legitimately able to report this person to the civil government. And if the civil government deems that it's righteous for them to punish him with death, that is an expression of God's wrath manifested in history through the agency that he has ordained.
Remember Genesis 9, by man his blood will be shed. God has the monopoly on wrath. God has delegated some of that to the civil government for the well-doing or the well-being of society, the protection of the judicially innocent, and the punishment of those who would threaten the civil order. So you see, there is a close connection.
I hope that you understand that. We're dealing with not avenging ourselves. We're dealing with giving place to wrath. And then lo and behold, we get to the section dealing on the civil government.
And we are told that this civil governor, this magistrate, is God's minister. We know the word, it's deacon. In the ecclesiastical sphere, it is deacon, a servant in the church. In the civil sphere, it is a magistrate, or a governor, or a lawmaker, or one of these persons that have been clothed with authority to execute judgment on behalf of God in the civil order.
There is a close connection. Now notice, Paul tells us there is a duty to submit to governing authorities. Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. This is legit.
Titus 3.1. 1 Peter 2.13-14. God did not call us to be anarchists. God did not call us to revolt and engage in revolution. Now is there a place for a just revolution?
Again, that's a debate for another time. But in the garden variety, normal ordering of affairs, God has told us as his people that we are to submit to the governing authorities. He tells us later we're to pay taxes because these governing authorities that conduct themselves doing these things do not live on love and fresh air. They live based on taxation.
Has it been abused? Yes. But because something is abused, it doesn't mean that we are not to pursue it. So let every soul be subject to the governing authorities.
Note the reason for the command. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Psalm 82, we just sang. Proverbs 8.13, Christ speaking his wisdom says, by me kings reign.
Nebuchadnezzar understood this in Daniel chapter 4 and verse 17. Your political leaders, brothers and sisters, are ordained by God. So therefore, we need to submit. Notice the sin of resistance.
Verse 2, therefore, whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. Now, we need to make sure we understand the necessary qualifications. Acts 5.29, when civil or ecclesiastical authority told the apostles that they were no longer to preach Christ, What did they say? Well, okay, we'll just go sit on our couch and play Nintendo.
No, they said we must obey God rather than men. When the magistrate or the governing authorities tell us to sin against God, then resistance becomes necessary. It is a sin to resist the authority in the garden variety ordering of affairs. But when the authority commands us to sin against God, then we must resist them.
We must obey God rather than men. Listen to John Gill on this statement concerning resistance. He says, this is not to be understood as if magistrates were above the laws and had a lawless power to do as they will without opposition. Now probably our minds are going to political leaders we're well aware of in our own generation and in our own day.
Remember that when Paul is writing Nero was the Caesar of Rome. Now admittedly Nero at this particular point wasn't as crazy as he would become. Paul wrote Romans at about the mid-fifties. It was about AD 64. that the Apostle Paul wrote 2 Timothy.
It was about that time that Nero had Paul executed by decapitation. Nero got bizarre, but in the mid-fifties there were men that hemmed him in. There were some wise advisors that kept him from doing the sorts of things that Nero would later go on to do. What kind of things?
Well, Nero would have garden parties and he would take Christians and he would light them on fire so that they would be the torches that would illumine the way for this particular party. Nero was a beastly man. In fact, John Fox in his Book of Martyrs refers to him as a beast. Nero was a wretch.
We need to understand that. Paul is telling us what is going on, but he is not living under a particularly excellent regime. He is not living under a particularly well-governed society. But he is telling us, however, that we need to, as far as we are able, to be subject to the civil authority.
So Gill says, this is not to be understood as if magistrates were above the laws and had a lawless power to do as they will without opposition, for they are under the law and liable to the penalty of it in case of disobedience as others. And when they make their own will a law, or exercise a lawless tyrannical power in defiance of the laws of God and of the land, to the endangering of the lives, liberties, and properties of subjects, they may be resisted." Again, that's the whole idea of revolution. That's a whole other sermon, a whole other topic, a whole other consideration. But for now, I just want you to understand, I am not advocating a blind, complete submission to the governing authorities.
The Bible says submit, but there are qualifications given within the text of Scripture themselves that indicate we must obey God rather than men. Now notice what he goes on to say. He tells them, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. Reason, verse 3.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good.
But if you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath, on him who practices evil." Now I want us to understand very specifically that what is in view in verse 3? It's a parallel. There's good works and evil works.
I realize it says good works and then it just says evil. And some have supposed that this would lead to that Orwellian nightmare I referred to this morning. You don't want to hear a knock on your door and open it up and have the RCMP there policing thought crime. You do not want them to say, I know that you've had evil thoughts, and I'm going to get you for that.
Now, the parallel, I think, is clear in the context. Good works, evil works. We do not want a magistrate policing the thoughts. God polices the thoughts.
And while we may entertain some wicked thoughts and pass by every civil magistrate on this side of high heaven, when we get before our God, He will deal with the sinful thoughts in our minds. We do not want magistrates necessarily punishing sin. We want them punishing crime. evil works, not evil thoughts or evil desires. Again, I'm not saying those are okay, but that is God's purview, that is God's responsibility.
God deals with the heart. We simply want the governing authorities to police those things that are external. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil works. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority?
Do what is good. Now, I think I can make this very simple, and I've used this illustration before. When I'm driving down the road and a policeman comes up behind me, I get nervous. I just do.
You know what the surefire antidote is? Obey the law, and you shouldn't have to get nervous. Right? That's Paul's point.
Do what you're supposed to do. Live in a manner that is consistent with God's Word, with the laws of the land, insofar as they are not commanding you to sin. Do what you're supposed to do. What does a Christian look like?
He does what he's supposed to do. Right? Why did the Christians ultimately find favor in the Roman Empire? I have the zany idea, probably, that the emperors, that the men in charge, saw that Christians were pretty easy to manage.
Christians paid their taxes. Christians did what they were supposed to do. Certainly we'll make it an accepted religion in that sort of an instance. Brethren, the point of the Apostle is very clear.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil works. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do it as good, and you will have praise from the same." Now, the praise from the same does not mean the police are going to take you into their office and give you coffee and donuts and say, you're a wonderful specimen of a human being. I think the praise from the same simply means they'll leave you alone.
Don't you feel praised from the government when they leave you alone? That's the kind of praise I'm looking for from the government. Leave me alone! I don't need coffee.
I don't need donuts. I don't need parades. I really don't. Just leave me alone." And insofar as you're doing what you're supposed to be doing, this is the praise that you will receive.
You'll be allowed to live your life. You'll be allowed to conduct yourself at work. You'll be able to go home at night and kiss your wife and deal with your kids and love them and play ball and do that for 40, 50, 60 years, and God will be pleased as well. Notice what he goes on to say.
Do what is good, you will have praise from the same. Verse four, for he is God's minister to you for good. We think that anarchy would be a good thing. No government.
We look at oppressive governments, oppressive regimes, and we say, what a terrible thing that would be. Brethren, I know total depravity. You get a bunch of people together, and probably they will not conduct themselves as they ought. That's my hunch.
That's my guess. I'm not saying that the sorts of evil and oppressive regimes that we have aren't necessarily good, but government in and of itself, just because we've seen abuses of it, does not mean that it is wrong, necessarily. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do, this is why I argue, evil works.
Not if you think evil, not if you have a lustful thought, but if you do evil, If you break the law, if you violate the civil order, if you engage in robbery, if you engage in perjury, if you engage in murder or rape or any other sort of thing, if you do evil, be afraid, for He does not bear the sword in vain, for He is God's minister and avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. It is necessary for the ordering of society that there be punishment in place for criminal offenders. Some argue that capital punishment or the death penalty is not a deterrent. I believe Paul over those some.
Paul tells us that if we do evil, we are to be afraid. You see, the problem today is men get away with all manner of crime because there's no punishment. Solomon spoke to this in Ecclesiastes chapter 8. You can look there.
Ecclesiastes chapter 8 verse 11. We see the necessity for punishment in the civil order, because if it is not inflicted, then men are given over to evil. Ecclesiastes 8.11, because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the hearts of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. You see, punishment is a necessary part of civil society.
As I've already mentioned, it is a deterrent. If you do evil, be afraid. You ought to be afraid of going out and committing murder. You ought to be afraid of going out and robbing a bank.
You ought to be afraid of going out and committing rape. You ought to be afraid, yes, because God is going to deal with you and cast you into the eternal lake of fire, But as well, there's a civil government that is going to try you legitimately, act on the basis of witnesses, make the determination, and then end your life. That ought to be something that promotes fear in the body politic so that we do not reduce ourselves to what we see in the book of Judges. What was the reality?
There was no king in Israel and everyone did what was right in their own eyes. and he wields the sword. He does not bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister. In the same way that Nebuchadnezzar was God's servant to execute judgment upon Judah, so is the civil government God's servant or minister to execute judgment on those criminal offenders in society. John Murray makes this comment with reference to the sword.
He says, the sword which the magistrate carries as the most significant part of his equipment is not merely the sign of his authority, but of his right to wield it in the infliction of that which a sword does. It can be wielded to execute punishment that falls short of death. But to exclude the right of the death penalty when the nature of the crime calls for such is totally contrary to that which the sword signifies and executes. So that's a biblical theology of the death penalty.
So somebody says, what did you study at church today on the sanctity of life Sunday? Oh, we studied the death penalty. Well, how could that be? Because the death penalty is an argument for the sanctity of life.
Because God so values his image bearers, he says if another image bearer comes along and murders them, by man that murderer's blood shall be shed. Why? For in the image of God, he made man. It is most certainly an argument for sanctity of life.
Biblical Objections Answered
Well, what are some common objections? We'll deal with these quickly. The first is Exodus 20.13 in the King James Bible. You shall not kill.
Some have taken that, believe it or not, and said, well, therefore, the death penalty is wrong. We've already tried to show Ratzah, that is used there, is a verb that contains the idea of premeditation. Murder is a better English translation. It speaks to malice of forethought.
It speaks to an intentional killing. It is not killing. Killing is authorized in these several instances that we have seen. Matthew 5, 38 to 42, I've already alluded to that.
Jesus there is dealing with personal ethics. Jesus there is a telling them not to engage in personal vengeance or personal retaliation. The passage jives with what we see in Romans 12, 17, and 18. This, Matthew 5, 38 to 42, is not a rule to never oppose wickedness personally.
It is not a rule to never oppose wickedness personally. Somebody slaps you. I know it says. Jesus says, turn the other cheek.
But there's instances where Jesus Himself does not do that. He is suggesting, not suggesting, He is commanding here. We're not to be like Pharisees. We're not to be vindictive or vengeful.
But the Bible never asserts that it's wrong to oppose wickedness personally. I hope you don't operate that way. I hope you have locks on your doors. I hope you have locks on your windows.
I hope if you hear that there's a rapist in your neighborhood, you don't invite him over for coffee. Of course you don't. We oppose wickedness personally. If the interpretation thrust onto this passage was legitimate, then get rid of your locks, get rid of your safes, get rid of your guns, get rid of everything, and just invite the riffraff over to murder, rape, pillage, and destroy everything that you have.
That is not what Jesus is telling us. Jesus does not contradict Exodus 22. Jesus does not contradict it. He upholds the place of self-defense.
He assumes that people will defend themselves. Again, this is in our daily personal ethics as we deal with one another. This obviously is not a universal rule to never oppose wickedness in the church. It's interesting, if we took the interpretation as it's proffered, we'd have to just watch as members of Christian churches engaged in all manner of wickedness.
Well, Jesus told us, turn the other cheek, we'll do whatever you want. That's not the case. Matthew 18, he tells us, we ought to exercise church discipline. And certainly, this is not a universal rule to never oppose wickedness in society.
Romans 12 19 just to remind you says beloved do not avenge yourselves but rather give place to wrath for it is written vengeance is mine I will repay says the Lord. Turretin on that passage and I think as well jiving with this one would say blameless protection is not prohibited in Romans 12 19 but private revenge that's the issue that both Jesus and the Apostle are telling us not to engage in.
John 8 and the Woman Taken in Adultery
Another passage that is an argument, a biblical argument, for the abolition of the death penalty is John 8. John chapter 8 verses 1 to 11. Basically it's the woman caught in adultery. That's what's going on in that particular instance.
It is the woman who was caught in adultery. It was indeed a capital offense according to Leviticus 20 and Deuteronomy 22. However, John alerts us to the reality that is going on in this particular passage. These religious leaders who bring this woman that was caught in the act, in the very act of adultery, they're not seeking justice.
They do not care one whit about justice. And the way that we know that is because John thankfully tells us so very clearly. Notice in verses 5 and 6. Now Moses in the law commanded us that such should be stoned.
But what do you say? This they said, testing him, that they might have something of which to accuse him. You see, what they want to do is to put Jesus on the horns of a dilemma. If Jesus says she ought to go free, He has denied Moses.
He has denied the Law of Moses. If Jesus says she ought to die, well then He's not the gracious, gentle, merciful Savior that everybody has been duped into thinking. You see, it is a legitimate dilemma they try to put Him in. It's interesting, though.
John tells us they weren't concerned with justice. This they said, they were testing Jesus. You know what's another great indicator that they weren't concerned about justice? Because they just brought the woman.
If the woman was caught in the very act Leviticus 20 and Deuteronomy 22 specifies it's not just the woman, it's the man. If they were so concerned about the law of Moses and the proper ordering of society, you would bring the adulteress and the adulterer. They don't care about this. Their whole intention, their whole design, their whole purpose behind this is to try to show Jesus as a mockery, as a fake, as a sham.
Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with his finger as though he did not hear the multitude of things that have been suggested that Jesus wrote here. It doesn't tell us, does it? It does not say. There's not one bit of evidence to indicate what he's writing there.
Some say, and I think I would favor this interpretation, it's almost as if to say, look, you're unimportant. kind of blowing them off, kind of showing that they are not legitimate. But then notice what Jesus does. Beautifully, he upholds the law of Moses and he shows himself as a merciful Savior. See, that's the way to deal with the horns of a dilemma.
You go right through it. How do I know that he upholds the law of Moses? Because he calls for witnesses. Doesn't the law of Moses demand two or three witnesses?
In a capital offense, he who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone. Now this doesn't mean there are sinless ones out there that can actually function as punishers of others. Probably what Jesus means is, let the one who is without this particular sin cast the first stone. Adultery was rife.
Adultery was prevalent. Sexual immorality was something that went on. This is further confirmed when we hear Jesus' instructions to the woman. When he says, go and sin no more, does Jesus actually think that she can be a sinless, perfect human being?
No, he means do not sin this sin anymore. In other words, repent from your adulterous behavior. Jesus upholds the law of Moses by demanding witnesses. But of course, none of these guys are going to pony up and be witnesses.
They are not going to do this because they're guilty of the self-same offense. So what happens? All these men draw back and there's Jesus alone with the woman. He's upheld the law and he exercises mercy and forgiveness.
Another way that we know that these men do not care about justice in society is because this isn't Jesus' job. He is not an ecclesiastical official. That means he doesn't hold office in the church. He's also not a political official.
He doesn't wield the sword in his earthly ministry. That is not his function. He is a carpenter who then is baptized into ministry to go and serve as the Messiah himself. But his particular task or calling is not to wield the sword in the execution of a criminal offender.
But Jesus upholds the law of Moses, and Jesus exercises grace and mercy to this woman.
Pragmatic Objections Answered
Now what are some pragmatic or practical? First, capital punishment is not consistent with the Christian's attitude of forgiveness. Then all forms of punishment are wrong. Because if we put somebody into prison for life, I just don't know how that's somehow better.
Wow, that's merciful. You know, it's interesting, in Old Covenant Israel, they didn't have state penitentiaries. They didn't have a prison system. You know what they had?
They had persons that stole, would sell themselves as slaves to the family that they stole from, so that they could work to pay back what they took from them. I don't know how anybody's ever thought that the Old Testament law is somehow barbaric. I think barbarism is taking a thief and putting him into a prison for many, many years so that he can be violated by other criminals. I just think in terms of bad, I'd rather be a slave in a covenant member's house serving and doing and paying back my debt to the person that I wronged.
Who's the target audience in terms of recompense today? Pay your debt to society. I didn't wrong society, I wronged the Smith family and I should only have to pay them back. I don't owe the states, I owe this man.
You start looking at biblical law and you'll start to understand, you know, God actually does have a better prescription for things. But the idea that capital punishment is not consistent with the Christian attitude of forgiveness. Somebody steals from me, I can forgive them and still want them to pay me back. I just don't get how that's inconsistent.
I don't see how that's wrong. If somebody murders my family, and they legitimately repent, and they turn to the Lord, and they're washed and cleansed and clothed in the righteousness of Christ, and they ask me to forgive them, I can forgive him and still stand by while he is executed for the crimes that he has committed. You say, well, that doesn't sound very nice of you, Pastor Butler. It is biblical.
It is justice. Niceness isn't necessarily Bible, brethren. We live where niceness is the overarching theme. Justice is preferable.
Judgment is preferable. Righteousness. Capital punishment is used on innocent people. Some of the literature suggests that blacks are far more likely to receive the death penalty than whites.
Now, we should certainly oppose innocent persons getting the death penalty. Absolutely! But again, the abuse of something doesn't mean we never seek to use it properly. Because there are persons out there that drink to the point of drunkenness, that does not mean we cannot use wine in our Lord's Supper service.
It's because some people use the internet for pornography doesn't mean you and I can't download sermons at sermonaudio.com. You see, the abuse of an instance or of a situation does not argue against the use of it. And interestingly enough, the Bible is clear that two to three witnesses are necessary for the prosecution of a capital crime. And that, if a perjurer makes this allegation and he is found out, then the perjurer dies.
Think about that for a moment. Deuteronomy 19 specifies this. If I go before the judges and I allege that Mike Kroll did this offense, And they hear the witnesses, they hear the evidence, they hear all of the data, and they realize that I have falsely maligned my brother. If I have made an allegation that is incorrect, then the punishment he would have received if he was guilty is given to me.
Now, I suggest that that will cut down on a whole lot of frivolous lawsuits. That will cut down on a whole lot of people thinking, well, I'm gonna show this guy, I'm gonna fix his situation. No, you need to realize that if you are found as a liar, then if death was the penalty, that's what you will get. And then, of course, in our society, DNA fingerprinting.
I mean, it's getting more and more easy to corroborate evidence with the sorts of technology that we have today. That's just not a good objection. Capital punishment does not deter crime. It certainly does.
If you've gone out and murdered ten people and the state executes you, you've been deterred! It's a beautiful thing. And you know what else? When these things were conducted in Old Covenant Israel, God says, all Israel shall hear and fear.
If we actually had a judiciary that was beating out proper punishments, I actually believe the deterrent factor would be much, much, much higher. And then finally, capital punishment will prohibit the salvation of the sinner. This is Pelagian or Arminian at best and ought not to be entertained by any serious student of Holy Scripture. If God has determined, if God has purpose to save His elect, even if one of them has to go out and get sentenced to die by the state.
God will save him on the way to the end there. Save him on the green mile. Isn't it interesting? Who's the only person that can come and speak to a condemned man at the end?
It's not his wife, it's not his kids, it's his minister. This idea that will prohibit persons has this thought that God has purpose to save a person that he can't save. This is not a good objection. This is not a good statement.
The Death Penalty and the Church
In conclusion, the death penalty and the church. I absolutely believe that the inspiration, the infallibility, the inerrancy of scripture are at stake in this unfortunate debate. Why Christians would ever, ever think that the death penalty is somehow unbiblical is still beyond me. I just don't understand it.
I don't know how you escape the implications of Genesis 9. and Romans 13. I don't see how anyone can see the Apostle Paul saying, if I have done anything worthy of death, I do not refuse to die. I don't know how anybody can get over these particular things. And if we compromise on this area, we are saying that there is a problem in the Word of the Living God.
Robert Haldane makes this commentary on Romans 13. This refutes the opinion of those who think that it is sinful, nay that it is murder, to put criminals to death. God here sanctions the practice. And if it is right in the civil magistrate to punish with death the violators of the fundamental laws of society, It is right in Christians to countenance and cooperate with the magistrate in effecting such punishments.
Now this may sound particularly ghoulish, but a Christian could serve in this very capacity. Mennonites are rolling around all over in this town. Pacifists are going nuts if they would hear what I'm saying here. Oh, you can't be part of the magistrate.
Yes, you can. As long as you're godly and faithful and you carry out your role accurately. If God sanctions the practice, it's not wrong to participate in it as a lawfully ordained civil governor. And then he makes this statement, and it was a connection I had never thought of, so I'm thankful to Haldane.
He says the same truth is taught by our Lord when he says, remember Jesus before Pilate, are you then a king? For this reason I was born, Jesus says. But my kingdom is not of this world. If it was, then my servants would fight.
What does Jesus indicate there? Of course, his kingdom does not originate from this world. It is from heaven. But if it did originate from this world, then would my servants fight?
Jesus sanctions fighting servants in kingdoms on the earth. He doesn't say it's bad, it's wrong, it's horrible, never ever take up the sword. No, Jesus assumes that in ethics or political ethics in this world, sometimes it's necessary. Haldane, I think, is brilliant to make this connection.
The same truth is taught by our Lord when He says, My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews. He says, This intimates that worldly power may be maintained by arms, and that it is lawful to use them for this purpose. So as far as the church is concerned, again, we need to think God's thoughts after him.
The death penalty and the magistrate, Gordon Clark, said God gave the right of capital punishment to human governments. He intended it to be used wisely and justly, but he intended it to be used. Abolition of the death penalty presupposes the faulty or the falsity of Christian principles. That good Puritan Thomas Watson made this observation, to kill an offender is not murder but justice.
A private person sins if he draws the sword. A public person sins if he puts up the sword. A magistrate ought not to let the sword of justice rust in the scabbard. And finally, if you are an unbeliever, you need to understand that God has instituted civil government to execute criminal offenders.
This is a foretaste or a down payment of what's going to happen in the age to come. And as I mentioned earlier, the state is concerned with evil works. God looks at the evil thoughts, God looks at the intents, God looks at everything, He weighs it, and you will ultimately give an account before Him. The only hope for salvation, the only hope for refuge, the only hope for safety and protection is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. and you shall be saved." Well, let us pray.
Closing Prayer
Our Father, we thank you for your word and its clarity, and we ask God that you would help us to receive from these things encouragement in terms of prayer, in terms of church life, help us as private individuals not to be vindictive or to seek retaliation or vengeance, but to give place to wrath, to realize that ultimately, God, you are in sovereign control and that there is a day of recompense coming. We also pray for the civil government, for the magistrates, those who are in authority. Our heart's desire is that they would function in the way designed by God, that they would do what they are called to do, what they are commanded to do. And we pray these things through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen. We'll close with a brief time of meditation.