← Back to sermon library

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. 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 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. 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. 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 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 
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. 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.