religious view of the death penalty?

Great Debates
1

I am new to SDMB, please excuse me if this thread is inappropriate. I did not feel qualified to interject my opinion into any of the long running debates. The following question is sincere and made with respect to all faiths and those who profess no particular faith.

I am in the legal profession and the question of the death penalty confronts me on a regular basis. Let me first say that on an emotional basis if I was to confront a person who had murdered a person dear to me I doubt I would hesitate in delivering them to their maker, hell or oblivion whatever the case may be. However if asked my opinion as an unbiased observer I would have to say that I believe the collective State should be superior to me, and withhold dispensing justice on an emotional eye for an eye basis.

However, my question to this forum is not one concerning the absolute “Justice” of the death penalty in general, but rather it is directed at those who profess belief in the Christian Bible (KJV). I have seen many Christian groups actively support the implementation of the death penalty. While I do disagree philosophically, I do not dispute there freedom to promote their particular beliefs.

My question is this, if the Bible states categorically that vengeance belongs to the Lord, how can any Christian support the death penalty? It seems to me that according to the language of the Bible there is a distinct difference between punishment and vengeance. I fail to see any aspect of punishment in the death penalty. Punishment is a means of altering behavior but killing is merely extracting revenge. In other words as I see it, punishment is permissible according to scripture up to the point of execution.

I am neither an advocate of the death penalty nor a particularly strong opponent, while I do not support it, I have done nothing to abolish it. I am however interested in the arguments of those who maintain religious beliefs while supporting the imposition of the death penalty.

2

The Bible also states categorically that there are a number of things (crimes/sins) for which the appropriate punishment is execution - here in Exodus 21 has death meted out as the punishement for killing another, while Chapter 31 lists it as the punishement for non-observance of the Sabbath and so on…

I would agree that the motivation for the death penalty is often vengeance rather than punishment and it is ironic that many of those who call loudest for the death penalty are the same people who would label themselves as “pro-life”. But there you go … “there’s nowt so queer as folk” as they say … no wonder Christians are accused of cherry-picking…

Welcome to the SDMB by the way!! :smiley:

Grim

3

First of all thanks for the welcome, you are the first. I was beginning to think folks around these parts a tad unsocialble.

Secondly, although I do not claim membership in any Christian sect, I have read the Bible. I believe the passage you reffered to was (well actually I know it was) in the Old Testement. Which Jesus expressly rejected in the New Testament when he said “I bring a new Law” he further disavowed the Laws of the Old Testement, which is precisely where Christianity diverged from Judiasm. So I do not think any reference to the Old Testement can refute my thesis. If I am wrong please instruct me.

4

Because the Old Testament (directly) and the New Testament (by implication) established the death penalty.

Note that this is not part of the Jewish civil code, but is established with Noah as a sort of general principle.

The distinction I think you are drawing between “punishment” and “vengeance” is different from the thinking of the Bible. “Vengeance” was private - the sort of blood feud between families that operates on a personal level. “Punishment” was seen as the just imposition of what God’s will was for the wrong-doer.

This idea of the state carrying out God’s will by imposing the death penalty and other punishments is mentioned most clearly in Romans 13:1-7, where Paul says explicitly that the state is put in place to carry out God’s will by maintaining public order. Providing the state does not attempt to force the believer to sin against God, Christians are expected to obey the law, pay taxes, and generally act as good citizens.

Some Christian groups oppose the death penalty. Others support it. My own denomination (the ELCA) officially opposes it. I do not, but it is considered an opinion that the individual member is free to agree with or not, according to his individual conscience. So I disagree, as I do with many of their political beliefs.

Regards,
Shodan

5

Thank you for you response, but as I said before I am under the impression that reference to the old tetement is, despite how often it is done, innapropriate. At least for Christians.

As to your quote by Paul (Who was Saul the most ardent persecuter of the followers of Christ, then the most ardent critic of the Jews) As you stated “providing it does not force the believer to sin against God”, my question was that if God says vengeance belongs to Him, and executing someone is no more than vengeance, since it can hardly be classified as a punishment, isn’t it sinning against god to execute someone? All executions in the old Testement aside. For in the New Testement Jesus said"Let him who is whithout sin cast the first stone!".

6

The death penalty for murder & violent crime is part of the Noahic Law- in Judaic thought, all peoples are subject to this law. Genesis 9:6- 6. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. The Mosaic Law, on the other hand, with its dealth penalty for various religious & sexual offenses does not apply to any people except Israel, and according to Jewish thought, only when a valid Sanhedrin is in session.

Old Testament Law did not allow vengeange, the vigilante settling of personal or legal grievances (Leviticus 19:18). The Blood Avenger/City of Refuge laws regulated the extent to which a family can hold someone accountable for manslaughter of a family member (Numbers 35).

7

The Catholic Church opposes capital punishment in all cases.

8

Well, it was Paul who makes the quote, “Vengeance is mine” (Romans 12:19), so it may not be consistent to take Paul as authoritative when he establishes vengeance as the prerogative of God, and then disregard him when he establishes punishment as the duty of the state. If you see what I mean.

But as to the rest of your post, I wouldn’t say that execution is vengeance rather than punishment, or that support for the death penalty is a sin against God forced on us by the state. Since the principle underlying the death penalty was established in Genesis 9:6 and not as part of the Jewish ceremonial law, which (as you mentioned) Jesus fulfilled (Matthew 5:17-19) and therefore is no longer applicable, it has not been established as being sinful. The moral aspect of the “law and the prophets” is still in force, and so it is appropriate for the state to carry out executions as the due consequence of the shedding of human blood.

Jesus was crucified between two thieves. One railed at him. The other repented and said that it was clear that in being executed, the thieves were getting what they deserved. And it was the second thief who Jesus promised would be with Him in Paradise. Jesus made no mention whatever that the death penalty was unjust in and of itself. Just the opposite, in fact - the only one who Jesus promised salvation to was the one who admitted that it was justified.

Obviously, you can make too much of this passage (Luke 23:39-43). But there is no hint that Jesus felt the death penalty to be at all a matter of sin against God.

Regards,
Shodan

PS - a belated welcome to the boards.

9

I do not want to turn this into a competition of quoting Chapter and verse. I think it is sufficient if we refer to well known principles as we understand them. If I am wrong I welcome anyone to show me the error of my ways.

It is my understanding that Jesus tought that the Last shall be First. He spent his time not with the righteious but with the sinners, the publicans, and the whores. He said that that the “Golden Rule” was Love God and your fellow man as you love yourself. He said “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” He said “Let him who has not sinned cast the first stone”. I cannot recall a single instance where Jesus advocated the execution of anyone or even indicated that it was acceptable.

10

See above for an example from Luke. Also see Matthew 22:7, Mark 12:9, and Luke 20:16.

If you don’t want to cite chapter and verse, how are you going to establish what are the “well known principles” that Jesus teaches?

It is my opinion that the death penalty does not conflict with the principle established by Jesus that we should “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” - taxes, obedience to the laws, and so forth. This is opinion rather than doctrine, and not a “salvation issue”. Other Christians disagree with me, as I mentioned. That’s OK, and it doesn’t mean that they are wrong. Nor does it mean that I am - just that we disagree.

It is a matter of opinion and of emphasis, as most such disagreements are.

Regards,
Shodan

11

Parts of what you say are indeed true, but I think you miss the point when you extrapolate from that. In our inter-personal relations, we are to be forgiving of everyone and turn the other cheek. However, it’s impossible to run a government under these strictures. No punishment would be permissible if we (represented by the government) were to turn the other cheek and forgive a thief. How I read Jesus’s commands is that if someone breaks into my house, as a Christian I am to forgive him. The government, however, is free to deal with that person according to its laws.

You seem to accept that some punishments are OK, but arbitrarily draw the line at the death penalty. Why? Depriving someone of their freedom (when the government puts them in jail) or their property (when the government fines someone or confiscates their goods) would be sinful if an individual did it, right? And so would me killing my neighbor because he killed my kid. So if we accept all three instances would be sinful if an individual did it, why are you willing to say that Jesus’s teachings only ban the last example? If the government truly were to follow Jesus’s teachings, as you suggest it should with the death penalty, then why not follow His teachings on theft?

The way I read it, Jesus’s teachings only apply to individuals. They aren’t a code of law or they aren’t precepts governments must follow. The regulate our inter-pesonal relationships and tell believers how to live. They are not there to order our society.

12

I believe the Mormon Church states that in order for a murderer to be forgiven by God for the murder, he must endure “blood atonement” i.e. put to death.

13

I have attempted to suggest that there is a difference between punishment, which serves the purpose of correcting an individuals behavior, and execution which serves no function other than exacting vengence. Can anyone argue that execution serves another NON PRAGMATIC function?

I have not suggested that governments may not punish according to their laws, but that since governments are ultimately just a manifestation of our collective will that it is no more entitled to usurp that which the Bible claims to be the sole province of God, that is exacting vengence, than any individual might.

I would suggest that appropriate responses to my question be limited to arguing that execution is not merely vengence, but that it serves some punitive purpose. I suggest you consider that my argument is more semantic than moral.

14

I believe the following are example of capital punishment, not for vengeance, but to keep people from breaking God’s law.

The last example specifies that the reason deaths are to keep wickedness away from you, obviously not a form of vengeance.

Yeah yeah, I know, these are examles from the OT. Can you point out specifically where Jesus rejects the OT?

15

false

16

Emark, although I do not know enough about those wacky LDS, I must point out that your cite is not dispositive of the alegation you are attempting to refute.

X-ray Here is one example of Jesus disavowing the old laws:

Old Testament" 'Observe the Sabbath, because it is holy to you. Anyone who desecrates it must be put to death; whoever does any work on that day must be cut off from his people. Exodus 31:14, NIV

New Testament “He said to them, “If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.” Matthew 12:11-12, NIV
You don’t really want me to look up each instance do you? I mean it is there in writing you can look it up as well as I.

17

Non-pragmatic? Why is that morally relevant?

Execution certainly corrects behavior, in that those who are executed are prevented from repeating their crimes. Is that the sort of thing you are asking for?

Execution serves for more than vengeance, if that is your assertion. It prevents future bad acts, as above, and serves as a demonstration of the seriousness with which we treat crimes against innocent human life. I guess the last would be an example of a non-pragmatic function of execution.

It is exactly because government acts as an instrument of the collective will that it is legitimate for the state to execute. By acting on behalf of the group, and in furtherance of a disinterested justice, execution removes the element of personal revenge and becomes an act of justice rather than vengeance.

Murder is considered an act against the People, not simply against the victim. The state, acting on behalf of and in accordance with the will of the People, acts against the murderer. Thus it acts in defence of the divinely ordained public order, in the Christian view. Therefore acts like imprisonment, which would be morally equivalent to kidnapping for a private individual, become licit when engaged in by the state in order to defend the public order.

Executions are, in this sense, a defence of the innocent, who are to be protected by the public order. Even those not personally affected by the murder participate in the public system of order, and are therefore acting disinterestedly by enforcing it against murderers.

I can’t see how you can argue that execution is not a punishment. Thus even your semantic argument doesn’t hold merit.

And if you are not arguing that it is immoral for Christians to support the death penalty, what are you arguing? If executions are a usurpation of God’s perogative of “vengeance”, then by Christian definition they are immoral. If they are a legitimate expression of an established role of government, then they are moral, and semantic arguments are meaningless.

I may not be understanding you. Feel free to clarify, or to correct me where I misunderstand.

Regards,
Shodan

18

I feel that an entire people could be in violation of the dictates of Christ, that is to the extent they profess belief in his teachings. The mere fact that an act is sanctioned by earthly government does not mean that it is just. No more than a government that conducted the Holocaust was immune from His teachings. A law that violates the teachings of Christ condemns the vary people that tolerate the law.

Please, do not misunderstand, I am niether a Christian nor do I adhere to Christian doctrine. My original question was an attempt to understand how those who advocate Christian beliefs could reconcile their support of the death penalty with the teachings expressed in THEIR bible. I ask this with the understanding (possibly mistaken) that no major Christian organization supports the death penalty. I was wondering how those who claim allegience to these organizations can ignore the position of the leaders of their own faiths. I was not attempting to argue that the death penalty was wrong per se.

Sincerely,
Askeptic

19

I don’t believe you provided a reasonable argument that Jesus disavowed the old laws. Saying it is lawful to do good deeds is not the same as saying it is ok to work, ie, make money.

Even if your example were a reasonable argument, it would only be an example of Jesus throwing out one of the OT laws, not all of them.

In your OP you ask, “My question is this, if the Bible states categorically that vengeance belongs to the Lord, how can any Christian support the death penalty?” As grimpixie has already stated, “The Bible also states categorically that there are a number of things (crimes/sins) for which the appropriate punishment is execution”. Your argument to that is that all the OT laws have been disavowed. Well, the burden of proof for that is on you.

20

Is it permissable for a person who starts a topic to acknowledge that continuing the topic would be simply obstinant. That while not conceding invalidity of his original idea nevertheless concedes his inability to adequately convey said ideas? While respecting all those who have so graciously attempted to enlighten the topic starter, and admitting grattitude to all who have responded? Is this allowed? :confused: