What Is Written 14-Feb-99: A Time to Kill

I don’t know if many of you saw the article in last Sunday’s Indianapolis Star written by Dennis Sasso, a Jewish Rabbi in Indianapolis. Mr. Sasso wrote opposing the death penalty in a column called “Focus on Faith.” He supports Senate bill 298, which proposes to abolish the death penalty in Indiana. He rounded up all the usual liberal arguments in an effort to support his opposition to the death penalty. I am not so much concerned with his ad hoc arguments as I am with his attitude toward the word of God. With a sweep of his pen he rejected the Bible as having any say on the subject. He said, “We see the Bible not as a static point in time but as part of a continuum of tradition.” This means that the Bible is not the fixed standard when it comes to addressing the problem of crime and punishment. I cannot do what this Rabbi did and just offhandedly dismiss the Bible as a divine standard when it comes to a discussion of the death penalty. This is because the Bible provides for us “all things that pertain to life and godliness,” (2 Pet. 1:3). This includes instructions on how to treat those who do not do what is right. When politicians and criminologists and the so-called clergy begin to discuss the crime problem, the one thing you never hear them discuss is what God has to say about crime and punishment. Mr. Sasso said in his article, “I believe it is morally wrong to continue the cycle of killing that execution by the state represents.” This is a sentiment expressed by many professed Bible believers. Yet the Bible says in Eccl. 3:3 that there is “a time to kill.” Is it morally wrong to do what God says is to be done when it comes to the matter of capital punishment? The scriptures say there is a time to kill. Is it morally reprehensible to believe and respect this statement from God? What is morally reprehensible is to behave as if we know more than God knows about the way to punish those who prey upon society and commit murder.

Do you recognize these names? Ed Gein was arrested in 1957 and it was determined that he murdered 15 women. Albert DeSalvo was the Boston Strangler. He murdered 14 women before his arrest in 1964. All, I’m sure, know who Charles Manson is. He claims to have murdered 35 people. David Berkowitz, known as the Son of Sam, he was convicted of seven murders after his arrest in August 1977. Ted Bundy, who died in the electric chair ten years ago murdered 11 people. John Wayne Gacy confessed to torture and murder of more than 30 victims. Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker, is credited with at least 14 murders. He was arrested in 1985 and died in the gas chamber. Jeffery Dahmer confessed to 17 murders after his arrest in 1991. Is it morally wrong to have these predators pay with their lives for the murders they committed? It would be, if God had not given us his law concerning crimes of this nature.

What is the biblical penalty for murder? To answer this let’s read from Gen. 9:5-6. “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God he made man.” This tells us that God esteems human life to be very valuable. We’re told that human life is made in the image of God. Therefore, any man-killing animal is to be destroyed, and every man-killing human is to be put to death as well. “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God he made man.” Yes whenever a man or woman takes an innocent life that person has forfeited his or her right to live. In the words of Solomon in Eccl. 3:3 it is “a time to kill.” The passage in Genesis makes it clear. Capital punishment, the taking of the perpetrator’s life, is what God demands for the murder of a human being by man or beast.

These sanctimonious men and women who presume to speak for God had better learn to remain silent. Throughout the Law of Moses — what we commonly refer to as the Old Testament — God had ordained capital punishment for an assortment of crimes. According to some, this would make God cruel and unusual in his handling of men and women who commit outrages. Consider some of what God has said about capital punishment. Exod. 21:15 says, “And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” Abuse of a parent meant death for the abuser. Exod. 21:16 continues, “He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.” A kidnapper was to suffer the ultimate penalty of death. The next verse (Exod. 21:17) says, “And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” An offspring who cursed a parent was also to be killed. Now, if you have a problem with what God said, your argument is with him. I am only relating to you what the Law of Moses contained. Add to these crimes the sin of killing an unborn infant in Exod. 21:22–25, witchcraft in Exod. 22:18, and the worship of other gods or goddesses in Exod. 22:20. Exod. 35:2 tells us that even working on the Sabbath was a capital offense. Adultery was punishable by death, according to Lev. 20:10. The disgraceful man who committed the sin of incest was to be put to death, according to Lev. 20:11–12, and 14. Homosexuality, bestiality, falsely prophesying, and rape were all punishable by death. For those who lived under the Law of Moses, carrying out God’s demands was not irresponsible.

There can be no denying that the Old Testament beginning in Gen. 9 teaches capital punishment. It began by demanding it for murder and expanded its application under the Law given to Moses to other crimes. Therefore, the principle of capital punishment is well established. But what does the New Testament say about capital punishment? If we listen to Pope John Paul II, we would be led to believe that Christ and his word oppose the death penalty. Often, the most severe critics of the death penalty are those among the so-called clergy. These men who say they oppose the death penalty in the name of Christ have, frankly, never consulted the New Testament of Christ to know what Jesus actually had to say about the death penalty. Capital punishment was the rule of law when Jesus lived. Caiaphas, who was the Jewish high priest made this confession in Jn. 11:49–50: “You know nothing at all, nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” Caiaphas was referring to the death of Jesus on the cross at the hands of the Roman authorities carrying out the death penalty. This wasn’t just idle talk by Caiaphas. Verse 51 says, “Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation.” This high priest knew that not only the Law of Moses authorized the death penalty, but he also knew what was best for his countrymen. For his part, while Christ lived, he never condemned capital punishment. In fact capital punishment was unjustly carried out against him. The sin against Christ was not the use of capital punishment. Instead it was that an innocent man was condemned and executed. If Jesus opposed the death penalty on religious or biblical grounds, he had ample opportunity to speak out on the topic, but he said nothing. To the contrary, when Jesus was on trial before Pilate he was reminded by this Roman governor in Jn. 19:10, “Do you not know that I have power to crucify you, and power to release you?” Look carefully at what Pilate is claiming. He is claiming that, as an instrument of the state, he had the authority to carry out the death penalty upon criminals. If the death penalty was wrong, and if it was inhumane, and if it violated the laws of God and man, this would have been the ideal time for Jesus to speak out against it. Yet, he did not. Instead he told Pilate that his authority to condemn criminals to death was granted to him by God. Verse 11 says that Jesus answered, “You could have no power at all against me unless it had been given you from above.” I would urge Mr. Sasso, the local Rabbi who opposed the death penalty in his article in last Sunday’s Indianapolis Star, to deal with Jesus’ response. Jesus, the ultimate Rabbi, said that God authorizes the state to carry out the penalty of death. Jesus told Pilate, “You could have no power at all against me unless it had been given you from above.” Yet in his article, Mr. Sasso writes, “Two distinguished second century leaders, Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiba, taught: ‘Had we been members of the Sanhedrin, no person would have ever been executed.’” I doubt that this will persuade anyone who so cavalierly rejects the authority of scripture by stating that it is just a flexible tradition. But for those of you who — like me — regard the Bible as the inerrant word of God, this is a persuasive argument. Jesus told Pilate that God granted the right of the state to put criminals to death.

Yes in the words of Solomon, there is a time to kill. Even the thieves being put to death with Jesus understood that they deserved their fate. In Lk. 23:40–41, the penitent thief said this to the thief who mocked and reviled Jesus: “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” This man understood that the state (Rome in this case) has the right to put these two men to death. Jesus heard what this man said and if the man was incorrect, Jesus had adequate time to correct him. Christ could have said to the repentant thief, “It does not matter what you have done, capital punishment is wrong. It should be done away with.” Guess what? He did not say that when he had a golden opportunity to do so. He was silent when the man said “we indeed justly” deserve our death on this cross. Did Jesus allow a lie to be perpetrated or did his silence lend credence to what the man said? I believe that Jesus would never allow a lie to go uncorrected. Instead the truth was spoken and the silence of Jesus acknowledges that truth.

“Well,” someone might say, “what about the incident in Jn. 8 of the woman being taken in adultery? Didn’t Jesus forbid capital punishment in that passage?” I believe that Jn. 8:1–11 does shed a great deal of light on the issue of capital punishment, but not in the way the opponents of the death penalty would like. I’m sure that this audience knows the account of this chapter. This is the passage where a woman has been discovered committing adultery. While Jesus was teaching in the courtyard of the temple, “The scribes and Pharisees brought to him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said to him, teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act” (Jn. 8:3–4). This was a Pharisee’s sting operation intending to trap Jesus and was not at all interested in the rule of law. It was designed to trap Christ and make him reject the law God had given to Moses or the Roman law of the day. Verse 6 makes their intentions plain: “This they said, testing him, that they might have something of which to accuse him.” Christ, however, did not violate the Law of Moses and neither did he repudiate the death penalty. The Law of Moses stated in Lev. 20:10, “The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death.” Many opponents of the death penalty think they see Jesus debunking capital punishment when he said to the woman in verse 11, “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” Anyone who can read the Old Testament can understand that adultery was punishable by death. But a requirement before it could be carried out was that there be witnesses. Num. 35:30 says, “One witness is not sufficient testimony against a person for the death penalty.” Christ did recognize a setup when he saw one. Verse 7 says, “So when they continued asking him, he raised himself up and said to them, he who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” This is hardly a rejection of capital punishment. He acknowledges that death was the suitable punishment. He did not say to them, “Wait a minute, where do you get off trying to put this woman to death?” Jesus did not say to them, “Why, you know the Bible does not authorize this cruel and unusual punishment upon this woman.” Instead of making the usual arguments we hear from opponents today, Jesus said, “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first.” Jesus was telling them that if this trial is just and the witnesses are willing to come forth, then carry it out. As hard as it might be for us to accept, Jesus did approve of capital punishment. In the instance of this woman’s adultery if the witnesses were there and willing to throw the first stones, then it would have, in the words of Solomon, been a time to kill.

Furthermore, Peter writes in 1 Pet. 2:13–14 telling Christians to “submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.” Those who have not closed their minds to the teaching of God can easily recognize that one duty of civil government (the state) is the punishment of evildoers. And this punishment is — as we’ve already noted — to include death when warranted. Paul wrote in Rom. 13:4, “For he [he is used here to depict the government] is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he [the civil authorities] does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.” This passage tells us that the state is to punish evildoers with the sword. The government is to use the sword to execute wrath. And, I’ll tell you what the state in Paul’s day did not use the sword to spank a murderer. It was used to sever the head. This is the root meaning of capital punishment. The 1899 edition of Webster’s International Dictionary says that capital punishment is having reference to, or involving the head or life hence punishable by death. This definition gives us an idea of the origin capital punishment. The word capital means head. Historically, a common means of carrying out the death penalty was to sever the head from the body. Such was the case with John the Baptist. Matt. 14:10 says that Herod “sent and had John beheaded in prison.” Also, in Acts 12:2, Herod “killed James the brother of John with the sword.” This was the use of the sword to execute wrath. When Paul wrote in Rom. 13:4 that civil government “is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil,” it wasn’t just an debate in theology. He believed it so strongly that when he was arrested and on trial for teaching that Jesus is the Christ, he said this in Acts 25:11: “For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying.” He did not argue that the death penalty was wrong. He did not say that it was cruel and unusual punishment. Paul did not say that it continued a cycle of killing and was contrary to the spirit of scripture and the nature of God. He simply said that if he was a criminal deserving of death, then the state had the scriptural right to carry out the sentence.

Rather than having such a conviction today, opponents of the death penalty, such as Mr. Sasso, become emotionally involved with the criminals on death row. Often a news magazine show like 20/20 or Dateline NBC will air programs sympathetic to a murderer. His race or his IQ or his deprived childhood or his economic status is brought up to garner sympathy. Often a murderer is dressed up in a suit and comes into court carrying a Bible, and suddenly he becomes the victim instead of a cold heartless murderer unfit to continue living in society. God has cautioned us that when one is deserving of death that “you shall not consent to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him or conceal him; but you shall surely kill him” (Deut. 13:8–9). As I heard someone say recently in quoting an Italian proverb, “You can dress the shepherd in silk and he still smells of the goat.” The murderer can be forgiven by the victim’s family and even by God and still be deserving of death. Nothing is able to change what is said in Gen. 9:6: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God he made man.”

Often we are told that we should abolish the death penalty because it does not deter crime. The death penalty was not designed by God to deter crime. Therefore, this is a hollow argument. And even if it did not deter crime, putting a murderer to death will ensure that he will never kill again. Ted Bundy will never commit another murder of a college coed. His execution deterred his ability to kill again. However, the opponents of capital punishment are wrong in their contention that it is not a deterrent to crime. In 1985, economist Stephen K. Layson at the University of North Carolina published a study showing that every execution of a murderer deters, on average, 18 murders. The study also showed that raising the number of death sentences by one percent would prevent 105 murders. But the sad truth is that only 38 percent of all murder cases result in a death sentence, and of those, only 0.1 percent are actually executed. This is why we are told that reinstitution of the death penalty does not deter crime. Only one tenth of one percent of murderers are actually executed. On occasion, circumstances have led to meaningful statistical evaluations of the death penalty’s deterrent effect. In Utah, for example, there have been five executions since the Supreme Court allowed executions to resume in 1976. On January 17, 1977, Gary Gilmore faced a firing squad at the Utah State Prison. There had been 55 murders in that state during 1976. During 1977, in the wake of the Gilmore execution, there were 44 murders, a 20 percent decrease. A decade later, on August 28, 1987, Pierre Dale Shelby, who in 1974 forced five people to drink liquid drain cleaner, kicked a ballpoint pen into the ear of one, then killed three, was executed. The count for January through August was 38 murders, a monthly average of 4.75. In the aftermath of the Shelby execution, there were 16 through the months of September to December, a monthly average of 4.0. That’s a drop of almost one full percent. Arthur Gary Bishop, who sodomized and killed a number of young boys, was executed on June 10, 1988. For all of 1988, there were 47 murders. During January through June, there were 26; for July through December, the tally was 21, a 19 percent difference. In the wake of those three Utah executions, there have been notable decreases in both the number and the rate of murders within the state. The figures are there, but enemies of the death penalty have chosen to ignore them. During the temporary suspension on capital punishment from 1972–1976, researchers gathered murder statistics across the country. Researcher Karl Spence of Texas A&M came up with the following statistics: In 1960, there were 56 executions in the U.S. and 9,140 murders. By 1964, when there were only 15 executions, while the number of murders had risen to 9,250. In 1969, there were no executions and 14,590 murders. In 1975, after six more years without executions, 20,510 murders occurred. So the number of murders grew as the number of executions shrank.

Even if the statistics did not show that it is a deterrent to crime, the death penalty is a mandate from God on how to punish a murderer. Some say they oppose the death penalty because it is unfairly applied. I do not deny that those who can afford the best defense attorneys stand a better chance of not being put to death, or even convicted. Consider Ted Kennedy and O.J. Simpson. Neither race nor gender should ever determine who is or is not put to death for murder. These are the facts. During 1997 — the latest figures I have — 74 people in 17 states were executed. 37 were in Texas; nine in Virginia; six in Missouri; four in Arkansas; three in Alabama; two each in Arizona, Illinois, and South Carolina; and one each in Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Oregon. All of those executed were men. 45 were white, 27 were black, one was American Indian, and one was Asian. If the death penalty is applied in a discriminatory manner then that needs fixing. The death penalty is not to blame. Those who administer it are to blame. Correct the injustice and begin to administer it to those worthy of being put to death.

Whenever someone takes the innocent life of another human being, the penalty is death. In the words of Solomon, it is a time to kill. I leave you with the unchangeable world of God in Gen. 9:6: “Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God he made man.”