What He Specifically Commands

This is part ② of terrette's death penalty discussion.

Beth: I found this essay by Kerby Anderson and some others on a quick search. The Anderson essay made the most sense to me.

[Note: this piece, "Capital Punishment," by the minister Kerby Anderson, argues that the Bible supports the death penalty. The article is quoted in the letters that follow.]

The death penalty is an expression of the value of human life. The state does not 'murder' the one guilty of murder. The criminal gives up his/her own right to life when he commits the crime.

The author used Old Testament references to God taking life. I don't see this as on par with man taking life. He gives life; he can take it. We have to take our direction from that which He specifically commands for us.

I thought the distinction between the theocratic principle regarding the value of life, and the later need for 'law' was helpful. Here it is in Anderson's words (mine are coming out a bit foggy):

Within this Old Testament theocracy, capital punishment was extended beyond murder to cover various offenses. While the death penalty for these offenses was limited to this particular dispensation of revelation, notice that the principle in Genesis 9:6 is not tied to the theocracy. Instead, the principle of Lex Talionis (a life for a life) is tied to the creation order. Capital punishment is warranted due to the sanctity of life. Even before we turn to the New Testament, we find this universally binding principle that precedes the Old Testament law code.

What did you think?

Did you see the news on the lady from Florida that was executed? Apparently it was her desire to get the execution over with. She knew she was guilty, felt that if released she would kill again, and didn't want to cost taxpayers any more money, or the families any more heart ache. I have the direct quote from her if you are interested.




terrette: Allow me to begin by quoting your letter in a few different spots and interjecting comments:

The Anderson essay made the most sense to me. The death penalty is an expression of the value of human life. The state does not 'murder' the one guilty of murder. The criminal gives up his/her own right to life when he commits the crime.

The questions I have with respect to these statements of yours are: how does the state's destroying the bodies of criminals increase the value of human life? What justifies the state's assuming absolute authority in the question of who should live and who should die? Why is the "right to life" administered, controlled, and, most pertinently, withdrawn by government officials? What are the consequences of entrusting state apparatuses with the capacity to destroy the bodies of citizens? And, most generally, why is it fair and just that the United States remains the only so-called Western democracy that practices the death penalty?

Both authors used Old Testament references to God taking life. I don't see this as on par with man taking life. He gives life; he can take it.

If that is the case, the question posed above becomes even more pertinent: why entrust the state with a power that you see as belonging to God alone?

We have to take our direction from that which He specifically commands for us.

Did God ever command for us to destroy the bodies of our fellow citizens?

It is interesting to note the wide and truly outrageous types of "crimes" that were deemed punishable by death in the Biblical passages discussed by Anderson, of which I recall, at the moment, fortune-telling (cf. Lev. 20:27). I thought it was significant that Anderson did not on principle reject this wide-ranging list of brutal punishments but only vaguely distanced himself from "particulars." In any case, the Old Testament prohibitions whose transgression merited death by a sovereign power are interesting in that they remind us of how arbitrary the criteria and application of the death penalty can be, depending on cultural and period preferences.

I thought the distinction between the theocratic principle regarding the value of life, and the later need for 'law' was helpful. Here it is in Anderson's words (mine are coming out a bit foggy):

"Within this Old Testament theocracy, capital punishment was extended beyond murder to cover various offenses. While the death penalty for these offenses was limited to this particular dispensation of revelation, notice that the principle in Genesis 9:6 is not tied to the theocracy. Instead, the principle of Lex Talionis (a life for a life) is tied to the creation order. Capital punishment is warranted due to the sanctity of life. Even before we turn to the New Testament, we find this universally binding principle that precedes the Old Testament law code."

What did you think?

I think I'll have to reread Anderson before responding to this one passage. I'll save that for my next letter. In the meantime, could you give this week's one hour of thought to my questions above?

Have you seen the news on the lady from Florida that was recently executed? Apparently it was her desire to get the execution over with.

I didn't see the news concerning the lady you speak of. However, I have often seen a great eagerness on the part of the executioners and those who support them to elicit such verbal acts of "contrition" and "moral resolve," since such declarations, which are sometimes vehemently denied by those on death row in the face of the hollow and self-serving "Christianizations" of their experience that are orchestrated by others, give death-penalty supporters a feeling that their brutality has been justified on spiritual grounds. If such spiritual grounds do not appear sufficient, then death penalty supporters appeal to presumed financial and emotional gains, as you did in your next comments:

She knew she was guilty, felt that if released she would kill again, and didn't want to cost taxpayers any more money, or the families any more heart ache.

It is extremely rare for a convict to claim that he/she will kill again if released, and their doing so would in no way justify the state's destroying the body of said convict, since, for one, incarceration for life would be sufficiently preventative. Moreover, it is widely known (that is, outside of some narrow-minded circles that support the death penalty) that court costs necessitated by the death penalty sentence far surpass the financial burden of maintaining a convict in prison for life.

I have the direct quote from her if you are interested.

Sure. It could be interesting to read. We could also read the quotes from the woman put to death for killing her abusive sex partners (it may, paradoxically, be the same woman we are speaking about) in which she attacks her profit-motivated legal consultants for forcing words of contrition into her mouth. I watched a two-hour long program on this woman's plight, and I was stunned at the mediocrity of her legal support. Destroying this woman's body did very little to raise the value of life in the United States, believe me. If it did anything, it reinforced among the populace the idea that violence is a proper and just solution to society's gun-wielding criminals, and that the state is a sovereign, King-like entity whose authority is on par with that of God. [end of letter]

Addendum to this moment of the discussion. The following are acts that deserve the death penalty, according to the Old Testament:

1. Murder (Gen 9:6, Ex 21:12, Numb 35:16-21).
2. Hitting one's father or mother (Ex 21:15).
3. Speaking a curse against one's parents (Ex 21:17).
4. Committing blasphemy against God (Lev 24:14-16,23).
5. Breaking the Sabbath (Ex 31:14, Numb 15:32-36).
6. Practicing magic (Ex 22:18).
7. Fortune telling and practicing sorcery (Lev. 20:27).
8. Leading others to turn away from faith God (Deut 13:1-5, 18:20).
9. Adultery and fornication (Lev 20:10-12, Deut 22:22).
10. A woman having intercourse before marriage (Deut 22:20-21).
11. Two persons having intercourse when one of them is engaged (Deut 22:23-24).
12. The daughter of a priest practicing prostitution (Lev 21:9).
13. Raping someone who is engaged (Deut 22:25).
14. Having intercourse with animals (Ex 22:19).
15. Worshipping idols (Ex 22:20, Lev 20:1-5, Deut 17:2-7).
16. Incest (Lev 20:11-12, 14, 19-21).
17. Lying with another man (Lev 20:13).
18. Kidnapping (Ex 21:16).
19. Bearing false testimony at a trial (Deut 19:16, 19).
20. Being in contempt of court (Deut 17:8-13).

Now, that's a lot to be killed for! Number 3 alone, if practiced today, would surely lead to the execution of nearly every teenager in the nation. Number 15, for its part, would arguably lead to the mass extermination of all Catholics by the world's governments.

Personally, I am left wondering how it is that, among these twenty conditions that, according to the Old Testament, all merit death, Christians who argue for the Biblical support of the death penalty feel justified in choosing only number 1 and passing indifferently over the other 19, precisely when it is they who claim to take their direction from what "God specifically commands."