The death penalty has been a rightly contentious political and moral issue in our country for at least the last 50 years. Christians rightly struggle with the question of taking the life a fellow image bearer even when that person has done something as heinous as murder. Questions of justice come into play when the system charged to carry out such weighty decisions is accused of systemic bigotry , racism, socio-economic imbalances and corruption that threatens to discredit the most serious of responsibilities for governing authorities.
The Christian ought to navigate all of life through the lense of scripture. Our worldview must be shaped by the bible in such a way that every decision from the most practical, to the most spiritual is informed and guided by the Word of God. To that end, how is the Christian to think about capital punishment?
The New Testament consistently establishes the authority of government as originating from God’s ultimate authority. And that because of this divinely granted authority, the Christian is to submit to the government (1 Peter 2:13-17, Romans 13:1-7, Titus 3:1, Acts 25:9-12).
An obvious problem with this submission to earthly authority is that human governments can be unjust in action and decree (Daniel 3:4-7, Luke 2:1-7, 13:1, 20:20-26, 23:4-22, Matt 2:1-19, 14:1-12, Acts 4:8-12, 5:17-42, 12:1-24, 16:4-40). Paul, and the rest of the NT writers were not unaware of this problem, as many of the apostles (not to mention Christ Himself!) lost their lives at the hands of evil and corrupt governing authorities. Not to mention that the apostles suffered lesser persecution many times when thrown into prison, endured beatings, and were falsely accused… all under the authority of the unjust Roman state. We read from John’s gospel that even Jesus acknowledged the jurisdiction of capital punishment God had given the to earthly rulers when Pilot asks “Don’t you know that I have the authority to release you and the authority to crucify you?” Christ’s response to the Roman governor is stunning: “You would have no authority over me at all… if it hadn’t been given you from above” (John 19). Even the authority to kill Jesus was granted by God to earthly rulers.
Additionally, ancient historical sources abound with stories of atrocities and injustices committed by the Roman government. Yet, even with this backdrop, the New Testament writers nowhere alter their prescription concerning the state’s authority and the proper Christian response to it… The response of the Christian toward his earthly ruler is: submission.
However, an important distinction is made by the actions of the apostles and early church recorded in the NT when the decrees or laws of earthly authority clearly contradicted God’s law. Amid such discord Christians were to obey God and not the unjust rulers (Acts 4:17-20, 5:29). The NT Church practiced civil disobedience in response to unjust rulers not unlike the OT church had done before them (Daniel 1, 3, 6, Exodus 1:15-21). For the Christian, God is the ultimate authority and judge.
Luke writes in his Acts of the Apostles about Paul’s encounter with the Romans authorities concerning capital punishment (Acts 25, 28:17-20). Strikingly, nowhere does Paul question the earthly ruler’s right or responsibility to sentence evil doers to capital punishment. On the contrary, Paul’s reason against his own death sentence at the hands of the Roman government is that he “had done nothing deserving of death”… and that he in apparent submission to the God given authority of the Romans government “was not trying to escape a death sentence”. The implication being that were Paul to have committed a crime deserving of death, the earthly rulers would have a right and responsibility to carry out capital punishment.
So while the NT and OT saints practiced civil disobedience in response to unjust rulers, no mention is made by the NT writers in kind toward the practice of capital punishment. The absence of such objection is stark given the heavy hand with which the Roman and Jewish governments subjected early Christians to constant persecution. While it is conspicuous that the NT records no such admonition or action to discredit the state’s right and responsibility to carry out capital punishment, mere absence alone isn’t the best argument in the affirmative.
The absence of any objection to capital punishment should hardly be surprising given the bible’s teaching on the matter as a whole. Throughout the Old Testament, God over and over requires capital punishment to be carried out by the governing authorities (Exodus 21:12,15,16, Leviticus 20:10,13, 24:17-22, Deuteronomy 21:18-21, 22:22). We see by only the 9th chapter of Genesis, after God has carried out his righteous judgement by wiping out all of mankind in the great flood, that a covenant is given to the only surviving family on earth. God grants through the patriarch Noah, to all of mankind His authority in various specific categories. In God’s covenant with Noah, along with granting man authority over the creatures, plants, birds, and fish, God bestows upon man conditional authority concerning the capital punishment.
“…if someone murders a fellow human, I will require that person’s life. Whoever sheds human blood, by humans his blood will be shed, for God made humans in his image.” (Gen 9:5c-6)
Thus, we see God’s requirement of capital punishment formalized in the covenant with Noah. This covenant proceeds from the aftermath of the flood and is not stipulated for a specific time, place or culture. The reformed theologian, Charles Hodge makes this observation concerning the Noahic covenant in its regard to capital punishment:
Because it is expressly declared in the Bible, “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” (Gen. ix. 6.) That this is of perpetual obligation is clear, because it was given to Noah, the second head of the human race. It was, therefore, not intended for any particular age or nation. It is the announcement of a general principle of justice; a revelation of the will of God. Moreover the reason assigned for the law is a permanent reason. Man was created in the image of God; and, therefore, whoso sheds his blood, by man shall his blood be shed. ”
– Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology Book III § 10.
The covenant with Noah makes clear that the taking of human life demands an earthly reckoning. The absence here of the eternal and eschatological reckoning at the hands of God on the day of the Lord’s final judgement shouldn’t be taken as incongruent with the earthly consequence of murder, but rather as a continuation and just harmony with the righteous judgement of God (1 Peter 2:14, Num 35:30-34).
Recently, it has become in vogue to “unhitch” the Old Testament from the relevant truth and love found in the New Testament because the commands of the OT are too difficult for us (read: “too barbaric, backward, non-progressive, unloving, etc…”). Thought there are seemingly apparent problems sustaining such difficult commands from God’s law expressed in the Old Testament to the New Testament believer, those apparent problems stem more from a lack of understanding concerning biblical covenants and God’s eternal law than they do from inconsistencies within the bible. While a robust explanation concerning the passing of the Old Covenant in exchange for the New Covenant is beyond the bounds of this paper, others have done a more than adequate job explaining the various positions why and how the Old Testament isn’t irrelevant to the eternal Law of God and the New Covenant believer (Schreiner 1, 2, 3; Clark 1, 2, 3; Kruger, Riccardi). For our purposes, it is sufficient to conclude that historically the church has taught that the Old Testament is not irrelevant for the New Covenant believer. Regardless if you lean toward the Reformed camp on the Gospel/Law distinction, or in to the Progressive Covenantal camp, or even out toward the fringes of the New Covenant Theology camp (or even the Dispensational camp)… all of these camps and many more agree that the law of God reflected in the Old Testament, is still relevant to the believer today. The God of the Old Testament is the God of the New Testament. God does not change. (Numbers 23:19, Malachi 3:6, Hebrews 13:8)
Additionally, it is an important observation that the prescription against murder and the institution of capital punishment is established not in the Mosaic law given to the ethnic nation-state of Israel, but rather rooted in creation (Imago Dei). While the means and methods of God’s law may change over time (and especially in the Levitical Laws given for a specific place, culture and time) His moral law, like His character, is eternal. This is why God can forbid the ethnic nation of Israel from eating all sorts of specific foods, animals, methods of cooking meat, etc. in the dietary laws written in the book of Leviticus (ch.11), but then tell the apostle Peter to “Rise! Kill and eat! What God has made clean, you must not call common.” This is why Jesus could say “You have heard that it was said, Do not commit adultery. But I tell you, everyone who looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Has God’s moral command changed? Do we no longer need to heed the commands found in the Old Testament? No, in fact, the eternal and moral law of God first revealed in the Old Covenant has not changed and is reiterated in the NT! This is because God’s moral law is eternal, existing from before creation, before the Mosaic/Levitical Laws, making it still binding on the believer today, summed up in what Paul calls the “law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21).
Correspondingly, we have very good reason to understand Romans 13 as a reiteration of God’s moral law concerning capital punishment established in creation. Paul affirms that the governing authorities “do not bear the sword (machaira) for nothing” (Rom. 13:4). While Paul surely conveys the general principle that the state has the right to punish evil doers, more specifically, since the sword was typically an instrument of death in the New Testament, and certainly in his letter to the Romans (Romans 8:35-36), it is evident that Paul intends to convey the state’s authority and responsibility to administer justice via capital punishment. Paul would not (and the New Testament authors nowhere…) have flinched at endorsing the right and duty given to earthly authorities for jurisdictive capital punishment, since Genesis 9:6 supports it by appealing to the fact that human beings are made in God’s image. The translation here in Romans 13 literally means that the governing authorities are to be “an avenger for wrath to the one practicing evil…”. And though this wrath is not of God’s ultimate judgement, when wielded justly, it is in agreement and cooperation with God’s moral judgement.
We see from the previous verses in Romans 12 that this just act of wrath carried out against wrong doers by earthly governments, is juxtaposition the unjust act of an individual carrying out wrath against their offender. The verb “avenge” (ekdikeō) in 12:19 is the same word (adjective form) used in 13:4 “avenger” (ekdikos). The connection Paul makes is plain. While the individual is not to wrathfully avenge himself against those who do him wrong, the governing authorities ought to do so in order that justice might be done. The implication is that there is a lack of justice, indeed an injustice when the ruling authorities let evil doers harm the innocent without penal repercussion. Notice also that the wrong being done is in the past… “do not avenge yourselves” assumes something has already been done deserving vengeance. So Paul’s argument is not primarily that the ruling authorities are to only prevent harm from ever occurring, by simply restraining the wrongdoer prior to his evil act. Instead the emphasis is on the wrathful consequence of an evil already committed.
Scripture consistently teaches that God has given a right and responsibility to human authorities to carry out wrathful vengeance upon those who harm others, and more specifically, to carry out capital punishment upon the murderer. It cannot plainly be shown that the New Testament is inconsistent with the moral principal of this command. It is plain that the NT writers had many occasions to instruct or imply that this moral principal was no longer binding, yet they passed up every such opportunity. It is plain that the Old Testament is replete with commands for capital punishment. It is plain that capital punishment was instituted not in the Mosaic law to the nation of Israel, but rather in creation (Imago Dei) and covenanted with all mankind through Noah. And it is likely certain that Paul reiterates this duty and responsibility explicitly in Romans 13:4.