In our society today, capital punishment is not a deterrent to crime because very few are carried out by our judicial system. The arguments against capital punishment are that it is unfairly enacted on the poor and minorities and has the potential of killing someone innocent. These arguments are only against unfair application of the law, not capital punishment itself. People who are for capital punishment say the number of capital offenses and/or executions have dropped because execution is a strong deterrent to capital crime. Abolitionists say executions have declined because judges and jurors are reluctant to risk taking a life when future scientific tests could prove innocence. The answer is to follow acceptable standards of evidence and/or improve existing standards of evidence before bringing evidence to the court. Sadly, we have allowed our court system to be manipulated and influenced by powerful politicians and money. Divorce courts have well proven this fact. A rapist today most likely will only get a short sentence and possibly even early parole. In today’s society in poor economic times, it is less costly to keep an offender imprisoned for life than execute. The reasons for the increased cost are slow appeals in the appellate court system, extra lawyers, strict experience requirements for lawyers, security cost, processing evidence cost (DNA) and segregated housing cost.
What should be the proper response to a crime? Punishment and restitution may include a fine, return of property, prison sentence or even death. Rehabilitation is taking measures to see that the individual does not commit a crime again and should be a condition of parole. In reality, successful rehabilitations are rare. When we define a capital offender, we are defining someone who commits premeditated murder and/or rape. Capital offenders are dangerous people and must be incarcerated to protect the public as well as other prisoners. A murderer inside a prison may have potential victims to kill and many often do. So, what do you say to the inmate of a lesser crime who becomes a victim? For the people who say it would be more humane to keep a capital offender in prison for life, is it fair to let the prison system lock the offender in solitary confinement without personal freedoms and luxuries such as books, computers, book deals, television and education, or should the prison system allow the offender such privileges?
According to the Torah (Mosaic Law), the following are a list of capital offences which may merit the death penalty in a Jewish major court system: premeditated murder, striking a parent, cursing a parent, a degenerate son, kidnapping, negligent homicide (ox-goring), sorcery and augury, bestiality, sacrificing to gods, Sabbath breaking, human sacrifice, adultery, incest, homosexuality, marrying your wife’s mother, prostitution by the daughter of a priest, blasphemy, worshipping Baal Peor (pagan god), false prophecy, contempt of court, false witness to a capital crime, and unchastity among those engaged to marry (Leviticus 20). In Leviticus 10:1-7, God executed the death penalty with dramatic and terrifying suddenness by striking down the sons of Aaron when they offered unauthorized profane fire on the incense alter. In 1Chronicles 13:5-10, God struck Uzza down when he stretched out his hand to steady the ark which David was bringing to Jerusalem on a cart. God’s punishment can be swift and severe.
These same crimes found in the Old Testament are found in the New Testament. God punished Ananias and Sapphira by death for lying to the Holy Spirit regarding holding back part of their gift from selling property, after they vowed to give it all. (Acts 5:1-11). God pronounced the Galatian legalists worthy of death for preventing the Gospel: “For turning to a different gospel…preventing the gospel of Christ…if anybody is preaching a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned (Galatians 1:6-9). God caused sickness and death to the Saints in Corinth who inappropriately observed and disregarded the Lord’s Table (1 Corinthians 11:17-34). God actually looked upon “disregard” for the New Covenant as an even more serious offense than disregard for the Old (Mosaic) Covenant. Civil and moral laws today are much different than biblical times, but have their foundations in biblical law.
In Exodus 21:23-25 it reads, “But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise. In Leviticus 24:19-20 and Deuteronomy 19:21, this same teaching is repeated. So clearly, this is much more serious than turning the other cheek. There are exceptions where God took a different approach to capital punishment. In Genesis 4:8, when Cain rose up against Abel and killed him in the field, some say God did not kill Cain because it was a “crime of passion”, but that was not true. Cain was angry, sad, depressed, and dejected before he asked Abel to walk in the field with him. Then, Cain said, “Let us go out in the field. And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.” Cain knew what he was going to do before he asked Abel to go in the field. Only God knows why He allowed Cain to live.
Matthew 5:38-39 it says, “You have heard that was said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for tooth. But I say to you, do not resist the evil person who injures you; but if anyone strikes you on the right side, turn to him the other one too.” In the Old Testament, God allowed retribution for a crime committed, and the retribution could be brutal. Retribution was tolerated and was accepted in a time when violence and revenge ran rampant. In Matthew 5:38-39, Jesus is reminding the Pharisees and his Disciples that the “Law of Israel” kept God’s people from going too far in retaliation. If someone lost an eye, they should not get the death penalty. By the Disciple’s time in history, a person’s debts could be paid in cash settlement. Again, Jesus is reminding the Pharisees and His Disciples of God’s measured justice. You can turn the other cheek, but justice is not excluded. In John 8:3-11, Jesus does not endorse stoning of the adulterous woman. By Roman rule this was a challenge to Jesus to commit sedition (resistance against Roman Rule), and if Jesus would have committed sedition, He would have been arrested. Maybe Jesus meant ‘among you’ not society as a whole and meant this for His followers, not society. The Hebrew culture was steeped in the religion of the Old Testament. Maybe Jesus foresaw the secular government and was giving instruction to the believers who will walk among the secularist.
Capital punishment in the Old Testament was enforced by the community picking up stones and taking part. This was an everlasting emotional experience by everyone involved. Our level of capital punishment has never approached that of the Israelites. In our times, many of the Old Testament crimes are no longer considered a threat to our society. Now that adultery is generally accepted because enough people have become adulterous, it is no longer considered a crime punishable by death. However, if immoral sexual activity spreads sexually transmitted disease to the point of epidemic proportions, such transmittable diseases could become a serious threat to all nations of the world, and laws would be needed to control them.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Bonefish
