By Man Shall His Blood Be Shed
The death penalty is back in public discussion. First, there was the failed execution of Christa Pike. Then there’s the upcoming execution of Nidal Hassan. Both stories come out of the US. Australia’s last death-penalty execution was in 1967; Canada’s was in 1962. There’s little appetite for this measure in either nation. Any discussion about it in these contexts has to contend with the reality that it’s not likely going to happen anytime soon.
Nevertheless, we should still reflect on whether, in principle, it should happen. Is the death penalty God’s will? If it is, are there any safeguards to consider?
There are Christians who argue against the death penalty for murder. They maintain that human life is sacred and the sixth commandment is absolute. This position fails to account for the full spectrum of biblical teaching. The idea that murder deserves capital punishment precedes the giving of the law at Mount Sinai. God pronounced it after the Flood in the days of Noah (Genesis 9:5-6). Of course, it was later included in the Mosaic judicial laws. Finally, it finds an echo in the New Testament with the Pauline teaching that civil government “does not bear the sword in vain” (Rom.13:4). This is, in its most basic form, the majority argument in Bible-believing Christianity in favour of the death penalty.
Long before I attended seminary, I’d heard this argumentation and found it persuasive. I believed that any convicted murderer should be punished with the death penalty. One of my seminary professors challenged my thinking on this. In one of our classes, Dr. Cornelis Van Dam taught us that capital punishment for murder is indeed a biblical principle, but Scripture also provides strict safeguards around it. In particular, God required the testimony of at least two eyewitnesses (Deut.17:6; Num.35:30). You can find this position elaborated upon in Van Dam’s God and Government: Biblical Principles for Today, pp.118-125.
Naturally, this raises the question of what constitutes an eyewitness. In class, I asked Dr. Van Dam whether circumstantial evidence like DNA or fingerprints might constitute an eyewitness in the modern sense. Van Dam said that there can always be alternative explanations for circumstantial evidence, and the most you can get from such evidence is a probability (however high or low) that an individual was the offender. While circumstantial evidence like DNA or fingerprints didn’t exist in biblical times, there were certainly other forms, including footprints, fabric, and possession of goods. Despite that, the biblical text insists on actual human eyewitnesses and so should we.
That brings up another issue: what if eyewitnesses conspire to lie against an alleged offender? That can certainly happen, as it did with Christ. Scripture safeguarded against that to the greatest extent possible by stipulating that a false witness would himself be put to death (Deut.19:18-19). God considered this to be the best way to balance the need for justice against the risk of an injustice. Can we devise something better than God? I think not.
Now, what if we apply these principles to the two cases with which I began? As far as I can tell, Christa Pike’s case is complicated. While she did not plead guilty, she admitted to killing Colleen Slemmer. That could be regarded as one eyewitness, and a significant one. Another person involved, Shadolla Peterson, agreed to be a witness against Pike in a plea bargain. So, from my reading of the case, there is enough to warrant the death penalty.
In the case of Nidal Hassan, it’s rather straightforward. Numerous eyewitnesses identified him as the shooter, having seen him do it. This type of mass murder typically leaves many witnesses, making the death penalty, from a biblical perspective, entirely justifiable.
In both cases, I’m not going to get into the additional complicating circumstances, like Pike’s failed execution and whether the state gets a second chance, or whether Hassan’s execution should be live-streamed. They are interesting questions, but beyond the scope of what I’m discussing here.
Finally, I appreciate Dr. J. Douma’s point in The Ten Commandments: “Destruction of man as the image of God is avenged with other punishments as well. We do not believe it is correct to say that every illegitimate killing should be punished with only the death penalty” (p.239). In a footnote, he mentions Cain, David, and Ahab – all murderers who were not given the death penalty. Indeed, as Christians we should acknowledge a legitimate range of penalties, recognizing the vast difference between, say, first-degree murder witnessed by numerous people and manslaughter. Because humanity is created in the image of God, our most severe penalties, up to death, should be reserved for murder.
