Welcome to a firm foundation presented by Princeton ministries with Doctor Ken Smith. This is Carol Smith, Ken’s wife. Please enjoy.

Today, in the United States of America, there are more than 1400 men and women who are in the prisons of our country who are on death row awaiting possible execution. Since the Supreme Court allowed states to restore the death penalty in 1976 19 people have been put to death. In 1984, there have been 8 executions. As Christians, there are some subjects that are distant from our experience, and there are others that are very close. Probably the subject of the Christian and capital punishment is one of those subjects that, on first observation, seems to be very removed from where you and I live and work in Jesus Christ. But it is about capital punishment that I want to speak with you today.

Joyful, joyful reality from the word of God. We invite you to stay tuned for the next half hour as we bring you a message from the word of God brought to us by the Reverend Ken Smith, minister of the Princeton Presbyterian Church in historic Princeton, New Jersey. Once again, here’s Ken Smith as he continues his message from the word of God.

Every thoughtful Christian who has input into the government of the United States of America ought to have a biblical understanding of capital punishment. You will be called upon someday to vote about it. You will be called upon in the context of some setting to give your opinion on the capital punishment question. Speaking personally, the subject of capital punishment was something very distant in my understanding of living the Christian faith until I began to work in a prison. And this week, just an hour and a half after word was given to one of the men in the Bible study that I conducted, that he now faces the possibility of execution by the state. To look in the eyes of a man who has since become a Christian, suddenly the question is not academic.

And you and I are called upon as Christians to have a biblical understanding of the subject. What is your opinion about capital punishment? Is it based in God’s word or is it simply based in the emotion of the topic? We are currently engaged in a great battle. We know that the scriptures tell us that it is a spiritual battle that goes back and forth between the forces of darkness and Satan and on the other hand, the forces of light through Jesus Christ. And we know that ultimately all will be held under the power of Jesus Christ. But there is in fact a legal battle that is ensuing in our courts. Doctor Hebden Taylor, in an interesting book called the New Legality, talks about this battle, but he talks about it from a perspective of truth and what actually is happening within the courts.

He says the separation of religion from law, which currently is what is happening throughout the law courts of this country. The separation of religion from law is rather the separation of Christianity from law. Christianity has for centuries been the major impetus to legal codes in America and the western land. Now, however, Christianity is in radical and revolutionary process of disestablishment as the religious foundation of laws, states and civil governments. And it is steadily being replaced by another religion, the religion of humanism. Now, humanism is the battle that is being waged within the courts this day that basically has dethroned God and is saying that man is the measure of all judgment. And the battle that is occurring within our legal system is a battle basically between humanistic interpretations of the world. On the other hand, Christian interpretations of the world.

And both of those are finding themselves in the arena of the courts. And the courts are attempting to unravel all of the various debates that are occurring now. The debate is showing itself in many issues. We know all too well about abortion in America and how the humanist influence has greatly changed the overall understanding in America for the unborn child. There are also currently battles in the courts related to the elderly. Should they, in a sense, commit their own suicide when they realize at the end of their life that they are too sick? Is that now the responsibility of the medical profession to enter into that question? And we’re finding that there are now areas that were unthinkable a decade or two ago, but today the grim facts are upon us with one and a half million abortions a year.

But the debate has also entered the area of capital punishment. Now, the humanistic approach says that the purpose of the criminal justice system is to rehabilitate the criminal, and that is the responsibility of the state. Now, that is an interesting change, because up until very recently, our prisons were called penitentiaries, and a person went there to do penance to pay the punishment for a crime. And it’s only within recent decades that suddenly the legal system has seen that it’s its responsibility to attempt to rehabilitate a criminal. Now, in the humanistic effort, Christians certainly agree that there should be some rehabilitation that occurs within the court system and within the prisons. But the bigger question is, what is the primary purpose for those institutions? Is it primarily to rehabilitate, or is it primarily a place where evil behavior is punished?

And that, in fact, is the debate that is going on throughout the country. Cs Lewis wrote a very interesting essay on the death penalty. In looking at the humanistic approach, he said this the humanistic theory revolves from punishment and the concept of is it deserved? But the concept of is it deserved? Is the only connecting link between punishment and justice. Lewis saw that the purpose of the prisons and our legal system is to punish evil action. That is its primary responsibility. Now, many Christians oppose capital punishment, and there are many reasons given. One, perhaps the most common is doesn’t the Bible say, thou shalt not kill? Well, as a matter of fact, the Bible does not say, thou shalt not kill. What the Bible says is, thou shalt not murder.

Some of the early translations of the scripture, in particular the King James translation, said that the commandment reads, thou shalt not kill. But as it has come to light exactly the various definitions of words that were used in the Hebrew, we find that the Hebrew words for killing and murder, there was a wide assortment of those words. There is a difference between the act of killing and the act of murder. And according to the number of words that Moses could have selected in the Old Testament, he chose the only word that means murder. It is the Hebrew word ratsach. It is the word to murder. And if you look at all of the translations of the scripture that have occurred within the last several decades, almost all of them explain that commandment and say, thou shalt not murder.

Now, murder is a violent and unauthorized killing and that the Bible condemns. Moses said, thou shalt not. Thou shalt not murder. Thou shalt not intentionally take the life of a person in a violent act. Now, some say, well, what that means is that there should be no capital punishment. Well, it’s interesting. If you just go to the next chapter, Exodus chapter 21, you find the explanation of the ten Commandments. And in chapter 21, you find Moses giving six examples, specifically of the death penalty. For example, he says, a man who strikes a man so that he dies should be put to death. He says that a man who strikes his father or mother should be put to death.

He says that if you own an ox and you know that it gorges people and that it is a violent beast, and if that ox goes out into the field and breaks the fence down and kills a neighbor, that you are responsible for the actions of that ox and that you can be called a murderer. He also says that a person who would strike a pregnant woman to cause the baby inside that woman to die is a murderer and should be put to death. Now, there are other objections that Christians make to the death penalty. Some say, well, Jesus said, turn the other cheek, and Jesus certainly said that. But we must look at the context. It’s interesting about context.

Everything in God’s word has a place, and if we take it out of its place, it simply becomes a pretext for some point that we want to make. Well, Jesus was talking in the sermon on the mount. And on the sermon on the mount, he made this declaration of turning the cheek. Now, let’s ask a very practical question. Was Jesus telling the policeman that when he captures a robber that he should turn his cheek to that criminal? Of course not. Or we read in the sermon on the mount, Jesus said, give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you, do not turn away. Was Jesus giving that portion of God’s word on the sermon on the mount as a teaching to a banker?

So when someone comes to you and they ask, don’t turn them away, give them what you have, is that what it would mean to be a Christian banker? We’d say, no, of course not. Well, there are many within the Christian church who take the sermon on the mount as the example for personal Christian living. It is not a teaching on corporate responsibility of the state or of the church or of businesses, but rather it is a personal ethic for Christians. And so if someone comes to you in need, it is our responsibility to help them. And if we are buffeted, one to one, that it is our responsibility to turn the cheek. But that is not the exhaustive teaching of God’s word on the subject of subjects like punishment and the use of our goods and other topics.

Well, what does the Bible say on the subject of the death penalty? Well, we know, first of all, it does say, thou shalt not murder. No person is ever given the right to murder another person. That is quite different than killing. Killing is the responsibility. At times, it is called upon as a declaration by those who are involved, as soldiers, to defend the nation. And you cannot become a soldier of the land if you say, I will not kill unless you take a conscientious objection to that statement. And there are some Christians who do that. But I would remind you that the scripture tells us, thou shalt not murder. Within the Old Testament and the Jewish legal system, it was never once said, suggested throughout the entire Old Testament, that this commandment of the Lord forbade judicial punishment.

Never in the Old Testament can you find anyone saying, the state does not have the responsibility to put to death those who would have broken the commandments that I read before. As a matter of fact, if you look to the Old Testament, you’ll find that the death penalty was exacted for many crimes under Jewish law. J. Hastings, in a book entitled the Encyclopedia of Religion, and Ethics tells us that the following subjects’ acts of crime were to be handled by the death penalty. Murder, child sacrifice, manslaughter, bearing false witness, especially in a court, kidnapping, incest, adultery, witchcraft, blasphemy, false claims to be a prophet, and breaking of the Sabbath. All of those were seen as sins that could be punished by the state with capital punishment. There were four methods in the Old Testament for the death penalty.

One was stoning, another was burning, another beheading, and in certain circumstances, even strangling. Now, when we look at the capital punishment question in the Old Testament, it’s easy to say it was very harsh. But there was also built in by the Lord’s mercy. The mercy showed itself in that the lord declared that there were to be six cities. These cities were cities of refuge. If a man committed a murder or a killing, he was free to find one of those cities which were known by the people. And once he got into the gates of that city, he was safe. But it’s interesting, those six cities, if a man went into that city and another body had the responsibility of investigating, was the man intentionally a murderer?

If he was found to be a murderer, he was to be taken out of that city of refuge and given capital punishment. On the other hand, if he was found to be innocent of the intent of murder, but had simply killed a person, perhaps by accident, then he could stay in that city of refuge and be protected. Now there were built in to the Old Testament concern for the death penalty, many statements of mercy. For example, no man could be condemned without two eyewitnesses. Also before the execution, a prisoner who was found to have broken one of the commandments of the lord related to the sentence of the death penalty. There was a man who proceeded the execution. His responsibility was to go in front of the group of people who were going to bring that man for execution.

He would call out the name of that man to the city. Anyone who knows anything about Joe Smith, he is going to be executed. If you have any information that would change the minds of the court, then bring that forward. And then even at the point of bringing that man for execution, there was a man stationed in the courthouse. He stood with a white handkerchief at a distance on a hill, a man on a horse. And if, perchance within minutes of the actual execution of that man, someone should come forward with information or evidence that would change the outcome of that case. They were instructed to go to the court, speak to the man standing at the door with the handkerchief, and if such a person came, that man then waved vigorously the handkerchief.

The rider on horseback galloped as quickly as he could to bring word of the reprieve that there’s new evidence. And so built into the Old Testament understanding of the death penalty and capital punishment was a great deal of room for mercy and seeking to understand the truth, but also allowing the state to exercise its responsibility. In the New Testament, we find that the commandment thou shalt not murder is repeated many times, and it is of some interest, I think, that the word that is used in the New Testament, always referring to the topic of murder, is always the word phone uo, the Greek word which means specifically murder. And so that consistency of the Lord, he has declared from the beginning, thou shalt not murder. Now when we turn to the Book of Romans chapter 13, we find this teaching given about the state.

The state has been given responsibilities by the Lord himself. We read in Romans 13, if you do what is evil, be afraid, for the rulers bear not the sword in vain, for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that does evil. Now we need to understand that the phrase that the ruler does not bear the sword in vain is a well documented historical reference to the fact that the state had the right to commit the death penalty to those people who had broken the law as the state defined the law. We need also to see that the teaching of God’s word is that the Lord has a high regard for human life. The Lord says that we are to preserve life.

And when he declared to Moses in Genesis, chapter nine, verse six, whoever sheds man’s blood by blood shall his blood be shed. That the Lord was saying that the life, the image of God that is in a person needs to be respected, and a person who would smash that image of God in the violent act of murder must know that the state has been given the sword to use in a way that the state believes will punish that crime. The state has been given that responsibility. Charles Hodge, the great theologian from Princeton, said, capital punishment is not inflicted to gratify revenge. It is inflicted to satisfy justice and preserve society. Jesus accepted the responsibility of the state to commit capital punishment.

When Jesus stood before Pilate, it was Pilate who said, do you not know that I have the power to crucify you and the power to release you? Jesus said, you could have no power at all against me had it not been given to you from God above. Notice if ever there was an opportunity for Jesus to tell the state they did not have the responsibility to fulfil the death penalty, Jesus could have spoken at that point, but he didn’t. And Jesus was ultimately given the death sentence by the state, a man who is totally innocent. He never once questioned that the state had that authority.

The difference between my friend, a Christian in a Bible study who possibly will face the decision of the state to have his life removed, and the difference between you and me is very small, because Jesus tells us without him, we have already been condemned.

You are right, Ken, when you say we don’t like to think about capital punishment. But I agree it’s an issue we have to face more and more today. If you’d like a cassette copy of today’s broadcast entitled Capital Punishment, we invite you to write or call Pastor Ken Smith. For more information. Here’s the address from the Word of God, box 3003, Princeton, New Jersey 08540. And if you’d prefer to call, the telephone number is area code 60 992-110-2220 be sure to ask for a list of messages available on cassette, as well as the list of those messages now in print. Let me remind you as well that you’re cordially invited to attend the Princeton Presbyterian Church. We meet each Sunday in the John Witherspoon Middle School on Walnut Lane, just a few minutes out from the center square of Historic Princeton, New Jersey.

Our Sunday school meets at 9:30 with classes for all ages. The morning worship service is at eleven. I think you’ll appreciate the warm welcome that awaits you. Thank you for listening. On behalf of our speaker, the Reverend Ken Smith, and all the Princeton Presbyterian Church family, this is your announcer, Joe Springer, inviting you to join us again next week, same time and station as we come to you again from the word of God.

Thank you for listening to Affirm Foundation presented by Princeton Ministries. This programming is supported by you, the listener. You may go to our website, princetonministries.org, or send your donation to Princeton Ministries Post Office box 2171, Princeton, New Jersey 08543. That’s Princeton Ministries, post Office box 2171, Princeton, New Jersey 08543. The Lord bless you and Doctor Smith looks forward to hearing from you