There is a profound moral contradiction in a society that recoils at the execution of a duly convicted murderer while tolerating, defending, and even legally protecting the deliberate murder of innocent human life in the womb. In many states an innocent baby will be sentenced to death while a convicted murderer is defended by mindless protestors.
The Bible does not teach that the taking of every human life is morally equivalent. It clearly distinguishes innocent blood from guilty blood, murder from judgment that is lawful, accidental death from premeditated killing, personal vengeance from civil punishment, and forgiveness before God from the temporal consequences of crime. But we live in a society that is governed largely by the outsourcing of critical thinking to the mass media, by which their view of morality is judged and defined. The same mass media that hates Christ, loves perversion, and tramples upon conscience and liberty defines the immorality of the masses.
Read more: Is the Death Penalty Biblical and Morally Defensible?According to Scripture, human life is sacred because man was created in the image of God. And because human life is sacred God declares murder worthy of the severest civil penalty. At the same time, Scripture repeatedly speaks of the child in the womb as a sacred life, formed, seen by God, recognized by God, and deserving of protection by the civil power.
There is nothing biblically inconsistent about defending the life of an unborn child while supporting capital punishment for a murderer who has been clearly proven guilty and convicted of murder. The inconsistency would be in doing the exact opposite: demanding absolute protection for the guilty murderer while withholding protection from the innocent unborn child.
Our society is reversing moral justice in their depraved marches defending wicked and evil men and women such as Nidal Hasan, Lindsey Clancy, Christa Pike and others. Let me be clear, I do not defend the concept of public executions, nor do I think we should turn it into entertainment. Justice and judgment are solemn responsibilities not MTV. However, these wicked people deserve the death penalty according to Scripture and no true Christian lends their voice in opposition to the state’s right to punish such wicked people.
The Sanctity of Human Life Is Actually the Foundation of Capital Punishment
Even before God gave any civil laws to Moses, before He wrote the ten commandments on stone with His very finger, and long before the establishment of Israel as a nation, He condemned the taking of innocent life.
After the flood, God said to Noah:
“And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”
—Genesis 9:5-6, KJV
What does the verse say? Does it tell us to let God judge and punish the murderer? No, it plainly states that man is to punish him. “by man shall his blood be shed.” And the reason given for the punishment is very important:
“for in the image of God made he man.”
Capital punishment for murder is presented by the Bible as a consequence of human life having extraordinary value. When we fail to punish the murderer we do not lift up life as scared. We instead show by our actions that we believe life has no value. The murderer has deliberately destroyed a human being created in God’s image and when we fail to punish him for this, we show toleration for an evil God has commanded us not to tolerate. And God requires an accounting for innocent blood shed.
Genesis 9 is particularly important for us to understand, because this command was not originally given only to Israel under the Mosaic covenant. It was given to Noah and his descendants after the flood. It establishes a foundational and basic principle of human justice: shedding man’s blood carries a corresponding requirement that the perpetrator’s blood be shed by man, which is the civil power’s duty.
The modern objection is often presented as respect for life and these protesters demand that society never deliberately take the life, even of a murderer. Genesis 9 disagrees. Because the victim’s life possessed such great dignity, the murderer cannot simply be treated as though he has committed any ordinary offense.
“Thou Shalt Not Kill” Does Not Abolish Capital Punishment
Another very common objection is the sixth commandment:
“Thou shalt not kill.”
—Exodus 20:13, KJV
Some have attempted to make the English word kill mean the taking of any life for any reason, however, it actually means murder and the Bible explains itself.
The same God who said, “Thou shalt not kill,” also one chapter later says:
“He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.”
—Exodus 21:12, KJV
And God then immediately distinguishes murder from an unintended killing:
“And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.”
—Exodus 21:13-14, KJV
Therefore “Thou shalt not kill” cannot mean that every taking of human life under every circumstance is forbidden. If it did, God would contradict Himself. Scripture condemns unlawful killing which is murder while authorizing the lawful judgment by the civil power against the murderer.
A murderer seizes an authority God never gave him and deliberately destroys innocent life. A lawful government executing a duly convicted murderer is acting in a fundamentally moral capacity: it is administering public justice against one who has shed innocent blood.
The choice of words in Exodus 21:14 literally means that the murderer is not to be spared, that there is no defense for murder and he must die.
God Explicitly Distinguished Murder From Accidental Killing
Numbers 35 describes homicide. It separates an accidental death from murder, hatred, enmity, and lying in wait.
For deliberate murder, the language is:
“And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.”
Again:
“But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die; Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer.”
—Numbers 35:16, 20-21, KJV
The Bible is clear, murderers are to be put to death.
The same chapter states:
“Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.”
This is very important. God sees the crime of murder as so great of a crime that He calls the state to punish the violator with death. However, the sanctity of life is so great that if there is any question of innocence, it would be better to let a supposed murderer free than to punish an innocent man. Notice how good God is? He says, you must punish the murderer but you have to be sure, you must have more than one witness.
Now, let me digress slightly to address the issue of public execution which many are in an uproar about. It does amaze me that many who take satisfaction in promoting abortion suddenly want to pretend they value life. I wish to call out this hypocrisy. However, this does not dismiss the evil of glorying in a public execution. We are not to turn it into entertainment.
In our age if you have enough money, if you can hire the right lawyer, you can get away with murder. Many might think of O. J. Simpson here. The Bible plainly teaches that we are not to accept a bribe or any price for a murderer to be excused. The word translated in the following verse as “satisfaction” means bribe, or price of a life. It is literally telling us that there is no price that can be paid for murder, except for the life of the murderer.
“Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.”
—Numbers 35:30-31, KJV
The phrase “which is guilty of death” is important. Guilt must be established and it must be proven that the man is a murderer. But once that evidence is established clearly, there is no justice until that person is put to death. The scriptures are clear here.
And Numbers also agrees:
“So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land.”
—Numbers 35:33, KJV
God does not describe the death penalty for the murderer as polluting the land but rather describes the shedding of innocent blood as pollution. Why do we have so many people who wish to defend the murderer who defiles our land?
Biblical Justice Requires Proof, Investigation, and Due Process
A biblical defense of capital punishment cannot be a defense of careless prosecution, mob violence, political executions, false accusations, personal revenge, or killing merely on suspicion. God requires clear and solid evidence before a man is put to death.
Deuteronomy says:
“One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin… at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.”
—Deuteronomy 19:15, KJV
The Bible then commands:
“And the judges shall make diligent inquisition.”
—Deuteronomy 19:18, KJV
And the Bible sets severe punishment for false witnesses. Biblically severe punishment requires severe evidentiary safeguards. The same God who declares murder worthy of death also demands that judges make “diligent inquisition.” A government has no biblical right to execute someone on shaky evidence, under one witness, or based on a witness who is unreliable. The gravity of the punishment demands gravity and careful examination in determining guilt.
The New Testament Does Not Abolish the Government’s Power to Punish Evil
Some have argued that even if capital punishment existed in the Old Testament, Christianity replaced it with different ethics under which government should never execute anyone.
Romans 13 disproves this claim.
Paul writes:
“For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.”
Then he says:
“For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”
—Romans 13:3-4, KJV
The ruler possesses a sword which he does not wield “in vain.” He is called God’s minister in the civil sphere and part of his function is the execution of judgment against evildoers. Executing wrath against a murderer cannot mean free room and board for life. Peter teaches the same doctrine that the civil power has authority to defend innocent life and execute judgment on the evil-doer:
“as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.”
—1 Peter 2:14, KJV
Government therefore has a punitive function according to the New Testament and an authority which is limited to the sphere of the second table of the law. Governments can act unjustly as the crucifixion of Christ demonstrates with terrible clarity. But the abuse of governmental authority does not prove the nonexistence of governmental authority.
Jesus Himself told Pilate:
“Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above.”
—John 19:11, KJV
Pilate was sinfully abusing his power in Christ’s case. Nevertheless, Christ acknowledged that civil authority itself existed under divine sovereignty.
Paul Explicitly Recognized That Some Crimes Can Be “Worthy of Death”
When Paul stood before Festus, he did not argue that death as a civil punishment was inherently immoral.
He said:
“For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar.”
—Acts 25:11, KJV
Notice Paul’s argument. He does not say, “No crime can ever justly deserve death.” Paul is acknowledging that there are crimes for which death is the right punishment and that Caesar, as the civil ruler, has a right to execute judgment in those cases. He is saying, “If you can show that I have done that which is worthy of the death penalty, I will submit to it as right.”
There are two principles here:
There are deeds sufficiently evil to be “worthy of death,” and an innocent man must not be condemned merely because he has been accused.
Private Vengeance Is Forbidden but Does Not Remove Civil Justice
Another error I see used as argument, comes from confusing Christian forgiveness with the abolition of criminal justice.
Romans 12 says:
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves… for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
—Romans 12:19, KJV
Then immediately afterward, Romans 13 describes the civil ruler as:
“a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”
Romans 12 forbids personal vengeance however Romans 13 authorizes civil justice. The Christian whose loved one has been murdered is not authorized to hunt down the murderer and kill him personally. But the magistrate is charged with investigating the matter, and administering justice according to law. Forgiveness is personal but judgment is judicial. The state does not forgive and the Christian does not execute private justice. Each must remain in his own realm.
Christians are commanded to forgive enemies and surrender personal vengeance to God, however, that does not mean judges are to dismiss murder charges, prison doors should be opened, restitution abandoned, or civil government stripped of its God-ordained function. You should forgive the murderer because if you do not, it will destroy your ability to love. However, forgiveness does not remove consequences.
“Turn the Other Cheek” Does Not Mean Abolish Criminal Justice
Jesus said:
“Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
—Matthew 5:39, KJV
Christ was addressing personal retaliation. The function of the civil power in administering justice is not personal nor retaliatory in nature, but rather judicial and a function to protect life. If “turn the other cheek” means government may never punish wrongdoing, then Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 would contradict Christ. Obviously there is no contradiction. A Christian may and should personally forgive the murderer who killed his child while simultaneously testifying truthfully in court and accepting the court’s lawful sentence.
“He That Is Without Sin” Does Not Abolish the Death Penalty
The woman taken in adultery in John 8 is also frequently invoked as though Jesus had announced that only morally perfect human beings may ever punish criminals.
However, that interpretation would eliminate every court, every prison sentence, every fine, every arrest, and every form of civil punishment, because every judge, juror, police officer, and governor has sinned.
Furthermore, John explicitly tells us the woman’s accusers were attempting to trap Christ:
“This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.”
—John 8:6, KJV
Jesus told them:
“He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
Then her accusers departed and Jesus then asked:
“Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?”
She answered:
“No man, Lord.”
And Christ said:
“Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”
—John 8:7, 10-11, KJV
This passage demonstrates Christ’s mercy and exposes hypocritical accusers. It does not repeal Genesis 9, abolish civil government, nullify Romans 13, or teach that sinful human beings are never to exercise lawful judicial authority. If the fact that we have all sinned automatically disqualified every human being from administering justice, no civilization could administer justice at all and anarchy would reign.
Mercy and Capital Punishment Are Not Opposites
Scripture teaches that God desires repentance.
“Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?”
—Ezekiel 18:23, KJV
But this cannot mean that temporal civil consequences cease whenever a sinner repents.
The thief crucified beside Christ provides a striking example.
He confessed:
“And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.”
He then appealed to Christ:
“Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.”
Christ answered the thief with the promise of salvation yet his temporal sentence continued and he himself acknowledged it was deserved. A murderer facing execution is not beyond the reach of the gospel but his acceptance of Christ does not nullify the consequences of his crime.
Scripture’s Special Condemnation of Innocent Blood
Now let me step on some toes. I see people protesting the death penalty, defending child-murderers like Lindsey Clancy, and a societal push to end the death penalty. And yet in many cases these same voices either are silent on abortion or outspokenly defend it as a supposed “woman’s right.” The hypocrisy could not be more striking. Defending the most vile of men while killing the most innocent truly is a sign of the wicked age we live in.
Proverbs says:
“These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood…”
—Proverbs 6:16-17, KJV
Do not miss the word innocent blood. Is an unborn child in the womb guilty? Even if the child was conceived in rape, the baby itself is innocent and the taking of that life is still innocent blood. This unborn child has committed no crime worthy of death, yet society stands by denying him the right to life, and at the same time it defends the Clancy’s and Hasan’s who justly deserve to die. We truly live in an age where good is called evil and evil is called good.
Modern moral reasoning is so perverted that enormous passion is expended insisting that the murderer must never be executed, while the unborn child may be deliberately killed without trial, accusation, guilt, defense counsel, judge, jury, appeal, or crime. This child sacrifice is paganism and Satan worship.
Scripture Recognizes the Child in the Womb as a Life Known by God
David wrote:
“For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb.”
He continues:
“My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret.”
And:
“Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect.”
—Psalm 139:13, 15-16, KJV
David speaks of himself as a person in his mother’s womb, that God saw him and knew him there. God’s relationship to David did not suddenly begin when David passed through the birth canal, magically earning the right to life and protection.
Jeremiah records God’s declaration:
“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee.”
—Jeremiah 1:5, KJV
Jeremiah’s prophetic calling was unique, but the language unmistakably reveals God’s personal knowledge and active work concerning human life in the womb before birth.
The New Testament Calls the Unborn Child a “Babe”
Luke’s account is even more clear when the pregnant Mary visited Elisabeth:
“when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb.”
The babe, not a clump of cells, leapt in the womb. Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost and called Mary:
“the mother of my Lord.”
Then she declared:
“For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.”
—Luke 1:41-44, KJV
John is called a babe while still in the womb. Mary is already called the mother of the Lord while Christ is yet unborn. The unborn John in the womb responds to the presence of the unborn Christ. And yet many Christians regard the child in the womb as morally disposable tissue, and this position is manufactured from the pits of hell itself.
God Demands that the Murderer of the Unborn is to Be Killed
Exodus 21 describes men fighting and injuring “a woman with child.”
The KJV states:
“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished”
and then separates punishments:
“And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life.”
—Exodus 21:22-23, KJV
The word depart means to come out; it does not mean to die, as is frequently taught by the higher critic. Throughout Scripture, it is frequently translated as “brought forth,” “went forth,” “went out,” “brought out,” “come out,” and similar expressions. Clearly, none of these mean death. The text is therefore stating that if the baby is born prematurely but no “mischief” follows—in other words, if there is no harm—then the man is only fined. However, if mischief follows, then it is life for life. This Scripture plainly establishes that if a mother is struck while pregnant and the baby is lost, the perpetrator of the crime is to pay with his life.
The Moral Perversion: Mercy for the Guilty, Death for the Innocent
It is truly disturbing to me that Christians will lend their voice to defend guilty murderers on death row but not innocent babies on death row. A society that insists: “We cannot execute a murderer because every human life has value,” while simultaneously defending abortion is a wicked society. The unborn child has received no trial because there is no crime of which that child could possibly be guilty.
Yet elective abortion imposes the death penalty upon the most innocent and vulnerable of human beings and scarcely a voice is raised in anger. We as Christians are to defend the oppressed, not the wicked.
