The ABP’s recent article on the mock trial of Jesus staged at First Baptist Church, Austin has sparked an angry response. Dudley Sharp insists that the New Testament endorses the death penalty. Moreover, he appears to argue that we should rejoice and be glad that Jesus was murdered by the Romans because, had he been acquitted, we would all be headed straight for hell.
It should be noted that the mock trial of Jesus does not primarily concern the death penalty. However, as the ABP article notes, “audiences must vote for or against death for Jesus using their own states’ laws on capital punishment” and, as law professor Mark Osler observes, “that often leads to a conflict between deeply held religious beliefs and support for capital punishment.”
Here’s Mr. Sharp’s letter:
To: Dr. Alan Bean Executive Director, Friends of Justice
Dr. Roger Paynter, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church
Dr. William Underwood, President, Mercer College
Re: Jesus faces mock trial in Texas, Associated Baptist Press, March 27, 2013,
Mr. Underwood “said he, too, had never thought about his faith being grounded in the execution of an innocent person.”
Response
The whole of Christianity is based upon this: Jesus is God, made man, who will take upon Himself the sins of the world, to provide the perfect sacrifice, the perfect, innocent Man/God, whose sacrifice through the Passion will provide eternal salvation for all, should they accept it, because He has died, an innocent, for our sins.
Dr. Roger Paynter, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church
“Paynter emphasized that the church isn’t taking a position on capital punishment . . . “. But is intended ” . . .to push participants to ask themselves if they could vote for death for Christ or anyone else, and how that squares with their core Christian beliefs.”
Response
My guess is that if one could not vote for death for Jesus, that He would, strongly, ask you to reconsider, that your salvation should matter as much to ourselves, as it does to He and His Father — a vote for Jesus’ execution is a vote for the will of God and our salvation and a vote against that execution would most serve evil, which works against our salvation and God’s will. Such is true, unless I got the foundation of Christianity wrong, in reply to Underwood, above
Bean said Osler’s presentation at First Baptist, Austin, is timely and appropriate, because it exposes the tension between belief in capital punishment and belief in Jesus Christ.
Response
I cannot say there is no such tension. However, that tension appears to be based upon a misunderstanding, which can be corrected.
Death penalty support, as expressed by Christian denominational writings, was near universal, prior to about the mid 20th century. In fact, it was overwhelming. One might ask, did the bible change that much when the calendar stuck 1960?There is a 2000 year record of Popes, Doctors of the Church, religious leaders, biblical scholars, Saints and theologians speaking in favor of the death penalty, a record of scholarship, in breadth and depth, which overwhelms any position to the contrary.
The New Testament death penalty support is overwhelming.
God/Jesus: ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother must certainly be put to death.’ Matthew 15:4
This is a New Testament command, which references several of the same commands from God, in the same circumstance, from the OT.Jesus: Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Jesus) replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” Luke 23: 39-43It is not the nature of our deaths, but the state of salvation at the time of death which is most important.
Jesus: “So Pilate said to (Jesus), “Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?” Jesus answered (him), “You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above.” John 19:10-11
The power to execute comes directly from God.
Jesus: “You have heard the ancients were told, ˜YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER” and “Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court”. But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, “Raca”, shall be guilty before the supreme court and whoever shall say, “You fool”, shall be guilty enough to go into fiery hell.” Matthew 5:17-22.
Fiery hell is a considerable more severe sanction than any earthly death.
The Holy Spirit, God, through the power and justice of the Holy Spirit, executed both Ananias and his wife, Saphira. Their crime? Lying to the Holy Spirit – to God – through Peter. Acts 5:1-11.
No trial, no appeals, just death on the spot.
God: “You shall not accept indemnity in place of the life of a murderer who deserves the death penalty; he must be put to death.” Numbers 35:31 (NAB) full context http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/numbers/numbers35.htm
For murder, there is no mitigation from a death sentence.
God: Genesis 9:5-6, from the 1764 Quaker Bible, the only Quaker bible.
5 And I will certainly require the Blood of your Lives, and that from the Paw of any Beast: from the Hand likewise of Man, even of any one’s Brother, will I require the Life of a Man.
6 He that sheds Man’s Blood, shall have his own shed by Man; because in the Likeness of God he made Mankind.
Of all the versions/translations, this may be the most unequivocal – Murder requires execution of the murderer. It is a command. The Noahic covenant if for all persons and all times.
“All interpretations, contrary to the biblical support of capital punishment, are false. Interpreters ought to listen to the Bible’s own agenda, rather than to squeeze from it implications for their own agenda. As the ancient rabbis taught, “Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.33.). Part of Synopsis of Professor Lloyd R. Bailey’s book Capital Punishment: What the Bible Says, Abingdon Press, 1987 Saint (& Pope) Pius V, “The just use of (executions), far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this (Fifth) Commandment which prohibits murder.” “The Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent” (1566)Pope Pius XII: “When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live.” 9/14/52.
17 thoughts on “Reader says Bible endorses capital punishment”
I am not angry nor do I represent any group.
Friends of Justice is building a Common Peace Community to tear down the walls of hostility. Mr. Sharp is a wall builder, building a wall between what he designates as “saved” from “unsaved”. He worships a god who guards the wall. We worship a different god altogether. Our God is incarnate in an itinerant peasant who invites us to follow him to live outside the gates of that wall. Mr. Sharp’s comments discourage us from our mission and should be taken off this blog. Nancy Bean, founding board member of Friends of Justice
I can understand why one would not want to give any credence to Sharp’s dull understanding of following Jesus, but it does make a great example of how one can certainly pick and choose scripture to support any position conceivable. It reminded me of the Christianity Today editorial that argued that yes, loving your enemy can support the concept of killing them.
Douglas E:
As you can see, I make a real effort to have as much supportive material as possible, for the position I put forward, a position well known and expressed for 2000 years, by the greatest of Christian scholars, many of whom I quoted for reference.
Do you find all of them in error, as well?
I certainly did not pick and choose scripture, by taking anythng out of context, to make a point, which the overall text did not support.
You might consider that Prof. Bailey was speaking to you.
Regardless of the Bible, our system of justice results in about 15 or 20 years of cost and torment of appeals, much of which would be avoided if there was no death penalty.
revnancy:
I think we need blogs like this to remind us of what our neighbors think. I had never before considered the effect of Jesus not being killed, given the notion of salvation by blood.
The teaching of Jesus is predicated upon redemptive non-violence and a rejection of the myth of redemptive violence. There is overwhelming consensus on this point among New Testament scholars. If we can’t see this someone has been messing with our theology.
I think someone needs to point out that, in God’s perfection, we all die because of our sins, whether we are saved or not.
There is no certain teaching that such death is non violent, at all, with ample evidence that there is no such requirment by Jesus, with the added truth that death without salvation far excedes the horror of any earthly violence.
One of the greatest and best known of biblical passages, teaches that lesson.
St. Dismas, the good thief died on the cross, soon to be in heaven, though made to suffer a horrendos death, of which Jesus made no comment, as salvation, not non violence, was the issue.
Mr Sharp – Well, in a word, yes. Anabaptism, and anabaptist writers, leaders, scholars and practitioners have been around for over 500 years, and we all reject violence as the Christian response to violence. In addition there are many contemporary biblical scholars and Christian leaders who agree with the anabaptist perspective on the death penalty, and as Alan notes, rejecting the entire concept of redemptive violence.
Mr. Elliot:
All problems with all justice systems and with any and all sancitons could be done away with, by eliminating all sanctions.
Instead, what mankind has chosen to do, is to improve, as with many other government issues, as well.
As to cost and torment, Virginia executes within 7 years of sentencing, on average, and has executed 72% of those sent to death row since 1976, or 108 murderers. Should anyone wish to improve either cost and/or appeals issues, they have a good model.
Appeals for life without parole, as you may know, can last for life.
Douglas E:
Many don’t know the true history of some of the anababtist leadership.
Quaker founder George Fox was only opposed the death penalty for lesser crimes, such as stealing, but not for murder. I have found no evidence that he opposed capital punishment for all crimes.
The other major figure in Quaker history was William Penn who, ” . . . in the preface to the “First Frame of Government”, argued for the divine right of government to “terrify evildoers” . . .”
In the Pennsylvania Holy Experiment of Quaker government ” . . . capital punishment was only allowed for treason and murder.” “However, in 1700 mutilation and branding were added, and in 1718 the provincial (Quaker) assembly extended the death penalty to twelve more felonies.”
” . . . Quakers in the assembly said that killing a soldier, whose sole crime was obeying his sovereign, was vastly different from executing a murderer or a burglar for violating laws, (which was proper).” “Quakers: Fox and Penn’s Holy Experiment”, Guides to Peace and Justice from Ancient Sages to the Suffragettes, HISTORY OF PEACE – Volume 1, by Sanderson Beck, World Peace
Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey:
” . . . the decree of Genesis 9:5-6 is equally enduring and cannot be separated from the other pledges and instructions of its immediate context, Genesis 8:20-9:17; . . . that is true unless specific Biblical authority can be cited for the deletion, of which there appears to be none. It seems strange that any opponents of capital punishment who professes to recognize the authority of the Bible either overlook or disregard the divine decree in this covenant with Noah; . . . capital punishment should be recognized . . . as the divinely instituted penalty for murder; The basis of this decree . . . is as enduring as God; . . . murder not only deprives a man of a portion of his earthly life . . . it is a further sin against him as a creature made in the image of God and against God Himself whose image the murderer does not respect.” (p. 111-113) “A Bible Study”, within Essays on the Death Penalty, T. Robert Ingram, ed., St. Thomas Press, Houston, 1963, 1992. Carey was a Professor of Bible and Past President of George Fox College.
Ms. Nell:
Somethng I recommend to Mr. Bean, yesterday.
“Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die”, by John Piper, D.theol., Pastor , Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota and is the author of more than 40 Christian books.
5) Jesus was under no constraint, but acted completely voluntarily.
“For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:17–18)
Piper concludes,
When John says, “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16), we should feel the intensity of his love for us to the degree that we see his intentionality to suffer and die. I pray that you will feel it profoundly. (The Intensity of Christ’s Love and the Intentionality of His Death)
From the Quaker Information Center website: Quakers are not: Amish, Anabaptists, Shakers or Puritans–we come from a separate tradition than these other groups. We mostly don’t dress like the man on the box of oats anymore, and today we hardly ever call people “thee.”
Douglas E:
Thank you for the correction. There are Quaker groups which are very akin to anabaptists. here:
But, you are correct that, as a rule, they should be considered separate.
My error and apology.
Ms. Nell:
Something I recommend to Dr. Bean, yesterday.
“Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die”, by John Piper, D.theol., Pastor , Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota and is the author of more than 40 Christian books.
many quotes online
=====
Added, now:
5) Jesus was under no constraint, but acted completely voluntarily.
“For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:17–18)
Piper concludes,
When John says, “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16), we should feel the intensity of his love for us to the degree that we see his intentionality to suffer and die. I pray that you will feel it profoundly. (The Intensity of Christ’s Love and the Intentionality of His Death)
from Piper’s blog
Of course, apology accepted.
My understanding is that tomorrow is Piper’s last day at Bethlehem Baptist, which is a bit misleading in that Piper is a hard-line Calvinist. Personally I have no truck many aspects of Calvinism and thus believe that much of what Piper preaches is mis-guided.
Friends of Justice 
I am not angry nor do I represent any group.
Friends of Justice is building a Common Peace Community to tear down the walls of hostility. Mr. Sharp is a wall builder, building a wall between what he designates as “saved” from “unsaved”. He worships a god who guards the wall. We worship a different god altogether. Our God is incarnate in an itinerant peasant who invites us to follow him to live outside the gates of that wall. Mr. Sharp’s comments discourage us from our mission and should be taken off this blog. Nancy Bean, founding board member of Friends of Justice
I can understand why one would not want to give any credence to Sharp’s dull understanding of following Jesus, but it does make a great example of how one can certainly pick and choose scripture to support any position conceivable. It reminded me of the Christianity Today editorial that argued that yes, loving your enemy can support the concept of killing them.
Douglas E:
As you can see, I make a real effort to have as much supportive material as possible, for the position I put forward, a position well known and expressed for 2000 years, by the greatest of Christian scholars, many of whom I quoted for reference.
Do you find all of them in error, as well?
I certainly did not pick and choose scripture, by taking anythng out of context, to make a point, which the overall text did not support.
You might consider that Prof. Bailey was speaking to you.
Regardless of the Bible, our system of justice results in about 15 or 20 years of cost and torment of appeals, much of which would be avoided if there was no death penalty.
revnancy:
I think we need blogs like this to remind us of what our neighbors think. I had never before considered the effect of Jesus not being killed, given the notion of salvation by blood.
The teaching of Jesus is predicated upon redemptive non-violence and a rejection of the myth of redemptive violence. There is overwhelming consensus on this point among New Testament scholars. If we can’t see this someone has been messing with our theology.
I think someone needs to point out that, in God’s perfection, we all die because of our sins, whether we are saved or not.
There is no certain teaching that such death is non violent, at all, with ample evidence that there is no such requirment by Jesus, with the added truth that death without salvation far excedes the horror of any earthly violence.
One of the greatest and best known of biblical passages, teaches that lesson.
St. Dismas, the good thief died on the cross, soon to be in heaven, though made to suffer a horrendos death, of which Jesus made no comment, as salvation, not non violence, was the issue.
Mr Sharp – Well, in a word, yes. Anabaptism, and anabaptist writers, leaders, scholars and practitioners have been around for over 500 years, and we all reject violence as the Christian response to violence. In addition there are many contemporary biblical scholars and Christian leaders who agree with the anabaptist perspective on the death penalty, and as Alan notes, rejecting the entire concept of redemptive violence.
Mr. Elliot:
All problems with all justice systems and with any and all sancitons could be done away with, by eliminating all sanctions.
Instead, what mankind has chosen to do, is to improve, as with many other government issues, as well.
As to cost and torment, Virginia executes within 7 years of sentencing, on average, and has executed 72% of those sent to death row since 1976, or 108 murderers. Should anyone wish to improve either cost and/or appeals issues, they have a good model.
Appeals for life without parole, as you may know, can last for life.
Douglas E:
Many don’t know the true history of some of the anababtist leadership.
Quaker founder George Fox was only opposed the death penalty for lesser crimes, such as stealing, but not for murder. I have found no evidence that he opposed capital punishment for all crimes.
The other major figure in Quaker history was William Penn who, ” . . . in the preface to the “First Frame of Government”, argued for the divine right of government to “terrify evildoers” . . .”
In the Pennsylvania Holy Experiment of Quaker government ” . . . capital punishment was only allowed for treason and murder.” “However, in 1700 mutilation and branding were added, and in 1718 the provincial (Quaker) assembly extended the death penalty to twelve more felonies.”
” . . . Quakers in the assembly said that killing a soldier, whose sole crime was obeying his sovereign, was vastly different from executing a murderer or a burglar for violating laws, (which was proper).” “Quakers: Fox and Penn’s Holy Experiment”, Guides to Peace and Justice from Ancient Sages to the Suffragettes, HISTORY OF PEACE – Volume 1, by Sanderson Beck, World Peace
Quaker biblical scholar Dr. Gervas A. Carey:
” . . . the decree of Genesis 9:5-6 is equally enduring and cannot be separated from the other pledges and instructions of its immediate context, Genesis 8:20-9:17; . . . that is true unless specific Biblical authority can be cited for the deletion, of which there appears to be none. It seems strange that any opponents of capital punishment who professes to recognize the authority of the Bible either overlook or disregard the divine decree in this covenant with Noah; . . . capital punishment should be recognized . . . as the divinely instituted penalty for murder; The basis of this decree . . . is as enduring as God; . . . murder not only deprives a man of a portion of his earthly life . . . it is a further sin against him as a creature made in the image of God and against God Himself whose image the murderer does not respect.” (p. 111-113) “A Bible Study”, within Essays on the Death Penalty, T. Robert Ingram, ed., St. Thomas Press, Houston, 1963, 1992. Carey was a Professor of Bible and Past President of George Fox College.
Ms. Nell:
Somethng I recommend to Mr. Bean, yesterday.
“Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die”, by John Piper, D.theol., Pastor , Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota and is the author of more than 40 Christian books.
Brief summary, here:
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/why-did-jesus-have-to-die-50-reasons-from-theologian-john-piper-2/
=====
Added, now:
5) Jesus was under no constraint, but acted completely voluntarily.
“For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:17–18)
Piper concludes,
When John says, “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16), we should feel the intensity of his love for us to the degree that we see his intentionality to suffer and die. I pray that you will feel it profoundly. (The Intensity of Christ’s Love and the Intentionality of His Death)
from http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/every-calvary-step-was-love
From the Quaker Information Center website: Quakers are not: Amish, Anabaptists, Shakers or Puritans–we come from a separate tradition than these other groups. We mostly don’t dress like the man on the box of oats anymore, and today we hardly ever call people “thee.”
Douglas E:
Thank you for the correction. There are Quaker groups which are very akin to anabaptists. here:
http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Anabaptists.htm
But, you are correct that, as a rule, they should be considered separate.
My error and apology.
Ms. Nell:
Something I recommend to Dr. Bean, yesterday.
“Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die”, by John Piper, D.theol., Pastor , Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota and is the author of more than 40 Christian books.
many quotes online
=====
Added, now:
5) Jesus was under no constraint, but acted completely voluntarily.
“For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (John 10:17–18)
Piper concludes,
When John says, “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16), we should feel the intensity of his love for us to the degree that we see his intentionality to suffer and die. I pray that you will feel it profoundly. (The Intensity of Christ’s Love and the Intentionality of His Death)
from Piper’s blog
Of course, apology accepted.
My understanding is that tomorrow is Piper’s last day at Bethlehem Baptist, which is a bit misleading in that Piper is a hard-line Calvinist. Personally I have no truck many aspects of Calvinism and thus believe that much of what Piper preaches is mis-guided.
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/185174322.html?refer=y