In 1986, Kenneth B. Harris, a crack cocaine addict had entered Lisa Haack’s apartment, raped and choked her, and then spent an hour drowning her in her bathtub. Now, he lay strapped to a gurney in a small powder-blue room in the state penitentiary in Huntsville, Texas, his feet lashed together and his muscular arms extended as if on a crucifix. Harris showed no fear. He turned his head to the side to smile and nod at his audience. With the warden at his head and the priest chaplain at his feet, Harris apologized to both families for the pain he caused them. Then he told the warden he was ready to die. Harris closed his eyes and expelled his last breath in two loud gasps through trembling lips. Six minutes later, Harris was pronounced dead.¹

Much controversy has raged around the question of capital punishment. On one hand it has been hailed as divinely instituted and socially necessary. On the other hand it has been labeled as barbaric and unchristian. Is capital punishment ever a morally justifiable form of criminal punishment? Is the death penalty effective in deterring crime? Is permanently incapacitating an offender the best way to protect the society?

The United States is one of the few industrialized countries that still retains capital punishment. Most countries in Europe have prohibited it, while it remains in force in some Asian countries. Many Third world countries and Islamic republics apply the death penalty for a variety of crimes, not just for murder. In poll after poll, more than 70 percent of Americans say they support the death penalty, a figure that has remained consistent for at least the past decade.²

The United States Supreme Court has issued two significant decisions concerning capital punishment. The first was the case of Furman v. Georgia (1972), in which the court ruled that capital punishment as currently administered in the state of Georgia violated the Eighth Amendment against cruel and inhuman punishment. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the court upheld a death sentence for the murder but made sure the juries had careful guidelines in determining the appropriateness of the death sentence. After these cases, thirty-five states enacted new laws authorizing the death penalty for certain crimes. In 1974, in the wake of growing international terrorism, Congress legislated the death penalty for murder in airline hijacking cases.

The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution protects individuals from cruel and unusual punishment. Specifically it provides protection from the wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain. The Western justice system rejects much of the Islamic style of punishment. For example, in many Muslim countries that are ruled by Islamic law, theft is punishable by having one’s hand cut off, and other crimes are punishable by floggings. The justice system of the Western world would view such practices in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Second, the Eighth Amendment protects a person from punishment that is out of proportion to the crime committed. Finally, the Constitution protects individuals from punishment without due process of law. Historically, capital punishment has not been considered cruel and inhuman punishment because when the Bill of Rights was written in 1789, every state allowed the death penalty. Its constitutionality was not substantially challenged until the Furman case in 1972.

Societies are designed to function in an orderly fashion, otherwise there would be chaos, and society as an organized whole would cease to exist. Thus, the punishment inflicted must be in proportion to the crime committed, and thereby able to equalize the offense, restoring balance in society.

When a murder occurs and innocent life is taken, the only punishment that is able to equalize the crime is capital punishment. Only the death penalty can express society’s moral outrage at the taking of an innocent life. " Justice being satisfied is especially important for a society dependent on due process of law instead of vigilantism to restore the imbalance created by crime."³

Those opposed to the death penalty claim that capital punishment is contrary to the New testament teachings on forgiveness. The New Testament teachings on revenge and forgiveness are part of a personal ethic that forbids individuals from taking revenge and that requires forgiveness when wronged. But this ethic can not be applied to the state. The responsibility of the state is to punish criminals, not to forgive them. The state may not exercise its role unjustly or indiscriminately, but God has given the state the responsibility of criminal punishment ( Rom. 13:1-7; I Peter 2:14)

Since the fear of death is virtually a universal phenomenon, the death penalty is an unparalleled deterrent for people considering a crime. Generally, the harsher the potential penalty; the greater the deterrent value of such a penalty. Deterrence increases with the severity of the penalty involved. Perhaps that is why the crime rate is much lower in societies under Islamic law than it is in the West, since in many cases Islamic law prescribes much harsher punishment than imprisonment. This is not to say that Islamic law is preferable, only that its severe punishment does act as a deterrent.

In a study done by Professor Isaac Ehrlick of the university of Chicago. He submitted evidence that "suggests that seven or eight innocent lives are saved with every execution."⁴ One murderer of about twenty innocent victims was asked if he would have killed those people if he knew that the result would be the electric chair. His response to the question was " Do you think I’m dumber than you are ?" ⁵ This crime occurred in New York, which at the time did not have the death penalty; which according to the criminal would have deterred him from committing the crime. Thus, society should retain the death penalty rather than unnecessarily risk the lives of potential murder victims by abolishing an effective deterrent.

3.  Capital Punishment Is Not Cruel and Unusual Punishment.

The Eighth Amendment in the Bill of Rights prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. This is normally taken to mean punishment that inflicts pain in a careless and unnecessary manner, as well as punishment that is unbalanced to the crime committed. Critics of the death penalty argue that it is inherently cruel and unusual punishment, yet it can be administered in a way that does not involve wanton infliction of pain, for instance lethal injection. Thus I maintain that it can be accomplished in a way that is neither cruel or unusual.

Those who oppose the death penalty cannot argue that the death sentence is out of proportion to the crime committed. It is not unreasonable to demand the life of a person who has taken someone’s life by first-degree murder. In cases where someone is convicted of first-degree murder and the criteria for the death penalty are met, then the notion that the life of the murderer be exchanged for the life of the innocent victim does not constitute punishment that is out of proportion to the crime.

When compared to alternatives, the death penalty, when quickly and painlessly administered is less cruel and unusual than serving a life term in prison. The indignities and harsh conditions coupled with the person knowing that one day he will die should be considered cruel and unusual punishment. So if those opposed to the death penalty are concerned about it being cruel and unusual, to be consistent they should object to a life term in prison due to its cruel and anguishing conditions.

The reason for this is to insure that no mistakes are made. As a result prisoners on death row had been waiting for an average of six years while they exhausted their appeals. "According to the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C., 69 prisoners have been released from death row since 1973 because they were improperly convicted or because evidence of their innocence was discovered after they were sentenced to death."⁶ This creates backlogs in appeals court. It would be much simpler and more cost-effective to eliminate the death penalty in favor of life sentences without the possibility of parole.

Statistics demonstrate that most of the convicted criminals who receive death sentences are minority men, particularly blacks, who come from lower economic classes. It is rare that whites or the middle and upper class of society receive the death penalty. Thus, capital punishment is unjust, discriminating, and actually oppresses the most disadvantaged groups in society.

The death penalty removes the possibility of rehabilitation that could lead to an individual becoming a productive member of society. In some cases, with the process of appealing a death sentence taking as long as it does, a convicted murder could be a very different person at the execution date than at the date of sentencing. A person could be put to death despite being rehabilitated during the time spent on death row. While many criminals do not change while in prison, some clearly do, even some who are awaiting a death sentence.

Now that the arguments for and against the death penalty have been seen, the contributions of Scripture to the issue must be considered. It seems every time a murderer is about to suffer capital punishment, people demonstrate against it. Some people object because they think it is against the teaching of the Bible. But what does the Bible teach about capital punishment?

The first time God taught on the subject of capital punishment was to Noah and his sons, "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)⁷ What God was requiring of the human race leaves no room for misunderstanding. Human life is so sacred to God that he requires the life of the murderer, whether it be man or beast.

God has clearly taught capital punishment will be a deterrent to crime. In Deuteronomy 19:15-21, Moses describes a court scene with judges and witnesses. He said, "And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot"(v.21). God’s justice was to punish a person according to his crime. "Life shall go for life" meant that if a person had willfully killed an innocent person, capital punishment was to be administered. This form of punishment was to be a deterrent to crime: "And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you"(v.20).

The New Testament teaches the same thing as the Old Testament on the sacredness of life and capital punishment. The command " Thou shall not kill" occurs five times in the New Testament (Matthew 5:21,27; Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20; Romans 13:9; James 2:11). Romans clearly teaches that the origin and authority of civil government is God:

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 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 13:1-4).

The sword is not a paddle but a death instrument. Civil government has been authorized by God to administer capital punishment. In Acts 25:11, Paul endorsed capital punishment when he said "For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die" in his trial before Festus. Paul acknowledged the authority that God had given to civil government. Paul could not have made the statement to Festus if capital punishment had been a sin. How could Paul agree to participate in that which god prohibits?

One important limit on the administration of capital punishment is described in Numbers 35:30, which says, " 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 prevented someone from being put to death on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone. The term translated "witness" literally means an eyewitness. Thus, it took two eyewitnesses of a murder to justify the use of the death penalty. The general principle that is important in this verse is that the judicial system must have a high degree of certainty about the guilt of the murderer. Circumstantial evidence and a single eyewitness were insufficient by themselves. Circumstantial evidence leaves room for doubt, and two eyewitnesses were necessary to insure that eyewitness testimony was corroborated before someone could be put to death. Thus, the degree of certainty required for the use of the death penalty exceeded that of the reasonable doubt standard that is used throughout the Western legal system.

If this principle is applied consistently to capital cases today, it would prevent a rush to judgment and conviction of a person on circumstantial evidence.

We have seen arguments both for and against capital punishment. When one lays these arguments against what the Bible teaches, clearly we see that God has authorized capital punishment. And if capital punishment is properly enforced by the civil authorities it will serve as an effective deterrent against murder. And our society will be a better, happier, and more peaceable environment in which to live.

NOTES

1. Shannon Brownlee, Dan McGraw, Jason Vest, "The Place for Vengeance," U.S News and World Report 16 June 1997: 25.
2. Op. Cit: 27.
3. Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1995) 186.
4. Jack L. Ray, " Life Shall go for Life," Gospel Advocate February 1998: 38
5. Ibid.
6. John W. Wright, ed., The New York Times 1998 Almanac (New York: Penguin, 1998) 326.
7. All Scripture references are from the King James Version.

 

Mike Gurganus
PO Box 916
Henderson, NC 27536