Pennsylvania media has long been fixated on the trial of the man who went on a murderous Anti-Semitic rampage at a synagogue in Pittsburgh back in 2018. Eleven people were murdered and six more suffered injury. The Federal trial resulted in a death penalty verdict and this has generated a range of responses. As I took them in and reflected on them in light of Scripture, I found myself not a little frustrated by the many false assumptions being made both within and without the Christian community.
Romans 13 teaches that the state is empowered with the sword,
a clear enough reference to violence if not an overt allusion to the tool of
execution.
Though this may sound odd to some, the passage does not teach
that Christians should support and encourage (let alone demand) capital
punishment. The preceding section (unfortunately separated by means of
artificial chapter division) teaches this. We (Christians) do not pursue
vengeance and as such the state fulfills a providential purpose but not a
covenantal, redemptive, or thus Kingdom function. The statements Paul makes
with regard to the state – which at the time was the Roman Empire under Nero
are generic, providing broad strokes of the role of the state vis-à-vis
Providence in these Last Days. Those that think Paul was outlining some kind of
idealized state or model of limited government, a mantle meant to be taken up
by Christians have erred and misread the passage, once again falling prey to
artificial chapter divisions which destroy the flow of argument – and one that
defeats their assumptions all down the line.
The role of the state and that of Rome (as implied by the
passage) is in continuity with the Providential ministry/servant function
played by previous Bestial states such as Assyria, Babylon, and Persia. The
latter's interactions vis-à-vis Israel has to be considered with a little more
care as there is some redemptive typology at work pointing ahead to the
inclusion of the gentile nations and the Kingly office of Christ – a
foreshadowing of the Church that is expressed with Cyrus the Achaemenid in a
way not seen with Tiglath-Pileser or Nebuchadnezzar. But even with the latter
examples they are called 'servants' or ministers in that they brought about a
typological Day of the Lord event in their respective destructions of Israel
and Judah – and thus they were the means or tools by which Providence expressed
judgment. Though fulfilling their Providential role, their judgment and
motivations were unrighteous, flawed and thus ultimately worthy of condemnation
– and as such the 'type' (as do all types) ultimately falls short and fails. If
it didn't, it wouldn't be a type.
Christ does come as judge but not in the form of Beast (the
False Judge) but as One who has triumphed over the Beast and defeated death –
the True and Righteous Judge.
Don't be confused by the typological and prophetic lessons of
Cyrus. They are pertinent, but as both Daniel and Revelation make clear –
Persia was still a Beast-power destined to be supplanted by the
Greco-Macedonian Hellenistic Empire of Alexander – and then by the worst of
all, Rome. And it is the spectre of the Roman Beast that haunts all of
subsequent Western Civilisation, including so-called Christendom. The
appropriation of Bestial Rome by the Church – an event often celebrated, was in
reality a tragic case of apostasy, and the assumptions live on to this very day
as the Church lost the lessons of Romans. This is further confused by those would
try and place a libertarian overlay on to Romans – an impossibility. Paul is
suggesting that even a Bestial state is better than the chaos of anarchy.
History demonstrates this, but history is neglected – as is the Scripture.
Returning to the matter at hand, when it comes to capital
punishment we as Christians don't support it, encourage it, or celebrate it –
but we don't oppose it either. In the end it doesn't really have anything to do
with us – not directly. If the state imposes it – so be it.
If the state decides to clampdown on gross forms of sin with
a heavy hand, then it can be an expression of Providence reining in wickedness,
a case of extended Common Grace. For example should the state decide to
restrain sodomy in all its manifestations, I will hardly lament it. But that
doesn't mean I support or encourage the state to do this. And a lack of lament
is not the same as celebration.
Be careful what you wish for. Such an empowered state is
likely to wax Bestial and confuse obedience with idolatrous obeisance and so
empowered, it will turn that sword just as easily on Christians – that is
assuming they don't sell out to it, which in terms of history has more often
than not been the result.
The state employs many 'swords' or threats of violence in the
form of fines and penalties that if neglected result in men with badges and
guns seizing a man and putting him in a cage and sometimes killing him. If he
resists he runs the risk of being cut down by the sword in the form of bullets.
There are buffers in modern society that did not exist in the past – and we
shouldn't despise them.
In the case of the most heinous of crimes like that of the
Pittsburgh Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting, our modern post-Enlightenment
society struggles with these issues as many consider capital punishment a relic
of a former and more barbaric age. It's odd as many of these same people will
champion various farcical but deadly humanitarian wars and destructive
interventions. Others seem all but oblivious to the role Wall Street plays in
generating and promoting violence around the world. They chafe at the prospect
of an individual murderer being executed but the layers of insulation society
has provided grant a plausible deniability to the fact that they too are part
of and profiting from a vicious system that is at its core violent and
murderous – and one that profits from that violence.
Many also fall into materialist commentary and the
assumptions of that philosophy seem to dominate the conversation. Death is
viewed as ceasing to exist, the mere dispersal of atoms, and thus when
murderers or extreme criminals die before trial or are executed, it's as if
they have escaped punishment and find a common fate that awaits all – even the
innocent. They think it's not fair.
But as Christians we know – as indeed the vast majority of
humanity has always known – death is not the end of the story. There is a
reckoning.
The old understand was that meeting your Maker and standing
before the Throne of Judgment sent that person to a fate and punishment beyond
anything man could administer. This is no longer grasped and in fact it is
explicitly rejected as it has wider, disturbing implications – not just for the
materialist philosophy but for ethics and what might be described as individual
and social psychology. By the latter I refer simply to modern man's ability to
retain sanity – which is already pretty shaky at best. The idea that there is a
reckoning after death has obviously profound implications and it is upsetting (even
ruinous) to think of loved ones suffering – which indeed is the case.
The materialist seems to think that putting a murderer in a
cage for decades brings about a type of justice – through means of their
suffering. In fact in listening to the commentary on this case, one
Pennsylvania politician who was upset by the death verdict seemed to relish the
thought that the murderer might suffer for decades in a cell and would prefer
it over execution. I'm not sure how that's justice. It doesn't fix anything or
bring anyone back. In fact he more or less is admitting that he wants torture
in lieu of the death penalty. Isn't that problematic as well? One is left to
assume that low-grade long-term torture is okay while severe short-term torture
(such as what happened at Black Sites) is barbaric and criminal?
Let's just say there's not a lot of consistent thinking at
this point and as many have testified – decades under isolated heavy lockdown
in a concrete cage is a form of torture that eventually breaks the mind. I
guess the politician in question finds some satisfaction in that. How is that
not sadism?
This is not for a moment to grant anything to those who
ravenously advocate for the death penalty. Their thirst for vengeance is
un-Christian as the apostle says and alien to the ethos of the New Testament.
Execution solves nothing other than it sends the person to the Divine bar –
where only the Almighty can actually provide the justice due. How many have
failed to understand this?
In other cases people advocate for or against the death
penalty in light of the many (and often extreme) delays that exist in the
American system and its labyrinthine judicial bureaucracy. On this basis some
even turn to an anti-death penalty position on a pragmatic basis rooted in the
economics of the question. It's cheaper to incarcerate a man for life than to
pay for all the legal proceedings generated by a death verdict. Practically
speaking, the point has some validity. Others would simply want to eliminate
the extended appeals process.
Timothy McVeigh was executed in June 2001, just over six
years after the Oklahoma City Bombing, and a mere four years after his
conviction. That's about as quick as it comes and that's because he wanted to
die and waived as many of the appeals and reviews as he could. The average wait
time is probably more like fifteen to twenty years and some wait even longer.
For the families and officials wanting to see these people executed, the drawn
out process becomes almost a form of torture for them as they cannot have any
kind of resolution – it just drags on for years and decades.
But of course, the execution of your child's murderer (or
whatever the crime) brings no real resolution as many have discovered and are
left feeling rather empty and unsatisfied. It's still something less than true
justice.
As frustrating and as the long delays are, we could look at
it as a form of mercy. It gives that person time to repent versus the older
practices in which those sentenced to death were often strung up within a few
days or weeks of sentence.
And that's just it – there are some, even some professed
Christians who actually don't want to see that person repent. They want to
condemn them to eternal punishment. Not only does that demonstrate a poor
understanding of grace, it's a verdict we don't have the right to administer.
And let's face it a lot of those executed are going to end up in Hell. By
pushing for their execution we are overriding and nullifying the Great
Commission and our call to make them disciples – another point lost on the
myriad Dominionist sects.
About a year ago we made sure to visit the Tree of Life
Synagogue while we were in Pittsburgh for the day. It's always interesting to
see the context. We had been down the street from it on many occasions and the Squirrel
Hill area is familiar to us. But actually seeing it and then re-watching the
footage – it's surreal as I'm sure it was for the people living in that
neighbourhood. One could not help but be moved, not just for the individuals
but the community and especially the significant and rather visible Jewish
community in the neighbourhood.
The shooter certainly deserves to die but that's not for me
to impose. If the Federal government wants to do that – fine, I won't protest.
But I also won't pretend its justice as only God can render that.
I do not celebrate it or condemn it – but I would not advocate
for it either as some Christians mistakenly believe they are called to do. I
can only imagine what was said from many a pulpit in the area the Sunday
following the verdict – and what will be said someday if he is in fact
executed.
The discussions heard in the media-sphere are many but few
are helpful as they are misguided and often rooted in false assumptions. That
said, the discussions heard in Christian circles and on Christian radio are not
helpful either and often completely miss the point with regard to New Testament
teaching.
Many appeals are made to Genesis 9 and the requirement of
blood for blood. While certainly true, the New Testament supersedes this
passage and provides authoritative commentary on it, a point often missed and
in some cases (as with someone like John MacArthur) explicitly rejected. The
immediate context of Genesis 9 was anticipatory of the Mosaic epoch and its
many typological penal sanctions – many of which were capital in nature. Modern
day Judaizers appeal to this fulfilled and now obsolete covenant in an ad hoc manner in order to justify what
are often their own proclivities and predilections. Through their misuse and
abuse of the text and their reading and utilisation of it in a de- or
non-Christocentric fashion, they dishonour the Lord and lead the Church astray
– fostering misguided feelings and generating a spinoff set of ethics
incompatible with our New Testament calling.
All of this needs to be kept in mind as we consume media,
reflect on cases such as this, and interact with what we hear in the context of
the Church. There are very few who get this right and understand the issues at
stake. And to be candid, the true Christian position (as is so often the case)
is unsatisfying to the flesh and a form of foolishness in the eyes of the
world. We should not be surprised. This too is a question of faith and its
application. Only by living life in the Spirit can we hope to see things aright
and have a sense of peace while living in this present evil age.