1
CHRISTIAN ETHICS
Lesson 17: The Sanctity of Life—Crime, Punishment, and Biomedical Issues
Introduction:
Crime is an activity or negligence that a human authority has decided to punish, usually
because it is regarded as injurious to others. Crime is not the same as sin or moral evil.
Not all sin is criminal (e.g., lust, pride, greed). Nor is all crime sin (e.g., unintentional
unknowing negligence such as an automobile defect or medical malpractice, or to witness
for Christ in a society which has criminalized it). Normally, however, crime and its
punishment are determined by society for the welfare of its members and based,
hopefully, on moral principles.
I. Crime and Punishment
A. The Nature of Crime and Punishment
1. Until the 19th century—crime was believed to be the outworking of a sinful
disposition for which the criminal himself was held responsible.
2. Modern behavioral sciences have assigned other causes, shifting responsibility
away from the criminal’s choice. E.g.,
a. Psychology—mental illness or incompetence
b. Sociology—the environment (environmental determinism and cultural
relativism) such as lack of love, discipline, injustice in society, evil
companions, poor education, poverty, the schools, the media, drugs,
racism, unemployment, etc.
Scripture teaches that indeed the environment does play a significant part
in shaping one’s behavior (cf. Ps 1). But it also insists that each person is
responsible for his own moral destiny and accountable for his own
actions.
3. What should be judged a crime?
That behavior judged to be potentially or actually injurious to others and
which society has the will to enforce.
a. Though it is ignorant and foolish to say that morality cannot be
legislated since most law has to do with questions of morality, most
would agree that private morality cannot be legislated (e.g. sins of the
heart).
b. But private vs. public morality are slippery categories. What is “private”
is never really so. Thus, are the use of drugs, adult consenting sex,
drunkenness, gambling, vagrancy, prostitution and pornography really
private and “victimless crimes” deserving of decriminalization?
c. Whatever society criminalizes, however, it must have the will to enforce.
Otherwise, respect for law is undermined and a lawless society is
promoted.
4. What Is The Purpose of Punishment?
a. Rehabilitation
This has strong Biblical precedent (Eze 18:23; 2 Thess 3:13-15; 1 Tim
1:19-20; 1 Cor 5:5 compared with 2 Cor 2:6-8). Yet it is admitted by
2
almost all hands to have been an almost complete failure in the USA.
Repeat offenders run as high as 70%. No one really knows what
“rehabilitates” criminals. Here is where the Christian teaching of
repentance (assumption of responsibility) and regeneration may play its
greatest role. Forgiveness and nurture in a Christian community can do
much (cf. Colson’s Prison Fellowship and Matt 25:36,39,43-45).
b. Retribution
This is punishment due in vindication of justice. Though not the sole nor
paramount reason given in Scripture, it is nevertheless one clear purpose
of punishment enjoined in Scripture (cf. the role of government officials to
mete out vengeance on evil-doers, Rom 13:3,4; 1 Pet 2:14). This
provision, however, has all but been rejected and scorned by so-called
“humanitarians” as cruel and uncivilized. But if this is unloving and cruel,
then God Himself is impugned as immoral for He promises a final
vindictive judgment upon mankind. Yet Christians must work toward a
more just system of punishment—consistent apprehension as well as
justice in sentencing and punishment.
c. Protection
The innocent are protected by incarcerating the criminal. This principle
too is strongly supported by Scripture where it commands the protection
of the widow, the fatherless, the alien, and the weak. Government is
“ordained of God” that citizens might lead “a quiet and peaceable life”
(1 Tim 2:2). Yet it is questionable whether imprisonment is the best
means of accomplishing this. Currently, prison sentences are short, early
parole the rule, and repeat crime is all but certain. Christians must be
willing to take direct action against crime when called upon, report all
crime, and explore alternative punishments to imprisonments for the
75% non-violent criminals. For the remaining 25% violent criminals, there
should be more stringent pre-trial qualifications for bail/bond releases,
longer prison terms, less parole.
d. Deterrence
This is strongly supported by Scripture. 1 Tim 5:20—“As for those who
persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand
in fear.” Cf. Deut 17:12-13; Acts 5; Rom 13:1-7. Because the 2 factors of
certainty and swiftness of punishment are most important in securing
deterrence, our current system is doing little to deter.
5. Bad Law
Bad law includes unenforceable law which undermines respect for law and
breeds corruption, unjust law which convicts without adequate evidence or
unevenness of application, and law which punishes inappropriately or
unequally. Such law encourages crime.
6. Unpunished Crime
Is it wrong to allow crime sometimes to go unpunished (e.g., David and
Bathsheba, the woman taken in adultery, the Samaritan adulteress at the
well)? May mercy and forgiveness in some circumstances be extended
without violating justice?
3
7. Alternative Forms of Punishment
a. deprivation of privilege?
b. corporal punishment (e.g., caning)?
c. banishment or exile?
d. military service?
e. restitution?
How likely are the first 4 to be instituted in the USA? Restitution (or
monetary fine or expropriation of property) holds some promise. It would
compensate both the victim and the government for the crime. It would
apply to non-violent crimes of adults and juveniles. Other possibilities are
community service or providing for the victim in some way. Restitution is
certainly a biblical principle (Lev 6:2-5; Nu 5:7).
B. Capital Punishment
Should capital punishment be employed as punishment for pre-meditated
murder?
1. The Case Against Capital Punishment
a. 18 modern nations have abolished the death penalty
b. Most major American religious bodies have called for its abolition
c. The OT commandment with the Mosaic Law has been set aside as obsolete
d. The OT commandment can never be fully implemented as ordered:
i.e., applied not only for murder, but also for accidentally causing the
death of a pregnant woman (?or her baby), for having an animal that
kills someone, for kidnapping, for rape of a married woman, for
fornication, for adultery, for incest, for homosexuality, for bestiality,
for striking a parent, etc.
e. The NT teaching of Christ deliberately set aside capital punishment.
He set aside the OT law of equivalent retaliation (Ex 21:23-25 and Matt
5:38-42) and he allowed divorce rather than execution for adultery (Matt
5:31-32; 19:9). He did not turn over to the authorities for stoning the
woman taken in adultery (John 8). His attitude in these instances should
be extended to other laws requiring the death penalty.
f. The Apostles likewise did not advocate the death penalty.
The “sword” of Rom 13 is to be understood as simply a symbol of
authority, a badge of office. It was carried not as an instrument of
execution, but for defense and enforcement of the officer’s authority much
as a pistol is in NY State which has abolished the death penalty (recently
restored but not tested in the courts).
g. The NT law of love rules out the use of capital punishment
2. The Case For Capital Punishment
a. The command to execute murderers predates the Mosaic law.
The command thus is unaffected by the setting aside of the Mosaic
legislation (Gen 9:6). Because man’s life is so sacred (likeness to God),
taking it requires capital punishment as the only adequate retribution.
b. It is doubtful whether indeed the moral precepts of the Mosaic law have
really been set aside.
4
See Jesus’ view of the Mosaic law in Matt 5:17-21ff and Paul’s view in
Rom 13:8-10 where love’s “summary” can be re-expanded into the
particular points of the Mosaic law. If those commands still stand, then
capital punishment is required (Lev 24:17; Nu 35:16-21). Though Christ
did set aside some OT law, he did not set aside the law of capital
punishment.
c. The “sword” in Rom 13 is not merely a symbol of authority, but a symbol
of the specific authority to execute.
Beheading was the method used for Roman citizens. A “sword” is not a
very apt symbol for imprisonment or flogging.
d. Are love and capital punishment really contradictory?
Then how can God, who is love, execute a sinner? Execution can be
carried out with love and sorrow and in the absence of vengeful pleasure.
e. Execution, unlike our own death, has a stated time and gives the criminal
time to prepare his soul.
f. Love for the guilty must not override love for all those in society he has
wronged and possibly will wrong if permitted to go unchecked.
g. Capital punishment, in spite of claims to the contrary, does indeed deter.
The underworld certainly thinks it deters and applies the principle
ruthlessly. And the Bible itself holds that it deters (Deut 17:12-13).
3. Evaluation of the 2 Cases (what your teacher thinks):
a. Capital punishment cannot be inherently immoral because God
commanded it.
b. Yet, it need not be insisted on since God did not insist on it in several
instances (Cain, David). It cannot be wrong, then, to show mercy.
c. The command is pre-Mosaic and thus of intended universal application.
d. The NT supports it only indirectly and somewhat tenuously.
e. Thus, it should be viewed more as a prerogative of human government
than as a mandate.
f. It is legitimate only if applied justly.
For example, from 1930-1967, Black on White murders brought almost
certain death; but White on Black murders almost never. 50% of those
executed in those years were Blacks. The poor and uneducated were
also groups which were victimized.
g. Mistaken execution of the innocent has been overblown.
By the most liberal estimates, the conviction of innocents of all kinds of
crime is only 5%. But in capital crimes, the judicial process is very
careful, slow, and unsparing of avenues of defense. The rare instance
of wrongful conviction must be weighed against the detriment to a society
without this sanction.
h. The “humanitarian” must be reminded that the extension of physical life is
not the ultimate value even on humanistic grounds.
i. Capital punishment should be reserved only for instances of pre-meditated
murder on the basis of certain proof and applied equitably to the guilty.
5
II. Biomedical Issues
A. Negligence
1. Some is legally punishable but is not a moral offense (unintended auto
defects; medical error).
2. Some is both legally and morally culpable (asbestos manufacturers,
hazardous chemicals manufacturers, etc., where management persist in the
face of known medical injuriousness).
3. Some is morally culpable though not usually legislated against (failure to
feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the oppressed, respond to a natural
disaster, etc. cf. Matt 25).
B. Medical Experimentation and Procedures
What is the Christian perspective on genetics manipulation, cloning, organ
transplants, psycho-surgery, mind-altering chemicals, fetal and human
experimentation, etc.?
1. There can be no objection in principle to scientific experimentation, research
and advance since man is made in God’s image and is expected to share in
God’s creativity. In a derived sense, man is to “play God.” He is to subdue
and have dominion over the earth (Gen 1:28).
2. Yet this does not justify arrogance, or the use of scientific advance for
selfish or malicious purposes.
3. Organ transplants and artificial organs are no more objectionable than
creating an artificial limb. Similarly, in vitro fertilization and genetic
manipulation do not appear in principle to be immoral.
4. Organ transplants, however, must not be done while there is still hope for the
life of the donor. Likewise, genetic manipulation that can theoretically
eliminate genetically transmitted diseases should not be done if harmful sideeffects result, or if the intent is to create a super-race through
government control, or if genetic experiments are carried out without the
knowledge (including the consequences) and cooperation of the patient.
5. Because the relationship between mind/soul and brain is unclear in Scripture,
psycho-surgery, mind-altering drugs, cloning, etc., should probably not be
engaged in. It seems immoral to attempt to manipulate the soul.
6. Christians have a responsibility to monitor carefully these scientific
experiments and processes. Often it is not the process itself, but the
application or use of the technology which is questionable.