Have you ever had one of those conversations you keep playing over and over in your head wishing you would have said the response you thought of two days after the conversation happened? Happens to me all the time. But there is one that sticks out in my mind more than any other for some reason, and I'm not totally sure why. It doesn't come too frequently but this morning it did, and I'm sick of it, so I'm hoping by writing it out here that helps put it to rest.
The title of this post is the subject of the conversation that took place nearly six years ago in my collage Sociology class. It ended up being a complete waste of time and honestly this conversation I'm about to share is the only thing from the class that I have any real memory of. The class that day began with us being divided up based on our opinion on the death penalty. Those for it were in the back of the room, those against were on the front right (if you are facing the back from the front) and those who were unsure were on the front left. I was in the back.
The reason I'm writing this is not that my opinion has changed but after six years of maturing, studying, and learning/observing I've matured and have a much better answer than I did more than half a decade ago. One of the guys in the "against the death penalty group" stood up and used John 8.1-11 as his basis for not having the death penalty. It was after this that I responded. I don't really remember much of what I said, I just remember talking really fast, probably sounding angry, and since I hate debating getting red in the face from talking in front of people in that context. The basis for his response was that Jesus had pity and forgave this woman, and after all this time, I now have my response. Hopefully this is the last time I ever have this conversation with myself.
The following will be me giving a response I wish I had given.
Your usage of the events of John 8 aren't really valid here. If you look at the historical context, everything that the Pharisees did was to get rid of Jesus. Everything they did privately was plotting how they could get rid of Jesus, and everything they did publicly was putting those plots into action. The events of John 8 is one of these attempts. In their minds they have Jesus. There is nothing that He can say to them in this situation without getting in trouble.
If He says "Yes, stone her," then He is guilty of breaking the law given by the Romans. No Jew could exercise the death penalty under Roman law. So if He says "yes" they can take Him before the Roman Governor and accuse him of breaking the law. Also, Jesus has set up His ministry and gained His following based on teachings of mercy, grace, and forgiveness. If now, when it is being called into action, He refuses the very things He's taught His ministry will be ruined. People will stop following Him because He would be seen as a hypocrite. If He says "Yes, stone her," they will have succeeded and will be rid of Jesus.
On the other hand, if He says "No, let her live," that base is covered too. They remind Jesus that Moses said to stone such a woman. If Jesus shows mercy then He is guilty of breaking the law of Moses, and they will be able to take Him before than Sanhedrin to accuse Him of breaking their law and trying to cause a riot. They could then take Him before Rome on those charges and be rid of Him. In their minds, they have Him. Game, set, match, it's over. Anything that comes out of His mouth they are ready for.
And so Jesus, knowing all of this and their motivation, says nothing. He begins to write on the ground and after being asked persistently gets up and says "Whoever is without sin can cast the first stone." Though the text doesn't say this, He is using part the Law here too. Deuteronomy 17 says that the witnesses are to throw the first stone. And so Jesus, following the Law tells them to go ahead. But the condition is that only those who aren't guilty are allowed to.
The all begin to leave and then Jesus is left alone with the woman. He says, "Where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She says, "No one," and then He says, "Then I don't condemn you either," and that is where you end your argument, but it isn't where the text ends. Jesus said, "Go and leave your life of sin." He said to her, "I do not condemn you, yet." He sets her free with the warning of final judgement, telling her that it is coming, and that if she doesn't change, she will be condemned. He says to her "You have a second chance, take advantage of it."
Your argument only looks at one side of God, it focuses only on mercy, but not justice. God is a just god. He has to be just in order to be Holy, Good, and Perfect. God hates evil and sin, He always has and always will. And sin must be punished. Again Deuteronomy 17 says, "On the evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness." There needs to proof, substantial proof, to enforce the death penalty. It isn't to be based on one witness that isn't supported, but when several people are in agreement and confirm it, it is to be carried out. And again, those who act as witnesses are to be the first ones to put the accused to death. And the purpose is to purge evil from the midst of the people.
God gives certain people the authority to carry out the death penalty. Romans 13 says, "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God...for it is a ministry of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil." We all have rights, but our rights only go so far until the encroach on someone elses. I lose the right to life if it takes away the rights of someone else. God has put authorities in positions to protect the rights and lives of the people they lead. Part of authority is carrying out the death penalty when, and only when, evidance is sufficant, in order to protect the rights of the rest of society.
End response.
This conversation and the response I've just shared has been nearly six years in the works in my mind. In it I see something crucial for me, the importance of study and organized thoughts. At the time of this conversation I was an immature, cocky, 20 year old college Sophomore who thought he knew a lot more about things than I did. I have matured over the last several years, and I can show, based on the above text, that I've learned and continue to learn.
The last time there was a presidential election, Mike Huckabee answered a question on the death penalty. He said that as a Governor it was the hardest decision he ever had to make because it was the one decision that when he signed the order, it was final. No judge or court could ever overturn that decision. God is a god of justice. Again He has to be in order to be Holy. One day He will destroy evil forever. Until then He has placed people in positions of authority to protect the rights and lives of society. Israel was to wipe out nations and destroy people in their own nation to protect them from being led astray from God.
To God alone be the Glory!
Peace be with you
No comments:
Post a Comment