Click here to get this post in PDF

Criminal Justice 1

Interestingly, the first reference in the law of Moses to the eye-for-an-eye principle is with respect to a law that could apply to abortion.

“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.” Exodus 21:22-25.

This passage combines God’s concern for the protection of innocent human life, created in His image, as well as the Dominion Covenant’s (Gen. 1:28) concern for the propagation of humanity, & the protection of the helpless. The eye for an eye principle is a principle of justice. It is opposed to a justice system focused solely upon prevention, which might end up punishing people beyond what is just in order to put fear into others. It is also opposed to a justice system tilted toward the rich and powerful and influential. No one is above the law, and no matter your class, you are subject to the law’s just demands.

People say the law of God is too harsh. Really? God, the God of mercy, the God who sent His Son to die for mankind, is too harsh? Well, the law of God was intended to drive us to Christ for mercy. Yes, but that doesn’t make it untrue or overly harsh. God doesn’t pretend justice & truth just to motivate; He embodies justice & truth. The law of God is the correct incentive for seeking Christ for the very reason that it is true. It is not too harsh, nor is it overly lenient.

If the law of God is too harsh, then so is Jesus Christ.

“Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matthew 15:1-9.

Notice that Jesus did not say the law requiring execution of those who curse father and mother was too harsh. He used it to contrast the evil behavior of the scribes and Pharisees, who were virtually cursing their fathers and mothers by hypocritically not providing for them, with the doctrine of washing hands when they eat bread. They were criticizing Jesus’ disciples for not washing their hands, when the critics themselves deserved death for their sins. He was not saying that the law was too harsh or unjust; He was saying that they were ignoring a just law of God in order to follow their own man-made rules. Which is the standard for justice – you or God? You think His law is too harsh? You could do a better job? No, you couldn’t. But that is exactly what we have done in our modern, progressive times – we pretend that we’ve come up with “better” laws than God could come up with. How can you know how far your heart is from God? As far as your lips are from affirming the law of God.

The scribes and Pharisees were too harsh when they should have been lenient, and they were too lenient, when the law might threaten them. They did not follow God’s law. Their failure in that area was one of the reasons that Christ was so harsh in condemning them. Notice that Jesus uses a law that today would be mocked as utterly barbaric in our “modern, tolerant-of-juveniles” time. We live in the day when youths gang together, and instead of learning a trade or education in school, sell and use drugs in the streets. They shoot people who drive down the wrong road at night, and they drive by houses and apartments and shoot innocent people. They live off crime, they prostitute women, they sell mind-debilitating drugs, they get welfare checks because they don’t have jobs, and they despise and dishonor their parents. But the law of God is too harsh in calling for such youths’ execution. We’re so much more enlightened by letting them run our streets and kill the innocent for a pair of shoes.

The law Jesus quotes in Matthew 15 is akin to the law in Deuteronomy 21 regarding the rebellious son.

“If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.” Deuteronomy 21:18-21.

Some Christians wrongly use this passage to argue that we shouldn’t implement God’s law. Again, they imply that God is just too harsh for us. Notice the procedure in that law. The parents are the only ones who can act as complainants. The natural affection for one’s child would prevent false accusations from occurring. The son is not a small child but someone who is a drunkard and old enough to perform work. This son is out of control, defying God by defying his parents. Respect to parents is taken very seriously by God and by Jesus.

Is some justice criminal and some civil? Where do you draw the line? If you had to draw a bright line in the western legal tradition between civil justice and criminal, which you really cannot do, you would have to use intent. Intentional conduct, as opposed to reckless or negligent conduct, is more likely to be criminal. The business that makes a defective product is not intent upon hurting you on purpose. Its behavior is in the realm of negligent behavior and results in civil lawsuits for money damages. The problem is the appropriate form of punishment for a corporation. Monetary damages punish the shareholders, not the worker or executive who made the mistake that resulted in the defective product. How do you punish the worker who decided to cut corners and put a lesser quality ingredient into the part that ended up killing people because it was weakened by that ingredient? Execution? Is the person really guilty of intentional murder? No.

“And it shall be, if thou do at all forget the LORD thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall surely perish. As the nations which the LORD destroyeth before your face, so shall ye perish; because ye would not be obedient unto the voice of the LORD your God.” Deuteronomy 8:19-20.

So what is justice? No, who determines what justice is and how it is to be applied? What will preserve God’s blessing upon a society? What standard do we use to determine a just law, a just sentence, the lawful victim?