Old Testament Justice

Update: 12-20-05 -----
The information below is my opinion based upon 40 years of Bible Study using such wonderful references as Dr. Adam Clarke's Bible Commentary and other great works. In no way is it intended to be stated as fact other than what others have said are fact, such as Dr. Clarke's findings about Jewish law and Customs.

- - - -

Since Capital Punishment has been a hot topic lately, I thought I would post on clearing up something in the Old Testament that has been getting a bad rap.

First a little background on Gods Laws.

The Gospel, (the good news that there would be a Messiah who would be sacrificed and enable anyone who would repent of their sins to be forgiven), was originally given to Adam and passed on down from generation to generation.

It was very lengthy and very detailed. It included some laws and also some rituals, which were to remind them of the sacrifice that God would make through his Son Jesus Christ. In fact the tenth day of the seventh month (Tishri) was set aside by the Lord as the annual Day of Atonement. Modern Jews call this day “Yom Kippur.” While there are two significant things that occur on this day, one of the things was the ritual of oral confession of all of the sins of the whole people while the leader laid his hands on the head of a goat they called “the scape goat.” (See Leviticus 16:21) This was also a reminder that Jesus was going to be the scape goat for all mankind.

There were two basic sets of Laws in the Old Testament; The "Gospel Law", and “The Law of Moses”, in which a new set of Laws called the “Carnal Commandments”, or as the Apostle Paul called them "the carnal ordinances", were added.

The Book of Exodus begins with the birth of Moses and ends with the building of the Tabernacle. At the moment the Tabernacle was finished, the children of Israel started to receive the Carnal Commandments.

These Carnal Commandments were meant to be temporary and to be a “schoolmaster” to bring Israel to Christ, or “The Messiah.” Once the Messiah came, they would be fulfilled. Paul makes this clear. He points out that they were “added because of transgression” (Galatians 3:19), and that they included the laws which “stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” - (Hebrews 9:10 )

In other words, until the Messiah came.

The Carnal Commandments can be grouped into three categories; The Laws of Purification, The Dietary Laws, and The Elaborate System of Sacrifices and Offerings.

The Laws of Purification contained the following; The Sin Offering, The Burnt Offering, The Peace Offering, The Wave Offering, The Trespass Offering, The Meat Offering, and The Drink Offering.

The permanent part of the Gospel Covenant could be grouped into four categories; The Ten Commandments, The Simple Sacrifice, (to be replaced with the Sacrament), The Laws of Preparation and The Policies of Justice, Generosity, Liberty and Equality for All.

This Gospel Covenant, which existed from the time of Adam, was to be just the “floor” of the Gospel, not the ceiling. Jesus wanted his disciples to use it as a minimum and then add to it things which are of a higher plane.

While people have a right of “justice”, God will reward us more if we resist the urge to retaliate. Jesus was teaching that people should rise to the highest possible capacity for tolerance, love and forgiveness.

While it was clear that a group such as the Jewish government or leaders was not to provide charity for the poor, love one’s neighbor; be honest in business dealings, etc. It was to be done by individuals by obeying principles of the Gospel.

Update: 12-20-05 ------

Of course the jewish leaders were also individuals and were suppose to be bound by the same standards. The Jews took these responsibilities upon themselves and did not pawn them off to their government as far as I know. Perhaps someone can show me where the Jews collected taxes to help the poor?

------------

The part of the Law of Moses, often called the Law of the Covenant by some, had a genius for achieving justice and equality that is unmatched by any other ancient code. Hammurabi’s Code for instance incorporated special privileges for certain classes and the application of the law depended upon the class to which a person belonged. Other codes such as Confucius, Menu and Zoroaster also had many great weaknesses.

Let’s now examine how the Law of Moses was generally misunderstood as being very harsh, when in reality it wasn’t.

First the old saying “an eye for an eye.” If some one deliberately put out someone’s eye, it was necessary for the guilty party to provide “satisfaction” to the victim, or lose his own eye. In other words it was the threat of losing his own eye that was the reason that the offender would desperately extend himself to the victim to make things right. It was also a way of showing that the punishment should fit the crime.

In most cases this “satisfaction” was in the form of money. If the person didn’t have any money, he could sell his services for up to six years to pay off the debt. Today we do the wrong thing by sending people to prison where they are separated from their family and instead of the injured party being compensated; either the city, county or state is paid money and/or society must do the “paying” by supporting the offender in prison.

The purpose of the Law of Moses was to balance the scales of justice with the victim, not the state. In modern justice we penalize the guilty, but we do nothing for the victim, which robs justice. In fact we are penalizing those who are not guilty with taxes to pay for the care of those who are. The Law of Moses was much more fair and there was no prison. I don't know of any references in the Bible for a Penal System.

The “satisfaction” was not only to restore, but also to give back more to make up for any inconvenience or fear to which he had subjected his victim. For example, the penalty for theft was to return twice as much as had been stolen. (Exodus 22:4)

Now for the main subject, Capital Punishment under the Law of Moses.

While a great many crimes carried the death penalty, only one carried a compulsory death sentence, and that was first-degree murder. (Numbers 35:31)

On all other offenses, where the maximum penalty was death, the person had two alternatives. One was to “be cut off from among his people” and the other was to “make satisfaction.” A person could be cut off from among his people by self-exile. From “his people” did not mean “all people.” You either made up for your bad behavior to preserve a wholesome society or you went to a society that had lower standards.

This shows that the Law of Moses was not a “Lex Talionis” (Law of Retaliation), but a Law of reparation. The object was equity and justice, not revenge. The object was to restore the victim, not to destroy the offender, by making the offender do the restoring.

With respect to the death sentence, the accusers had to “throw the first stone.” Then the leaders of the community could carry out the sentence. If the accusers refused then it was assumed that there was something wrong with their testimony.

Next, the idea that there were many other “death sentences” for seemly much less serious crimes will be addressed. For example, take the dealings with a dissolute, disobedient and obstreperous son. While it would seem backward to say the least to impose the death penalty because a son was out of control, remember the offending person had the option of self-exile.

First, the sons of Israel were very obedient because they knew that the parents had the backing of society with legal authority over their very lives if they became too rebellious. Next, the parents were required to exhibit the utmost patience with him to try to work out their bad behavior before they could declare him anathema.

“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…” (Deuteronomy 21: 18-20 )

At this point the parents had to pick up and cast the first stone. It is no wonder we don’t have any record of this ever happening. Parents, no matter how provoked would not likely do this to their children. They would probably suggest self-exile if the son was not willing to obey, but the psychological value of having the ultimate consequence of not obeying ones parents, of either getting killed or imposing self-exile made children very obedient.

This may be where the Muslims get the concept of “Honor Killings.” Remember they obeyed the Laws of Moses at one point also. They probably just forgot that the offending party should have the choice of self-exile of where they would have to leave the Muslim society.

And finally, the offenses against society where there is no need to “make satisfaction” to the victim. These offenses were dealt with by “public whippings.” The maximum amount was to be forty lashes.

“And it shall be, if the wicked man be worth to be beaten, that the judge shall cause him to lie down, and to be beaten before his [the judge’s] face, according to his fault, by a certain number. Forty stripes he may give him, and not to exceed: lest, if he should exceed and beat him above these with many stripes, then thy brother should seem vile unto thee.” (Deuteronomy 25: 2-3)

Under the Law of Moses, once the offender was whipped he was released. They could not put him in a dungeon, starve, mutilate, or torture him, as was custom in the non-Jewish societies in those days.

So, there you have it. God is a loving God and there are very few recorded instances, (they maybe translated incorrectly), of the death penalty being carried out for some of the offenses that carried the death penalty other than murder in the first degree under the Law of Moses. There was to be an alternative of self-exile for all the other crimes. (Update: 12-20-05 - This paragraph has been edited to accomodate possible exceptions to this rule. Thanks to Kt4JC for pointing out what might be at least one exception.)

Maybe we should consider the victim as much as the Law of Moses did instead of the “state” getting the “satisfaction” and the taxpayers paying to have a person be separated from his family for things like theft that could be handled by the focus being on victims and justice instead of jails and fines for the state treasury.