Justice is roughly equivalent to the lex talionis principle. It is why we see it arise within the theocracy of Israel under the law. The “eye for an eye” principle is what we might call, along with the Westminster Confession of Faith, a principle of general equity. General equity basically means common justice. These are principles common to all civil societies. Their manifestation within the law of the theocracy of Israel is evidence of their universal nature. As God gave to the state the authority to shed blood for those who commit violence, he did so as a principle for all civil order. And when the state fails to shed the blood of those who commit capital crimes, it inevitably leads to chaos. Without the deterrent of death, what then restrains man from carrying out his basest impulses?
God’s common grace extends beyond the role of the state in subduing civil disorder. God’s common grace has a restraining effect on the corruption of sin universally. While every man is equally totally depraved, not all men are equally corrupt. Total depravity—better called extensive depravity—means that every aspect of the image bearer has been touched by sin. But no man is as sinful or corrupt as he could be. Part of that restraint comes through the ordering of society in church, family, and state. But another reason is God’s mercy in causing both rain and sun to fall on the just and the unjust. The sun and the rain are microcosms of the greater universal blessing of God on creation. Just as he sustains the physical life of man through the sun and rain, God gives mercy to both the just and the unjust in restraining their corruption. How exactly that works on a spiritual level is not as easy to articulate as how it works on a physical level. Nevertheless, it remains a mystery to which the Scriptures plainly testify.
Yet the state, in its role as a deterrent to evil—as it punishes evil and rewards good—is an essential element in the preservation of the common order. And God is not mocked. To resist the servant of God in the civil realm is to resist God himself. And when God is resisted, whether in church or state, chaos of one kind or another ensues. To use the language of Romans 1, God turns men over to their basest desires, and that itself is an act of divine judgment.
God is ultimately the judge of all, and we will all have our day in court. It will not be pleasant for those outside of Christ. But for those who are in Christ, it will not be justice that is served on that day toward us, but mercy and divine compassion, as God beholds us in the perfect righteousness of Christ and makes the declaration that only a just God can make: We are forgiven of our sins and are righteous in his sight.
Regarding Rome and its approach to society: The Constantinian experiment has, from my perspective, totally failed. This is not to say that no good came from the church from the fourth century onward. Of course there was good. God always has a true church on earth. But in terms of the way in which the church has related to the state and society, it has been a complete failure. And I cannot comprehend why any Protestant would want to go back to that. I understand that a number of Protestants were in favor of the nationalization of Christianity. But just because our heroes of the past said something does not mean we must agree with it. And it seems to me that the Scriptures of the New Testament completely override the Constantinian experiment.
Because it did not understand the full spirituality of the church, Rome could not help but blur the clear distinctions between the mandates of church and state. Even to the present day,
Rome’s imposition of its theology on the state has caused great havoc. And while I celebrate the court’s decision concerning Roe v. Wade, before we spike the football, we ought carefully to consider the fact that many who voted our way did so on Roman Catholic principles. And while we agree with them on this particular decision, we may not be as gleeful when they seek to abolish the death penalty. In many ways, Roman Catholics throughout the country have led the way toward that end.
If we consider the problem of the penal system in America today, it will not take long to see the chain reaction this has caused. If there is no death penalty and somebody commits a capital crime, he is put in prison for life, and some are even paroled before then. This means that prisons become overcrowded, and when that happens police departments and state penitentiaries are forced to keep criminals for shorter and shorter periods of time. While this is often presented as mercy and compassion, it is really only a disguise covering the most fundamental problem of all—that we have rejected the God-mandated purpose of the state.
In a final word to those who seek the cause of regaining “Christendom”: This is why you do not want it. If the state is to establish and promote Christianity, then—since it bears the sword—it must also enforce its establishment and endorsement. If the state is not to bear the sword in enforcing its preference for Christianity, then the state is clearly operating outside its mandate. Thus, coercion in matters of religion—or the promotion thereof—without the sword renders the state impotent. But the state with the sword endorsing and establishing Christianity is called in the book of Revelation Babylon. You may think that is a rash overstatement meant merely to provoke. But one only needs to look back as far as the sixteenth century to see the way in which the state bore the sword in support of its religion.
You may say that the solution is some form of pan-Christianity—a broad Christianity, if you will, that equally promotes Roman Catholicism and orthodox Protestantism. But then you have an even greater problem. No longer is Christianity promoted by the state as true religion. As Protestants, we believe that the oneness of the church is not formed by mere external principles but is a matter of the heart as believers gather around a common doctrine and life. That kind of state religion and state-sponsored Christianity is something with which I want nothing to do. Neither should you.
Final Words About State Power and Capital Punishment
The establishment of the state is an act of divine revelation. It is revealed in both general and special revelation. In special revelation, we find it in the form of a divine oracle given in Genesis 4 and 9. In nature, it takes the form of divine justice embedded within the covenant of works.
There is no state before the fall. Nevertheless, the principle of “an eye for an eye” is already present within the covenant of works. If Adam does good, he is rewarded with eternal life; if he does evil, he is punished with death. That principle remains embedded within the natural order.
Just as marriage between one man and one woman is embedded within nature even before the fall, the creation mandate for man to till the soil and subdue the earth is embedded within the natural order. Therefore, one does not need to be present for the special revelation of the divine oracle establishing the state in Genesis 4 or 9 in order to know what the obligation of the state is. It is embedded within the natural order itself. In this way, human magistrates ought to know what they are supposed to do and what they ought not to do.
The problem, of course, is sin. Sinful magistrates often fail to carry out their divine mandate properly. Sometimes they wrongly execute the principle of “an eye for an eye” on citizens who ought not to receive such punishment. An easy example would be an Islamic theocracy executing Christians. This is not because Christianity is somehow to be favored by the state. It would be equally wrong for the state to execute an “eye for an eye” judgment on any practitioner of a religion in which there is no human-to-human harm.
There are also times when the state fails to carry out capital punishment on those who commit capital crimes. An example of this is, of course, the modern United States when it fails to execute punishment on those who commit such crimes. Once again, to borrow the language of Romans 1, the state fails to do what it ought to do, even though it knows what it ought to do by nature because it suppresses natural revelation in unrighteousness.
But it is especially heinous for those who possess special revelation—such as Christian magistrates—to fail in this regard. In such instances, they suppress not only what is known to them by natural revelation but also what is known through special revelation.
This way of thinking has the advantage of perhaps redefining the use of natural law in jurisprudence. Natural law, understood in this way—and arguably as a distinctive Protestant notion—is not something deduced merely on the basis of natural reason independent of revelation. This understanding is much more in keeping with Roman Catholicism and with the thought of Thomas Aquinas in particular.
Those states that do not care about God or special revelation are nevertheless held accountable for their failures according to natural revelation. But Protestant magistrates not only may, but must, operate with natural revelation interpreted through special revelation. In this way, their approach to legislation can never ignore or compartmentalize God’s oracle establishing the mandate of the state. They know what God has ordained in Genesis 4 and 9 and ought therefore to operate as magistrates with that mandate always in view.
This would mean that no Protestant has any excuse for opposing the death penalty in instances of capital crime. This is the logical position of Rome given its notion of natural law. The details concerning exactly what warrants a capital crime and which sub-capital crimes ought to be punished and in what manner are not fully given to us in the special revelation of God’s oracle. Likewise, the list of crimes that received the death penalty under the law of Moses does not necessarily carry over directly to all nation-states whatsoever. Which laws do and do not carry over is a matter of biblical exegesis and prudent debate for civil magistrates to consider.
Thus, what we have in the divine oracle concerning the state is an establishment of the state before the giving of the Mosaic law, and therefore it is nontheocratic in that sense. At the same time, it is not grounded merely on natural reason. Such a position establishes a firm no both to theonomy on the one hand and to autonomous natural law theory on the other.
©Jim Cassidy. All Rights Reserved.
RESOURCES
- Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
- Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
- Browse the Heidelshop!
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Lexham Press, 2025)
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization
Jim Cassidy
Jim is the pastor of South Austin Presbyterian Church (OPC). He previously served in OPC pastorates in Pennsylvania (Johnstown) and New Jersey (Ringoes). In his ministry he has been and continues to be committed to proclaiming Christ and Him crucified from all the Scriptures. Jim earned an MDiv at Westminster Theological Seminary as well as a PhD in Historical and Theological Studies, concentrating in systematic theology and writing on the theology of Karl Barth.
More by Jim Cassidy ›
While acknowledging the duty of the state to promote justice, and the biblical authorization to wield the sword, people of faith must acknowledge and decry the fact that there are far too many instances in this, “the best judicial system in the world” of innocents being imprisoned and even executed…not Islamic extremist taking out hatred on Christians…but a judicial system supposedly designed to provide every man a fair trial, but that is actually focused on political power and winning rather than justice as it provides some parties with greater “justice” while stacking the deck against others.
God will judge our nation for her many sins. He will also judge those who claim Him as Lord while cheerleading a status quo of injustice.
Darryl,
Because of the success of the anti-capital punishment movement very few people have been been put to death in the USA for many years. In 2023, according to the Bureau of Prisons, only 24 people were put to death. Because of the high bar required for the death penalty in the USA it’s almost impossible to put to death even the most obviously guilty people.
As to claims by the Innocence Project etc the rhetoric seems louder than the facts. It is increasingly difficult for the cops to get DAs to charge and prosecute lesser crimes let alone capital crimes. The evidentiary burden, the extended appeals process, and the standards in most states for executing the sentence make is nearly impossible.
If officials have indeed willfully executed the capital punishment upon the innocent, they will indeed bear that burden before the Lord but we should not think or leave the impression that this is commonly done. A murder is far more likely in 2026 to be walking the streets that awaiting capital punishment.
Dr. Clark is right.
I have been following murder cases for decades now, upwards of a dozen in the last two decades in my own county of 55,000 people in the rural Missouri Ozarks. This has become a deep red county in which there is no doubt that jurors, if given the opportunity, would not only convict of murder but give the death penalty.
Our state allows the death penalty, but there have to be extenuating circumstances, and the most common example of that is that two or more people are killed in the same act.
That means even when a known drug dealer from Chicago, with prior convictions in his previous state for killing other people, came to our county and shot four people, but only one died (a second person died shortly after the trial), the person couldn’t be given the death penalty. Things would have been different if that second person had died before rather than after the trial, but life in prison was the most that could be done. He got life in prison, unlike Illinois which let him out. Four victims in Missouri wouldn’t have been shot if Illinois courts had done their job.
Same for the “parents” of a child tied up and choked to death by too-tight ropes around her neck while her mother and her mother’s lesbian lover slept. She was tied up because her two “parents” were upset that she was stealing food at night. In other words, she was hungry. Only one person died, so no possibility of the death penalty.
Same for numerous cases of severe child molestation that led, in a recent case involving a half-dozen teenage and pre-teen victims, to multiple life sentences that will ensure the abuser never gets out of prison, but the death penalty isn’t a possibility no matter how extreme the child sexual abuse, no matter how young the victims, unless the victim dies.
I can recall only one case in our county in which the death penalty was even an option, a situation in which a group of soldiers killed a pregnant woman off post by stuffing her in the trunk of a car and setting it on fire. The jury could have given the death penalty because the mother and her unborn baby died, but did not, leading to life in prison for the primary person who killed the mother and her unborn baby.
These are real cases in a deep red county. In the one case where the death penalty was even possible, the jury said “no.” In the other cases, it wasn’t even an option.
Oh, and by the way, the convicted criminals in Cases #1 and #3 were black. It’s not legally relevant, but one might expect a jury in a rural Southern county to be more inclined to give the death penalty to certain races than to other races. Didn’t happen here.
Anyone who thinks our court system is sending innocent people to death row on any kind of regular basis isn’t reading the realities of court cases. Anyone who thinks our rural white jury pools are wrongfully convicting minorities isn’t looking at my county. It may go on elsewhere in the rural South, but not here. Since defense attorneys can ask for changes of venue, if a crime DOES happen in a county where the defense fears a bigoted jury pool, it can be moved to a county where that won’t be a problem.
I grew up in Michigan, a state that hasn’t had the death penalty since territorial days before it was a state. Even in conservative Republican circles, support for the death penalty was considered crazy kooky talk in the 1970s and 1980s. I became convinced by Scripture that the death penalty is required for what we today would call deliberate premeditated murder cases, but I knew enough to keep my views quiet to avoid being branded as a right-wing extremist. (Michigan politics have changed a lot in the last four decades; I’m describing an “Overton window” of an earlier era, not today’s politics.)
Here in the rural South, where I can openly and loudly support the death penalty, I do so based on decades of actual coverage of actual court cases. The stuff that death penalty opponents claim, i.e., lots of people being railroaded in bigoted courts, just aren’t happening.
I don’t dispute that there was a racial bias problem in the past. That’s really beyond dispute. I don’t dispute that in the past, we probably DID have people convicted who should not have been.
That just isn’t an issue today.
We need more people sent to death row, not less, and more cases in which the death penalty is at least an option for the jury to impose.
Clarification: I should have said that the convicted criminals in Cases #1, #3, and #4 were black, not just #1 and #3. The death penalty wasn’t an option in Cases #1-3. In case #4, where it was an option, the jury didn’t impose it.
My point was even in a rural Southern county, when the death penalty was an option, the jury didn’t impose it. So much for claims that minority victims are being unjustly executed by mostly white juries in rural America.
Also, I could have cited plenty of white murderers, or (to agree with Dr. Clark on another issue, two white female teachers in rural public school districts in our county who were charged with sex with students). My point was that even in a rural Southern county like ours, black people and other minorities get a fair trial, and in the one case where the death penalty COULD have been given, the jury decided otherwise.
The claims that rural Southern courts are biased just don’t match the facts of what I see here. Other types of racism? Yes, and I’ve seen it firsthand due to my interracial marriage. But not in the court system. Defense attorneys are pretty good at smelling bigots and keeping them off juries.
Thoughtful article.
But, before throwing out there-Christianization of the state, maybe it would be better to consider that the whole idea of the political supremacy of law over the power holder, political compact involving consent of the governed, and restraints on power came from a galaxy of early Reformed thinkers reading Dt. 17 and I Sam. 8. I refer you to Rutherford, DuPlessis-Mornay, Hotman, Beza, Marnix Van Saint Alsegobde, Althusius, Knox, Ponet, and others.
True, we do not have the thoroughness of the Scots Reformation any more. But conceding the state and its power to the ungodly is what brings the banning of the Decalogue from the courthouse and our being taxed to support training in totalitarian socialism.
I am not advocating for conceding the state to the ungodly, as if Christians are forbidden to govern. And I stand quite opposed to posting the decalogue in courts. The reason we are being taxed to fund public schools is because somewhere “Christian American” didn’t read its Bible very well and decided it would be a good idea for the state to go outside its narrow mandate to execute justice in order to educate its citizens. Christians were widely in favor of public education, while they had the power and influence. When the boogeyman of evolution crept into the schools, Christians got spooked and abandoned the project altogether in favor of Christian schools and home schooling. For what its worth, that is probably what Christians should have done (Christian school/home school) in the beginning instead of supporting public education. Now its too late to cry about being taxed to fund public educations – its the monster created by Christians in the first place.
As a public school teacher and believer I want to say I don’t see public school as a monster. In fact, it’s really been a public good and blessing for the vast majority of the students I’ve worked with. No system is perfect. I’m glad I can minister in such a setting, especially in my case in an area where families could not dream to afford to homeschool or private school.
God bless.
Ben,
I’m a product of the public school system (Omaha and Lincoln) and I’ve been teaching the product of the public systems for 31 years. I’ve seen a marked decline. There were philosophical problems with public schooling from the beginning, in the 19th century (they were intended more to socialize immigrants than to educate). Teachers and administrators probably did better work than the system really intended but since the 1970s the system has become, as Van Til would say, “epistemologically self-conscious.” The teachers colleges have abandoned objective truth or what education was in favor of subjective experience. Increasingly it seems that the teachers are themselves poorly educated and worse, even criminal. I’ve been tracking the number of sexual assaults (and other types of assault) by public school teachers and staff and the results are shocking and under-reported.
Check out the comment box for the essay, “Why It’s Reasonable…”
The X account “Leave Public School” seems less active but there’s another that has taken it’s place. The results are the same. There is a news story every day (or close enough) about a teacher or a staff member assaulting a child. If it were any other institution, it would be a major story.
First let me be clear. Even 1 assault is terrible. However, there are over 4 million teachers in the US. Ratio wise the amount of assaults parents do on their children is higher than that of teachers. (These teachers and parents should be fired imprisoned and punished to the highest extent of the law).
I’m not doubting you, but I hear subjective experience flinged around for schooling. The science, math, history, etc classes I’ve taught and been in have all taught truth as objective. The only one more fluid is English which I currently teach, but there is a lot more fluidity there. Since curriculum guidelines are set by local school boards there is a ton of flexibility from school to school, similar to homeschool family to family. I was homeschooled my whole life for context.
Don’t get me wrong. I think homeschooling and Christian school are great. I think public school has a lot of problems. However, I just need to push back on the whole “public school is the greatest evil” which I see a lot.
I mean it’s ironic, but in my area (just an anectode) there’s more Christian teachers in the public school than there is at the “Christian” school!
Ben,
It’s not subjective experience. These are court cases. After the “reasonable” piece I followed “Leave Public School” closely for a year. Just about every working day (M-F) there was a serious criminal charge in the news. I think I posted about 80 of them. Fox News did story about that time noticing it but for a variety of reasons it’s hard to get people to pay attention to the trend.
The last district in which I was educated, in the middle of the country, has been captured by the sexual revolutionaries. It’s not an isolated issue. It’s inherent to the system. As I say, the intellectual roots of the problem are in the 19th century but the 21st century manifestations are pretty dark.
Check out this account on X. She has posted 12 cases, all of which are in the news, since June 4.