In this concluding article, I address another of the Constitution’s more serious “camels”—which Christians should be choking on instead of swallowing.
Amendment 8’s Denunciation of Cruel and Unusual Punishments
Amendment 8 prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. But what did the framers mean by “cruel and unusual”? No one knows because the framers never defined this term, nor did they make exceptions for any of the Bible’s civil judgments:
Amendment 8’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments implies the Constitutional Republic’s punishments must be kind and usual. The Constitution’s failure to define “cruel and unusual” allows unbiblical and antinomian courts to arbitrarily determine what is allowable.1
Some of the framers believed that capital punishment in any form was cruel and unusual:
“There were some significant voices at the time in favor of abolishing capital punishment. Some argued that the success of the new republic should depend upon the virtue of its citizens and not on their fear of a harsh penal code, which many saw as the hallmark of tyranny. Benjamin Rush, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence [and, reputedly, one of fathers of America’s unbiblical penal system], declared that “capital punishments are the natural offspring of monarchical governments.” Even a conservative like Alexander Hamilton believed that “the idea of cruelty inspires disgust,” and that the death penalty undermined republican values and behavior.” [International Information Programs, USInfo.org, “Cruel or Unusual Punishment,” Rights of the People: Individual Freedom and the Bill of Rights.]
The virtue of capital punishment was settled by Yahweh2 in His law long ago, but the debate over the death penalty rages on, thanks, in part, to the ambiguity of Amendment 8’s wording….
As of 2012, fifteen states have repealed the death penalty. The Supreme Court’s capriciousness regarding “cruel and unusual punishments” is witnessed by its varied and often contradictory decisions … [which are a demonstration of] a government of, by, and for a fickle people and adjudicated by a mercurial court system….
“We have nothing to guide us in defining what is cruel and unusual apart from our own consciences. A punishment which is considered fair today may be considered cruel tomorrow. And so we are not dealing with a set of absolutes. Our decision must necessarily spring from the mosaic of our beliefs, our backgrounds and the degree of our faith in the dignity of the human personality.” [Supreme Court Justice Frank Murphy, draft of an unpublished dissent (1946), quoted in International Information Programs, USInfo.org, “Cruel or Unusual Punishment,” Rights of the People: Individual Freedom and the Bill of Rights.]
What we find described above is government ruled by the prevailing humanism of the day.3
Without a definition or specific standard by which to determine what constitutes cruel and unusual, the Constitution is unequivocally a “living document,” left to the capricious interpretation of each and every Supreme Court.4
More importantly, what does Amendment 8’s interdiction against cruel and unusual punishments say about Yahweh’s righteous judgments?
Instead of making His punishments as humane as possible, Yahweh chose cruel and unusual forms of punishments. Stoning [is] His principal means of carrying out public executions….
If we believe Yahweh is unquestionably just, we must embrace His means of punishment and renounce the Eighth Amendment as rebellion against Him. Because He is a loving and merciful God, who desires no one to perish and everyone to come to repentance, His judgments are not only just but also remedial and preventative:
“And thou shalt stone him [a promoter of false gods] with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from YHWH thy God…. And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.” (Deuteronomy 13:10-11)….
“The death penalty [especially stoning] … provides a deterrence effect—deterring the criminal from future crime (he dies), deterring other criminals from committing similar crimes (fear of death), and deterring God from bringing His covenant judgments on the community for its failure to uphold covenant law (fear of God’s wrath).” [Gary North, Tools of Dominion: The Case Laws of Exodus (Tyler, TX: The Institute for Christian Economics, 1990/1997) p. 324.]5
There are several compelling judicial reasons why Yahweh instituted stoning as His principle means of execution:
In order for the death penalty to be the greatest possible deterrent, Yahweh chose a brutal form of execution. The harsher the punishment, the greater the deterrent. People are less likely to write checks against insufficient funds when they are penalized thirty dollars rather than thirty cents. Likewise, people are less likely to commit felonies when the maximum penalty is mandatory for unrepentant criminals. This is especially true if it is compulsory for the whole community to attend and participate in public executions:
“And YHWH spake unto Moses, saying, Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp; and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation [community] stone him…. And he that blasphemeth the name of YHWH, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land….” (Leviticus 24:13-16)
Stoning is one of the few methods of capital punishment that allows direct involvement by the witnesses and others. Witnesses must be so certain of their testimony that they, along with the blood avengers, are prepared to initiate judgment. Yahweh did not prescribe lynchings, decapitations, gassings, electrocutions, or lethal injections because they do not allow for the blood avenger, or next of kin, the witnesses, and others in the community to be involved [Deuteronomy 17:6-7, 19:11-12].5
These and other judicial safeguards were forfeited as a result of Amendment 8’s interdiction against Yahweh’s righteous judgments.
Consider another important reason why Amendment 8 must be renounced for its apostasy:
Christians’ aversion to Yahweh’s judgments is one of the prime reasons Christians have lost dominion. Those who define criminal behavior and dispense judgment clearly rule society. Antinomians’ aversion to Yahweh’s judgments can only mean they believe man’s judgments are superior to Yahweh’s and that non-Christians are more competent to dispense judgment than Christians, which in turn means most modern Christians do not believe “…the judgments of YHWH are true and righteous altogether” (Psalm 19:9). They also do not believe “the law of YHWH is perfect” (Psalm 19:7), because any law void of its judgments is an imperfect law, lacking one third of its indispensable components. Abolishing a Commandment’s judgment guts the Commandment the judgment enforces:
“There has been an ancient tradition on the part of Christian commentators of appealing selectively to Old Testament laws whenever convenient in moral arguments, but almost never to the God specified sanctions…. This is wholly illegitimate exegetically, and it has led to the accusation by consistent critics that Christians who uphold “the moral law of God” apart from God’s specified civil sanctions are hypocritical, that they want all the moral benefits of theocracy without any of the embarrassing theocratic sanctions.” [Roy L. Aldrich, “Causes for Confusion of Law and Grace,” Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. 116 (July 1959), p. 226, quoted in Gary North, Tools of Dominion: The Case Laws of Exodus (Tyler, TX: The Institute for Christian Economics, 1997) pp. 913-14.]….
People opposed to Yahweh’s judgments prefer crime over judgment, criminals over victims, and man’s law—at least man’s judgments—over Yahweh’s. Put another way, these same people would prefer people be murdered, kidnapped, raped, and plundered rather than claim responsibility for administering Yahweh’s righteous judgments:
“The robbery of the wicked shall destroy them; because they refuse to do judgment.” (Proverbs 21:7)5
As with most of the Constitution, Amendment 8 forces us to choose between the framers’ capricious traditions or Yahweh’s perfect law. In this instance, it’s a choice between Amendment 8’s interdiction against cruel and unusual punishments or Yahweh’s altogether righteous judgments. Choose carefully!
“[You have] … changed my judgments into wickedness … for they have refused my judgments and my statutes, they have not walked in them. Therefore thus saith the Lord YHWH; Because ye … have not walked in my statutes, neither have kept my judgments … behold, I, even I, am against thee, and will execute judgments in the midst of thee in the sight of the nations.” (Ezekiel 5:6-8)
Related posts:
Chapter 14 “Amendment 5: Constitutional vs. Biblical Judicial Protection”
Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments”
1. Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.
2. YHWH, the English transliteration of the Tetragrammaton, is most often pronounced Yahweh. It is the principal Hebrew name of the God of the Bible and was inspired to appear nearly 7,000 times in the Old Testament. In obedience to the Third Commandment and in honor of His memorial name (Exodus 3:15), and the multitudes of Scriptures that charge us to proclaim, swear by, praise, extol, call upon, bless, glorify, and hold fast to His name, I have chosen to use His name throughout this blog. For a more thorough explanation concerning important reasons for using the sacred name of God, see “The Third Commandment.”
3. Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.
4. The Constitution is also demonstrated to be a “living document” in that, unlike the Bible, Article 5 provides for its own amendment. There is nothing in the Constitution that cannot be amended or repealed.
5. Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments” of Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective.
