fbpx
Articles

Killing. Are there exceptions?

/
July 15, 2014

“Do not murder.” Exodus 20:13

Murder goes deeper than the death of a human being by the hand of another human being. Murder is the crime of unlawfully killing a person—especially with malice or forethought. Murder, therefore, is distinguished from killing by the issue of motive. Jesus identified that motive behind murder as anger in Matthew 5:21-22. In Matthew, Christ goes to the root of the behavior and sees the anger behind the action. The act of murder is still subject to the punishment we see in Genesis 9:6.

In the sixth commandment, God forbids murder and thereby emphasizes the value of human life. Because we are made in the image of God, murder is a sin. How should we account for situations in which killing does not fall under the category of murder? These will be viewed through the lens of Scripture, and you may notice that all three lack the primary motive that Christ would cite behind murder in Matthew 5—anger. What are situations in which killing does not cross into the category of murder?

Self-defense

We see in Scripture that a person is allowed to defend him or herself from an attacker (Neh. 4:11-14). Exodus 22:2-3 reads, “If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him, but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt for him.” So even after the Ten Commandments are given in Exodus 20, we can see that God permits the taking of a life if one’s own life is in potential danger.

If a thief broke into a house at night, he would have to fear the homeowner, who would not be able to determine an intruder’s intentions, whether theft of property or harm to the occupants. The homeowner would not be at fault for killing the thief by beating him to death. Notice, however, that even the thief’s life was valued. If a thief broke in during the daytime (when his intentions would be clear) and were killed by the owner, then the owner would be guilty of murder. While reasonable self-defense is recognized in Scripture, value for human life is the rule.

Capital punishment

Genesis 9:6 not only shows that we are to value human life because of creation, it points out that if a man killed another man, his life should also be taken. Even before the law was given to Israel—before the commandment not to murder—God established capital punishment. This punishment speaks to the severity of the crime. The taking of a life warrants a punishment in kind—a death for a death.

The command is not given for vengeance but for justice, and the role of justice is carried out by one specific office. Romans 13 breaks down the importance of the government’s role in keeping the peace. Romans 13:4 says, “for [a ruler] is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” Prior to this passage, Paul gave the principles of living at peace with all men and not taking vengeance into our own hands (Rom. 12:18-21). The sword belongs to the governing authorities to wield and to deliver justice to those who commit evil.

Today, Christians are divided regarding the issue of capital punishment. Some appeal to Genesis 9 in support of capital punishment. Because this passage precedes the Mosaic law and reaffirms humanity’s image-bearing status, many believe capital punishment should still be applied today. Other Christians have reservations about capital punishment or reject it due to the way it can be unfairly implemented. Both sides rightfully appeal to the image of God in humanity to make their case.

Just war

In Scripture, God at times commanded battles between nations. Such battles and wars were God’s hand of justice against the wicked. Examples of God sanctioning war can be found throughout the historical books of the Old Testament. Although men and women are killed in battle, there must be a difference between the act of murder and a death in battle.

In the New Testament, God works primarily through the church. The church is not a nation that goes to war. The government is the carrier of the sword and acts through its military. The church does no such thing for the kingdom of God. Jesus himself said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world” (John 18:36). Christ does not ask that his followers stand and fight for physical territory or possessions. However, there is an understanding that kingdoms of the world have servants who go out and fight, and Christians are not necessarily exempt from participating in military actions.

As with capital punishment, Christians are divided on the issue of just war and whether Christians can serve in a nation’s military. Wrestling with these issues requires acknowledging God’s Word as the foundation, value for human life as the rule, and the need for a Spirit-sensitive conscience. In his book Issues Facing Christians Today, John Stott sums up the seven conditions of a just war (formal declaration, last resort, just cause, right intention, proportionate means, non-combatant immunity and reasonable expectation) in three main points:

Firstly, its cause must be righteous. It must be defensive, not aggressive. Its objectives must be to secure justice or remedy injustice, to protect the innocent of champion human rights…

Secondly, its means must be controlled. There must be no wanton or unnecessary violence. In fact, two key words are used to describe the legitimate use of violence in a just cause. One is ‘proportionate’ and the other ‘discriminate.’ ‘Proportionate’ signifies that the war is perceived as the lesser of two evils, that the violence inflicted is proportionately less than that which it is intended to remedy, and that the ultimate gains will outweigh the losses. ‘Discriminate’ means that the war is directed against enemy combatants and military targets, and that civilians are immune.

Thirdly, its outcome must be predictable…There must be a calculated prospect of victory, and so of achieving the just cause for which the war was begun.

Conclusion

Ultimately, we must come to grips with what the Bible teaches, that God’s sovereignty and power extend even over death. Deuteronomy 32:39 says, “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.”

This section is an excerpt from The Gospel Project’s study “God’s Way“

ERLC

Read More by this Author

Related Resources

Infertility

Explainer: How the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling on life affects IVF

By Jason Thacker

Parenting

How the Weeping Widow brought laughter back to our home

By Amy Richards

Courage

The duty and courage of Queen Elizabeth II

By Alex Ward

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24