by Rev. Adam Chandler (Lutherans For Life of Canada)
The most basic way to understand killing is as a termination of life; and if killing were this simple, this article would end here. Things can quickly get quite complicated. For example, killing can be either active (directly intervening to end a life) or passive (withholding something necessary for life). Therefore, you can be responsible for someone’s death simply by not helping them as you can. While the definition of killing is relatively simple, the subject of killing becomes increasingly complex if we start talking about all the moral implications.
The Moral Debate
Is it ever good to terminate life? Fundamentally, this is what we are asking whenever the subject of killing comes up as a moral quandary. To view murder as evil, we are claiming contempt, hatred, or indifference to life as being evil. On the other hand, not all killings can be characterized as murder.
Murder, execution, slaughter, etc. are all different ways to kill. Differentiation between these ways of killing largely depend on the intent behind the action. For instance, an executioner may be performing a civic duty while murder is being deliberately unlawful. Continuing on the legal theme, the distinction between manslaughter and murder is important to distinguish in a court of law where manslaughter is without malice of forethought while murder is premeditated. This affects how severely a person is judged for their action. Instances of manslaughter could even be counted as indifference to human life, which is immoral but not necessarily as immoral as maliciously murdering someone. Intent behind killing is one of the central points of discussion in whether killing is morally acceptable in certain circumstances—circumstance also being a major factor in morally debating killing.
Social issues surrounding killing include abortion, euthanasia, suicide, and capital punishment. The circumstances behind each of these issues, and the individual scenarios in which these things might be done, are unique although each one is heavily influenced by the intent of the people involved. (We could also discuss warfare as a social issue, but warfare would be better understood as its own complex subject. Let us focus on killing within civil society, as ironic as civil killing may sound.) Oddly enough, those who are most in favour of abortion and euthanasia are typically least in favour of capital punishment. We could try to examine this in terms of killing intent, but discussion often shifts from intent to the question of what constitutes human life and also quality of life (e.g. at what stage a fetus should be considered a human being or what level of pain someone should be in to request euthanasia). Debates over whether abortion or euthanasia is wrong, for instance, rarely talk about if murder is correct but whether the label of murder can be applied to the situation.
Rather than getting bogged down in definitions of life and what qualities of life a person should have, let us turn back to the act of killing itself. As stated above, it largely comes down to intent of the killer. While intent is by definition subjective, judging whether an intent is condemnable relies on moral laws, which are objective. Moral laws apply universally to all circumstances, which would include a law that murder is objectively wrong. So, if we are trying to establish universal moral laws, we should look to a universal moral lawgiver.
The Biblical Position
When God declares the Fifth Commandment, “You shall not kill,” it is specifically referring to murder and manslaughter (Heb. ratsach; Exodus 20:13). Jesus explains this commandment to include the intent behind the action as sinful in and of itself. He declares that we are guilty of murder even for hating and insulting our neighbours (Matthew 5:21-26), that is, murdering them in our hearts. Why does God command us not to kill? In essence, life is sacred. Life stems from God Himself and actions to end life are personally against God. Here, though, we need to make a distinction.
God permits killing animals for specific purposes such as food (e.g. Genesis 9:3), clothing (e.g. Genesis 3:21), and religious sacrifices (e.g. Leviticus 1-7). The death of animals is for the preservation of human life physically and spiritually, thus valuing human life above animal life. Animals are not worthless, though. God highly values them as part of His creation and cares for them (e.g. Psalm 104:24-30; Job 38:39-39:30). However, human beings are closer to God and His being than animals. God has given humanity His own Image (Genesis 1:26-27). Humans are unique in God’s creation on account of this.
The Image of God can be understood as possessing certain attributes of God, including His righteousness and holiness in addition to being rational creatures.[1] The Image comes up within the scope of humanity’s place in the creation, so it can also be expressed in terms of how we reflect God within the creation. For example, God is the Creator and people were commanded by God to be procreators—being fruitful and multiply. God sustains all things by His Spirit, and people are to have dominion over the earth by herding the animals and cultivating the plants. Adam and Eve accomplished these aspects of the Image when they procreated Cain and Abel who became a farmer and shepherd, respectively. Properly living in the Image of God depends on acting rightly as God wills.
God is the author of all life. Despite parents being procreators and giving their flesh in the creation of their children, God remains the one who physically shapes His creatures from conception onwards (e.g. Psalm 139:13-16). God is the only one who should determine when life is taken away as He is the one who gives it. The Lord’s condition for ending life is sin (Ezekiel 18:4; Romans 6:23), which makes sense. God fashioned all things in His creation to work together and reflect His righteous perfection. Sin denigrates and desecrates this perfection by introducing failures (“missing the mark”), corruption (iniquity), and transgression. Upholding creation involves removing sin from it. This is done by either cleansing sinners of their sin that they may persist in life eternally, or removing sinners themselves who retain their guilt in rejection of God’s forgiveness. God has given life and His Image, sin has tarnished the Image and invited death.
Even if humans have fallen short of God’s glory as they reflect sin instead of Him, humans retain the Image, albeit brokenly. Any assault against the Image of God is an assault against God Himself. When someone kills any human being, they are attacking God, their Creator, and the work of His hands. Murderers extinguish the lives of their victims and simultaneously assault the source of life Himself. Therefore, murder implies not only death of the victim but also an end to life in the abstract, that is, God as the source of life. For this reason, God declares that those who murder will themselves pay by their own execution (Genesis 9:6). Murderers deny life and now their life is denied.[2] Not only this, since God is also the arbiter of taking life from sinners, a murderer taking death into his/her own hands means the murderer is usurping God as judge over life and death matters. If you will, murderers play God. They execute people by their own judgments over life and death, not God’s judgment, thus trying to make themselves God by usurping His authority.[3]
Conclusions
Killing should not be taken lightly because it is the ending of life, the most precious gift we have. Whether or not killing is considered murder (an unlawful and deliberate killing) lies with intent and circumstance. The biblical perspective views the only permissible killing of another human being as execution in punishment for sins against God and humanity. Death itself is a punishment for sin and execution is an immediate application of death for a specific sin. Killing should be viewed as punishing sin, not as the way to deal with unfavorable social situations, such as lowered quality of life. Doing so is playing God by enacting His punishment on things which are not sin. Killing in this way is a vicarious assault against God and life itself by terminating those who bear the Life-giver’s Image.
O Lord of life, you call all people into being and, by your judgment, you condemn our sins. Forgive us our sins and bring us to new life in Jesus Christ. Guide our lives and actions that we do not take life lightly but see it as a gift. Help us encourage others to understand this gift and hold it sacred that no one ends life against your will. In the name of Jesus, we pray. Amen.
[1] Johann Gerhard, trans. Richard J. Dinda. On Creation and Predestination, (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2013), 266-7.
[2] More broadly, God also instituted executions for other significant sins in Israelite civil society since sin results in God’s judgment of death. For example, Lev 20:10-21 lists execution as a punishment for numerous sexual sins. Since sex is the act by which new life is meant to spring, serious sexual sin thematically connects to murder in that it desecrates life.
[3] Of course, this merely demonstrates the grounds for execution being an acceptable punishment in a society operating under God’s moral laws. It is not absolutely necessary that God’s followers institute Levitical laws of execution. Those laws were specific to the Old Testament Jews. Jesus has fulfilled the law and now gives us new freedom in forgiveness (cf. Matt 5:17-18). A woman was once presented Jesus as deserving execution (John 8:1-11). Rather than immediately call for her death under the law, Jesus brought attention to her accusers’ and would-be-executioners’ need for forgiveness. With no one to condemn the woman, Jesus told her to go and sin no more rather than stone her. He withholds punishment that she may live a repentant life in good works and service to her neighbour. Much more could be said about this and all the moral implications, but this should suffice for the present article.