Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

Those of us who are working to produce Truth Magazine are constantly looking for ways in which we can improve the quality of the Magazine. Hence, we sometimes produce special issues on current topics, make technical changes in the printing of the paper, etc. all of which are designed to make Truth Magazine a better journal through which the gospel of Jesus Christ is presented. Among the things which we have done to improve the paper is to secure the services of qualified writers to make sure that the content of this paper is worth the cost which our subscribers pay. We like to think that we have always presented a good staff of writers who regularly contribute articles to this paper which make this magazine among the very best in print.

Sometimes we lose writers for one reason or another. Some of our regular writers are growing old to the point that their years of service are very much limited. Some, because of health reasons, are no longer able to write regularly for us. Others have committed themselves to other fields of labor to such an extent that they are no longer contributing articles to Truth Magazine. Hence, we are losing staff writers from time to time. Even at this time, we are losing Ferrell Jenkins, Harry Ozment and Bruce Edwards. Hence, we find it necessary to enhance our staff of writers by adding some new staff writers at this time.

Before announcing the names of our new staff writers, there are some introductory remarks which I would like to make. It should go without saying that each writer is solely responsible for the material which he himself writes. We ask no writer to accept responsibility for the total content of this journal nor even request that he defend us in all matters of judgment. There will always be times when the manner in which another author writes is not pleasing to me and the manner in which I write will not be pleasing to someone else. Hence, we only ask that each writer be responsible for his own work. There will be times that various members of our staff will disagree with things which appear in this journal and may choose to express that disagreement. Sometimes, as editor, I even request that opposing viewpoints of different matters be presented. This is done in the belief that the presentation of both sides of an issue will help make the truth shine brighter.

We always request that each staff writer contribute at least six articles each year for publication. Our reason for this is that we have no intention of publishing a masthead filled with the names of venerable brethren who do not regularly write for this journal. Hence, if any of our staff writers decide that they do not want to write at least six articles per year for Truth Magazine, we request that they at least let us know of their intention to quit writing for us by resigning.

The men whom we have chosen to write for us are very well qualified men. One is a well-known, experienced preacher who has been serving our Lord for more years than I have been alive. Two others of our writers are rapidly approaching the ripe old age of thirty and the fourth has recently passed that age. I guess that we would have to list him as being in the prime of his life. All of those whom we are adding are known and respected for their faithfulness to God and His word. Their lives are impeccable and their abilities are well-known. We sincerely believe that Truth Magazine will be enhanced by their contributions.

In order that I might introduce these men to you, I have written a brief, biographical sketch of each of these men. By knowing a little of their background, perhaps you will appreciate their works a little more. In alphabetical order, our new staff writers are as follows:

Bill Cavender

On November 28, 1926, Bill Lavender was born in Bemis, Tennessee. The son of Methodist parents, Bill graduated from high school in 1944 and promptly joined the United States Navy serving until August, 1946. While in the Navy, he served as a pharmacist’s mate. Two years after his discharge from the armed forces, Bill married Miss Marinel Raines of Malesus, Tennessee.

Bill attended Union University in Jackson, Tennessee and David Lipscomb College in Nashville; he graduated from Lipscomb in 1950.

While in the Navy, Bill obeyed the gospel. He was stationed in San Francisco, California when he heard the gospel preached, believed it and obeyed it. Less than two years after he was baptized into Christ, Bill had preached his first gospel sermon in his hometown. While attending school, he preached for two years at the Deason church in Bedford County, Tennessee and then at the Philadelphia church in Maury County and the Fosterville church in Rutherford County by Sunday appointments.

Since then, Bill has done local work at Ashland City, Tennessee; Cooper, Texas (4 years); Dallas, Texas (3 years); Longview, Texas (5 years); and Port Arthur, Texas (14 years). He has preached for the Imhoff Avenue congregation for the last eleven years.

During his life, Bill has had the privilege of personally baptizing approximately 900 people. He has had one debate and that with a United Pentecostal preacher. At the present, while working with the brethren at Imhoff Avenue, he holds ten to fifteen gospel meetings every year and writes an eight-page monthly church bulletin which has a circulation of 4,500. Bill is known and loved by brethren all over these United States.

Bill and Marinel have four sons: Paul, Philip, Bradley and Bait. They are also the proud grandparents of one little girl. I know that you will enjoy the articles which Brother Bill Cavender writes for us.

Daniel Hayden King

Daniel was born on August 1, 1948 to Mr. and Mrs. Hayden King of Union City, Tennessee. His father was a “sharecropper.” To the King’s were born two other sons and one daughter. To make a living as a sharecropper in that area was extremely difficult; hence, in 1954 the King’s were forced to leave Tennessee in search of a better job. The family ended up in Detroit, Michigan where Hayden King worked in the construction trade.

Daniel’s father was reared as a Methodist; his mother was a member of the Lord’s church, as most of her family before her had been. Her family had been forced to disassociate themselves from the Christian Church when the division occurred over instrumental music and missionary societies. Because of strong gospel preaching and the influence of a god-fearing woman, Hayden King was converted to Christ and took the lead in raising his family to be Christians. Mr. and Mrs. King must have been rather effective at this since all four of their children are faithful Christians.

When the family moved to Michigan, they began to worship with the East Detroit church. Already, the battle was raging over whether or not the church could scripturally support benevolent institutions and the sponsoring church arrangement. Letters from home reported the Newbern, Tennessee debate between Roy E. Cogdill and Guy N. Woods. The aftermaths of this debate are the primary cause of the King’s stand against liberalism in the church today. Finally, when the church at East Detroit became too liberal for the King’s to tolerate, they left the congregation and identified with the saints at South Macomb in Roseville, Michigan.

In the meantime, Daniel was having some trouble deciding to be a Christian. The presentation of evolution as scientific fact had persuaded him that the biblical account of creation could not be true. He wrestled with this until, in the summer of 1965; he was baptized into Christ by the ‘young evangelist at the East Detroit church, Jimmy Carter (no relation to the President, I presume). Upon his conversion, Daniel decided to change his plans from majoring in Biology to become a gospel preacher. Soon, he preached his first gospel sermon on “Creation.”

During the period following his graduation from high school, Daniel met Miss Donna Jean Chapman, the young lady destined to become the wife of a young preacher. She had been a member of the Catholic Church but through their studies together, she became a Christian. On September 7, 1968, Donna and Daniel were united in marriage.

During the years that Daniel was getting his education, he worked part time with several congregations. From 1966 to 1968, he studied at Wayne State University in Detroit where he primarily studied Greek and public speaking. From there he went to David Lipscomb College where he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Bible. His interest changed to the study of the Old Testament while at this college. Soon, he enrolled at Harding College Graduate School of Religion from which university he received the Master of Arts degree in Old Testament in 1973. While in Memphis, Daniel help to establish a new congregation in Millington, Tennessee. During this time, the church grew from twenty members to over eighty members in just two and one-half years. In 1973, he moved to work with the Gallatin, Tennessee church with which he labored until 1975. When he moved to Nashville to work with the Hillview church, he continued his education by attending Vanderbilt University where he has almost completed the classroom work for a Ph. D. degree in Old Testament Studies.

Daniel has written for several periodicals. He was a regular contributor for Facts For Faith, a periodical dealing with Christian evidences. In October, 1972, he engaged Dr. David Otis Fuller, author of Which Bible? in a written discussion on whether or not the King James Version was the best translation of the biblical texts. Too, Daniel has contributed several articles to Truth Magazine.

Daniel and Donna have one son, Daniel, Jr., who is now four years old. They are expecting their second child in March, 1977.

Keith Sharp

Keith is richly blessed by being the son of a faithful gospel preacher. He was born September 27, 1945 in Del Rio, Texas to H. F. and Pearl Sharp. H. F. Sharp, a native of Arkansas, has been preaching for nearly 35 years and was the first preacher in the state of Arkansas to publicly take a stand against church support of orphan homes. Through the years he has manifested a steadfast, unyielding and uncompromising loyalty to truth.

During Keith’s childhood, the Sharp’s were doing located work primarily in Conway, Arkansas. After completing high school in that city, Keith attended Florida College where he compiled quite a record as an outstanding student, holding several class and society offices and receiving several awards for outstanding work. While in Florida, Keith also met the woman who became his wife, Miss Sandra Diane Hawkins. They were married on September 4, 1965. Sandy is from Elgin, Illinois; her parents are faithful Christians and her father formerly served the Elgin church as an elder.

In May of 1965, Keith began his first full-time work by preaching in Quitman, Arkansas. While working with that congregation, he continued his education by attending Arkansas State Teachers College (now known as the University of Central Arkansas) in Conway. In 1966, he moved to El Dorado, Arkansas to preach for the Union Heights congregation. While there he received the BSE degree in social studies from Southern State College in Magnolia. After graduating, he taught one year of school at Parkers Chapel High School. That must have been a busy year for Keith because during that year he taught school, drove a school bus, attended to extra-curricular school activities, preached weekly, and wrote a bulletin. During this same year, Sandy gave birth to their firstborn son, Brent (now eight years old).

In 1969, Keith moved his family to Rogers, Arkansas. He continued his secular education by attending the University of Arkansas from which institution he received the Master of Arts degree in history. During their stay in Rogers, their twins, Michelle and Bryan, were born. Too, Keith engaged E. H. Miller of La Grange, Georgia in a debate on the “one cup” and classes issues.

In 1972, the family moved to Baytown, Texas where they are presently located laboring with the Pruett and Lobit church there. He is presently editing two bulletins published by that church, one which is handed out to the members and one which is mailed out to residents of Baytown. This past summer, Keith had his second debate, a debate with a Mormon.

During his years of preaching, Keith has contributed articles to the Gospel Guardian, Preceptor, Searching the Scriptures, Torch and Truth Magazine. The Preceptor Company is in the process of printing his first book, a class book on first principles entitled What Must I Do To Be Saved

Their fourth child, Timothy, was born in 1975. Hence, the Sharp’s are blessed with four children. This July, they will be moving to begin work with the church in Conway, Arkansas. You will be appreciating the articles which Keith will be writing on the Sermon on the Mount.

Johnny Stringer

Johnny Stringer was born August 2, 1947 in Lufkin, Texas. He was reared in East Texas, primarily in Longview. His parents, Mr. and Mrs. N. W. Stringer, are faithful members of the Greggton church in Longview. They had one other son, a young man who was killed in an automobile accident at the age of 18 in 1963.

Since his parents attended the Greggton church, Johnny was privileged to grow up under the influence of the preaching of Brother Bill Cavender during the time that he worked there. At the age of 15, Johnny obeyed the gospel during a gospel meeting conducted by Luther Blackmon. Brother Cavender was a major influence on Johnny during these years. He was the one who contributed the most influence in Johnny’s decision to spend his life preaching the gospel. Of course, after Johnny had made this decision, his parents and home congregation encouraged him. Approximately one year after his baptism, he was given the opportunity to preach his first lesson during the morning service of the Greggton congregation. Too, his parents made many sacrifices in order to make it possible for him to attend Florida College.

In the fall of 1965, Johnny enrolled in Florida College. He completed the four-year program at Florida College and earned the certificate which they give to those who have completed that program. During these years, he was able to spend his summers working with various congregations. In 1967, he worked with the church in Pine Bluff, Arkansas and in 1968 he worked with the 40th Street church in Tampa, Florida. During his last year at Florida College, Johnny preached for the church in Dunedin, Florida.

After leaving Florida College, Johnny began working with Bill Cavender in a two-preacher arrangement in Port Arthur, Texas. He, therefore, had the privilege of working under the oversight of godly elders and with an experienced preacher. This arrangement continued from June, 1969 through July, 1971. At that time, Johnny moved to Terre Haute, Indiana to work with the small, struggling church in that city. While there, Johnny and I had the occcasion to work together regularly in the publication of our bulletins. Through that association, I have grown acquainted with him to the point that I have nothing but the highest respect for his abilities, his dedication to God and loyalty to his friends. Needless to say, my family was saddened when Johnny announced his plans to move to Trumann, Arkansas in November of 1973. Being personally associated with Johnny, I am more intimately acquainted with some of the sacrifices that he has made to be able to preach the gospel. He has worked with churches which lacked the ability to pay him what other gospel preachers were making, yet I have never heard him complaining about it.

Johnny married Nanette Birdwell, the daughter of O. C. Birdwell who is one of our associate editors and a board member of Cogdill Foundation. Those acquainted with the Birdwell’s know of their faithfulness to God. The Stringers have a very intimate family association and are blessed with one daughter, Cynthia Marie who was born September 27, 1974. Their second child is expected to be born in May. Nanette has always been willing to share Johnny’s load of work and sacrifices; I have never heard her complain of the problems associated with being married to a preacher.

Johnny has written articles for The Gospel Guardian, Seraching the Scriptures, With All Boldness, and Truth Magazine. Recently, he published his first booklet entitled The Grace-Unity Heresy which was previously reviewed in this magazine.

Truth Magazine XXI: 10, pp. 147-151
March 10, 1977

By Bill Cavender

Due to the entreaties of Brother Cecil Willis and the earlier invitation of Brother Mike Willis, and in “a moment of temporary dementia,” I have consented to obligate myself to be “a staff writer” for Truth Magazine. As I understand it, this agreement will in no wise increase my earthly wealth and what earthly fame may attach thereto will, no doubt, be fleeting and fanciful. It does increase my time with a typewriter, is supposed to challenge whatever -mental processes I am capable of generating, and is designed “to help the cause of Christ” (but in exactly what way Brother Cecil did not say!).

Thus I nave promised to do that which heretofore I had said I would not do and did not have time for. So chalk up one more change of mind and blot out one more of those generalizations made in the past when I said, “I won’t do that.” Life is teaching me that we do many things we say we would never do. Simon Peter learned that (Mark 14:29-31). All parents of children learn that lesson, and preachers who are asked to write and obligate themselves for at least six articles per year know that broad, general statements do not always mean what they say.

I obeyed the gospel in February, 1946, and immediately subscribed to The Bible Banner. Brother Foy E. Wallace, Jr. had held a meeting in San Francisco, California, in the fall of 1945. I was in the Navy there, boarding with Brother George W. Dickson and his family, the preacher of the Seventeenth Street church. Brother Wallace stayed with the Dickson’s during the meeting; I was with him every night, and heard him preach each evening. Even though I was a Methodist at the time, they were all very kind to me. Brother Wallace greatly impressed me with his Bible preaching, and early the next year I obeyed the gospel. Later that year I began taking the Gospel Advocate, the Firm Foundation, Eugene S. Smith’s Gospel Broadcast, E. C. Fuqua’s The Vindicator, and Brother James A. Allen’s Apostolic Times. The Bible Banner (later The Gospel Guardian) impressed me most and, more than any other one influence, helped to shape and solidify my convictions in the crucial years of the late forties, through the “fighting fifties,” and until the present time. I have not taken the Advocate and Foundation in years, and the other papers mentioned above ceased publication and their editor-owners are all deceased.

I say all that to convey my conviction that gospel papers serve a good purpose, hopefully with others as with me. Faithful brethren are presently publishing some good papers (Truth Magazine, Searching The Scriptures The Gospel Guardian, etc.). I do not subscribe to all papers our brethren publish as I just do not have the money for all nor the time to read all of them.

I have believed through the years that brethren have a personal, individual right to work together and cooperate individually in publishing gospel papers, owning publishing houses and book stores, operating schools which teach the Bible in classes, and conducting legitimate businesses in which they might teach the Bible to their employees. I have heard such men as Foy E. Wallace, Jr., G. C. Brewer, Carl Ketcherside, Leroy Garrett, G. K. Wallace, Flavil Colley, George DeHoff, Bill J. Humble, James R. Cope, etc. discuss these issues orally and in writing. Such papers, schools, publishing houses, businesses, etc., cannot scripturally have any organizational connection with local churches of our Lord. One is human, the other divine. So it is in good conscience that I enter into this relationship with others in publishing and writing Truth Magazine.

All my preaching life, now thirty years, I have wanted to avoid groups and cliques among brethren, not being identified with any paper, party, or political body among our brethren. I realize there are groups among conservative brethren, of more or less obvious or behind-the-scenes influence and power, which have used or will use brethren for their own purposes. None of this have I ever participated in, nor do I plan to do so in the future. I have intended to ever be “my own man,” the Lord’s servant, and to be faithful in the discharge of my duties as a Christian, a gospel preacher, a husband, father and brother in Christ. By writing for Truth Magazine, I intend to do just that-write. For any activities by others connected with the paper I will not be responsible, nor party to anything that I believe to be wrong or not in the best interests of truth and the church of our Lord.

My writings will represent my own understanding, knowledge and convictions of God’s truth. I have not always agreed with everything that has appeared on the pages of Truth Magazine. I will probably not do so in the future, just as others will probably not always agree with me. The general course pursued by Truth Magazine in the past of upholding truth and exposing error I have agreed with and appreciated, and it is on this basis that I am willing to participate in writing so as to maintain that course in whatever future God may grant to us.

Doing a full-time local work with a good church, holding 12-15 meetings a year, writing and printing an eight-page monthly paper, and other work regularly more than takes my time. But I plan to try to streamline my activities even further and find time for this endeavor also. So with some “fear and trembling,” and with a hope and prayer that these efforts shall be productive of some good some way, I embark upon the sea of journalism as “a staff writer.” Your prayers for me and others connected with this paper will be appreciated.

Truth Magazine XXI: 10, p. 146
March 10, 1977

By Tarry L. CluffFort

What would you think of an organization that was set up for the study of cancer research (that was its charter and reason given for their pleas to solicit funds from the public), one day while they were on their way to the research laboratory they came upon a bridge that needed repairs, so having all the funds with them they decided to pay for the repairs needed on the bridge? Their reasoning went something like this: “If we don’t fix 1 his bridge someone might get killed and what good would cancer research do for a dead person? Besides fixing the bridge would be a good work, so that must make it alright.” Or what would you think of a man in charge of repairing bridges, given thousands of tax dollars to do so, but he decided cancer is such a bad thing that he would take the money and start a cancer research program? After all, cancer research would be a good work, so he tells himself: “Surely no one would object to using the money for such a good cause.”

It should be obvious to everyone that both the cancer research organization and the bridge repair man would be guilty of misappropriation of funds. It is not a matter of what would be a good work for these people to do, but simply a matter of appropriation. The same basic question should always be asked, what were the funds appropriated for?

When you and I give to a cancer research group, we expect them to use it for that purpose. If they spend the money for something else, they have deceived us and misappropriated the funds. Such would be a violation of their charter and against the law. Likewise for the man employed to repair bridges, he would be fired from his job if he took the funds given to him and used it for something other than what he was paid to do, no matter how good the other work may seem to him.

The Bible authorizes the church to spend the Lord’s money for certain things. To spend it for something not authorized by God’s Word would be a misappropriation of the Lord’s money. Jesus has authorized the -funds of His church to be used in three categories:

1. Evangelism-converting sinners to Christ by preaching the Gospel (1 Thess. 1:8).

2. Edification-teaching members of the church (Eph. 4:15-16).

3. Benevolence-relieving the needs of members, when such needs exist (Acts 11:29).

This is the work of the church; the funds of the church are authorized for these three works only. If the church uses its funds for anything other than evangelism, edification and benevolence to needy saints, it would be misappropriating the Lord’s money, because other things are not authorized by the Lord (see 2 John 9 and Colossians 3:17).

Churches today spend thousands of dollars for things you can not read about in God’s Word. The other day I read an article of a church buying a “youth camp” for almost one hundred thousand dollars. Where in the Bible do you read of the Lord’s money being used for such a thing? Remember it is not whether a youth camp may be a “good work,” but what is the church authorized to do? The church has no business being in the entertainment field. Let us not “saddle” the church with entertainment responsibilities which rightfully belong to the home!

If you belong to a church that is spending its money for things like this, please ask them where they get their authority? Ask them to show you where in the New Testament the church ever engaged in such things. I assure you such is not found in the Bible. If they will not stop this misappropriation of funds, get out of it and look for a church interested in doing the Lord’s work in the Lord’s way (see 1 Peter 4:11).

Truth Magazine XXI: 9, pp.141-142
March 3, 1977

By Jeffery Kingry

Capital punishment as a penalty for certain crimes has fallen upon “bad times” recently. Since 1965 there have been but a handful of executions in the United States. The penalty is being reviewed by the Supreme Court as “cruel and unusual punishment” and hence unconstitutional. It is interesting, though, that as fewer criminals have had to suffer death for capital crimes, that the rate of capital crime has skyrocketed. While the two rates are not statistically related to one another by experts, this writer feels that their correlation is direct. As law loses its power to enforce moral standards, then increasingly those standards will be neglected by the citizen and fearlessly disregarded by the evil-doer.

Arguments Against Death Penalty

The arguments against the death penalty are primarilly directed against its abuse: errors of justice sometimes lead to the execution of innocent people. Sometimes the death penalty is applied unequally, mostly to the poor and the defenseless, who cannot afford lawyers, appeals, or alternate pleas.

Some Christians oppose the death penalty or declare “It may be lawful, but I wouldn’t throw the switch.” The latter view begs the question. If something is “lawful”-pleasing to God-then our squemishness or scruples place us “above” God’s will. This position is not unlike the brother who “accepts” the scripturality of church autonomy, but is not willing to make it a matter of principle as far as his life and practice is concerned. It has been said before, but we must be careful that our scruples do not surpass the Lord’s.

The former view is primarilly supported by the general pacifist arguments. Basically the idea expressed is that the Christian does not have the right to take the life of a man for whom Christ has died. The death penalty is human judgement (sending a man to perdition without ever obeying the gospel), and thusly takes from God something that belongs only to him.

This view overlooks one crucial point-the Christian (or anyone else) does not have the individual human right to take life outside of law. The question is not whether an individual may take life, for this is granted. Murder or manslaughter is certainly against the law of man and God. One may not seek vengeance by taking the life of one who has committed capital crimes as an individual. “Lynch law” or “Vigilantee justice” has always been abhorrent to God. The question is may government, state, community, the “higher power” claim the life of one who is guilty of capital crime? If the answer is yes, then the individual acting within law as a Christian may operate in any part of that process which brings death to the evil-doer: as a juror, a judge, a lawyer, a policeman, a guard, an executioner, or a lawmaker.

This power is specifically granted in Romans 13:4. Evil doers are to fear the “higher powers” because it carries the sword “to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” The sword is not a symbol of punishment; it is an implement of death or execution. Government does not carry the sword without reason, Paul claimed. It was given to the government to enable that power to act as God’s minister to those who keep law in protecting the community from lawmakers by penalizing the criminal.

Why Kill the Evil Doer?

The question often arises, “Why kill the evil doer? Doesn’t life imprisonment act just as well as a deterrent to crime, and keeping the criminal off the street?” The answer is “No.” Life imprisonment is seldom for “life.” A man is eligible for parole on a life sentence after six years, and many criminals guilty of murder, rape, kidnapping, arson, assassination, lynching, bombing, treason, etc. have been freed after a few years on a “life” sentence. In the month of April in Anne Arundel county in Maryland a man attacked, raped, and almost killed a fourteen year old schoolgirl. Just seven months before, he had been released from a prison where he had served seven years for raping and brutally murdering a sixteen year old girl. This past month the kidnapping of a young boy made headlines in the Baltimore area. After two weeks the youngster was found in Virginia captive of a convicted homosexual child abuser and murderer. It was found that the . man had never been sentenced, but remanded to a state clinic because he had been judged “sick” instead of “guilty” in his earlier murder and abuse of a toddler. When he was arrested the young boy was then able to lead the police to the grave of another young boy that he had witnessed his kidnapper molest and murder. The criminal was sent back to the state “hospital” and placed under heavier security. Before, he had been able to just walk away and was not missed, till a child had turned up missing. Brethren-there are some things worthy of death.

Why Death?

Many have imbibed of the modernistic penal philosophy that criminal sentence should be primarially for the rehabilitation of the evil doer. The thought is that man is not as responsible for his condition as society is. The combined qualities of environment, race prejudice, economic deprivation, and schooling failures make criminal behaviour. “Why hold the criminal responsible for what Society has done to him?” This view of criminal behaviour eliminates God’s teaching that every man is responsible for what he does, and that all men will be judged individually for what they do, good or evil. While it is true that the criminal is in need of repentance and rehabilitation, punishment is not for his benefit.

Vengeance. Scripture tells us that punishment of the evil doer is fundamentally one of revenge. Now, vengeance is not worked individually. The Christian is not allowed to arbitrarily seek vengeance for wrongs he has sustained (Rom. 12:17, 19; 1 Thess. 5:15; 1 Pet. 3:9). But the restriction God has placed on us in seeking personal revenge does not mean that revenge for evil is wrong. God has sought revenge may times against those who have wronged him (2 Cor. 10:6; Rom. 12:19; 2 Thess. 1:8; Heb. 10:30). 1 might ask the same question that Paul did of the Romans, “Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world” (Rom 3:5,6)? Vengeance belongs to God, and he has placed his sword into the hands of the state “for he is a minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath ,upon him that doeth evil” (Rom. 13:4). When one has lost someone dear due to the bloody hands of a murderer or worse, then God gives us vengeance through his minister of vengeance by the shedding of the murderer’s blood. “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s, brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: For in the image of God made he man” (Cf. Gen. 9:5,6; Ex. 21:12; Lev. 24:17; Matt. 26:52; Rev. 13:10).

Deterrence. Punishment is an example as well as vengeance. When God practiced divine retribution against the lies of Ananias and Saphira, the result among God’s people at their execution was that “great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things” (Acts 5:11). The threat of punishment by the state restrains the criminal, as well as providing reason for the law keeper to remain within law. Those who argue from statistics that capital punishment is not an effective deterrent to crime overlook or forget that the threat of punishment is not effective unless there is an assurance of swift punishment. Today, though there are strong penalties for certain crimes, execution of punishment is seldom brought about. Criminals figure, “cop a plea” “serve time,” and then get “out on parole.” Punishment that is deferred or not enforced actually encourages crime rather than deterring it. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Eccl. 8:11). In fact, in many instances the only person who suffers is the victim. What advantage is there in keeping the law when there is no penalty to be feared for breaking law? “There is a vanity which is done upon the face of the earth; that there be just men unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked; again, there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the righteous” (Eccl. 8:14).

But proper sentence speedily executed without respect of persons is a very real deterrent to crime: “And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. . . and all Israel shall hear, and fear. and shall do no more any such wickedness as this among you” (Dent. 13:10, 11). “When the scorner is punished, the simple is made wise” (Prov. 12:11). “Now these things were our examples (destruction of the Jews in wilderness because of sin 10:6-11) . . . now all things happened to them for ensamples” (1 Cor. 10:6, 11).

Protection of Public. Capital punishment is not only punitive, but it also is defensive. Criminals beget crime, prey on the lawkeeper and the innocent, and destroy the unity and purpose of community. Criminals lower

the value of human dignity and take away freedoms and liberties of all citizens by their abuses. Society must preserve itself from those among it that would prey on its members. We see the way in which discipline protects and keeps the church pure by isolating and negating the influence and power of the sinner (1 Cor. 5:5-8, 13). In society, the criminal who is guilty of capital crime is eliminated through execution. The expression may be crude, but not the concept: “The murderer who is put to death will never murder again.” “Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright: for the end of that man is peace. But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of the wicked shall be cut off” (Psa. 37:37, 38).

Human life belongs to God, and he is not unrighteous to take it. There are some crimes that are deserving of death (Acts 25:11). Christians should repudiate any maudlin sentimentality which does not take crime seriously. Men may try to eliminate punishment for evil doing. God will find vengeance ultimately though men fail in their appointed roles. Men may escape death at the hand of men, but they will never escape death at the hand of God.

Truth Magazine XXI: 10, pp. 140-141
March 3, 1977