‘No one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle’

Asbury seminary president Timothy Tennent responds to Adam Hamilton’s exegesis over the question of why we no longer stone sinners.

[I]t is important to understand the reason the New Testament does not command Christians to stone sinners. It is not because of a relaxation of the moral demands of God, nor even, quite frankly, because of any relaxing of the consequences of sin.

On the contrary, the New Testament teaching is that we do not put sinners to death because Christ has already been put to death for every act of human sinfulness. It is in the face of Christ that we see the full extent of how God’s mercy meets God’s righteousness. It is not that “stoning” is culturally bound and therefore we can draw a red line through it. It is not because God has now relaxed the consequences of sin. Rather, it is that Jesus Christ has already borne the full penalty of our rebellion against God and neighbor on the cross. Just as we say, “Christ died for us” so we could also say, “Christ was stoned for us.”

After the Rev. Tennent’s eloquent argument, I deserve to be stoned for the following link, but I cannot write about this topic without thinking of something completely different.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “‘No one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle’

  1. “On the contrary, the New Testament teaching is that we do not put sinners to death because Christ has already been put to death for every act of human sinfulness.”

    Who is ‘we” in the above statement?
    We are talking capitol punishment here?
    Does the New Testament at anytime revoke the states right to impose capitol punishment?

    1. The reference is to sinners not those who break civil law, but there is a fairly long debate in the church about the death penalty, add you know.

      1. I am sorry but I am not understanding your comment completely.
        Civil Law and “sinner law & penalty” many times overlap.

        At one time Roman Law called for death if a woman committed adultery.
        That would be an example of overlapping law.

        1. The post in question was not about the death penalty in modern nation-states. It was about the New Testament and Old Testament.

  2. I still do not get the connection.
    The state existed in the N.T. and there would have been converts to the Christian faith in the state or gov. as it existed at that time. There is no reference that I am aware of that revokes the right of the state to impose capitol punishment in any of the New Testament.
    I know of no N.T. teaching that revokes capitol punishment.

    If you are referencing the plight of the Christian and the forgiveness of penalty due that is a very different thing.

  3. It is a very interesting topic.
    The Jews, after they lost the right to self rule, never had the authority to impose the death penalty.
    The death penalty was regulated by the gov., or leadership the Jews fell under.
    In the time of Christ Rome ruled and the Jewish community did not have the authority to impose the death penalty.
    Rome held that authority. Had the Jewish community had the right and authority to impose the death penalty they would have gladly done so themselves when their goal was to eliminate Christ.

    I have not studied the history behind the topic so I am at a little disadvantage.
    What the church did and what penalties were imposed when the Christian Church was a force I will have to look into.

Comments are closed.