I was glad that the current lawlessness of the cops was noted by Christian Reconstructionist/Theonomist Bojidar Marinov in his series of articles:
- Douglas Wilson: Tossing the Victims Under the Bus, “Biblically”
- The Victims are Still Under the Bus
- Another Non-Reply… and the Victims are Still Under the Bus
Essentially, Douglas Wilson refuses to condemn a policeman killing a black man without all of the facts: Bojidar Marinov wants to know if “all the facts” — and can we really know all of the facts? — are needed.
And the answer is no.
What does the Bible say about the issue? Do we really need all the facts?
No. We need only three relevant facts, and only these three facts need to be established by witnesses. Correct, not all the facts. Only three relevant facts. Let’s see:
But if he struck him down with an iron object, so that he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death. If he struck him down with a stone in the hand, by which he will die, and as a result he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death. Or if he struck him with a wooden object in the hand, by which he might die, and as a result he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death. The blood avenger himself shall put the murderer to death; he shall put him to death when he meets him. If he pushed him of hatred, or threw something at him lying in wait and as a result he died, or if he struck him down with his hand in enmity, and as a result he died, the one who struck him shall surely be put to death, he is a murderer; the blood avenger shall put the murderer to death when he meets him (Num. 35:15-21).
The first sentence is relevant to all killings with a gun:
But if he struck him down with an iron object, so that he died, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death.
So, the three facts that need to be known are these: (1) the fact of the crime, (2) the identity of the killer, (3) the nature of the weapon.
So this is a good thing: we actually know what God requires us to know, to ascertain guilt in a criminal case.
Finally: a standard of justice that doesn’t depend on God-hating lawyers, on or off the bench. True: it will take some time until a sufficient number of Christians — weary of the incompetence and malice of our current overlords — decide to repent before God, get empowered by the Holy Spirit, break free of the drooling Pharoahs, and establish a God-honourig society.
(As opposed to hiding in our ever-shrinking ghettos, waiting for the Rapture…)
But that day will come, assisted with decentralizing, accelerating technology. Within decades, everyone — believer and on-believer alike — will be able to create their own style of government, ruled by themselves (preferably locally or self-governed).
It won’t be about revolution – the centralizing of power by the Compassionate Ones.
It will be about quiet, peaceful secession as the Authorities smoothly de-legitimize themselves, failure after failure.
We need to know our Bible, so we can rule ourselves according to God’s standards, and so receive God’s blessings.
As opposed to the curses that are being swelled by our dying society.
Again, to Marinov (who is acting as a very good model of a Biblical judge, instead of a clerical servant of a anti-Christian State):
Notice how there is no condition for an iron object as there is for stone or wood, “by which he might die.” “An iron object” is the Law’s code word for “an object specifically designed to kill.” A man doesn’t strike with an iron object unless he wants to kill. One must be careful with such weapons – if you kill with such weapon, you are not allowed exemptions. You know it kills people, and you know it is specifically designed to kill people. You are a murderer in the eyes of the Law.
When we apply this as a case law today, its force is even greater when it comes to modern firearms. An iron tool in Israel could be used for killing but could be used also for work. (Micah 4:3, “swords into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks.”) No such thing can be said for firearms. (OK, OK, a .22 pistol can be used for driving nails into concrete; but that’s about it.) Firearms are used for killing. Once you draw and you point it at a man and you pull the trigger, you know the result can be only one: the man at the other end of the barrel will die. There is no doubt about it. And then, no matter what the other facts say, you are a murderer, period.
So, really Biblically, do we need all the facts to condemn a cop? No, we need only threefacts, according to the Law of God. First, was anyone killed? Second, did that cop kill him, or was it someone else? Third, did that cop use a weapon for killing to kill the victim?
Thus, Biblically, in the real sense of “Biblically,” not in Wilson’s sense of the word, we surely can condemn that cop. We know a man was killed; no one disputes that fact. We know the cop did it; no one disputes that fact. And we know the cop used a weapon for killing to do it, not a shovel or a sewing machine. Thus, Biblically, the cop is a murderer. He must be executed, Biblically.
What are the witnesses for, then? The witnesses are not to establish all the facts. The witnesses are to establish only these three relevant facts. If the three relevant facts are known, no other facts are needed. The cop must be executed, Biblically.
What if the cop acted in self-defense? It is possible, and I covered this in the article I wish Wilson had plagiarized. If the cop acted in self-defense, that is an accusation against the victim, and therefore another, separate case. Now he needs his own set of witnesses to prove that the victim did actually pose a mortal threat to him. Now, if the dead man had attacked the cop at night in his own home, that would be a different issue – then the cop would have been free of guilt (Exo. 22:2-3). If the dead man had drawn a gun in public and pointed it at the cop, that would be a proof in favor of the cop. But he needs two or three witnesses to support his claim against the dead man. His own fellow cops can’t count – they are biased. The cop needs independent witnesses who can supply information on why he had to kill the dead man. If he can’t bring in such witnesses, he is a murderer, and he must be executed, Biblically.
No reverence for the uniform, but great reverence for the explicit commands of God.
We can do more with this kind of preaching from the pulpits.
Now, let’s follow the chain of reasoning, of a real Biblical theonomist:
So, let’s re-capitulate. If the cop has killed a man, using a weapon for killing, he is a murderer, period. Witnesses are needed only when we don’t know who did the killing, not when the killer is known. The “innocent-until-guilty” principle stops where the killer is known. If the cop has acted in self-defense, he needs to file a counter-charge against the dead man, and bring in independent witnesses against the dead man. If there are none, the cop is a murderer. There, thinking Biblically. Really Biblically, not like Wilson.
That we don’t need to know all the facts is also clear from another example, related to murder, that of rape in the absence of witnesses:
But if in the field the man finds the girl who is engaged, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lies with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the girl; there is no sin in the girl worthy of death. . . . (Deut. 22:25-26).
No need for witnesses to establish guilt. The only facts that need to be known are that the man was with the girl in the field, and that she accused him of rape. She may have gone with him voluntarily. She may have thrown herself on him. It doesn’t matter. He should have thought better before it happened. He is guilty, period, until he produces witnesses that can testify that the girl gave herself voluntarily.
Which means, if a 25-year-old man in your church performs sexual acts with a 12-year-old girl in the absence of witnesses, and the girl testifies against him, you don’t take the side of the man, you automatically take the side of the victim. You don’t try to “restore” the man. You don’t accuse her father of “negligence” or whatnot. You don’t try to find a middle ground between the rapist and his victim. You don’t try to seek excuses with “Christian love” etc. You just deliver the man to the authorities and you demand his execution, according to the Law of God. If the authorities refuse, you speak prophetically against them. That’s what Biblical thinking is.
I said this case is related to murder. Why did I say that? Because the next sentence specifically says it:
. . . for just as a man rises against his neighbor and murders him, so is this case. (Deut. 22:26).
In the case of murder, the guilt is even clearer: no one voluntarily goes to get murdered. Not like the ambiguity of whether the girl wanted it or not. Thus, no need to know all the facts to condemn a cop. Only the three relevant facts. Once they are known, the cop is a murderer. Call for his execution. Again, unless he has witnesses that he was saving his own life. He shouldn’t have gotten in the fight in the first place if he doesn’t have those.
Government uniforms do not shelter a man from the wrath of God.
(As opposed to the AMPLE protection government uniforms give from secular laws and morality. But this is to be expected: Servants of the State are Servants of the People, the only God there is, so far as todays intellectual elite is concerned.
And why are the People to be exalted? Not because of their moral superiority but because of the Power they have.
So we come to the realization that, once again, secular governments only serves Power, be it demagogic or financial or military. God hates idolators, and the worship of Power is idolatry. Such a society will be destroyed… just as ours is being destroyed, root and branch, even as we watch.)
Should any government on earth actually establish and uphold the Biblical law code, I will be there, faster than lightning (God willing!). Justice is what God demands, and for the first time ever, Christians would be giving God what He demands in public, as well as in private.
It’s about time!
If the victims have to supply all the facts to get a fair trial, no victim can prove his case in court. In the final account, the one walking away with the spoils is the criminal, for even though he has committed the crime, no witnesses can supply all the facts. Ah, yes, there may be trial, etc., but we know how these trials work. Eric Garner was murdered in plain sight, on video. Where’s the trial, and where’s the verdict against his murderer? And the Doug Wilsons in the churches are silent and just offer the same excuses as the political machine which defends murderous cops. “We need all the facts to condemn a cop.” The cops, on the other hand, don’t need all the facts to kill anyone. They just need to say that they “felt in danger.” They know, there is always some Doug Wilson somewhere in some church to make a theological excuse for why they should get away with it.
When you demand all the facts to condemn a criminal, not only the three relevant facts, its only those with power who profit from it.
What about the victims?
They are thrown under the bus.
I know, I know, may be I am too harsh on Doug Wilson. But may be I am not. If I am too harsh, surely next time he will dutifully plagiarize me to avoid defending criminals in uniforms.
So, Doug, you have my permission. Next time don’t write pagan theories of justice and call them “biblical.” Just plagiarize from “Brown, Garner, and the Application of Biblical Law to Homicide and Murder.” Don’t mention my name, pass it for your own. Just steal it. In the name of Christ, you may.
Let’s pick out the key sentences here, in bold:
And the Doug Wilsons in the churches are silent and just offer the same excuses as the political machine which defends murderous cops. “We need all the facts to condemn a cop.” The cops, on the other hand, don’t need all the facts to kill anyone. They just need to say that they “felt in danger.”
I grow weary, on the criminal level of importance our precious, fragile, FEELINGS have in this society, and how deeply despised the actual, dependable, predictable, just LAW OF GOD is.