Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1858-05-26

makes God assign why life shall be ia
ken, is the very reason above all others
would seem to forbid it, and, if any
legislation upon the subject were need
ed, call for directly contrary law
That reason is, '.tor IN the image Q,
God made he man.
4. If it ever was Law requiring OF
authorizing the taking of human life, it
has since been repealed, or superseded
by another Law from the same high
source. "Thou shalt not kill" was the
Law proclaimed from Sinai, as the Law
OF God. There were no exceptions OF
persons guilty of particular crimes
that they might not be killed-but the
prohibition was express, concerning
one as we'll as another, ''Thou shalt not
kill" The whole spirit Of the new COW
enant, forbidding revenge and retallia-
ton, and requiring forgiveness and love
and efforts to reform, is the same ex-
preston of Gods will and law against
the taking of any mans life.
But is it thus with God, that he must
annul and change his Laws from time
to time, or supercede one Law by anoth-
er? Is not this Law the same whether
it be written or not? Is his written
Law anything more than the express
sion of his will? and what is his will
but his good pleasure? And is not his
good pleasure the same to-day that it
ever was? and was it not always the
same as it is to-day? And if so was it
not always, and is it not now, true of
him, IN his own language by the proph-
ct, GAS [ live saith the Lord God, have
no pleasure in the death of the wicked;
but that the aciched turn from his ruy
a1ad ire?" And if this is his good
pleasure, and his good pleasure is his
Law, and he is Interchangeable, (and will
any venture expressly to question or de-
ny this?) can it be that God ever prom
ulgated a Law requiring OF authorizing
one man-or human governments-to
take the life of another? Certainly not:
and |, for one must believe that Gods
Law is the same, written or unexpress-
ed, that his aciW is his lar, from first to
last, without change or variation, or re-
spcct of persons, whether concerning
Cain or Samech, or Moses, or some 9th
erperson. 1t seems to me that it marks
an extro ardinary degree of boldness
or presumption in one, to stand up and
charge God with commanding or au-
thorizing in the text under considera-
ton, the taking of human life BY the
hand Of man; for certain it is that if
God is Interchangeable and his will is
his Law, it is human governments alone
and not the Law of God which have
authorized and commanded the she'd
ding ofman's blood. But governments
as well as individuals, are wont to seek
justification of their acts.
It may be said that God, by Moses,
gave Laws to the Israelites. and that
those Laws authorized the taking of
human life. But this is assuming good
deal too much. The Law of Moses
did indeed permit-or if you please au-
thorize-the taking of human life. for
certain crimes:-not alone for the crime
of murder, but for several other crimes.
SO, too, it allowed men to divorce their
wives when they did not please them.
But every Law Of Moses was not nee
essarily Law Of God. Ezekiel saws
expressly, that his laws were Statutes
that were not good, and judgments
whereby they should not live And
Christ says, in reference to the Law OF
divorce, "Moses, for the hardness Of
your hearts, suffered you to put away
wives; but from the BEGINNING 1t ecus
not So" And so in reference to the IA.
king of human life, we grant that laws
to that effect or permitting it are in his
statutes; but it does not follow from
this, that Gods Law requires or per
mits it, or that Moses so understood
Gods Law. Gods Law, given to him
in plain terms, was the same as from
| the beginning, and in the DAYS of Christ
and now, s'Thou shalt not kil:' and ]
am inclined to think that he understood
it perfectly well: yet, ''for the hardness
of their hearts, he suffered them tc
take the life Of man, but introduced
certain restrictions concerning the
avenger of blood, by the appointment
Of the cities of refuge; that he MIGHT
lead them and prepare them to obey
from the heart the Law Of God ssThor
shalt not kill"
5. The text was not given as Law
of God authorizing the taking of human
life, but is a reproof and prohibition O.