The 6 Commandment

6. You shall not kill.

Respect for Living Things. The commandment here envisions the lives of other people, but it may be worthwhile to consider first its implications for the life of animals and plants. Plants and animals are also creatures of God, but man was given the right to eat them (plants in Gen.1:29-30, animals in Gen. 9:3). Nevertheless, God cares for such living things (Jon.4:11): He gives them food and drink (Ps.104:11-30), accepts them as sacrifices, etc. We cannot use plants and animals simply for our purposes because they exist for God’s glory both in this life and in the world to come (Isa.11:6-8; Rev.22:2)! We may abuse neither animals nor plants (see Exod.23:5), although they may be used to serve our needs. Vegetarianism, therefore, has no biblical basis. Neither does opposition to animal experimentation.

Respect for Human Life. Apart from animals and plants, human beings have been created uniquely in God’s image. Human life, especially therefore, must be received with respect (Gen.9:6; Jas.3:9). Whether a person functions as the image of God is meaningless in this ethical question; the very fact that he can, and is called to, bear God’s image, gives people the right to live.

Freedom, Life and Praise. The sixth commandment, like the others, follows the preamble about deliverance and liberation. King Pharaoh wanted to destroy Israel by killing. God delivered his people from death, thereby making life a sign of grace for His people. To destroy life would be an attack this grace. Life originated from God, through creation and redemption (even from Egypt), and exists for the purpose of God’s praise (Ps.118:17). Every human being is someone, either actually or potentially, who declares God’s praise. To kill a human being in this sense is to rob God.

Reverence for Human Life. Life exists for a purpose — that implies a limitation. Human life is not a goal in and of itself, but it is designed for service to God and neighbor. Plants and animal life do not have absolute value — they may be killed for human purposes; but neither does human life. Killing is justified at times. Immortality is innate in humans — it is in God, but it is bestowed on humans (1 Cor. 15:53-54). The expression ‘reverence for life’ gives the impression that life was sacred. This was Albert Schweitzer’s view — to pluck a leaf or kill a flower was sinful. We must have reverence for God over reverence for life. God gave us animals to eat and God entrusts the state with the sword. The maxim, ‘reverence for life’ is too broad, too high and thus too dangerous.

No Unlawful Killing. The commandment is concerned with unlawful killing, the kind of killing that violated justice. But it includes far more than "murder." Murder involves premeditation and intention. If someone kills intentionally, but without premeditation, it is voluntary manslaughter. When someone kills out of recklessness (e.g. reckless driving), it is called involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide). A nurse who administers the wrong medicine to a patient who dies because of it is also guilty of involuntary manslaughter. A death for which there is no culpability is one in which, for example, an axe head flies off the handle and kills someone (see Deut.19:5). The fifth commandment applies to all of these suggesting to us that what is forbidden is more than mere ‘murder.’ Accidental deaths in the Bible required special provisions, either involving a flight to the altar of Yahweh (Ex. 21:3) or to a city of refuge (Num. 35). Even when there was no culpability, special provisions were in order.

Abortion. Until quite recently, both Catholic and Protestant believers were convinced that abortion was morally wrong. The need to defend human life and personhood from conception (Ps.129; Job.10:8-12) is becoming great, even within Christendom. Several arguments have been advanced in support of abortion, the first of which we accept:

(1) the medical argument — when the mother’s life is threatened;

(2) the psychological argument — the woman’s psychological heath is threatened by continuing pregnancy;

(3) eugenic argument — the likelihood of disabled children;

(4) ethical argument — pregnancies resulting from criminal acts such as rape or incest. Shouldn’t that unborn child receive the right to live?

(5) social argument — woman’s social standing is threatened by continuing pregnancy (e.g. studies, income, etc.). We must always maintain the possibility of adoption.

Euthanasia. We must distinguish between different forms of euthanasia. Within what is often called active euthanasia, there exists, first of all, involuntary euthanasia by which a person’s life is terminated without his or her consent. Such euthanasia is often administered to newborns with severe handicaps or to older folk who suffer from senility. This form of euthanasia is outright wrong. We are to value life, not from our own measly estimations, but in terms of God and the glory he receives, even from seemingly meaningless life. Christ provided a place in his kingdom for lunatics and paralytics, the blind and the deaf.

Also within active euthanasia we can speak of voluntary euthanasia by which a person requests the termination of his or her life. Although such death is self-determined, the self does not always know best. Besides, we do not have self-determination over our lives! God commands us not to kill — and that includes ourselves. People will argue that in view of all the medications and treatments life no longer ends naturally. But here a distinction between culture and nature is warranted. Humanly planted trees, we say, are grown naturally. So we recognize that life, even plant life, is not a human product but has an existence quite apart from humanity. It matters greatly, therefore, whether someone dies from euthanasia or cancer — the first being a fatal human act, the latter being a fatal illness. The first is an unnatural death; the second is natural, even if medications were involved. But since we do not believe in the absolute reverence for life because ‘absolutes’ belong properly and only to God, we will concede that life can be prolonged, but need not be stretched. To postpone life by a day or a week seems unnecessary.

The second category is passive euthanasia. Such terminology carries a number of problems so we prefer termination of treatment. There is a grand distinction between termination of life and termination of treatment. Death may follow a termination of treatment, but not necessarily so. A person no longer receiving medical treatment will still be fed and loved and cared for. Hence the term ‘passive euthanasia’ is unfitting.

Suicide. Suicide involves a person taking his own life without the help of others (e.g. euthanasia). The Bible records a number of suicides (e.g. Samson and Saul), but nowhere gives a moral commentary. Our starting point, therefore, must be the sixth commandment. Because we have been created in God’s image, killing ourselves, like killing others, is wrong. We must also be careful in our religious judgment of people who have taken their own lives — suicide often results from pathological, rather than reasoned behavior. But suicide can never be justified ethically. In Jesus Christ there is refuge and hope for the desperate. He is sovereign, not we. He makes of our lives what He wants; we do not decide that.

Negligent Homicide. Israel was to protect the life and safety of her neighbors by building railings around her roofs. This principle extends also to us, at both small (slippery sidewalks) and great (Chernobyl) levels. The sphere of sports and entertainment is also relevant here. If certain sports put human lives at risk, than they cannot be considered healthy sports. The same applies to addictions to drugs and excessive uses of alcohol or tobacco. Much good can be said about alcohol — it makes the heart glad (Psalm 104:15) and the fruit of the vine will be enjoyed in the kingdom of God (Matt.26:29). But alcohol abuse is a reality — something the Scripture also warns against. Wine can bite like a snake and sting like a viper (Prov.23:32). Christians must take preventive measures to ensuring healthy lives (diets, etc.).

Getting to the Heart of the Matter. To get at the root of the matter dealt with in this commandment involves turning to envy, hatred, anger and vindictiveness. Yet the heart of the matter involves loving God and neighbor and acting in a way that is patient, peace loving, gentle, merciful and friendly. Hatred for others put one "danger of hell fire" (Matt.5:22). Dishonor need not include only physical pummeling. Mere words and language can serve as deadly venom (1 Sam.25:10; 2 Sam.16:7-8; Prov.12:18, NIV). Anger is more of a momentary explosion of rage involving a more direct display of disgust. Words kill and so do looks. Envy involves a desire to steal a good piece of fortune that we do not have. It attacks another and destroys oneself (Prov.14:30). A vindictive person wants to enforce a punishment against another without the right to do so. We must let God be judge (Rom.12:19). Yet these four ‘emotions’ can be expressed legitimately. "Do I not hate them that hate you," we read in Psalm 139. Marital infidelity often invokes righteous jealousy. Saying "no" to death also means saying "yes" to life. We must be willing to go the extra mile with our neighbor (Matt.5:41).

The Commandment’s Long Reach:"Your Neighbor." If we are to love our enemies, then no one is excluded from that love. But not everyone is our neighbor in the same sense. We are not called first to love those farthest away, but those nearest to us, those who cross our path. The priest and the Levite saw the half-dead man, but the Samaritan saw and did something.

Self-Defense. Killing in self-defense is biblically permissible, but not always so. We discover in Exodus 22:2-3, that if an intruder was killed in the dark there was no culpability on the part of the killer; there was culpability, however, if the intruder was killed in the daytime.

Capital Punishment. We must defend capital punishment as a consequence of our respect for life and God’s law (Gen.9:6). A person may not be killed with impunity. The government has the right to bear the sword for the protection of life. The catechism confesses that the sword is used to prevent murder. The sword functions in the service of life, not death. But notice how the sword is entrusted to the government and no to individual persons. Romans 12 says, "Take no revenge, but let God be judge." In Romans 13, we read that the government may exercise vengeance on God’s behalf. Karl Barth has argued that the death of Christ has satisfied the judicial basis for the death penalty. But then what about other criminal punishments — wouldn’t they be satisfied too? Capital punishment for murder is different than other OT punishments — e.g. homosexuality, adultery. With murder, the context is avenging wrongdoing: life for life, eye for eye (Ex.21:23-25).

War. The government may also use the sword for outside invaders. This refers to ‘just war.’ Generally state, a just war must be waged (1) by a legitimate government, (2) for a legitimate cause, (3) with a legitimate purpose, (4) with consideration of benefits and costs, (5) with means proportionate to the offense and (6) recognizing the difference between civilians and soldiers. War and bloodshed in the Bible was never accepted as normal phenomena (Josh.1:13; Isa.2:2-4). Nuclear weapons should not be banned because there will always be one side storing them up. Thus such weapons can function as a deterrent.

Back to THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: