Does Genesis 9:6 still apply?

This text is from a transcript of a talk by David Gooding, entitled ‘An Abundant Entrance into the Eternal Kingdom’ (1985).

This verse is concerned with the death penalty.

Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.

Jews of the old world took it that these commandments, being addressed to Noah, were to be regarded as commandments for all mankind, and not just specifically for the Jewish people.

If we ask what view does the New Testament take of this, well, as far as I know, the New Testament consents with the fact that the governor, king, ruler or judge is appointed by God. He is God's servant, at some level at any rate, and he bears the sword for the execution of justice. I know nowhere in the New Testament where that is denounced as being against Christian teaching.

People will say, 'But doesn't the new covenant repeal or alter God's command in Genesis 9:6?'

Well, that would be a big story. Suffice it to say that, as far as I know, the new covenant hasn't really got anything to do with Genesis 9:6. The new covenant is new because it is different from the old covenant. The old covenant was the covenant that God made with the house of Israel as a national theocracy. The new covenant is made with us today and, so far as it is made with us today, it is made with the believers; with the church, if you like. The church is not a political theocracy. The church does not have magistrates. I don't myself quite see how the new covenant would be meant to apply to the world outside anyway. It is not made with them. It is made with believers in the Lord Jesus so, in that sense, I don't think the new covenant perhaps has any real bearing on the topic.

What does bear on it, perhaps, is our Lord's word to the woman who was taken in adultery. She was brought before our Lord, and she possibly had already been condemned. According to Jewish law, the sentence would have been death by stoning. Only, at that stage in Judaism, the death penalty was not normally carried out. The question they were putting to our Lord, presumably, was, 'Should the sentence be carried out?' Our Lord, in replying, 'Neither do I condemn you; I refrain from carrying out that sentence', did not deny the sentence was just. He indicated that he, personally, had no intention of carrying it out (see John 8:1–11).

If you ask why that is, I suspect you will have to trace that to the ministry of our Lord: 'I did not come to judge the world' (John 12:47). One day he will (see Acts 17:30–31). When a certain man from the crowd appealed to him to intervene in a civil dispute our Lord declined.

Someone in the crowd said to him, 'Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.' But he said to him, 'Man, who made me a judge or arbitrator over you?' (Luke 12:13–14)

It was not in our Lord's ministry to take up, in this world, a judicial post or execute the judgments of the law, either civil or criminal. And, therefore, I think again our Lord's attitude does not, in that sense, really bear upon the topic of whether a lawfully constituted government should use the death penalty for murder. As far as I know, the New Testament takes it for granted that the civil authority has this power, and rightly uses it. It does not, as I understand it, go on to say that it is a Christian duty, or the part of a Christian qua Christian, to pronounce upon these things.