Revenge, Justice, and the Law

22 THE WAYNE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 50:4
Is God acting immorally when he inflicts such suffering? I doubt that is the
lesson which the Bible seeks to teach. 79
Indeed, the Bible does not reserve only unto God the right to revenge.
Dinah’s brothers’ revenge for the rape of their sister, 80 is but one example
of where the act, if not expressly countenanced by God, is neither the
subject of rebuke. Indeed, the Bible tells of God commanding the Hebrews
to create three “cities of refuge” to which those accused of crimes could
receive sanctuary from those seeking to avenge the alleged wrongful acts.
If the accused was innocent of the crime, for example, if he killed another
person by accident, he could remain, unscathed and protected in the cities. 81
However, if the killing was without excuse, “then the elders of his city shall
send and fetch him thence, and deliver him into the hands of the avenger of
blood, that he may die.” 82 Thus, while the ancient Hebrews recognized the
danger that a revenger who acted while his “heart [was] hot” 83 risked the
shedding of innocent blood, they also recognized the legitimate right of the
avenger to exact the punishment once cooler heads had determined the guilt
of the accused. 84
In response, one might argue that even if the Bible permits suffering as
part of punishment, requiring it as part of punishment is nonetheless
79. Admittedly, all of the Biblical references cited so far in this Essay have come from
the Old Testament. In contrast, the New Testament, particularly when retelling the story
of Jesus, is often cited for its emphasis on mercy and forgiveness. For instance, Jesus’s
admonition in John 8:7 to those who wished to stone to death a suspected adulteress that
“He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” is often cited as
representative of the New Testament’s turning away from the often harsh justice of the Old
Testament, towards a more forgiving social order. See JACOBY, supra note 11, at 89. While
such an absolute differentiation between the two Testaments is probably overly simplistic,
there is some merit to the distinction. See generally JEFFRIE G. MURPHY, GETTING EVEN:
FORGIVENESS AND ITS LIMITATIONS 87-93 (2003). Such an admission, however, does not
invalidate the references to the Old Testament. Indeed, it is not the position of this Essay
that vengeance should be the sole standard for determining justice. Rather, I would argue that
just as the Bible, when read in its entirety, recognizes the virtues of vengeance and
compassion, so too, should the law recognize the value of both desires when deciding levels
of fair and just punishment. See infra notes 202-04 and accompanying text.
80. See supra notes 1-8 and accompanying text.
81. Deuteronomy 19:2-6 (King James).
82. Id. at 19:11-12.
83. Id. at 19:6.
84. But see infra notes 112-14 and accompanying text (discussing the New Testament’s
prohibition against mortal’s exacting revenge in Romans 12:19).