Look at your examples: in neither of them was a human agent responsible for meting out punishment. Revenge is God’s prerogative, is it not? Where do you see Joe Catholic getting to step into God’s shoes?
Is giving a murderer a term in prison a vengeful act that steps into God’s shoes?
The Lord told Israelites, in the Old Testament, to kill idolaters. Whenever they failed to enforce bans on idolatry in the land, the Bible says that the Lord was angered. He certainly acted through human agents, and we know that the Lord was just in establishing this law.
It is clear from the New Testament that it is God’s will that the civil law still apply in at least these following situations:
"1 Timothy 1:8-11:
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers- and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
We still use the Old Covenant civil law’s mandate to punish murderers and thieves, though we temper the punishment with mercy, as Jesus advised that we do because we live in a time of grace. The decision to no longer punish witchcraft, sexual immorality, idolatry, or now murder in many cases (abortion and euthenasia) is a decision that has been made in a secular, non-Christian environment, since the end of the Medieval Ages and partly causing the end of the Medieval Ages. It is a decision that has made these evil behaviors become legitimate in the eyes of mainstream society.
Just as in the Old Testament, when evil was allowed to exist in Israel, it flourished, so in our nations, evil has been allowed to exist and it consequently flourishes. Now, many people cannot even see these things as bad anymore.
The New Testament does not talk often about civil law. That is because the Church at that time did not have political power, so there wasn’t much point. They had other concerns, so they mostly wrote about those other things that more directly related to them.
However, where the New Testament does talk about civil law, it tends to uphold the Old Covenant Law, while simultaneously teaching that when it is practiced, it should be practiced with mercy. In John 8, when the teachers of the law said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” Jesus said, “If any of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”
He did not tell them that their law was to be rescinded. Indeed, Jesus said in Luke 16:17 that, “It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.” But the Lord showed humans how to apply the law with mercy.
That applies to our laws against murderers and thieves. We should apply a law- Jesus wasn’t teaching anarchy. But the law should be applied with mercy.
This goes also for witches, the sexually immoral, abortionists and idolaters in our nations. There should be a law against those that practice these destructive behaviors, destroying either souls or bodies of other people, and sometimes both simultaneously, through these acts. The laws against these behaviors should be tempered with mercy, but they should exist. Our nations are experiencing the tragic effects of the lack of these laws all around us.
Out of curiosity, what kind of punishment do you consider appropriate for unbelief?
The law the Lord gave us, which must be just because he gave it to us, is death. However, as I said, it should be tempered with mercy.
That is why, in the Medieval Ages, only 2% of those who were charged with heresy before the Inquisition were sentenced to death. The rest that were found guilty were banished, scourged or fined.
Similarly, before the 15th century, very few witches were killed in Medieval society. The witch hunting spree went on between the 1450 and 1750, and was primarily exercised in Protestant countries. The Catholic Church generally opposed it, though often Catholics did carry it out on a local level.
Also, the kinds of evidence used in the late Medieval Ages to accuse people of witchcraft were pretty appalling.
But there were laws against sexual immorality, abortion, idolatry, and witchcraft. They were also often applied with mercy, rather than the full penalty being exacted. That is the ideal situation, in my view. A situation where the law is established, but is tempered with a thick dose of mercy. The law needs to condemn and punish what is evil and uphold and support what is good.
It is when the law was separated from God’s Law and became the law of the will of the people that all of these forms of wickedness that today have become mainstream became legal and often socially acceptable forms of behavior.
It’s only natural that when laws against evil practices are removed, those practices will spread and become more socially acceptable. It’s both natural and observable.
.
