Objections answered: (1) Jesus's "turn the other cheek" refutes personal vengeance, not governmental justice; (2) David's pardon is a divine exception, not a rule; (3) John 8 (woman in adultery) was a mob, not a court — and the passage is textually questionable.

Eye for an eye (Matthew 5): Jesus refutes individuals taking vigilante justice, not courts applying proportional justice. "Eye for an eye" is a COURT principle meaning perfect proportional justice — not personal revenge. David's pardon: a divine pardon by God Himself, pointing to Christ's atonement (Psalm 51). Exceptions don't make rules — at most this shows pardons are sometimes allowable, not that the death penalty is wrong. John 8 (woman caught in adultery): (1) This was a mob, not a court — no due process, no witnesses properly called, the man isn't even there; (2) Adultery was a death-penalty offense under the Law of Moses but NOT in Genesis 9 or Romans 13 — so it doesn't apply post-Law anyway; (3) The passage itself is textually questionable (likely not original to John).