Lizzie Borden: Commonly Held Errors

Lizzie Borden took an axe
And gave her mother forty whacks.
When she saw what she had done,
she gave her father forty-one.

For many decades, even small children have been familiar with this verse—and probably repeated it. The only problem is that not one of the things mentioned in the poem may be true. First, it was Lizzie’s stepmother who was killed—not her mother. Her mother had died when Lizzie was just two years of age. Second, she was struck 18 times—not 40. Third, the murder weapon was a hatchet—not an axe. Fourth, Lizzie’s father was struck 10 times—not 41. Fifth, and most importantly, Lizzie was probably not the murderer. She was acquitted by an all-male jury after only two hours of deliberation—due to an utter lack of evidence against her.

How has she, therefore, come down through history as being guilty of the crime, as depicted in three movies? This will come as a surprise. A newspaper reporter decided she was guilty; he published a book to that effect which was popular for thirty years. He suppressed facts and information, however. Many people in Fall River, Massachusetts believed Lizzie was guilty and shunned her despite the favorable verdict.

Our source material (which is based on facts) comes from a book titled Forty Whacks, written by David Kent, who devoted himself to studying the case and published his findings in 1992 on the 100th anniversary of the crime. (He also died that same year.) The author did not specifically accuse anyone else of the crime, but he did make an interesting comment about Andrew Borden’s first wife’s brother, who just happened to be a guest when the murders took place. No, he was not at the house at the time of the murders; he had an alibi for just about every second, however.

Lizzie’s sister, Emma, was away on a visit, or she might have been present that morning. Mrs. Borden told someone she was going out that morning, but she never left the house. Her husband had been out early but had come back after a few errands and was resting on the couch. The only other persons on the property were Lizzie and a maid, Bridget Sullivan, whose room was on the third floor of the house. Mrs. Borden had charged the maid to wash the windows—even though it was the hottest day of the year. Something she had eaten the night before had not set well; so, she went to lie down in her room for a few minutes. Lizzie was out back in the barn. When she came back into the house, and saw the condition of her father, she immediately cried out, “Murder.” Mrs. Borden had been the first one killed, and Lizzie’s father became the second victim about a half hour later. That such a crime could occur in broad daylight (between about 10:00 and 11:30) in a busy section of town was thought to be incredible.

One can only imagine three possible explanations. Someone living at the residence did the murders. Only two were present: Lizzie Borden and the maid Bridget Sullivan. Someone was hired to do the murders and was provided all the household information. That someone would be certain to have an alibi. An unnamed stranger from off the street took his chances that he would be able to slip in, commit the murders, and escape unnoticed. This last one is extremely unlikely. The second one could have happened, but no evidence of it exists. That leaves Lizzie and Bridgette.

This case is one of the most famous of unsolved murders. News commentator Paul Harvey had two “Rest of the Stories” involving this event. One of them focused on Miss Sullivan, who was sometimes called, Maggie.” According to the research of a famous criminologist, his judgment was that the murderess was the Irish maid, whose room was directly above Mrs. Borden’s. We do not know if his opinion is correct, but it does fit the facts. However, neither Bridget nor Lizzie ever implicated each other as the perpetrator of the crimes. Bridget moved to Montana and remained there until her death; she never discussed the case again.

The other “Rest of the Story” dealt with Lizzie’s life after the trial. She and her sister Emma lived together for a few years before Emma moved out. Lizzie used the money she inherited largely for the well-being of others. She helped fund the Fall River Animal Rescue League, founded by a friend of hers, Helen Leighton. Although most citizens of Fall River considered her guilty, nevertheless she had a dozen or so friends. She also provided college scholarships for youths. Helen Leighton said of Lizzie:

Many, many individuals were aided by Miss Borden. She delighted to help people and gave most generously of her means. She helped several young people to obtain a college education. Fond of good reading herself, she saw to it that many persons who enjoyed good books but could not afford to buy them were well supplied with reading matter. Very few people knew the extent of her charities (Beck 209).

Did she commit the murders? Perhaps we will all find out on the Day of Judgment. She might have—even though no blood spatter appeared on her clothes or hair. Although her stepmother did not show much warmth toward anyone, her father adored Lizzie; she seems to have genuinely loved him as well. It is hard to imagine that she could have brought herself to have killed him. Stranger things, however, have happened.

“A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who speaks lies will not escape” (Pr. 19:9). Those who lie in court will be held accountable. So will those who besmirch (without proof) the name of the dead.

More Widely Accepted Errors

President Ronald Reagan is famous for a quote concerning his liberal friends, but it applies (maybe even more so) to society in general as it pertains to the Scriptures. So, here is our paraphrase: “The problem with our denominational friends is not that they are not ignorant of the Bible. It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”

Like what? For some reason, most are convinced that the Lord’s Supper consists of bread and wine (alcoholic). Yet in the New Testament, the Greek word for wine is not used in any passage referring to the Lord’s Supper. The Bible refers to it as “the cup” or “the fruit of the vine.” Besides Matthew, Mark, and Luke, where Jesus originated the observance, Paul likewise uses the same descriptions in 1 Corinthians 10:16-21 and 11:23-29. Nevertheless, most still incorrectly call it “the wine,” as though this expression actually came from the New Testament, but it did not.

The “Pastoral” Epistles and “The Pastor”

This is the common designation of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. Why? Timothy and Titus were not pastors. Rather, they were to appoint elders or pastors or bishops, all of which designate the same group of men. For that reason, Paul provides the qualifications of these leaders. But Timothy and Titus were not themselves pastors. Therefore, no logical rationale exists for calling them the pastoral epistles.

Furthermore, one would think that the New Testament was shot through with such designations as Pastor Paul, Pastor Timothy, Pastor Titus, et al. Generally, it is assumed that every preacher is a pastor even though this phraseology does not occur even one time in the New Testament. This is just one of the things that people know that just isn’t so. Don’t people ever wonder why that terminology is not found in the New Testament, or are they just not reading their Bibles?

Equally erroneous is the use of Reverend. This also comes from the common practice of the day—not from anything one might have read in the books of the New Testament. The term reverend does not occur there, period. It appears once in the Old Testament (Psalm 111:9) and is applied to God—not man. In fact, Jesus makes it a point to teach that men are not to be exalted (Matt. 23:8-10). Yet it is not unusual for preachers to be called, “Reverend”—even though they have never used the “title” nor encouraged others to venerate them in that way.

Christmas and Easter

Another assumption is that all Christians celebrate Christmas and Easter—even though these arose from the traditions of men and are not found in the Bible. One would think that December 25th was taught in the Sermon on the Mount and that Jesus commanded people to celebrate His birth.

His birth was unique. No one else has ever been born of a virgin! (One wonders if those who do have “Christmas” programs actually believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, which was prophesied in Isaiah 7:14.) Many “ministers” do not. However, God did not command the day of His birth as a day to celebrate. He had no problem in communicating when the Day of Atonement would be (Lev. 16); neither was there any ambiguity in observing the Passover or the other feasts. God has really good communication skills. But the New Testament never authorizes us to remember the day of Jesus’ birth, significant though it was. In fact, we are not told what day of the year it was when He was born.

Likewise, people bandy about such terms as Ash Wednesday, Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, and Easter Sunday just like they were in the Bible. None of them is (although the King James Version erroneously put Easter in at Acts 12:4 even though they knew it was the word for Passover). Once again, people are more familiar with the traditions of men than they are with what is actually in the Bible. The Lizzie Borden poem has been repeated so often that people now accept it as truth despite the lack of evidence. The same thing is true of these various Christian practices.

Singing

Another assumption is, “If you are a Christian, you must like Christian music.” Few have noticed that, although instruments of music were used—even commanded in the Old Testament (2 Chronicles 29:25)—it is totally absent in the New. Everyone who reads the New Testament should notice that instruments are never used in the singing of hymns. If Jesus never used them, and the apostles never used them, and the churches never used them, then by what authority do Christians use them today? They have no authorization! Christians sing (see Ephesians 5 and Colossians 3:16-17).

The Rapture

This is another word that does not appear in the New Testament. The Bible describes Jesus’ return, but it is not to set up a kingdom; He already rules over His kingdom (Dan. 7:13-14; Acts 2:29-35). Jesus only comes to the earth; Christians rise up to meet Him in the air (1 Thess. 4:13-17). He is coming for judgment (2 Thess. 1:7-9). When He does so, the earth shall be burned up (2 Peter 3:10-13). The books advocating premillennialism oppose the teaching of the Scriptures. Most people, however, assume Christians believe that fiction.

“Faith Only”

Most think that Christians believe in “faith only” for salvation—even though the Bible teaches the exact opposite (James 2:24)! Necessary for salvation are repentance and baptism, as taught on Pentecost (Acts 2:38) and repeated throughout the Book of Acts. Why don’t people teach and believe what the Scriptures teach? Could it be that they prefer slogans often repeated instead of the truth?