What is the effect of a prosecutor's biblical argument to the jury in a death penalty case?

We have previously stated, "`[t]he primary vice in referring to the Bible and other religious authority is that such argument may "diminish the jury's sense of responsibility for its verdict and ... imply that another, higher law should be applied in capital cases, displacing the law in the court's instructions."' [Citations.]" (People v. Hughes (2002) 27 Cal.4th 287, 389, 116 Cal.Rptr.2d 401, 39 P.3d 432.)

Even if the prosecutor's argument was error, such error was harmless. (People v. Slaughter (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1187, 1211, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 477, 47 P.3d 262.) The prosecutor's biblical argument was only a small part of her argument, the bulk of which focused on arguing to the jury why it should find that the statutory aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors.

c) Prosecutor's alleged statements suggesting ultimate responsibility for imposing the death penalty did not rest with the jury