PDA

View Full Version : Pro Death Penalty Christians?



Pages : [1] 2

groovemongrel
Jan 10th 2008, 02:01 PM
I'm trying to find some evidence that the death penalty is part of Gods plan for man to do to another man. Most platforms are pro life/pro death penalty or pro choice/anti death penalty. Could somebody more versed than I with some good opinions clear this up please? You often see the warmongering Republicans on the pro life/pro death penalty side. Let's talk about this important issue. Would Christ vote pro death penalty?

Fenris
Jan 10th 2008, 02:15 PM
The five books of Moses mention the death penalty for murderers in each book.

Slug1
Jan 10th 2008, 02:19 PM
In Romans 13:4 God authorizes governements to use force to put down evil which in some cases requires force in the form of Law Enforcement and/or Military Forces.

I support the death penalty because if I didn't then I'd be disobedient to God's will for governement.

groovemongrel
Jan 10th 2008, 02:57 PM
The five books of Moses mention the death penalty for murderers in each book.

What about forgiveness?


In Romans 13:4 God authorizes governements to use force to put down evil which in some cases requires force in the form of Law Enforcement and/or Military Forces.

I support the death penalty because if I didn't then I'd be disobedient to God's will for governement.

Brother Mark
Jan 10th 2008, 03:03 PM
What about forgiveness?

Where does God tell the government to forgive? If Government forgives, can there be any form of punishment for criminals? How can one punish what has been forgiven?

Fenris
Jan 10th 2008, 03:25 PM
What about forgiveness?What about it? Forgiveness doesn't preclude punishment.

Also, in the case of murder the victim isn't around to give forgiveness. So any forgiveness is incomplete.

Slug1
Jan 10th 2008, 03:28 PM
What about forgiveness?Forgiveness has nothing to do with consequenses (Imprisonment/death penalty) of criminal activity. Forgiveness is for the person doing the forgiving so that their soul is at peace with God.

SammeyDW
Jan 10th 2008, 04:19 PM
Not just that, but what about the repentive criminal ?
Jesus fully forgave the criminal but didn't lessen
the earthly punishment and suffering by one bit (that we know of).

Luke 23:39-43 NIV
(39) One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
(40) But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence?
(41) We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
(42) Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
(43) Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

th1bill
Jan 10th 2008, 08:23 PM
Not just that, but what about the repentive criminal ?
Jesus fully forgave the criminal but didn't lessen
the earthly punishment and suffering by one bit (that we know of).

Luke 23:39-43 NIV
(39) One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
(40) But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence?
(41) We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
(42) Then he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
(43) Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

If their repentance is true, the very moment they lie down for that shot they are standing at the gate to Heaven. Would you send them back into society, where they will be dogged, for the rest of their life for their crime, and steal Glory from them?

I apologize. Back to the purpose of this forum. GM, these folks have a debt to pay and that debt is not to God (if they repented, they have paid that one) but their debt is to society. It is very much a principal of God that if I steal your automobile and I am caught that I owe you seven like vehicles. Society has turned away from God and is disobedient, as are many "Christians." We believe we are smarter than God and if you will look around you, you will see the result of that disobedience. God has, by and large, abandoned us to our own devices and web are in a mess because of it.

Mods, I promise not to break the rule again.

ohpenn
Jan 11th 2008, 04:20 AM
Killing someone in captivity ( a prisoner) and killing them in defense or on a battlefield are very different circumstances.

Fenris
Jan 11th 2008, 10:43 AM
The bible does not make that distinction.

th1bill
Jan 11th 2008, 08:54 PM
Killing someone in captivity ( a prisoner) and killing them in defense or on a battlefield are very different circumstances.
.. Since we are Christians here the last court of arbitration is the Word of God and as referenced by Fenis, the wise non-Christian, the Bible will not support that premise. Unlike the lost man and the Catholic/Greek Orthodox, we never lean on tradition to supercede the Word of God.

dan
Jan 12th 2008, 08:01 PM
GEN 9:5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
GEN 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

EX 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, [there shall] no blood [be shed] for him.
EX 22:3 If the sun be risen upon him, [there shall be] blood [shed] for him; [for] he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

NUM 35:31 You shall not take money of him that is guilty of blood, but he shall die forthwith.
NUM 35:32 The banished and fugitives before the death of the high priest may by no means return into their own cities.
NUM 35:33 Defile not the land of your habitation, which is stained with the blood of the innocent: neither can it otherwise be expiated, but by his blood that hath shed the blood of another.
NUM 35:34 And thus shall your possession he cleansed, myself abiding with you. For I am the Lord that dwell among the children of Israel.

ECCLES 3:3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;

MT 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

LK 3:14 And soldiers also asked him, saying, And we, what must we do? And he said unto them, Extort from no man by violence, neither accuse `any one' wrongfully; and be content with your wages.(The Bible In Basic English)

LK 11:21 When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things are in peace which he possesseth.

REV 13:9 If any man have an ear, let him hear:
REV 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

ohpenn
Jan 14th 2008, 02:16 AM
Still waiting for "Thou shall kill"


The bible does not make that distinction..

If your comment is correct, then all killing is wrong, including the instances of defense.

th1bill
Jan 14th 2008, 05:44 AM
Still waiting for "Thou shall kill"



If your comment is correct, then all killing is wrong, including the instances of defense.
I'm sorry to be the one to point this out to you but the word kill here has been adapted from a 1611 English translation and the use of the word then is somewhat different than today. In most later English translations the Hebrew word is translated "murder" and that is indicating exactly what was inferred in 1611. Your stance is without sufficient historical study.

daughter
Jan 14th 2008, 09:31 AM
רצח râtsach,
from a root meaning to dash to pieces, destroy, meaning murder, specifically related to man.

I don't know what's happened to the font here! Sorry folks, I'm not trying to be funky.

Fenris
Jan 14th 2008, 01:20 PM
Still waiting for "Thou shall kill"



If your comment is correct, then all killing is wrong, including the instances of defense.
It doesn't say 'Thou shall not kill'. That's a mistranslation in the KJV. It says "You shall not murder", which means something else entirely.

groovemongrel
Jan 16th 2008, 06:50 PM
If their repentance is true, the very moment they lie down for that shot they are standing at the gate to Heaven. Would you send them back into society, where they will be dogged, for the rest of their life for their crime, and steal Glory from them?

I apologize. Back to the purpose of this forum. GM, these folks have a debt to pay and that debt is not to God (if they repented, they have paid that one) but their debt is to society. It is very much a principal of God that if I steal your automobile and I am caught that I owe you seven like vehicles. Society has turned away from God and is disobedient, as are many "Christians." We believe we are smarter than God and if you will look around you, you will see the result of that disobedience. God has, by and large, abandoned us to our own devices and web are in a mess because of it.

Mods, I promise not to break the rule again.


Good stuff. For what are you apologizing?

daughter
Jan 16th 2008, 07:12 PM
I used to think that it was always wrong to kill a sinner, because they mightn't have time to repent, but I've come to realise that this is an error. Nothing will thwart God's purposes, even an unjust execution.

Admittedly, I do still tend to think that the death penalty is wrong... but interestingly, while Israel didn't have prisons, they did have a very sophisticated system of justice, which more or less worked, and this did include the death penalty. You could argue that a life time of incarceration is more inhumane than the death penalty.

I don't hold as "religiously" to my anti capital punishment theories as I once did. It still makes my skin crawl, but at least I understand it now.

Ayala
Jan 16th 2008, 07:28 PM
If the world did away with capital punishment, I'd be more than cool with that...but I do recognize and understand its purpose.

Lefty
Jan 16th 2008, 08:16 PM
Ratsach-

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2585

Tru_Knyte
Jan 16th 2008, 11:50 PM
I have to say I've never really been comfortable with the death penalty. To me I'd rather leave judgment up in God's hands than in mine. Capital punishment is too final, you can't go back if you make mistakes, and there has never been conclusive data to show that it even works in the first place.

Ayala
Jan 16th 2008, 11:55 PM
Probably one of the biggest deterrents for me is the idea that someone could be sentenced to death, only later to find out that they were actually innocent...and this has happened. Human justice is far from infallible.

ohpenn
Jan 17th 2008, 04:11 AM
I'm sorry to be the one to point this out to you but the word kill here has been adapted from a 1611 English translation and the use of the word then is somewhat different than today. In most later English translations the Hebrew word is translated "murder" and that is indicating exactly what was inferred in 1611. Your stance is without sufficient historical study.


I'm still waiting for thou shall kill to be sited.

I'm still waiting for you shall murder.

It's nice to see that anything be justified. History exceeds "sufficient" on this matter.

th1bill
Jan 17th 2008, 04:38 AM
I have to say I've never really been comfortable with the death penalty. To me I'd rather leave judgment up in God's hands than in mine. Capital punishment is too final, you can't go back if you make mistakes, and there has never been conclusive data to show that it even works in the first place.
Your just being cute, right? I mean dead is very conclusive. That person will never again kill another person. Couple that with the fact that God prefers obedience over repentance and the fact that the killing of a person is a sin against God and the death penalty, as commanded by God is a righteous execution of righteousness.

th1bill
Jan 17th 2008, 04:44 AM
Probably one of the biggest deterrents for me is the idea that someone could be sentenced to death, only later to find out that they were actually innocent...and this has happened. Human justice is far from infallible.
Now this will knock your feet right out from under you but I agree! For that reason we must turn the law, as written today, to conform with the principals God has set forth for murder trials. In reading the requirements for righteous trials from the Pentateuch we easily conclude that when the death penalty is invoked we must ascertain an iron clad case that the person, so charged, did the deed. In short, we do not throw the baby out with the dirty bath water.

th1bill
Jan 17th 2008, 04:47 AM
I'm still waiting for thou shall kill to be sited.

I'm still waiting for you shall murder.

It's nice to see that anything be justified. History exceeds "sufficient" on this matter.
And because I choose not to misread you by reading between the lines, would you care to come right out with your point?

Fenris
Jan 17th 2008, 01:36 PM
I'm still waiting for thou shall kill to be sited.

I'm still waiting for you shall murder.

It's nice to see that anything be justified. History exceeds "sufficient" on this matter.
The bible itself gives a court the right, nay, the obligation, to impose the death penalty.

misfit815
Jan 17th 2008, 04:35 PM
What is the purpose of the death penalty?

- As a means of specific deterrence? If that is so, are we not capable of meeting the same goal through lifetime incarceration.
- As a means of general deterrence? This relies on the theory of rational choice, which is far from applicable toward those who commit atrocities "worthy" of the death penalty.
- As a form of justice? That's a tough one. Is justice served when we execute the wrong person? Is justice served when one demographic is executed much more often than another? Won't the unrepentant soul pay for his crimes after death anyway? Is lifetime incarceration not sufficient?

Plus, it is often easy to mistake justice for vengeance. The latter is decidedly un-Christian. I cite two examples of that; the story of Ahithophel, and the simple fact that the word "vengeance" is not even present in the New Testament (NLT), and when it's mentioned in the OT, it's often attributed to God alone, not to man.

I personally do not believe that it is right to take the life of someone when not either defending yourself or an innocent, in the same vein that I do not believe it is right to take the life of an unborn child. Both are murder, as far as I can tell.

What concerns me, though, is the desire of Christians to support it. I would think that Christians would either oppose it, or be ambivalent about it, as much as one can about such a matter. A Christian who strongly supports it just gives me an uneasy feeling.

J

Slug1
Jan 17th 2008, 05:23 PM
Plus, it is often easy to mistake justice for vengeance. The latter is decidedly un-Christian. I cite two examples of that; the story of Ahithophel, and the simple fact that the word "vengeance" is not even present in the New Testament (NLT), and when it's mentioned in the OT, it's often attributed to God alone, not to man.That's the thing, God has delegated His vengence upon the government to kill evil doers. If a government doesn't do as God wills, that is why we have criminals living well in prison or without fear on the streets... because the government is to timid to utilize the rights given to them by God.

Read Romans 13:4

The reason for this is very simple... if God took vengence, now that we are in the new covenent and not the covenent of the OT... where would faith be. If God destroyed whole cities as He did in the OT these days then where would faith be in the equation of belief in God?

Kinda impossible to say their is no God when everytime a criminal runs outside a bank after robbing it and having killed a guard inside... he's struck with lightning on a sunny day soon as he's out the door.

So God has given us permission to use that "sword" to use the "ministers of God" to bring wrath down on the wrong doer (one who does evil).

People can "not like it" but I can't understand why people say it's wrong when even God says it's "right".

I support it cause God says it's the governments responsibility to bring wrath down on the wrong doer.

Fenris
Jan 17th 2008, 05:35 PM
What concerns me, though, is the desire of Christians to support it. I would think that Christians would either oppose it, or be ambivalent about it, as much as one can about such a matter. A Christian who strongly supports it just gives me an uneasy feeling.

J
Why? Religious Jews support it. Are we so morally lacking?

th1bill
Jan 17th 2008, 06:48 PM
What concerns me, though, is the desire of Christians to support it. I would think that Christians would either oppose it, or be ambivalent about it, as much as one can about such a matter. A Christian who strongly supports it just gives me an uneasy feeling.

J
misfit, excuse me if I missed it but on what grounds are you uncomfortable about my being obedient and following the commands of God?

StevenC
Jan 18th 2008, 03:15 AM
What concerns me, though, is the desire of Christians to support it. I would think that Christians would either oppose it, or be ambivalent about it, as much as one can about such a matter. A Christian who strongly supports it just gives me an uneasy feeling.

J

I wouldn't think too much of it, all things are in the hands of God. There may be some Christians eager for revenge, having lost the principles of faith in God, that God shall avenge, but this has nothing to do with the death penalty. The Old Testament is filled with examples of the death penalty. Even David put to death the man that assisted in Saul's suicide. Samuel a prophet of God put Agag to death after Saul broke God's command and allowed Agag to live, etc.

-Steven

Nihil Obstat
Jan 19th 2008, 08:18 AM
Jesus (Ps. 2:12; 110:5-6) and we His saints (Ps. 149:6-9) will be exacting such judgments upon His return...!

And Moses by God's spoken word instituted and enforced such laws...!

God does not change... Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever...!

That which is not compatible with Him and His kingdom will be destroyed...!

- Lk.11

ohpenn
Jan 20th 2008, 06:11 AM
The bible itself gives a court the right, nay, the obligation, to impose the death penalty

The justification for murder has been brought up before on this thread and again it is brought up without proof.

dan
Jan 20th 2008, 06:37 AM
Still waiting for "Thou shall kill"

If your comment is correct, then all killing is wrong, including the instances of defense.

...That you require?

NUM 35:31 You shall not take money of him that is guilty of blood, but he shall die forthwith.

REV 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword.

A larger font?:lol:

Athanasius
Jan 20th 2008, 06:54 AM
The justification for murder has been brought up before on this thread and again it is brought up without proof.

Unfortunately, this does not constitute the use of the word 'murder'. As, one could very easily argue that a court imposed death sentence is, discounting mock trials, based upon some sort of vile evidences.

Certainly, no one would be foolhardy enough to say that the serial murder who rapes that is sentenced to death is, in the eyes of God, being murdered by the court. It would be quite the contrary.

misfit815
Jan 21st 2008, 03:28 PM
misfit, excuse me if I missed it but on what grounds are you uncomfortable about my being obedient and following the commands of God?


Throughout history, a lot of death and destruction has been caused by people claiming to be Christians. I'm not uncomfortable with obedience. I'm uncomfortable with anyone who, outside of actual combat, condones any kind of killing without extremely careful consideration.

A similar (though decidedly less mortal) topic is corporal punishment. Yes, I spank my kids, but I didn't come to that conclusion lightly. I prayed about it, studied the Bible, read research, discussed it with my wife, and considered my own experiences with it before making a conscious decision that I would use it as a form of punishment. And when I'm in conversation with other parents who may still be undecided, I offer advice, but I do *not* vehemently support it. Instead, I do all I can to ensure that they are educated enough to draw their own conclusions.

It's that vehement support of capital punishment that frightens me. It seems indicative of a violent personality - of a person a little too willing to take actions without first fully weighing their consequences.

J

th1bill
Jan 21st 2008, 11:26 PM
Throughout history, a lot of death and destruction has been caused by people claiming to be Christians. I'm not uncomfortable with obedience. I'm uncomfortable with anyone who, outside of actual combat, condones any kind of killing without extremely careful consideration.

A similar (though decidedly less mortal) topic is corporal punishment. Yes, I spank my kids, but I didn't come to that conclusion lightly. I prayed about it, studied the Bible, read research, discussed it with my wife, and considered my own experiences with it before making a conscious decision that I would use it as a form of punishment. And when I'm in conversation with other parents who may still be undecided, I offer advice, but I do *not* vehemently support it. Instead, I do all I can to ensure that they are educated enough to draw their own conclusions.

It's that vehement support of capital punishment that frightens me. It seems indicative of a violent personality - of a person a little too willing to take actions without first fully weighing their consequences.

J
.. Then you, sir, have mistaken me for someone else. One of my sons got exactly one spanking in his entire life and I do support Corporal Punishment fully, as the final measure.
.. This however has no relation what-so-ever to that issue. In more than one of my posts on this very subject, the death penalty, I have stated that no man or woman should receive this penalty except the proof of the crime meet the Biblical standars, which are quite strict. That being said, to abolish instead of reforming the the law on the death penalty is to slap God in the face and to disobey Him. Your position is in direct defiance of what God has determined to be best for His most cherished creation, man. God thinks so much of man that the Trinity appears to have consulted and determined to "make him in our image." That means that when a man or a woman murders another that they are murdering the "image"of God. They are sinning agains God!

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 01:37 PM
We are all sinning against God.

Yet we all have the opportunity to ask for and receive forgiveness. As uncomfortable as it may be, the sinner on the cross next to Jesus received His forgiveness and was given eternal life. And even the most horrendous monsters among us have that same opportunity.

I could never, outside of self-defense or the defense of another, take someone's life and rob them of that opportunity and of the opportunity to live a Christian life.

Yes, it is possible that God has determined that a particular sinner's time is up, and that He has delivered that person into the hands of an executioner. But the fact that the executioner is part of His plan does not absolve him of the responsibility of being a Christian. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. There may be people who will never turn to Christ, who deserve death. But if every one of us was a true Christian, I believe there would be none left to stone them.

J

Fenris
Jan 22nd 2008, 02:20 PM
But if every one of us was a true Christian, I believe there would be none left to stone them.

You know, I actually agree with you on this point. If everyone in the world lived up to Jesus's example, there'd be no crime or wars and we'd have brought heaven down to earth. The problem is that everyone doesn't live up to that example, and that put the onus on us to wage wars and fight crime. That means doing things you might find distasteful, such as using violence. But from a practical perspective, we simply have no choice...

Slug1
Jan 22nd 2008, 02:26 PM
Yes, it is possible that God has determined that a particular sinner's time is up, and that He has delivered that person into the hands of an executioner. But the fact that the executioner is part of His plan does not absolve him of the responsibility of being a Christian. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. There may be people who will never turn to Christ, who deserve death. But if every one of us was a true Christian, I believe there would be none left to stone them.

JThen who is God authorizing to bring wrath down on the wrong doer in Romans 13:4? Is this delegation of vengence only for the non-Christians to fill the boot's of the "sword" or "Minister of God"?

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 02:59 PM
Then who is God authorizing to bring wrath down on the wrong doer in Romans 13:4? Is this delegation of vengence only for the non-Christians to fill the boot's of the "sword" or "Minister of God"?

Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. - Romans 13:1-5 NLT (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2013:1-5;&version=51;)

Paul makes no distinction regarding who the authorities are, except that they are God's servants. He also doesn't discuss any sort of punishment specifically, only stating that they have the power granted by God to punish. Yes, in other translations, the authorities "bear the sword", but is that really a direct reference to capital punishment?

Paul's intent is to make it clear to us that we should respect the authorities, and he provides several reasons for that, including freedom from fear. Paul is not focused on the authorities, but on the Christian living under their authority.

Similarly, when the Pharisees tried to trap Jesus in John 8, he turned the focus from the woman to them. Just as the law of Moses commanded them to stone her, our law commands us to execute persons convicted of certain crimes.

Take your focus away from the accused and from the law, and apply it to yourself. Are you without sin? Would you be able to cast the first stone?

And, Fenris, a Christian's response should be the same regardless of his surroundings. We are not two different people on Saturday night and Sunday morning. At least we shouldn't be.

J

Fenris
Jan 22nd 2008, 03:21 PM
Everyone must submit to governing authorities.When did being a Christian become an excuse to ignore common sense? Submit to governing authorities? Even the Nazis? The Soviet Union? Is that what God really wants? Blind obedience to evil?


And, Fenris, a Christian's response should be the same regardless of his surroundings.
This is the same lack of common sense. So we shouldn't raise armies or fight evil. We should just pray and leave it to others to fight the evil that we are 'too good' to take action against.

Slug1
Jan 22nd 2008, 03:28 PM
Take your focus away from the accused and from the law, and apply it to yourself. Are you without sin? Would you be able to cast the first stone?

J
This woman was without trial and had not been found guilty of any crime yet. That mob did not have the authorization to execute her and Jesus gave her a chance to repent just as all criminals that are found guilty will be given. All criminals are asked if they want religeous services provided just prior to their execution and by doing this, God is offering that final chance for forgiveness.

Since I am without sin I would not cast the first stone while a criminal is still innocent (till proven guilty) but as a servant of God and placed in a position to be Minister of God then, yes... I would be obedient to God's Will and be able to execute a guilty criminal.

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:03 PM
When did being a Christian become an excuse to ignore common sense? Submit to governing authorities? Even the Nazis? The Soviet Union? Is that what God really wants? Blind obedience to evil?

This is the same lack of common sense. So we shouldn't raise armies or fight evil. We should just pray and leave it to others to fight the evil that we are 'too good' to take action against.

Wow. This is way off target. No, not blind obedience to evil. 1 Peter 2:13-25 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%202:13-25;&version=31;) tells us to "submit ... to every authority instituted among men," and makes it very clear that we should submit "not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." But in Acts 4:18-22 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204:18-22;&version=31;), you'll find that obeying the law is secondary to obeying God. Obey the Nazis (if you were a citizen of Germany)? Yes (assuming that they are indeed the authority - the dissolution of the Reichstag is one example of many that challenge that claim to authority). But obey them by murdering innocent Jews? Absolutely not. That would be disobeying God.

Which brings us to the United States Constitution, specifically Article I, Section 8, Article II, Section 2, and Article VI. We should raise an army to defend ourselves, because that is "the supreme Law of the Land." And, as Christians, we should obey that law as long as it does not contradict God's law, which I do not believe it does.

Again, killing your enemy on the field of battle, where he has made a conscious decision to risk his life on behalf of his countrymen and his principles, as you yourself have done (by virtue of being a soldier), is not murder. But killing a defenseless prisoner is not the same. Once again, can you cast the first stone?

J

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:08 PM
This woman was without trial and had not been found guilty of any crime yet. That mob did not have the authorization to execute her and Jesus gave her a chance to repent just as all criminals that are found guilty will be given. All criminals are asked if they want religeous services provided just prior to their execution and by doing this, God is offering that final chance for forgiveness.

Since I am without sin I would not cast the first stone while a criminal is still innocent (till proven guilty) but as a servant of God and placed in a position to be Minister of God then, yes... I would be obedient to God's Will and be able to execute a guilty criminal.

There is considerable evidence in scripture to assume that she was in fact set up for the crime, that the Pharisees were not only sure of her guilt, but that they had facilitated it so that they could capture her in the act. "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery."

And you're once again focusing on the criminal. Focus on yourself. Is it right, under any circumstances besides self-defense, or the defense of another, for you to take another person's life?

J

Slug1
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:17 PM
There is considerable evidence in scripture to assume that she was in fact set up for the crime, that the Pharisees were not only sure of her guilt, but that they had facilitated it so that they could capture her in the act. "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery."

And you're once again focusing on the criminal. Focus on yourself. Is it right, under any circumstances besides self-defense, or the defense of another, for you to take another person's life?

JExecuting a criminal found guilty... is self defense. Why would self defense only during the criminal activity resulting in the killing of a criminal to be justified for you? Killed during the act or killed after the act is still justice and the consequence for doing the act.

Just cause a criminal sat behind bars for a period of time doesn't remove the criminal act and doesn't remove the consequences for the criminal activity.

Justice served immediately (self defense) or served after conviction is still justice and the same... just the timing is different.

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:31 PM
This isn't about justice or consequences. The primary purpose of incarceration is specific deterrence; preventing the criminal from committing further crimes. If you feel it necessary to kill a prisoner out of self-defense, then you need to fix the prison system, not kill the prisoner.

I think your notion of self-defense is remarkably different than mine. Here's what Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_defense) says:

"Self-defense refers to actions taken by a person to prevent another person from causing harm to one's self, one's property or one's home."

Now how exactly is incarceration an insufficient action?

J

Fenris
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:48 PM
Wow. This is way off target. No, not blind obedience to evil. 1 Peter 2:13-25 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%202:13-25;&version=31;) tells us to "submit ... to every authority instituted among men," and makes it very clear that we should submit "not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." But in Acts 4:18-22 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%204:18-22;&version=31;), you'll find that obeying the law is secondary to obeying God. Obey the Nazis (if you were a citizen of Germany)? Yes (assuming that they are indeed the authority - the dissolution of the Reichstag is one example of many that challenge that claim to authority). But obey them by murdering innocent Jews? Absolutely not. That would be disobeying God.Um, by supporting an evil state you are complicit in their crimes, whether you personally commit them or not.


Which brings us to the United States Constitution, specifically Article I, Section 8, Article II, Section 2, and Article VI. We should raise an army to defend ourselves, because that is "the supreme Law of the Land." And, as Christians, we should obey that law as long as it does not contradict God's law, which I do not believe it does.

Again, killing your enemy on the field of battle, where he has made a conscious decision to risk his life on behalf of his countrymen and his principles, as you yourself have done (by virtue of being a soldier), is not murder. But killing a defenseless prisoner is not the same. Once again, can you cast the first stone?

JWould I cast the first stone to kill a convicted murderer? Absolutely.

Athanasius
Jan 22nd 2008, 04:53 PM
If you feel it necessary to kill a prisoner out of self-defense, then you need to fix the prison system, not kill the prisoner.


This takes the entire onus off the prisoner and places it on the prison system.
It is like defending the drunken man who wandered onto the highway and was subsequently killed by a passing car. It's not the drunken man who should have been looking out for himself, but solely the driver of the passing car.

In case it isn't clear enough; the onus is on both the prisoner and the system.
Not just one or the other.

Slug1
Jan 22nd 2008, 05:02 PM
This isn't about justice or consequences. The primary purpose of incarceration is specific deterrence; preventing the criminal from committing further crimes. If you feel it necessary to kill a prisoner out of self-defense, then you need to fix the prison system, not kill the prisoner.

I think your notion of self-defense is remarkably different than mine. Here's what Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self_defense) says:

"Self-defense refers to actions taken by a person to prevent another person from causing harm to one's self, one's property or one's home."

Now how exactly is incarceration an insufficient action?

JI guess our opinions of self defense will remain different :hug:. The result remains the same although the timing isn't... a dead criminal and a safer place to live as a result.

th1bill
Jan 22nd 2008, 10:47 PM
misfit,
You are waffling and twisting so much that even you, if you would read back over your comments would find you are not sure of why you believe what you believe. I wish you a good life but the very moment you succeed with your line of endeavor here, you will be doomed. If these other men stick to the effort with you, do be it. I'll leave you in the hands of almighty God and be done here.

misfit815
Jan 22nd 2008, 11:17 PM
misfit,
You are waffling and twisting so much that even you, if you would read back over your comments would find you are not sure of why you believe what you believe. I wish you a good life but the very moment you succeed with your line of endeavor here, you will be doomed. If these other men stick to the effort with you, do be it. I'll leave you in the hands of almighty God and be done here.


I call argumentum ad hominem and a non sequitur. I went back and read over my comments.

Were you referring to this (separating it from combat):

1st Post: I personally do not believe that it is right to take the life of someone when not either defending yourself or an innocent, in the same vein that I do not believe it is right to take the life of an unborn child. Both are murder, as far as I can tell.

2nd Post: Throughout history, a lot of death and destruction has been caused by people claiming to be Christians. I'm not uncomfortable with obedience. I'm uncomfortable with anyone who, outside of actual combat, condones any kind of killing without extremely careful consideration.

3rd Post: I could never, outside of self-defense or the defense of another, take someone's life and rob them of that opportunity and of the opportunity to live a Christian life.

5th Post: Again, killing your enemy on the field of battle, where he has made a conscious decision to risk his life on behalf of his countrymen and his principles, as you yourself have done (by virtue of being a soldier), is not murder. But killing a defenseless prisoner is not the same. Once again, can you cast the first stone?

Or how about this (on supporting and committing it):

1st Post: What concerns me, though, is the desire of Christians to support it. I would think that Christians would either oppose it, or be ambivalent about it, as much as one can about such a matter. A Christian who strongly supports it just gives me an uneasy feeling.

2nd Post: Throughout history, a lot of death and destruction has been caused by people claiming to be Christians. I'm not uncomfortable with obedience. I'm uncomfortable with anyone who, outside of actual combat, condones any kind of killing without extremely careful consideration.

3rd Post: Yes, it is possible that God has determined that a particular sinner's time is up, and that He has delivered that person into the hands of an executioner. But the fact that the executioner is part of His plan does not absolve him of the responsibility of being a Christian. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. There may be people who will never turn to Christ, who deserve death. But if every one of us was a true Christian, I believe there would be none left to stone them.

4th Post: Take your focus away from the accused and from the law, and apply it to yourself. Are you without sin? Would you be able to cast the first stone?

6th Post: And you're once again focusing on the criminal. Focus on yourself. Is it right, under any circumstances besides self-defense, or the defense of another, for you to take another person's life?

Or maybe this (on its purpose):

1st Post: What is the purpose of the death penalty?
- As a means of specific deterrence? If that is so, are we not capable of meeting the same goal through lifetime incarceration.
- As a means of general deterrence? This relies on the theory of rational choice, which is far from applicable toward those who commit atrocities "worthy" of the death penalty.
- As a form of justice? That's a tough one...

7th Post: This isn't about justice or consequences. The primary purpose of incarceration is specific deterrence; preventing the criminal from committing further crimes. If you feel it necessary to kill a prisoner out of self-defense, then you need to fix the prison system, not kill the prisoner.

Or was it this (on obedience):

2nd Post: Throughout history, a lot of death and destruction has been caused by people claiming to be Christians. I'm not uncomfortable with obedience. I'm uncomfortable with anyone who, outside of actual combat, condones any kind of killing without extremely careful consideration.

4th Post: Paul's intent is to make it clear to us that we should respect the authorities, and he provides several reasons for that, including freedom from fear. Paul is not focused on the authorities, but on the Christian living under their authority.

5th Post: Which brings us to the United States Constitution, specifically Article I, Section 8, Article II, Section 2, and Article VI. We should raise an army to defend ourselves, because that is "the supreme Law of the Land." And, as Christians, we should obey that law as long as it does not contradict God's law, which I do not believe it does.


Yeah, these examples all *clearly* show how I've been waffling and twisting. :confused

J

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 03:35 AM
When Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong, you may think that was for only individuals.

In America, individuals vote and tell the government what to do.

Check and mate.

Please help me work to abolish the death penalty.

th1bill
Jan 29th 2008, 03:56 AM
When Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong, you may think that was for only individuals.

In America, individuals vote and tell the government what to do.

Check and mate.

Please help me work to abolish the death penalty.
First, this is not some contest and the only loser so for is yourself for attempting to "WIN." Nest if you'll just look at Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary you will find that you are way out of context here. This portion of the Sermon on the mount was addressing retaliation and the death penalty might seem to some a good method to retaliate, may God forgive them, but the Government is in the business of protecting it's citizens and is not retaliating in fact.

I'm sorry to see that display of pride in winning.

Slug1
Jan 29th 2008, 03:59 AM
Please help me work to abolish the death penalty.Why would you want to take the sword away... the one that God gave to the government and told Christians to support.

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 04:12 AM
Why would you want to take the sword away... the one that God gave to the government and told Christians to support.

I will not use my sword on an unarmed person.

And so, I will not vote for the government to do that.

Slug1
Jan 29th 2008, 04:15 AM
I will not use my sword on an unarmed person.

And so, I will not vote for the government to do that.

Ya have to separate the two.

The Body of Christ spreads the gospel, this is the mission given to us by God.

The government protects it's citizens, that is the mission given to it by God.

You're blurring the two together. God didn't tell the Body of Christ (all us Christians) to force our opinions on the government, He told us to support the government so we can be focused on our mission.

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 04:29 AM
The government can protect it's citizens.

Some of them need to be protected from themselves.
Jail cells.

Give them 200 years in jail.
Once they are locked up, there is no need to kill them.

Slug1
Jan 29th 2008, 04:32 AM
The government can protect it's citizens.

Some of them need to be protected from themselves.
Jail cells.

Give them 200 years in jail.
Once they are locked up, there is no need to kill them.If you were forcing this opinion on the government over 2000 years ago... and won your case. Then we'd have no resurrected Savior.

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 04:42 AM
The death penalty was needed about 2000 years ago.

It is no longer needed today, in America.

Today we have cops, CSIs, and prisons.

Slug1
Jan 29th 2008, 04:47 AM
The death penalty was needed about 2000 years ago.

It is no longer needed today, in America.

Today we have cops, CSIs, and prisons.OK, so they had 2 out of 3 back then ;)

Cops = Roman soldiers
Prisons = jails
CSIs = :hmm:

Why would a CSI team make the authorization from God for the government to have a need for the death penalty go away?

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 05:06 AM
OK, so they had 2 out of 3 back then ;)

Cops = Roman soldiers
Prisons = jails
CSIs = :hmm:

Why would a CSI team make the authorization from God for the government to have a need for the death penalty go away?

I think Jesus removed the authorization, when the death penalty was no longer needed.


That's why I said "about 2000 years ago".
After the work of Jesus, the death penalty was no longer needed.

Slug1
Jan 29th 2008, 05:20 AM
I think Jesus removed the authorization, when the death penalty was no longer needed.


That's why I said "about 2000 years ago".
After the work of Jesus, the death penalty was no longer needed.Well, based on scripture God authorized the governments to crush evil doers and based on this same scripture.. we as Christians need to stand behind what God is telling us what to do.

chivalrous
Jan 29th 2008, 06:23 AM
Jesus removed the death penalty authorization, that makes me think God has removed it too. They are one.

Athanasius
Jan 29th 2008, 07:23 AM
Jesus removed the death penalty authorization, that makes me think God has removed it too. They are one.

I don't see where he said this? If you're referring to his 'repudiation' of 'an eye for an eye' then I digress, you're out of context in applying it to the death penalty.

Fenris
Jan 29th 2008, 01:33 PM
The biblical injunction of 'an eye for an eye' was never meant to be taken literally.

dan
Jan 29th 2008, 02:07 PM
...Should demonstrate.

The OT says:

LEV 24:19 And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;
LEV 24:20 Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again.

DEUT 19:21 And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

The NT says:

MT 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
MT 5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
MT 5:40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.
MT 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
MT 5:42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Notice that Jesus did not say "life for life". You assume that He meant it because He addressed the other two? I believe that if He'd meant to include it, it would have been included.

...And quite literally, I should think.

Fenris
Jan 29th 2008, 03:37 PM
What happens if a guy with one eye pokes out someones eye?

Fenris
Jan 29th 2008, 03:40 PM
...Should demonstrate.

The OT says:

LEV 24:19 And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;
Rashi on that verse: so shall be done to him Heb. כֵּן יִנָּתֵן בּוֹ. Our Rabbis explained that this does not mean the actual infliction of a wound, but payment of money. [And how is an injury estimated? The victim] is evaluated as a slave [if he would not have had the injury, and how much with the injury, and the difference is the compensation]. This is why Scripture uses the expression נְתִינָה, “giving,” [thereby alluding to] something that is “handed over (הַנָתוּן)” from hand to hand.

Nihil Obstat
Jan 29th 2008, 07:30 PM
Rashi on that verse: so shall be done to him Heb. כֵּן יִנָּתֵן בּוֹ. Our Rabbis explained that this does not mean the actual infliction of a wound, but payment of money. [And how is an injury estimated? The victim] is evaluated as a slave [if he would not have had the injury, and how much with the injury, and the difference is the compensation]. This is why Scripture uses the expression נְתִינָה, “giving,” [thereby alluding to] something that is “handed over (הַנָתוּן)” from hand to hand.

Huh... neat. I learn something new every time I come on here.

chivalrous
Jan 30th 2008, 12:10 AM
Notice that Jesus did not say "life for life". You assume that He meant it because He addressed the other two? I believe that if He'd meant to include it, it would have been included.

...And quite literally, I should think.

Today Christians say "an eye for an eye" to describe their support for the death penalty.

It's almost as if Jesus knew what would happen many years later.:hmm:
Yes, He was talking about the death penalty.

th1bill
Jan 30th 2008, 01:42 AM
Today Christians say "an eye for an eye" to describe their support for the death penalty.

It's almost as if Jesus knew what would happen many years later.:hmm:
Yes, He was talking about the death penalty.
I have in my lifetime seen a number of cults formed and these cults, i.e. Heavens Gate, and these, often, begin with someone originating a thought that they consider Biblical but they never support their claim with scripture. I have laid back these few days watching you attempt to develop this argument and you have and you are failing. The Holy Scriptures do not bear out your idea, unless you can build a case from either the Old Testament or from the New.

I do not wish to see you make a fool of yourself but it's past time to step into the Batter's Box.

chivalrous
Jan 30th 2008, 10:27 PM
Bill, do you think God knows what will happen before it does?

th1bill
Jan 30th 2008, 10:50 PM
Bill, do you think God knows what will happen before it does?
He either knows or He is not God and God is!

chivalrous
Jan 31st 2008, 05:12 AM
He either knows or He is not God and God is!

I agree on that point.

dan
Feb 2nd 2008, 07:21 AM
...Jesus said:

MT 15:3 And in answer he said to them, Why do you, yourselves, go against the word of God on account of the teaching which has been handed down to you (by men)?

napsnsnacks
Feb 3rd 2008, 09:33 PM
I'm trying to find some evidence that the death penalty is part of Gods plan for man to do to another man. Most platforms are pro life/pro death penalty or pro choice/anti death penalty. Could somebody more versed than I with some good opinions clear this up please? You often see the warmongering Republicans on the pro life/pro death penalty side. Let's talk about this important issue. Would Christ vote pro death penalty?

Here is my take on the death penalty.

Firstly, secular government, and unfortunately many religious authorities (as has been demonstrated heavily over the past few years) are literally capable of anything as both publicly demonstrate this every day.

Christians should not be pro death penalty. If they demand the Old Testament principle of an eye for an eye, they are hypocrites because they did not forgive under the New Testament principles, therefore their sin will not be forgiven them, they are lost in my opinion and are in the same position as a person who uses the title of Christian to identify themselves but are warmongers or those same types who claim the title of Christian but are full of hate an are racist.

The church rarely in human history has had sole say in government. At the time that it did, the death penalty was wrong to be law and carried out as punishment. These murderers according to everything decent should have been imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives, even after any repentance and acceptance of Christ because forgiveness without punishment in society really is nothing more than a license to sin so we can't go that route either because that's just anarchy in the name of God. "I'm sorry." is already evolved into nothing but lip service a long time ago. It's nothing but a license because they knew up front that their words and deeds were wrong both before, during and after the act.

That in conjunction with the church state and or the church itself providing for and committed to a faithful prison ministry for any of these these lost souls who happen to realize their wrongs and truly feel guilty.

Anyone under the impression that jail or prison is a freeloading easy way lazy life of ease and comfort knows nothing of incarceration. Even if they have a phone and TV, books to read and blanket from home. Even home bound people suffer the same things as prisoners do but theres no crime and no conviction. In effect, life in prison has taken their life from them.

That would be or should be the church and church state position and practice.

Now as for Christians who live under a secular government with some Christians inhabiting public and appointed offices and judges they have sentencing requirements and the death penalty is on the table for capital crimes. These Christian judges can easily sentence them to 3 life terms without parole but there are in the same position as the following governors and presidents:

There is nothing stopping that Christian governor from calling the warden 1 minute before they throw the switch. If they don't they are not meeting Christian principles but meeting both the secular and errant Christan public demands for blood in addition to making sure they don't get reelected in a heavily pro death penalty state so they kill them to further their own careers. Same goes for the President and a federal prison.

By far, executions in our country are more vengeance and emotional satisfaction for the general public of getting even than dispensing justice and the hate for these murderers and demand for blood is no different that Rome throwing the Christians they hated to the lions in the sports arena. There was even one proposition a while back to put executions on a cable/satellite channel therefore becoming real life macabre entertainment so that everyone can sit back and enjoy the death of another instead of having it staged in a movie. The same goes for all the simulated murder and rape scenes on TV. The viewer can enjoy it without actually being there. These are the same people who would be entertained by seeing a real life rape or murder.

That aspect of it is really all that is left of it because look at all the good executions have done in our country when in fact the number of people awaiting execution over time only increases. It isn't a deterrent and is little more than a matter of public emotional satisfaction.

A Christian is in no way to take pleasure in such things nor be happy when evil befalls anyone else or make light of the downfall of others.

"Getting even" and "settling the score" is NOT punishment and makes the one getting even or settling the score no better than the one they are doing it to, basically rendering evil for evil.

Unfortunately and long ago, the church lost diligence and became slack in maintaining a higher standard than secular society who in essence believe that right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder and what is illegal or legal is changed on a whim and some paperwork.

The same moral downfall goes for our elected officials, our police, many preachers. It has spread like a disease in our society and certain damnable practices of our society has even spread to other countries when we at the time were the only known source of it. It is easy to deny that but only after it infected the whole globe because that totally blurs the source of it thus giving the matter an air of being inherent by default in all societies. Sin, like yawning, is highly contagious and currently pandemic.

These so called Christian people kill the condemned but they pardon those who stole billions in the business sector, among other crimes, that are just as much a threat to the stability of our society as any murderer. Both result in anarchy by the collapse of our financial system or anarchy by killers freely roaming the landscape.

We know that these sentenced to death are most likely lost and have no salvation. We guarantee that by killing them. They are different that other unsaved who die outside of execution because the others ended up in the lake of fire of their own doing...but...these executed ended up in the lake of fire by half their doing and half of others doing because executing them in this condition is really removing any and all opportunity to repent and receive salvation.

As a Christian I would not want to stand on judgment day and have to answer for my half of providing that person with my half of a one way ticket to hell.

I would rather stand at the judgment and be known for having mercy and allowing them to live out their (really miserable) lives in prison while operating or participating in or contributing too a prison ministry along with patience and prayer for such condemned men.


If we kill these people all hope for their repentance is gone. Housing them is not a money issue either. Theres plenty of money for endless tax breaks for the rich, fee money in subsidies for the corporate sector, endless bailouts and tax payer "insurance" for financial institutions run into the ground such as the recent sub-prime lending failure, and more importantly over the past few years, trillions of dollars for war.

So there are the three positions: The church and the church state and the secular state occupied by many Christians in office.

Athanasius
Feb 3rd 2008, 09:39 PM
Once again; forgiveness is not a suspension of consequence.

Slug1
Feb 3rd 2008, 09:59 PM
If they demand the Old Testament principle of an eye for an eye, they are hypocrites because they did not forgive under the New Testament principles, therefore their sin will not be forgiven them,

I'll say it again also, giving forgiveness has absolutely nothing to do with justice. Forgiveness is for you... not the criminal. You don't forgive the criminal and set them free, you forgive the criminal so you can heal from the wrong they did to you. Otherwise the hurt they did to you will tear you apart and cause Jesus to judge you the same if you never forgave a criminal.

It has nothing to do with allowing a criminal freedom to go kill again and again and again cause you "free" them to show that you "forgave" them.


If we kill these people all hope for their repentance is gone.All criminals are offered a chance with a religious man (whatever their faith is). Ya know, GOD doesn't even do that. When it's time to go, He just takes you whether you have faith in Him or not. So the, "all hope for repentance being taken away" means nothing. If anything... a prisoner has more chances to put faith in God then at any other time in their life cause now they know life is coming to an end in a day or a year... when the sentence is carried out. They won't get that with God, they just die at the time they're to die and it's usually.... SURPRISE.

Brother Mark
Feb 3rd 2008, 11:27 PM
If we kill these people all hope for their repentance is gone.

Perhaps, when a man is forced to face his own mortality, he might make an appeal to God. I wonder how many people get saved on death row. :hmm:

chivalrous
Feb 4th 2008, 06:05 PM
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled."
"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy." (Matthew 5:6-7)

Put them in jail, but don't kill them.
And you will be both.

Brother Mark
Feb 4th 2008, 06:43 PM
"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled."
"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy." (Matthew 5:6-7)

Put them in jail, but don't kill them.
And you will be both.

How is jail merciful? Grant mercy and just let them go free.

Fenris
Feb 4th 2008, 07:34 PM
How is jail merciful? Grant mercy and just let them go free.Better yet, let them move in to your house! :idea:

Slug1
Feb 4th 2008, 07:35 PM
Better yet, let them move in to your house! :idea:
If you're gonna go that far, go all the way and offer yourself as their next victim :rolleyes: :idea:

Or, as a minimum required by God (Romans 13:1-2)... allow the men designated by God to protect you and don't fight against this will of God.

BTW: v1-2: 1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

chivalrous
Feb 4th 2008, 07:37 PM
How is jail merciful? Grant mercy and just let them go free.

When you put them in jail you are righteous.
When you don't kill them you are merciful.

Fenris
Feb 4th 2008, 07:39 PM
When you put them in jail you are righteous.
When you don't kill them you are merciful.
Maybe killing them is merciful. Through their death, maybe they can achieve atonement.

Slug1
Feb 4th 2008, 07:44 PM
When you put them in jail you are righteous.
When you don't kill them you are merciful.The government isn't required to be merciful to them. Criminals are to FEAR authority, as authority has the God given right to protect. God orders Government's to bring God's wrath down on them and as we see throughout the Bible, God's wrath most likely means death of evil.

Keeping criminals in jail does not put fear in a criminal. It puts fear in citizens that don't want to go to jail... just like a lock keeps an honest man honest. A lock does nothing for a criminal, doesn't even slow them down. Jails keep honest folk honest but nothing for most criminals.. all a jail does is offer shelter, food etc to a criminal and separation from the general population. Many have no fear from this. Thus the government isn't executing their authority to bring down the required wrath on criminals.

Usually cause more people speak out "against" what is the will of God instead of supporting the will of God for the Government.

Brother Mark
Feb 4th 2008, 07:51 PM
When you put them in jail you are righteous.
When you don't kill them you are merciful.

So being merciful doesn't mean forgiving? I thought we were to forgive. :rolleyes:

God has used the death penalty throughout the ages and has never dissolved it. Show me in scripture where God endorsed the prison system as righteous.

Brother Mark
Feb 4th 2008, 07:52 PM
The government isn't required to be merciful to them. Criminals are to FEAR authority, as authority has the God given right to protect. God orders Government's to bring God's wrath down on them and as we see throughout the Bible, God's wrath most likely means death of evil.

Amen. God never tells government to show mercy. It's not their purpose. Government's purpose when dealing with evil doers is to bring God's wrath.

chivalrous
Feb 4th 2008, 08:09 PM
Maybe killing them is merciful. Through their death, maybe they can achieve atonement.

You want to do a bad deed to make something good happen?


Atonement is something the sinner must choose to do.

Fenris
Feb 4th 2008, 08:17 PM
You want to do a bad deed to make something good happen?Why is the death penalty a bad deed? God makes it clear it's what he wants in each of the five books of Moses.



Atonement is something the sinner must choose to do.
The philosophy behind the punishments meted out by the Sanhedrin was that those punishments provided atonement for the sinner.

chivalrous
Feb 4th 2008, 08:24 PM
God has used the death penalty throughout the ages and has never dissolved it.

Jesus dissolved it.

John 8:1-12
Matthew 5:38-39

Athanasius
Feb 4th 2008, 08:36 PM
Jesus dissolved it.

John 8:1-12
Matthew 5:38-39

These verses have already been explained. . . .

chivalrous
Feb 4th 2008, 08:41 PM
These verses have already been explained. . . .

When Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong, you think that was just for individuals and not the government.

In the U.S.A.,
individuals vote and tell the government what to do.

Individuals have the power to abolish the death penalty.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 08:46 PM
Maybe killing them is merciful. Through their death, maybe they can achieve atonement.

A non Christian would say something ridiculous like that, if for no other reason than to get the matter off topic and onto atonement.

I though non Christians were to be posting in a separate section? Or are you of a different faith other than Christian?

Fenris
Feb 4th 2008, 08:49 PM
A non Christian would say something ridiculous like that, if for no other reason than to get the matter off topic and onto atonement.It's not ridiculous, it's a perfectly valid viewpoint.


I though non Christians were to be posting in a separate section? Or are you of a different faith other than Christian?Yeah, I got special permission. For some inexplicable reason my presence is tolerated here. :lol:

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 08:58 PM
In this matter you can have forgiveness, punishment under secular law ordered by a Christian judge, and mercy.

Forgiveness in this respect is not for the perpetrator. This is for the many victims so that they put it behind them instead of carrying the baggage of hate. The perp can ask forgiveness but he can't give it in this respect so it doesn't apply to him in this context.

Mercy is also implemented by not recommending the maximum sentence which is death.

And for the other poster, God may have not ordered secular government to be merciful but that is no institution to not be merciful and making that a mandatory order for death is an errant demand for a pound of flesh. According to your reasoning applied in reverse any type of evil practice not specifically mentioned in the bible for us to stay away from is OK for Christians because God didn't mention it.

The court does have mercy even with no one involved with it is Christian. "The mercy of the court." "Throw yourself on the mercy of the court."

If mercy as disallowed there would be no recommended sentencing "guidelines."

These guidelines aren't laws and are at the discretion of the judge and even if he blatantly disregarded them he can't be prosecuted or unseated for that though he would be on the hot seat in the media.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 09:00 PM
It's not ridiculous, it's a perfectly valid viewpoint.

A perfectly valid viewpoint from which source?



Yeah, I got special permission. For some inexplicable reason my presence is tolerated here. :lol:

Well, I adamantly disapprove. I recommend others do the same. But then again this is a "special" section isn't it?

Slug1
Feb 4th 2008, 09:04 PM
In this matter you can have forgiveness, punishment under secular law ordered by a Christian judge, and mercy.

Forgiveness in this respect is not for the perpetrator. This is for the many victims so that they put it behind them instead of carrying the baggage of hate. The perp can ask forgiveness but he can't give it in this respect so it doesn't apply to him in this context.

Mercy is also implemented by not recommending the maximum sentence which is death.

And for the other poster, God may have not ordered secular government to be merciful but that is no institution to not be merciful and making that a mandatory order for death is an errant demand for a pound of flesh. According to your reasoning applied in reverse any type of evil practice not specifically mentioned in the bible for us to stay away from is OK for Christians because God didn't mention it.

The court does have mercy even with no one involved with it is Christian. "The mercy of the court." "Throw yourself on the mercy of the court."

If mercy as disallowed there would be no recommended sentencing "guidelines."

These guidelines aren't laws and are at the discretion of the judge and even if he blatantly disregarded them he can't be prosecuted or unseated for that though he would be on the hot seat in the media.
Yes, the courts can always offer mercy such as life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, this I agree 100%. However, we as Christian's are not allowed to "protest" the fact that if no mercy is offered and the sentence is death for a criminal then this is the "wrath" that God is executing through the government.

Fenris
Feb 4th 2008, 09:28 PM
A perfectly valid viewpoint from which source?
A Jewish source.


Well, I adamantly disapprove. I recommend others do the same. But then again this is a "special" section isn't it?
If you don't like it, take it up with the moderators. I am only here because they permit it.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 09:34 PM
Yes, the courts can always offer mercy such as life imprisonment instead of the death penalty, this I agree 100%. However, we as Christian's are not allowed to "protest" the fact that if no mercy is offered and the sentence is death for a criminal then this is the "wrath" that God is executing through the government.

You can protest. Freedom of speech. God said to respect the laws of the land. You can legally write a letter of disapproval to a judge anytime for any of his or her decisions just like they and politicians get mail like that all the time.

Now if you are referring to the usual mob scene outside of prisons with the pro and con on each side that is acceptable too as long as you respect the laws of the land and follow orders of police as you do it.

I wouldn't engage in such a practice as protesting but I don't rail on those who do provided they keep a Christian attitude about it all as opposed to engaging in a riot.

Edit: If you really want to see who demands blood just ban the death penalty entirely, Then wait and see who protests and who lobby's the politicians to reinstate it.

These are the people you're dealing with and overwhelmingly they would NOT be "faith based" types of people.

Just because we have had capital punishment in our system from the beginning really doesn't mean much considering that we also used to burn witches at the stake but that didn't make it right.

dan
Feb 4th 2008, 09:38 PM
...Continue to kill in prison. There are even many examples of murders being planned and carried out by men in prison.

If you can't guarantee the safety of the public from the murderers that have already been captured, your condoning the act, in effect.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 09:49 PM
...Continue to kill in prison. There are even many examples of murders being planned and carried out by men in prison.

If you can't guarantee the safety of the public from the murderers that have already been captured, your condoning the act, in effect.

You cannot prevent these people in prison from coming up with a new angle but when they do it is cut off at the pass.

Firstly the public is protected because these types are not on the streets, secondly when they fabricate a way to operate from inside that method is shut down.

Brother Mark
Feb 4th 2008, 09:55 PM
You can protest. Freedom of speech. God said to respect the laws of the land. You can legally write a letter of disapproval to a judge anytime for any of his or her decisions just like they and politicians get mail like that all the time.

Now if you are referring to the usual mob scene outside of prisons with the pro and con on each side that is acceptable too as long as you respect the laws of the land and follow orders of police as you do it.

I wouldn't engage in such a practice as protesting but I don't rail on those who do provided they keep a Christian attitude about it all as opposed to engaging in a riot.

Edit: If you really want to see who demands blood just ban the death penalty entirely, Then wait and see who protests and who lobby's the politicians to reinstate it.

These are the people you're dealing with and overwhelmingly they would NOT be "faith based" types of people.

Just because we have had capital punishment in our system from the beginning really doesn't mean much considering that we also used to burn witches at the stake but that didn't make it right.

Nowhere in scripture does God say government should not be able to execute his wrath through death. He instituted the governmental death penalty after the flood and hasn't rescinded it yet.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 10:45 PM
Nowhere in scripture does God say government should not be able to execute his wrath...

Any human who is arrogant and proud enough to claim that they are dispensing Gods wrath has superseded God because it is not their place.

Which is where I think you may be getting all this from.

God will dispense His own wrath. No leader or governor is under any order to implement Gods wrath.

Especially if that is a secular/atheistic government and for those Christians who hold offices inside secular government who are capable of ordering the death penalty are ordered to mercy and the least merciful is multiple life sentences in prison.

In the OT forgiveness was not required one to another because an eye for an eye settled it so since the law is no longer written in stone but on our hearts we are to exercise mercy during the course of punishment because look at what an eye for an eye did in the OT all the while these people still carried around that baggage after they got their pound of flesh.

When they seen the guy without an eye that even accidentally put out their eye they were just like, "Ha hood you got what you deserved."

That is all over.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 10:47 PM
A Jewish source.


No surprise there. What is an atheist doing with Jewish religious sources anyway?

Brother Mark
Feb 4th 2008, 11:19 PM
Any human who is arrogant and proud enough to claim that they are dispensing Gods wrath has superseded God because it is not their place.

Which is where I think you may be getting all this from.

God will dispense His own wrath. No leader or governor is under any order to implement Gods wrath.

Especially if that is a secular/atheistic government and for those Christians who hold offices inside secular government who are capable of ordering the death penalty are ordered to mercy and the least merciful is multiple life sentences in prison.

In the OT forgiveness was not required one to another because an eye for an eye settled it so since the law is no longer written in stone but on our hearts we are to exercise mercy during the course of punishment because look at what an eye for an eye did in the OT all the while these people still carried around that baggage after they got their pound of flesh.

When they seen the guy without an eye that even accidentally put out their eye they were just like, "Ha hood you got what you deserved."

That is all over.


Actually, God himself said government was to dispense his wrath in Romans. It's often overlooked.

Rom 13:1-7

13 Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil. 5 Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
NASB

It's not arrogant for government to dispense God's wrath on the evil doer. It's biblical.

Slug1
Feb 4th 2008, 11:21 PM
It's not over looked, it's ignored. One of those pages practically torn out of many a Bible :rolleyes:

Athanasius
Feb 4th 2008, 11:22 PM
Any human who is arrogant and proud enough to claim that they are dispensing Gods wrath has superseded God because it is not their place.

Moabites
Amalekites
Philistines
Babylonians
Assyrians
Egyptians. . . .

Should I keep listing the nations God used as punishment towards the Israelites? You know, God using people (people dispensing God's wrath).

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 11:42 PM
Actually, God himself said government was to dispense his wrath in Romans. It's often overlooked.

Rom 13:1-7

13 Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil. 5 Wherefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
NASB

It's not arrogant for government to dispense God's wrath on the evil doer. It's biblical.

It most certainly is for a secular/atheist government to engage in such practice since the entity has nothing to do with God. That is like Israeli leaders who are mostly atheists claiming their biblical boundaries given them by God as the reason for expanding or wanting to expand. It is just manipulation of what they do not believe in anyway and so is the same for secular government to be claiming to be dispensing God's wrath.

It's just hypocrisy.

napsnsnacks
Feb 4th 2008, 11:44 PM
Moabites
Amalekites
Philistines
Babylonians
Assyrians
Egyptians. . . .

Should I keep listing the nations God used as punishment towards the Israelites? You know, God using people (people dispensing God's wrath).

Sure God did that but you are calling oranges apples. Demonstrate where these people knowingly implementing God's wrath. They must have been believers and obedient for your position to be valid.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 12:01 AM
You guys are employing a double standard.

It is one thing for God to remove His hand of protection then all the sudden the one that was protected sees their enemies descending on them.

Pagan enemies, atheist enemies, idolatrous enemies, those who have nothing to do with God. If they had a god even it would be false so in the mind of the one dispensing the misery they are doing it just because they don't like them or are doing so in the name of a false God.

Neither one of those is a nation dispensing Gods wrath like you guys make it out to be as if they do this by commission from on high.

In order for them to do that they must believe in God and obey God and all that.

Israels enemies did not march on them with the war cry, "We bring upon you the wrath of God and slay you in the name of God." In order to do they they must have shared the same God and faith.

In other words they are not willing participants in dispensing Gods wrath as you guys make it sound.

God on the other hand giving Israels enemies free run over them is God dispensing His wrath, not Israels enemies dispensing Gods wrath.

You guys are making both to be the same instances.

For all that is worth you might as well say that atheists can conduct valid scriptural baptisms.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 12:04 AM
It most certainly is for a secular/atheist government to engage in such practice since the entity has nothing to do with God. That is like Israeli leaders who are mostly atheists claiming their biblical boundaries given them by God as the reason for expanding or wanting to expand. It is just manipulation of what they do not believe in anyway and so is the same for secular government to be claiming to be dispensing God's wrath.

It's just hypocrisy.

So when scripture says that government is the sword of God's wrath that's hypocrisy?

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 12:09 AM
So when scripture says that government is the sword of God's wrath that's hypocrisy?

The disposition of the one dishing it out is the issue.

These people in their ignorance can be used by God to punish by allowing them to do as they wish to whomever but its a factual impossibility for these people dishing it out to go about dispensing Gods wrath of their own accord because they don't believe in it.

Only a believer and or willing participant can dispense Gods wrath in that fashion.

Other than that, they ones dishing it out and having nothing to do with God, they are just a means to an end.

Therefore our secular government that allows and carries out the death penalty is not carrying out God's wrath because the state is non religious on all fronts.

In that context it is carrying out its own wrath.

That mix up in turn is blended with the errant idea that we are or ever have been a Christian nation.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 12:22 AM
So when scripture says that government is the sword of God's wrath that's hypocrisy?

Notice that the "sword of God's wrath" is a weapon (these people) used by God and not a bunch of people doing their duty under God to dispense righteous punishment.

Athanasius
Feb 5th 2008, 12:24 AM
Sure God did that but you are calling oranges apples. Demonstrate where these people knowingly implementing God's wrath. They must have been believers and obedient for your position to be valid.

Why is that? You just said. . . .


Any human who is arrogant and proud enough to claim that they are dispensing Gods wrath has superseded God because it is not their place.

Slug1
Feb 5th 2008, 12:24 AM
Notice that the "sword of God's wrath" is a weapon (these people) used by God and not a bunch of people doing their duty under God to dispense righteous punishment.Actually they're called Minister's of God and revengers, IOW those that have the authorization of God's delegated vengence. At least those within God's will and obedient to the will of God, will do so.

The "sword" is bared (wielded) by the Ministers of God.

v4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Tru_Knyte
Feb 5th 2008, 12:41 AM
Question: how do you know when you are doing God's will then (if capital punishment by man is indeed endorsed by him)? I mean, I know man is fallible, and I know we make mistakes. Look at all of the mob lynchings that occurred throughout history because people thought they had the right to exact this extreme punishment. Do you know how many innocent men (and women died) because man thought himself able to tell the difference between guilty and innocent?

I myself could not bear the stains of blood on my hands of an innocent man. I would rather pay higher taxes with life in prison than risk having the ultimate injustice of murdering an innocent man.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 01:00 AM
The disposition of the one dishing it out is the issue.

These people in their ignorance can be used by God to punish by allowing them to do as they wish to whomever but its a factual impossibility for these people dishing it out to go about dispensing Gods wrath of their own accord because they don't believe in it.

Only a believer and or willing participant can dispense Gods wrath in that fashion.

Other than that, they ones dishing it out and having nothing to do with God, they are just a means to an end.

Therefore our secular government that allows and carries out the death penalty is not carrying out God's wrath because the state is non religious on all fronts.

In that context it is carrying out its own wrath.

That mix up in turn is blended with the errant idea that we are or ever have been a Christian nation.

Where in Romans does it say only secular government? Doesn't really matter, the point remains. Government (secular or theistic) is an instrument of God's wrath according to scripture. For this reason, those under it's authority should fear doing wrong or else face the consequences of the wrath of God being poured out via the government.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 01:02 AM
Notice that the "sword of God's wrath" is a weapon (these people) used by God and not a bunch of people doing their duty under God to dispense righteous punishment.

Right. It is government doing it. Government ordained by God to dispense wrath. He set up government for this purpose. So when someone commits an evil deed (i.e. murder) and government kills the evil doer (i.e. the death penalty) they are bearing the "Sword of God's wrath" upon that evil doer.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 01:04 AM
Question: how do you know when you are doing God's will then (if capital punishment by man is indeed endorsed by him)? I mean, I know man is fallible, and I know we make mistakes. Look at all of the mob lynchings that occurred throughout history because people thought they had the right to exact this extreme punishment. Do you know how many innocent men (and women died) because man thought himself able to tell the difference between guilty and innocent?

I myself could not bear the stains of blood on my hands of an innocent man. I would rather pay higher taxes with life in prison than risk having the ultimate injustice of murdering an innocent man.

Mob lynchings are not carried out by those in authority and are thus, not biblical. God first initiated the death penalty after the flood. He made a promise not to destroy the earth by water again. Seeing how bad it got, and since he was removing his hand, he gave government to man to "shed man's blood" in order for society to protect itself.

It's all about authority.

Tru_Knyte
Feb 5th 2008, 01:09 AM
Mob lynchings are not carried out by those in authority and are thus, not biblical. God first initiated the death penalty after the flood. He made a promise not to destroy the earth by water again. Seeing how bad it got, and since he was removing his hand, he gave government to man to "shed man's blood" in order for society to protect itself.

It's all about authority.

How do you define "authority" though? Did not Nazi Germany have authority? How do you determine whether the executions exacted by them were right or wrong? By their "facts", certain groups committed particular felonies and thus were rightly executed. After all, homosexuality is a crime punishable by death according to the Bible right?

I'm not saying that I don't feel governments shouldn't be able to maintain order, but that they should maintain order by means other than capital punishment if at all possible. And I think in today's modern society we can see that capital punishment is not a necessary or sufficient condition for order.

Slug1
Feb 5th 2008, 01:15 AM
Look at all of the mob lynchings that occurred throughout history because people thought they had the right to exact this extreme punishment. Do you know how many innocent men (and women died) because man thought himself able to tell the difference between guilty and innocent?




Mob lynchings are not carried out by those in authority and are thus, not biblical. God first initiated the death penalty after the flood. He made a promise not to destroy the earth by water again. Seeing how bad it got, and since he was removing his hand, he gave government to man to "shed man's blood" in order for society to protect itself.

It's all about authority.Just to emphasize what Mark said... this is also confirmed in the scripture when John the Baptist talked with the soldiers asking what they should do.

Luke 3:14

14 Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, “And what shall we do?”
So he said to them, “Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.”

Soldiers/police are in an authoritative position but without a trial, if they were to use this position to intimidate people, or accuse people falsely (in your post we see in a mob situation), this isn't justifiable but pure intimidation and accusation without trial. Such people doing this are not in God's will and are abusing their power... using it for evil and not good.

Now if they drag them to jail and the trial finds a criminal guilty and sentenced to death, then the death is under the will of God and what He directed the governments to do, to protect their people.

Slug1
Feb 5th 2008, 01:17 AM
How do you define "authority" though? Did not Nazi Germany have authority? How do you determine whether the executions exacted by them were right or wrong? Let's use some common sense here, do you think their use of authority was righteous, or was it exactly what John the Baptist specifically told soldiers what NOT to do? Thus not in the will of God.

What was the German government protecting their citizens from to start taking over Russia, Poland, etc and tossing every Jew they encountered into the camps?

Again, using their authority for evil and thus not within the will of God.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 01:17 AM
How do you define "authority" though? Did not Nazi Germany have authority? How do you determine whether the executions exacted by them were right or wrong? By their "facts", certain groups committed particular felonies and thus were rightly executed. After all, homosexuality is a crime punishable by death according to the Bible right?

I'm not saying that I don't feel governments shouldn't be able to maintain order, but that they should maintain order by means other than capital punishment if at all possible. And I think in today's modern society we can see that capital punishment is not a necessary or sufficient condition for order.

That's fine. Nothing wrong with your argument at all. It's when we start saying that scripture forbids capital punishment that I begin to disagree. If a government or society wishes to do away with capital punishment and use the sword in another way, no problem there. Though God did establish the death penalty, I don't think it entirely necessary. I do think prison time is much harder to justify scripturally than the death penalty is.

All the things you say about Nazism and the punishments they meet out can be said about any punishment. Why limit it to simply death? All the misdeeds and misuses are still there. That's why God's example in the OT required 2 witnesses. ;) You don't hear to many supporters or anti death penalty folks talk about that. But it wouldn't be a bad place to start.

Tru_Knyte
Feb 5th 2008, 01:22 AM
That's fine. Nothing wrong with your argument at all. It's when we start saying that scripture forbids capital punishment that I begin to disagree. If a government or society wishes to do away with capital punishment and use the sword in another way, no problem there. Though God did establish the death penalty, I don't think it entirely necessary. I do think prison time is much harder to justify scripturally than the death penalty is.

All the things you say about Nazism and the punishments they meet out can be said about any punishment. Why limit it to simply death? All the misdeeds and misuses are still there. That's why God's example in the OT required 2 witnesses. ;) You don't hear to many supporters or anti death penalty folks talk about that. But it wouldn't be a bad place to start.

I don't think it forbids it per se, I think that it's hard to determine when it's appropriate to utilize it as a proper tool of coercion. And I think death is a special circumstance, because unlike many other punishments (e.g. jail time, fines, etc.) it cannot be easily rectified. Sure, you would lose a period of time of your life in jail if you are innocent, or some of your money, but you do not lose your entire life. I can't bring back to life the body of a man I killed whom I thought I was rightfully punishing.

Athanasius
Feb 5th 2008, 01:27 AM
We're all gonna die eventually ;)

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 01:28 AM
I don't think it forbids it per se, I think that it's hard to determine when it's appropriate to utilize it as a proper tool of coercion. And I think death is a special circumstance, because unlike many other punishments (e.g. jail time, fines, etc.) it cannot be easily rectified. Sure, you would lose a period of time of your life in jail if you are innocent, or some of your money, but you do not lose your entire life. I can't bring back to life the body of a man I killed whom I thought I was rightfully punishing.

Again, I have no problem with your thought processes. Obviously, God considered that as well. That's why he established the 2 witness rule for Israel to carry out the death penalty. It's one reason it occurred so rarely in scripture.

Another thing God did was he required restitution of the wrong done over prison. If restitution couldn't be paid, one sold themselves into slavery until the year of jubilee when all could go free again. Very creative if you ask me.

Tru_Knyte
Feb 5th 2008, 01:59 AM
Again, I have no problem with your thought processes. Obviously, God considered that as well. That's why he established the 2 witness rule for Israel to carry out the death penalty. It's one reason it occurred so rarely in scripture.

Another thing God did was he required restitution of the wrong done over prison. If restitution couldn't be paid, one sold themselves into slavery until the year of jubilee when all could go free again. Very creative if you ask me.

That'd be interesting. I don't see slavery being utilized again in the Western world for a long time though. :P

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 03:24 AM
That'd be interesting. I don't see slavery being utilized again in the Western world for a long time though. :P

Me either! And the slavery in the western world was NOTHING like the slavery in scripture. Abraham's servant would have inherited his entire fortune had Isaac not been born.

Anyway, I have no issues with those that wish to do away with the death penalty for political reasons. I think a government can have latitude in how it bears the "sword of wrath" for the Lord. It's just we need to be careful saying what God does and does not approve of when it comes to punishment.

Enjoyed our chat. :cool:

Tru_Knyte
Feb 5th 2008, 04:00 AM
Me either! And the slavery in the western world was NOTHING like the slavery in scripture. Abraham's servant would have inherited his entire fortune had Isaac not been born.

Anyway, I have no issues with those that wish to do away with the death penalty for political reasons. I think a government can have latitude in how it bears the "sword of wrath" for the Lord. It's just we need to be careful saying what God does and does not approve of when it comes to punishment.

Enjoyed our chat. :cool:

Haha, likewise. :)

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 01:57 PM
No surprise there. What is an atheist doing with Jewish religious sources anyway?What makes you think I'm an atheist?

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:05 PM
Actually they're called Minister's of God and revengers, IOW those that have the authorization of God's delegated vengence. At least those within God's will and obedient to the will of God, will do so.

The "sword" is bared (wielded) by the Ministers of God.

v4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Taking your position for face value, as you assert it, this means that you cannot pick and choose which laws of the land are of God and which laws are in opposition of God.

If you aren't willing to go all the way this only means you are using the scriptures to promote something you approve of, such as the death penalty, but if secular law allows something you disapprove of you may shift gears in the opposite direction because...

You must wholeheartedly support abortion as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it and the doctors who do it are ministers of God.

You must wholeheartedly support pornography as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it are ministers of God.

You must wholeheartedly support same sex marriage as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it and conduct such marriages are ministers of God.

I can't leave out the work of Hitler (et al), the things carried out by his government mandates, you must also support this genocide as the work of the ministers of God.

The laws of the "powers" are all inclusive according to your use of these verses so you cannot exclude all laws except in the area of the criminal justice system.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 04:07 PM
Taking your position for face value, as you assert it, this means that you cannot pick and choose which laws of the land are of God and which laws are in opposition of God.

If you aren't willing to go all the way this only means you are using the scriptures to promote something you approve of, such as the death penalty, but if secular law allows something you disapprove of you may shift gears in the opposite direction because...

You must wholeheartedly support abortion as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it and the doctors who do it are ministers of God.

You must wholeheartedly support pornography as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it are ministers of God.

You must wholeheartedly support same sex marriage as a Godly law because those who wrote it and passed it and conduct such marriages are ministers of God.

The laws of the "powers" are all inclusive according to your use of these verses so you cannot exclude all laws except in the area of the criminal justice system.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Except that the death penalty is supported with many, many scriptures.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:12 PM
What makes you think I'm an atheist?

Because you specifically quoted my question in one of your posts but failed to answer the question.

"I thought non Christians were to be posting in a separate section? Or are you of a different faith other than Christian?"

You said nothing so I set you in the atheists camp.

That could have been avoided had you properly answered.

Unless you wish to keep your religious affiliation a secret of course. Then one would have to wonder why.

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 04:13 PM
Because you specifically quoted my question in one of your posts but failed to answer the question.

"I thought non Christians were to be posting in a separate section? Or are you of a different faith other than Christian?"

You said nothing so I set you in the atheists camp.

That could have been avoided had you properly answered.

Unless you wish to keep your religious affiliation a secret of course. Then one would have to wonder why.
Ah, I see.

Maybe I should edit my profile to make it clear.
I'm Jewish.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:17 PM
Why is that? You just said. . . .

In order to speak of the matter I must do it in the context of your point of view, that doesn't make it my point of view.

It's a part of the mechanics of conversation called sympathizing similar to psychiatrists and psychologists using "we" when there is no "we" because they don't share in their patients issues.

Most people know this and use it as a trap against the other person to make it look like they are hypocrite because the only way to answer them is with a sympathetic example, then they use their words against them.

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 04:21 PM
Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong. :B

But you don't feel like talking about that.

When you use death penalty you take a chance on killing an innocent person.
How do innocent people end up on death row?
1. They could be framed. (It’s not just in the movies.)
2. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3. Mistaken identity.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 04:25 PM
Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong. :B

When speaking about the individual, yes he did. He also said "leave room for God to take vengeance" and he does so through government.



When you use death penalty you take a chance on killing an innocent person.

How do innocent people end up on death row?
1. They could be framed. (It’s not just in the movies.)
2. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3. Mistaken identity.


THat's why God said to have 2 witnesses before stoning someone.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:34 PM
Except that the death penalty is supported with many, many scriptures.

They also use scriptures to endorse homosexuality and to support abortion, and to support sex with children, marriage to children, support of slavery, support of genocide, so in essence you are not referring to the scriptures per say but your "interpretations" of scriptures.

In other words, you, or your groups point of view.

Also, you or your group (not an insinuation that you are a lobbyist) are not the only ones lobbying or who have lobbied or are currently doing so, using religious pretexts, in fact>their interpretations of the scriptures into acceptable law.

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 04:34 PM
When speaking about the individual, yes he did. He also said "leave room for God to take vengeance" and he does so through government.

THat's why God said to have 2 witnesses before stoning someone.

The problem is, in America, individuals vote and tell the government what to do.
Yes, stoning. But leathal injection in not in the bible.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:42 PM
Again, using their authority for evil and thus not within the will of God.

Notice that it is the sole decision of you and or your group as to what is secularly a good law or an evil law in respect to God.

If it suits your purpose you say its a Godly law. If the law offends you say it is evil and none of this Gods wrath and Gods sword applies.

In this context you are making it up as you go. In effect it isn't scripture you are dealing with, you are only asserting your interpretation of it and that is highly known to be blown with the wind.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 04:43 PM
The problem is, in America, individuals vote and tell the government what to do.
Yes, stoning. But leathal injection in not in the bible.

Government is government and bears the wrath wrath of God upon evil doers. Stoning, lethal injecting, hanging, all forms of the same thing. But if you wish to use that argument, you want to do away with prisons?

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 04:45 PM
Notice that it is the sole decision of you and or your group as to what is a good law or an evil law in respect to God.

If it suits your purpose you say its a Godly law. If the law offends you say it is evil and none of this Gods wrath and Gods sword applies.

In this context you are making it up as you go. In effect it isn't scripture you are dealing with, you are only asserting your interpretation of it and that is highly known to be blown with the wind.

Nah, we keep throwing scriptures up that are not really addressed. We are willing to discuss the scriptures and how they abolish the death penalty. We just can't find them. ;)

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 04:46 PM
They also use scriptures to endorse homosexuality and to support abortion, and to support sex with children, marriage to children, support of slavery, support of genocide, so in essence you are not referring to the scriptures per say but your "interpretations" of scriptures.

Hmmm. No one in this thread has done that. Not sure what you are talking about here. Not the first person here has said abortion, pedophelia or any such thing is OK. Sounds like a straw man to me.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 04:57 PM
Ah, I see.

Maybe I should edit my profile to make it clear.
I'm Jewish.


Again you dodge the issue. You're Jewish, fine. The issue has nothing to do with race.

Your religious preference would sum things up.

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 05:02 PM
How do you know that lethal injection is an acceptable form of the death penalty?

It's not in the bible.

Lethal injection tricks the eye.
It doesn't even look like your killing someone.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 05:06 PM
How do you know that lethal injection is an acceptable form of the death penalty?

It's not in the bible.

Lethal injection tricks the eye.
It doesn't even look like your killing someone.

How do you know it's not an acceptable form of the death penalty? It's not spoken against in scripture. It fits with government authority and carrying out the death penalty. It seems to hold with the the spirit of the law.

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 05:12 PM
Why not use a type of execution from the bible? (to be sure)

How could lethal injection be called Gods wrath?
It looks so tame and boring.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 05:13 PM
Jesus said that "an eye for an eye" was wrong. :B

But you don't feel like talking about that.

When you use death penalty you take a chance on killing an innocent person.
How do innocent people end up on death row?
1. They could be framed. (It’s not just in the movies.)
2. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3. Mistaken identity.



You make a point most hated by those who say they are Christians but seek only vengeance and thirst for blood.

I reference the 15 innocents. Look for the "yes" listed under DNA on the right hand side because DNA leaves no shadow of a doubt.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=110

"The list includes cases in which the release occurred 1973 or later."

Given that, how do the pro death penalty "Christians" justify state murder or involuntary manslaughter, or negligent homicide, among other titles?

Jesus rescinded eye for an eye, among possible other reasons, possibly because the responsibility of the witnesses required at the stoning worked out in their OT society to be liars abusing the system to get rid of people they don't like or don't want around anyway and no doubt many innocents were murdered.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 05:18 PM
Why not use a type of execution from the bible? (to be sure)

How could lethal injection be called Gods wrath?
It looks so tame and boring.

I am OK with either one. ;)

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 05:20 PM
You make a point most hated by those who say they are Christians but seek only vengeance and thirst for blood.

I reference the 15 innocents. Look for the "yes" listed under DNA on the right hand side because DNA leaves no shadow of a doubt.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=110

"The list includes cases in which the release occurred 1973 or later."

Given that, how do the pro death penalty "Christians" justify state murder or involuntary manslaughter, or negligent homicide, among other titles?

Jesus rescinded eye for an eye, among possible other reasons, possibly because the witnesses required at the stoning worked out in their OT society to liars getting rid of people they don't like or don't want around anyway and no doubt many innocents were murdered.

Jesus didn't rescind governmental eye for an eye. He was speaking to individuals. If you really believe that, are you saying we should not resist evil at all?

Matt 5:38-39

38 " You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' 39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
NASU

If Jesus is referring to government, and you use this verse to say "no death penalty" then you also have to take the rest of the verse and get rid of all police. Can't resist an evil person you know.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 05:26 PM
The problem is, in America, individuals vote and tell the government what to do.
Yes, stoning. But leathal injection in not in the bible.

If you advocate stoning, which I hope you don't, then you are saying that we are commissioned to wander the landscape looking for and burning witches.

Which brings up another issue for the pro death penalty "Christians."

Out of all the capital crimes in the bible, notice how selective they are in their application of it when in fact if their government is failing to burn witches then the commission falls to them to carry out God's will but they don't do that.

They are afraid of being caught and executed for murder. LOL.

They don't run around stoning to death homosexuals either do they?

Why? "It's against the law."

LOL!!!

It's all hypocrisy on their part but the Christian who is not pro death penalty doesn't carry that stigma.

They love OT law when it suits their purpose but if it should not serve their purpose or should personally inconvenience them then they just find some rationalization to blow it off.

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 05:31 PM
You cannot save all innocent people from the death penalty.

It's too late for people like Ruben Cantu and Cameron Willingham.

R.I.P.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 05:42 PM
Nah, we keep throwing scriptures up that are not really addressed. We are willing to discuss the scriptures and how they abolish the death penalty. We just can't find them. ;)

Look up and research love for the sinner, and mercy, there you find it, the same thing God grants you and us but you among others do not offer it to your fellow sinner. You, like a Pharisee, only look to the "letter of the law."

You don't exhibit mercy, you exhibit a desire to kill. That is lacking the Holy Spirit there mister.

And you even have the gall, pride and arrogance to claim that you are "As righteous as Christ."

Fenris
Feb 5th 2008, 05:45 PM
Again you dodge the issue. You're Jewish, fine. The issue has nothing to do with race.

Your religious preference would sum things up.
That is my religious preference.

Slug1
Feb 5th 2008, 05:45 PM
How do you know that lethal injection is an acceptable form of the death penalty?

It's not in the bible.

Lethal injection tricks the eye.
It doesn't even look like your killing someone.


Why not use a type of execution from the bible? (to be sure)

How could lethal injection be called Gods wrath?
It looks so tame and boring.Methods change. You actually think that if the electric chair, leathal injection, firing squad existed in the day when Jesus was walkign around or even earlier when God instituted the death penalty that these methods would not be used? Of course they would! Maybe our Saviour would have been shot, electricuted, or slept off to death from the injection... instead.

It's the "principle" of a death penalty and crucification and stoning where the methods of the times. Just because the "methods" have changed this doesn't change the "principle" and the reason God instituted the death penalty.

Letter of the word vs. the Spirit of the Word.

Athanasius
Feb 5th 2008, 05:50 PM
Why not use a type of execution from the bible? (to be sure)

How could lethal injection be called Gods wrath?
It looks so tame and boring.

No one's being sarcastic.
Don't start now.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 05:55 PM
Look up and research love for the sinner, and mercy, there you find it, the same thing God grants you and us but you among others do not offer it to your fellow sinner. You, like a Pharisee, only look to the "letter of the law."

You don't exhibit mercy, you exhibit a desire to kill. That is lacking the Holy Spirit there mister.

And you even have the gall, pride and arrogance to claim that you are "As righteous as Christ."

I did up above. I'm still willing to discuss it. It's actually a verse you guys brought up.

Matt 5:38-39

38 " You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' 39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also
NASU

So, are we to get rid of our police force and stop resisting evil people?

As for being as righteous as Jesus is, if I wasn't, then I'd go to hell. It's his righteousness I have not mine. ;)

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 06:00 PM
Today the death penalty is hidden from the eyes of the public.
If it was not, the death penalty would be abolished.

If they used anything other than lethal injection as the primary type of execution, the death penalty would be abolished.

The death penalty was changed so it could be kept as long as possible.

Let go of your hate. It's 2008.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 06:01 PM
For those who hint at this position: God didn't tell the secular government to do it, he told His followers to do it, simultaneously, you use OT law as a basis of who to execute.

Given that, please tell us, as you think you are personally ordered to carry out these executions against murderers, witches, homosexuals, just how many notches have you in your gun and if you did not obey this commission from God that you claim, how many kills have your henchman racked up?

Do tell please or confess to denying God and this commission to execute given you and in such as you readily accept this commission but don't do it you are a hypocrite for saying one thing and doing another. Or in this case saying one thing and not doing it thus leaving the commission to secular government,the same commission that according to you was given to you.

Hhhhmmmmm?

Also make a BIG NOTICE that at the time capital punishment was instituted after the flood, secular government did not even exist then as the form of government ruling over the ones given these laws by God and secular government still never existed until long after capital punishment was instituted.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 06:10 PM
So, are we to get rid of our police force and stop resisting evil people?


Not at all, we can keep the police and resist evil, just practice mercy and put the accused in prison for life.

You irrevocably DEMAND blood. You show no inherent proclivity as a Christian to MERCY.

It simply is not part of your spiritual make up because you have demonstrated after all this conversation that you simply cannot relate to the biblical principle of mercy.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 06:15 PM
Jesus didn't rescind governmental eye for an eye.

Back up a bit, a few hundred if not a thousand years. The carrying out of executions as never mandated by mans decree nor the commission ever given to "government" as we know it.

At the time of this, God was the only government.

No mistake you are referring to human government in your treatise.

Please demonstrate at the time of the institution of capital punishment, that human government was ever ordered to this?

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 06:16 PM
Not at all, we can keep the police and resist evil, just practice mercy and put the accused in prison for life.

But he scripture clearly says to not resist evil. So why resist it with police?


You irrevocably DEMAND blood. You show no inherent proclivity as a Christian to MERCY.

It simply is not part of your spiritual make up because you have demonstrated after all this conversation that you simply cannot relate to the biblical principle of mercy.Ah, but see, you have no idea how much mercy I have shown in life. Just that I don't see where government is told to show mercy. As for demanding blood, not really. If people wish to do away with the death penalty politically, that's fine. It's when they try to say scripture did away with it that I disagree. Hey, if government wants to bear the sword with prison, I am OK with that.

But, let's bring the verse up again.

Matt 5:38-39

38 " You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' 39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also
NASU


How did God do away with the eye for an eye portion in this verse? I suppose it was in his answer "do not resist an evil person" and "to turn the other cheek".

So when someone resists arrest, should the police turn the other cheek? When the murder pulls a gun on the officer, shouldn't he just stand there and not resist?

My point? Either we take the whole verse the way you apply it to capital punishment and apply it consistently the whole way. Or we realize, Jesus is speaking to those under authority and not in authority, i.e. citizens and not government.

Brother Mark
Feb 5th 2008, 06:17 PM
Back up a bit, a few hundred if not a thousand years. The carrying out of executions as never mandated by mans decree nor the commission ever given to "government" as we know it.

At the time of this, God was the only government.

No mistake you are referring to human government in your treatise.

Please demonstrate at the time of the institution of capital punishment, that human government was ever ordered to this?

Not true. God instituted capital punishment after the flood and before Israel was a nation. Here's a link to a thread if you wish to read more.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=113217&highlight=death

Athanasius
Feb 5th 2008, 06:31 PM
Today the death penalty is hidden from the eyes of the public.
If it was not, the death penalty would be abolished.

No, it isn't. . . .

chivalrous
Feb 5th 2008, 06:34 PM
No, it isn't. . . .

Yes it is.

Behind closed doors, at 12:01 A.M.

napsnsnacks
Feb 5th 2008, 06:34 PM
Today the death penalty is hidden from the eyes of the public.


That is one of the reasons that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime in our society but I'm not saying that it should be public or broadcast on TV.

The only deterrent that it really proposes is the fear of death and the more time passes in a society that gets further from their Creator as time passes more and more people don't give one whit about death at any age.

Athanasius
Feb 5th 2008, 06:38 PM
Yes it is.

Behind closed doors, at 12:01 A.M.

We've already been through this in another thread.

Slug1
Feb 5th 2008, 06:44 PM
That is one of the reasons that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime in our society but I'm not saying that it should be public or broadcast on TV.

The only deterrent that it really proposes is the fear of death and the more time passes in a society that gets further from their Creator as time passes more and more people don't give one whit about death at any age.I agree with this.... and IMO if the firing squad was waiting outside the courtroom in another room and the found guilty criminal was brought 30 feet to this room and then the next thing heard was the offer for religeous services, followed by the sound of a gun shot... then the "fear" as stipulated in the v4 of Romans 13 would be in effect.

I agree, it shouldn't be at 0001 hrs as Chivalous says (I agree with his statement) cause what "fear" is inspired by this? God specified that evil should FEAR God's Minister's of God....(the government).

By taking away the death penalty you will only be taking away God's will for the government to strike fear in the wrong doer. I just don't understand why anyone would want to put themselves between the will of God and a government???? Which verse was it, v2 and 3 of Romans 13? I'm at work again and can't look it up...

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 06:19 PM
But he scripture clearly says to not resist evil. So why resist it with police?

You are making the common mistake that the church has made since who knows when before I was born.

Resisting evil is resisting temptation and this resisting is for believers, not non believers.

"Evil." The police don't resist evil. They are allotted authority under secular law resist those who COMMIT evil ACTS that even under atheistic secular law are illegal.

Your position is the same as the police or ignorant Christian stereotyping people as bums or pot smokers because of their clothing or their hair. Or saying that a male is a homosexual because he has an earring. Or even selecting a red, blue or green shirt out of a crowd of people and saying they are bloods, crips or MS13 gang members or saying a black guy in an expensive car is a dope dealer.

All these people without evidence are viewed in the eye of the beholder on sight as evil.

I first recognized this as a child.

In other words your interpretation of evil is out in left field.

You do not even know what evil is.

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 06:27 PM
Hmmm. No one in this thread has done that. Not sure what you are talking about here. Not the first person here has said abortion, pedophelia or any such thing is OK. Sounds like a straw man to me.

The reference was not to people in this thread. The reference was to these people using the SAME STYLE justifications to promote causes.

You know that, but making light of it out of context of m reference as if no one done this in this threads takes the light off of you making not a case of scripture but making a case of your interpretation of it.

This is called manipulating a premise while you are in a corner hoping that I would be put off my points of order.

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 06:34 PM
That is my religious preference.

"Jewish" is not a religious system nor any type of theological school revolving around a Creator.

Bing Jewish reflects nothing except that the speaker is Jewish and under the only proper definition of Jew/Jewish they are saying that they are a member of or descended from the tribe of Judah. Not that there is anything wrong with that of course.

Again you dodge the issue.

This is three times already.

Are you that ashamed of what you believe in?

Maybe you don't want it more popularly known exactly what your theological tenets are concerning Christ, Christians and the Church?

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 06:45 PM
Not true. God instituted capital punishment after the flood and before Israel was a nation. Here's a link to a thread if you wish to read more.

http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=113217&highlight=death

You're purposely (cognitive slight of hand) reversing everything I say. Making it look like I said something that I didn't. This has mental effect on people reading this and your position of proposing that I am in error is to throw the reader off course.

This is by the method of me saying something, then you quote me, then you say you disagree, then immediately you say exactly what I said but in a paraphrased fashion.

You aren't debating the issues you're manipulating the conversation. Manipulating me, and that I take offense to.

Your style of rebuttal is identical to the answer methodology of an atheist.

And in the hopes I will quit discussing it with you then the desired result was achieved by making it look like I bowed out of the debate because I was wrong. LOL!!! When the fact is the person abandon your conversation because it was so below par it was nothing more than a burden similar to casting pearls to pigs.

So the point of order is still in effect that capital punishment was never given to secular atheistic human government but was given to believers by God when at the time God was the only government.

"WE want a king." (human government) comes into play much later.

Brother Mark
Feb 6th 2008, 06:50 PM
You are making the common mistake that the church has made since who knows when before I was born.

Resisting evil is resisting temptation and this resisting is for believers, not non believers.

"Evil." The police don't resist evil. They are allotted authority under secular law resist those who COMMIT evil ACTS that even under atheistic secular law are illegal.

Your position is the same as the police or ignorant Christian stereotyping people as bums or pot smokers because of their clothing or their hair. Or saying that a male is a homosexual because he has an earring. Or even selecting a red, blue or green shirt out of a crowd of people and saying they are bloods, crips or MS13 gang members or saying a black guy in an expensive car is a dope dealer.

All these people without evidence are viewed in the eye of the beholder on sight as evil.

I first recognized this as a child.

In other words your interpretation of evil is out in left field.

You do not even know what evil is.


Let's look at this verse again. You say "an eye for an eye" was done away with. Look at the whole passage.

Matt 5:38-39

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 "But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.
NASB

Resisting him who is evil is not resisting sin. It is the follow up, explanation of, resisting the one who took the eye. In other words, turn the other cheek. But this is written to those that have no authority to resist. Police can and do resist and government can and does take vengeance for God.

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 06:57 PM
Let's look at this verse again. You say "an eye for an eye" was done away with. Look at the whole passage.

Matt 5:38-39

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 "But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.
NASB

Resisting evil is not resisting sin. It is the follow up, explanation of, resisting the one who took the eye. In other words, turn the other cheek. But this is written to those that have no authority to resist. Police can and do resist and government can and does take vengeance for God.

Your errant concept of evil is the root of the problem of this issue. Also you have it out of context to use it to prove a point.

More mind games, you respond but you only respond to half of my point such as we can resist evil. You conveniently leave out exactly which evil I am referring to such as temptation.

That is like dubbing an audio tape of a speech to make the speaker say anything you want.

This is the 4th point of order of you manipulating my words.

You are only discussing this with me for the sole purpose of leading others to believe you have the solid ground and your methods speak volumes of your motivation.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 07:02 PM
"Jewish" is not a religious system nor any type of theological school revolving around a Creator.Really? Man, I've been misled my whole life! :rofl:


Bing Jewish reflects nothing except that the speaker is Jewish and under the only proper definition of Jew/Jewish they are saying that they are a member of or descended from the tribe of Judah. Not that there is anything wrong with that of course.Well, that's one part of it.



Are you that ashamed of what you believe in?No, I already told you that.


Maybe you don't want it more popularly known exactly what your theological tenets are concerning Christ, Christians and the Church?Well since you seem to already know what I believe why don't you tell me?

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 07:06 PM
All: I'm quitting this conversation because I am doing nothing but figuratively casting pearls to swine. Everything I say is twisted and dragged through the mud, manipulated and stomped upon and didn't quit because I saw any error in my point of view, was embarrassed so subsequently bowed out in disgrace.

I just have better things to do with my life and my time than to engage in such a process as this.

I will right one more post though for all later.

Brother Mark
Feb 6th 2008, 07:08 PM
Ok everyone, let's not get too personal. Discussion is good, personal accusations are not.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 07:08 PM
Gee, that's such a shame. Now I'll never find out what Jews believe.

napsnsnacks
Feb 6th 2008, 07:12 PM
Really? Man, I've been misled my whole life! :rofl:
Well, that's one part of it.

No, I already told you that.
Well since you seem to already know what I believe why don't you tell me?

There are several "Jewish" oriented, predominantly "Jewish" schools of religious thought and "Jewish" is not one of them.

Do tell us your position that way there's no mistake about it.

Asking me to assume and tell you what your school of thought is such is just bait before me, a trap set by you to fault me in conjunction with you avoiding the issue without end.

Fenris
Feb 6th 2008, 07:27 PM
There are several "Jewish" oriented, predominantly "Jewish" schools of religious thought and "Jewish" is not one of them.

Do tell us your position that way there's no mistake about it.

Asking me to assume and tell you what your school of thought is such is just bait before me, a trap set by you to fault me in conjunction with you avoiding the issue without end.Well from the way you were carrying on I assumed you knew exactly what Jews believe.

I am Orthodox, if that helps clarify anything. I believe that God gave the Jews a set of moral and religious instructions at Sinai and said rules are still in effect.

Confused64
Feb 6th 2008, 07:27 PM
"Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's, give to God what is God's" (perhaps slightly paraphrased)

I look at this line from the Gospels, and I see that the first part can be interpreted in many ways. I personally believe that giving to "Ceasar" what is Ceasar's can mean allowing governments to enforce their laws here on Earth, while allowing the Lord to institute final judgement on the soul based on whether or not repentance has been made.

Anybody follow me on this?

chivalrous
Feb 7th 2008, 04:35 AM
"Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's, give to God what is God's" (perhaps slightly paraphrased)

I look at this line from the Gospels, and I see that the first part can be interpreted in many ways. I personally believe that giving to "Ceasar" what is Ceasar's can mean allowing governments to enforce their laws here on Earth, while allowing the Lord to institute final judgement on the soul based on whether or not repentance has been made.

Anybody follow me on this?

Why are humans on Earth?
I would say God gave us a chance do good deeds.

When humans kill other humans they mess with God's plan.

And as for Ceasar, Rome and Italy no longer have the death penalty.

AliveinChristDave
Feb 7th 2008, 05:28 AM
"Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's, give to God what is God's" (perhaps slightly paraphrased)

I look at this line from the Gospels, and I see that the first part can be interpreted in many ways. I personally believe that giving to "Ceasar" what is Ceasar's can mean allowing governments to enforce their laws here on Earth, while allowing the Lord to institute final judgement on the soul based on whether or not repentance has been made.

Anybody follow me on this?

A God that can't rule the world isn't a strong enough God to judge the world.

Lots of things don't belong to Caesar, mainly me and my family's rights and life and liberty, our property, our happiness and our religious freedoms among others.
I give to Caesar what is his, which by law is all I have to give him. Trust me, he don't own much.
He has no right to take anything that isn't his.
Any law that infringes on any of my rights is wrong and I will not obey it.
God gives me that authority right here and right now.
Any action by our government that disobeys our constitution is wrong.
Romans 13 says the same thing when we read it without blinders.
The only law is God's laws written in our hearts.
The constitution wasn't written to rule over us. It was written to assure that we would keep our freedoms.
Some laws I obey to avoid confrontations and to keep order. Some I obey because they provide for my safety and well being. I don't obey them because I'm scared.
No law written by man has power over us.
Any law written by us as a ruling nation has to be supported in the framework of our constitution. If it isn't it is illegal.
I will never obey a law that takes any part of my life, liberty or pursuit of happiness from me, my family or my friends or makes me disobey my morals or my Chrisitan beliefs because it is wrong to do that.
Jesus paid his taxes because he wasn't a political crusader. Refusing to pay taxes at that time would have taken the focus of why He was in Jerusalem to begin with.
He was ruling then. He was judging then. He jsut chose to give the king his ransom/

Slug1
Feb 7th 2008, 11:11 AM
Why are humans on Earth?
I would say God gave us a chance do good deeds.

When humans kill other humans they mess with God's plan.


Ya really need to re-read the parts of the Bible that you seem to be either ignoring or clearly have not read. God kills, He has people kill other people, and when He returns, it's gonna be to slaughter a whole lot more people.

Yes, people who "murder" are not within God's plan. If this is what you mean, then I agree. Murder is nothing more then satan using killing against God's plan and purpose of "killing".

Killing , is in God's plan and is made clear throughout the Bible.

Confused64
Feb 7th 2008, 01:47 PM
And as for Ceasar, Rome and Italy no longer have the death penalty.

I'm assuming you know that my reference to Ceasar in that instance is interpreted as Man's government, not a literal translation.

Confused64
Feb 7th 2008, 01:52 PM
A God that can't rule the world isn't a strong enough God to judge the world.

Lots of things don't belong to Caesar, mainly me and my family's rights and life and liberty, our property, our happiness and our religious freedoms among others.
I give to Caesar what is his, which by law is all I have to give him. Trust me, he don't own much.
He has no right to take anything that isn't his.
Any law that infringes on any of my rights is wrong and I will not obey it.
God gives me that authority right here and right now.
Any action by our government that disobeys our constitution is wrong.
Romans 13 says the same thing when we read it without blinders.
The only law is God's laws written in our hearts.
The constitution wasn't written to rule over us. It was written to assure that we would keep our freedoms.
Some laws I obey to avoid confrontations and to keep order. Some I obey because they provide for my safety and well being. I don't obey them because I'm scared.
No law written by man has power over us.
Any law written by us as a ruling nation has to be supported in the framework of our constitution. If it isn't it is illegal.
I will never obey a law that takes any part of my life, liberty or pursuit of happiness from me, my family or my friends or makes me disobey my morals or my Chrisitan beliefs because it is wrong to do that.
Jesus paid his taxes because he wasn't a political crusader. Refusing to pay taxes at that time would have taken the focus of why He was in Jerusalem to begin with.
He was ruling then. He was judging then. He jsut chose to give the king his ransom/

Then, if that was the case, why did Jesus tell the Pharisees to pay the taxes required by Rome? If you're saying that Man's law has no authority in God's kingdom, wouldn't He have said something to them along the lines of "hey, God's the King, Ceasar is just a puppet. You don't have to obey his laws because they have no authority before God."? Paying taxes at the time was part of the law.

I don't see how you can seperate the 2 and have different interpretations.

chivalrous
Feb 7th 2008, 09:17 PM
Ya really need to re-read the parts of the Bible that you seem to be either ignoring or clearly have not read. He has people kill other people

You seem to miss one thing. They had direct orders from God.

The last time God spoke to humans was when He said Jesus was His son.

Brother Mark
Feb 7th 2008, 09:19 PM
You seem to miss one thing. They had direct orders from God.

The last time God spoke to humans was when He said Jesus was His son.

Romans 13 is a direct order from God. Oh, and God still speaks to humans. But that's another thread. ;)

chivalrous
Feb 8th 2008, 11:11 PM
The point is, just because God told someone to kill, that does NOT make it OK for you to do the same. They needed a direct order from God.
You assume that it's OK for you to do the same.

Brother Mark
Feb 8th 2008, 11:16 PM
The point is, just because God told someone to kill, that does NOT make it OK for you to do the same. They needed a direct order from God.
You assume that it's OK for you to do the same.

No God did not have to give a direct order to kill. He said when they broke certain laws, then killing them was OK. After the flood, he gave an order that if a man shed another man's blood, then by man his blood would be shed. He instituted the death penalty. Never rescinded that order to Noah as it was pre-covenant i.e. pre-law.

Romans 13 tells us how it is carried out in the NT. It is carried out by the government.

chivalrous
Feb 8th 2008, 11:30 PM
The death penalty was in effect from Noah untill Jesus.
It may have been out of order before Jesus.
"Thou shalt not kill." or "Thou shalt not murder."
It's hard to tell for sure.

For some reason I don't trust the Romans.

Brother Mark
Feb 9th 2008, 12:49 AM
The death penalty was in effect from Noah untill Jesus.
It may have been out of order before Jesus.
"Thou shalt not kill." or "Thou shalt not murder."
It's hard to tell for sure.

What scripture was it that did away with the death penalty? Let's discuss it.


For some reason I don't trust the Romans.

Meaning you don't trust the book of Romans in scripture?

AliveinChristDave
Feb 9th 2008, 02:26 AM
Then, if that was the case, why did Jesus tell the Pharisees to pay the taxes required by Rome? If you're saying that Man's law has no authority in God's kingdom, wouldn't He have said something to them along the lines of "hey, God's the King, Ceasar is just a puppet. You don't have to obey his laws because they have no authority before God."? Paying taxes at the time was part of the law.

I don't see how you can seperate the 2 and have different interpretations.

I didn't separate them, God did.
1: Things that belong to Caesar-- which would be the government.
2: Things that belong to God which is me, my family, our property, rights, liberty, happiness, freedom to serve Him, etc.


Romans 13 says let every soul be subject to the higher powers.
Who are the higher powers?
1. There are no powers but of God.
2. The powers that be are of God
Question: Since there is no power that can be but of God, ultimately, who has the power? Power means authority.
Answer: God
Question: Since God is in power, is there anything that can be written by man or enforced by man that would super exceed the authority of God?
Answer: No, because if there could be, it would be more powerful than God Himself.
Question: How can there be "powers that be?"
Answer: God ordained them.
Question: Would God ordain something that would contradict or have precedent over anything He ordains or says?
Answer: Obviously no--NO WAY.
Question: How can the authorities that are in existence have authority to rule over us?
Answer: They are authorities that first of all are ordained of God and secondly, they are authorities who's rules or ordinances are in agreement with whatsoever God says.
So, what should a believer do when any authority passes or tries to enforce a law that contradicts the laws of God?
Answer: We have the moral and spiritual authority, given by God to disobey it.
Question: How are we to know what to obey?
Answer: We obey the laws written on our hearts, then we only obey any law written by man that would not cause us to disobey God's laws written on our hearts.
There are preachers on TV and on Radio and in pulpits today who are telling people to submit to the laws of the land regardless of what they say or what they ask us to do. The same people tell us that whosoever is elected to office is "of God."
Some are deceived but most are puppets of authorities who were never ordained by God to be or authorities or who were once of God but have backslidden to the point Satan is in control of their lives.
God's promised to give us wisdom if we ask.
I think it would be beneficial for all of us to continually ask God for His wisdom.
I know I have problems explaining things at times.

AliveinChristDave
Feb 9th 2008, 12:32 PM
I want to boil this down a bit more.
Most of us are involved in a Church in some way or another. If we aren't involved we still understand the concept of Church government.
God gave the Church apostles, prophets, evangelist pastors and teachers.
All these people are for our completion or perfection.
What would most churches do if someone walked in the door, went right to the pulpit and told them they (the Church) had no more authority and that from that point on the person who barged in was in authority over them?
You'd go ape. You'd march that person out the door with one swift kick because you know that your authority to function as a body of Christ comes from God and no one has the right to come in and tell you they were more powerful than God.
What if the same scene happened in your home? I'm sure they would meet the same resistance. Most of us are willing to take advice from others with more wisdom than us but ultimately we know that our homes are our responsibilities, not someones from outside.
Lets go a step further. What if someone came up to you and told you personally that they knew more about how you should live than you do and that from that time on they were going to control your life by telling you what to do, when to do it and how to do it irregardless of how it related to spirituality?
Once again, I'm pretty sure they'd be met with the same resistance.
Why would we resist someone coming in and telling us what to do in any of these instances?
Because, ultimately it boils down to the fact that we, as believers, believe God is able to show us, as a Church, as a family and as an individual how we are to govern our own lives.
God would NEVER grant someone authority over us who was not approved by Him and who would not honor the right and responsibility we have to govern ourselves through personal obedience to His laws.
That's the context in which to translate Romans 13.
Now, on top of all that, it's our responsibility here in America as heads of our churches, homes and families to control those who govern us, not the other way around.
Leaders who are in tune with the mind of God should be feared. They watch for our souls.
Even still, my advise is to be really careful who you submit yourself to. Base your subjection on the teaching of the Word of God. That is true in churches, in our homes or in worldly governments.
If a man who is a leader doesn't obey the Word he shouldn't be a leader. Never listen to him (or her) and get rid of them from your midst.
Because there can't be any authority unless it is given of God and it will never be given to them if they are not holy and only the authority that is given from God is to be obeyed.
Don't give anything to Ceasar that Ceasar doesn't have a right to have.

TrustingFollower
Feb 10th 2008, 08:31 PM
A God that can't rule the world isn't a strong enough God to judge the world.

Lots of things don't belong to Caesar, mainly me and my family's rights and life and liberty, our property, our happiness and our religious freedoms among others.
I give to Caesar what is his, which by law is all I have to give him. Trust me, he don't own much.
He has no right to take anything that isn't his.
Any law that infringes on any of my rights is wrong and I will not obey it.
God gives me that authority right here and right now.
Any action by our government that disobeys our constitution is wrong.
Romans 13 says the same thing when we read it without blinders.
The only law is God's laws written in our hearts.
The constitution wasn't written to rule over us. It was written to assure that we would keep our freedoms.
Some laws I obey to avoid confrontations and to keep order. Some I obey because they provide for my safety and well being. I don't obey them because I'm scared.
No law written by man has power over us.
Any law written by us as a ruling nation has to be supported in the framework of our constitution. If it isn't it is illegal.
I will never obey a law that takes any part of my life, liberty or pursuit of happiness from me, my family or my friends or makes me disobey my morals or my Chrisitan beliefs because it is wrong to do that.
Jesus paid his taxes because he wasn't a political crusader. Refusing to pay taxes at that time would have taken the focus of why He was in Jerusalem to begin with.
He was ruling then. He was judging then. He jsut chose to give the king his ransom/

What I see you saying here is Me, Me, Me.... Your rights you have today are man made rules for the most part. If you are having trouble submitting to the authority of the government presiding over you now then how are you going to be able to submit to the rule of God when Jesus returns? Can you honestly say to yourself that you can 100% submit to his authority without thinking about your own needs or wants first? That is simply all that will matter when Jesus returns and reigns over the earth for 1000 years.

God does and has in the past allowed man made governments to be established even though it was not his desire in the first place. For a good example read 1 Samuel where the people wanted a king to rule over them. We do not have a big enough imagination to even think up all the things of God's plan or purpose for us here in this world. What we do know is that we need to obey his word and part of that word tells us to submit to the authority of the government he established to rule over us.

cwb
Feb 10th 2008, 08:57 PM
What we do know is that we need to obey his word and part of that word tells us to submit to the authority of the government he established to rule over us.

Are you saying that we are to submit to a man made government if that government tells us we must do something that is against the word of God? Daniel certainly didn't submit to the government in his day when they told him to worship other gods. That submission only applies as long as laws that government makes does not go against the word of God. if any government is this world makes a law against spreading the gospel, no Christian should submit to that.

TrustingFollower
Feb 10th 2008, 10:24 PM
Are you saying that we are to submit to a man made government if that government tells us we must do something that is against the word of God? Daniel certainly didn't submit to the government in his day when they told him to worship other gods. That submission only applies as long as laws that government makes does not go against the word of God. if any government is this world makes a law against spreading the gospel, no Christian should submit to that.
Like it is in China today? As a Christian we can live under the government and still do God's work. If the said government has a law against it then we will have to pay the consequences for apposing the government. Just as in Daniel's case he was willing to pay the consequences for apposing the government of the time. If we have faith in God as Daniel did we too will be rewarded for it, either here on earth or in heaven. Just as our brothers and sisters are doing in China today, I can still spread the gospel whether our government were to out law Christianity or not. The way I see it someday Christianity will be out lawed. It will be a sign to me that Christ will be returning soon (prophesied about in Revelations). So you see your argument is just a straw man argument, it will happen at some time anyway, just be ready.

Brother Mark
Feb 11th 2008, 12:36 AM
Are you saying that we are to submit to a man made government if that government tells us we must do something that is against the word of God? Daniel certainly didn't submit to the government in his day when they told him to worship other gods. That submission only applies as long as laws that government makes does not go against the word of God. if any government is this world makes a law against spreading the gospel, no Christian should submit to that.

Only in one instance did Daniel NOT submit to his governing authority. When it came to what to eat, he appealed to the authority and requested a change. The change in his meal was granted. When a law that could not be changed was instituted, he continued on with his daily prayers as always. That is the only law he broke that was recorded. In all other ways, he submitted. He submitted to the governing authority so well, that he himself was given authority in the government of the day.

Daniel is a great example for us to follow. Appeal to our authority first. If that doesn't work, then if the law requires us to sin, then and only then do we rebel. In all other matters, submit. Even if it means giving up our "rights".

napsnsnacks
Feb 11th 2008, 02:16 AM
Firstly it cannot be denied that OT law was not secular law but Gods law given to man long before secular government ever existed.

Also such interests have no concept of God no longer interfering in the affairs of nations then those nations run amuck from within and on each other so lacking that concept they say that these people and these nations are strictly under the control of God in league with and having agreements with the Devil to go about all the war and murder and genocide and rape and torture.

You will find most if not all of the 10 commandments in effect upon society as secular law in even the most despotic nations but that's no proof that those people or that country adopted those laws from the bible.

Has anyone paid close enough attention to see that this is a situation of the popular picking and choosing of articles of OT law that please the one or the organization doing the choosing and then leaving the rest aside BECAUSE it IS OT law and their address of the things in the OT that don't please them or work for them they say was replaced by Jesus in the New Covenant?

The only difference is that it is updated to fit modern man under secular law. They pick and choose what to support, at their fancy, then deny the rest as the work of the Devil and simultaneously say the articles of secular law are the work of the Lord.

This is being double minded and wearing two hats.

When secular law carries out the death penalty it is not God doing it, it is secular law doing it. If it was God doing it Christians would be carrying out the punishment in a religious setting outside of the acts of criminalized murder.

These proponents who believe these things must confess their obedience to God and admit how many times they or their group have "executed" someone and if not then they have no proof that they practice what they preach and are hypocrites in the action of failing to carry out Gods word by letting secular law do it for them while they sit back and claim that it was an execution ordered by God.

They love the death penalty as a God thing but look at other secular law they abhor and claim is no good in connection with God and look at the OT law they laud as valid while invalidating the rest.

This type of theology is just a system of convenience compared to a religious institution whose primary purpose is to serve God.

TrustingFollower
Feb 11th 2008, 02:27 AM
Without the death penalty we would have no salvation. God used the death penalty for his purpose and our good. God knew that Christ would be put to death with the death penalty and used it for a sacrifice that we benefit from. So in that line of thinking did God establish the death penalty so we could be saved?

AliveinChristDave
Feb 11th 2008, 02:28 AM
What I see you saying here is Me, Me, Me.... Your rights you have today are man made rules for the most part. If you are having trouble submitting to the authority of the government presiding over you now then how are you going to be able to submit to the rule of God when Jesus returns? Can you honestly say to yourself that you can 100% submit to his authority without thinking about your own needs or wants first? That is simply all that will matter when Jesus returns and reigns over the earth for 1000 years.

God does and has in the past allowed man made governments to be established even though it was not his desire in the first place. For a good example read 1 Samuel where the people wanted a king to rule over them. We do not have a big enough imagination to even think up all the things of God's plan or purpose for us here in this world. What we do know is that we need to obey his word and part of that word tells us to submit to the authority of the government he established to rule over us.

If you will read my past posts you will see that I place submitting to God first. Everything goes through Christ and the Cross he bore.
Nowhere in scripture does it tell us to submit to anything that would have more authority over us than the cross of Christ.
To say a person has to submit to man or government before they can submit to God is a foolish statement.
As I said, there is a limit as to how far we can go to obeying the authority of any government.
Daniel is an example. So is Joseph. As faithful they were to the kings and rulers, there was a time when both of them refused to obey their lord. They knew there would be a price to pay but knew there God expected them to put Him first.
When Saul disobeyed, God removed him as king.
Paul thought he was doing great in his going door to door rooting out believers in Christ, all with permission from the authorities.
He was blinded by what he thought was right but he was wrong and when God finished with him he could only see Christ and Him crucified.
Christ said for us to love our neighbors. He said if our enemies are hungry, feed them etc. You know the verses.
Anyone who says they can kill their enemies in the name of a government is either deceived or wicked. They will have to bow before God someday and be judged for their deeds. I'd hate to be in their shoes.
Discussing the kingdom would be better discussed in another separate thread.

Brother Mark
Feb 11th 2008, 02:32 AM
Firstly it cannot be denied that OT law was not secular law but Gods law given to man long before secular government ever existed.

Actually, he gave the death penalty before he gave the law to Moses. Also, some will tell you there is a difference between the Law of Moses for governing and the Law of God as related to spiritual matters.


The only difference is that it is updated to fit modern man under secular law. They pick and choose what to support, at their fancy, then deny the rest as the work of the Devil and simultaneously say the articles of secular law are the work of the Lord.

This is being double minded and wearing two hats.

Romans 13 is NT and still speaks of secular government wielding his wrath upon evil doers.


When secular law carries out the death penalty it is not God doing it, it is secular law doing it. If it was God doing it Christians would be carrying out the punishment in a religious setting outside of the acts of criminalized murder.

God has often used both believers and unbeliever to do his work. God still does so. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Romans 13 spells it out rather well.

TrustingFollower
Feb 11th 2008, 02:57 AM
Dave,

God commands us to submit to government in Romans 13.


Romans 13:1-2
1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.


We need to take a stand for our faith when pushed into a corner, but in the mean time we need to submit to the authority having jurisdiction.

napsnsnacks
Feb 11th 2008, 08:18 AM
Without the death penalty we would have no salvation. God used the death penalty for his purpose and our good. God knew that Christ would be put to death with the death penalty and used it for a sacrifice that we benefit from. So in that line of thinking did God establish the death penalty so we could be saved?

That doesn't pan out.

It was not God that used the death penalty to kill Jesus. It was the Jews that demanded blood and then the Romans gave in to the mob scene so it was those two parties who did it.

They were not being controlled by God like robots to serve God.

For the crucifixion to come to pass God took His hand of protection away (Jesus asked why this was as He hung on the cross) and then what happened happened but it was not God that did it.

By saying that God used the death penalty to kill Jesus when in fact Jesus was not guilty of charges because he spoke the truth when he said (MT 27:11 And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.) so according to your position or proposition of God using the death penalty on Jesus, God murdered an innocent man, not only that, given the trinity, you are saying God committed suicide, worse, a murder/suicide.

The crucifixion simply cannot be used to support the death penalty.

napsnsnacks
Feb 11th 2008, 08:26 AM
Actually, he gave the death penalty before he gave the law to Moses. Also, some will tell you there is a difference between the Law of Moses for governing and the Law of God as related to spiritual matters.

It being instituted before Moses day is irrelevant.

Even if it went all the way back and God had given it to Adam and Eve it still makes it Gods law and not secular law.

Secular law is man made. Gods rules came from God.

Therefore it was given to Gods people of the day before secular law existed.

Brother Mark
Feb 11th 2008, 01:12 PM
It being instituted before Moses day is irrelevant.

Even if it went all the way back and God had given it to Adam and Eve it still makes it Gods law and not secular law.

Secular law is man made. Gods rules came from God.

Therefore it was given to Gods people of the day before secular law existed.

I have no problem with the death penalty being God's law. He gave it to man to control evil. He promised not to destroy the earth again with water as he did the first time. It was filled with violence. In order to keep the violence in check, he gave the death penalty to mankind. Hasn't rescinded it since.

Romans 13 is a great example of that. We keep bringing up Romans 13 because no one really wants to answer what it says.

napsnsnacks
Feb 11th 2008, 10:45 PM
I have no problem with the death penalty being God's law. He gave it to man to control evil. He promised not to destroy the earth again with water as he did the first time. It was filled with violence. In order to keep the violence in check, he gave the death penalty to mankind. Hasn't rescinded it since.

Romans 13 is a great example of that. We keep bringing up Romans 13 because no one really wants to answer what it says.

A large part of the issue is that so many pro death penalty proponents who are Christians say that the death penalty found in secular law exists because secular law and secular government do such and institute such on behalf of God.

This simply cannot be because a secular institution is not capable of serving God just like an atheist cannot serve God because they don't believe in it or honor it.

Surely if Satan who adamantly knows of the reality of God and doesn't deny it but at the same time does not serve Him neither can secular law that does not believe in or honor God serve God.

Nor can it be proven that any nation under secular law adopted the death penalty into its system from the bible or any other holy book.

The same goes for laws against stealing, lying (perjury and fraud) of which there is no proof that these points of secular law were adopted from the bible.

If it could be proven that these items were adopted into secular law from the bible they still err by picking an choosing which parts and pieces of OT law that they wish to have as laws of the land or not.

It is secular law picking and choosing of what it will honor and which it will not and in that acts serves itself and not God, then proposing these actions to a mostly Christian population that it is a Godly thing. In definition, secular government in any claims by the government or Christians saying the death penalty was adopted straight out of the bible do lie out of ignorance because the death penalty was stolen from God instead of instituting it on behalf of God or else they or that would possess the whole of OT law, not just a piece of it that makes their life easier.

With that out of the way...

US secular law is based upon Roman law in almost every respect including the political structure.

We didn't borrow it from the bible we copied it from the Romans and you know the attitude the Romans had against the Christians.

So, as far as motivation goes and why our government desired to have the death penalty, was it because they honored and respected God and OT law?

Far from it.

We use that premise now because it is convenient but originally this was not instituted as law for any Creationist reasons.

napsnsnacks
Feb 12th 2008, 12:35 AM
I offer a fictitious conversation (not real people living or dead) to anyone who may get some good out of it...

Guy 1. "You know I have always said and believed that the law of capital punishment in our country has always been on behalf of God and I whole heartedly believe that God uses that as punishment in our modern day."

Guy 2. "Really? Seems to me that it is the judge, jury and executioner along with all the participants which include a wide range of people and religions, do all that process under secular law with God officiating none of it. Where does the Christian or God fit in."

Guy 1. "Because we are a Christian nation."

Guy 2. "Sounds pretty convenient. If you were Christian shouldn't you practice mercy as instructed in the New Testament and lock these people up for the rest of their lives?"

Guy 1. "No. Mercy was not a law that went along side of Old Testament law including capital punishment."

Guy 2. "You just keep opening a bigger can of worms. Why are you as Christians holding so dearly to Old Testament law, or just a piece of it I might add, but you leave the rest of it as not applicable or not practicable today?"

Guy 1. "Well that's kind of hard to explain."

Guy 2. "Yes I'm sure, but before we get into that I must say that I know OT law, and I got nosey so I did a casual investigation of you and your past and you seem to have a little of that OT law due you too."

Guy 1. "Huh? Uh, uh, well we Christians are forgiven our sins and escape punishment in the afterlife since Christ bore that matter for us on the cross."

Guy 2. "Yes but since when is this the afterlife? This is here and now. You never got caught or exposed so if I let the cat out of the bag shouldn't you just go ahead and accept which OT law would apply to you in the matter?"

Guy 1. "No. Of course not. The church and believers also forgive us our sins, and punishment for such people usually slides."

Guy 2. "They show you mercy right?"

Guy 1. "Yes."

Guy 2. "It seems that you get 100% mercy for your sins but the murderer who is or was the same sinner doesn't even get 50% mercy by getting life in prison instead of the electric chair?"

Guy 1. "Murderers are not Christians"."

Guy 2. "Obviously and neither is this the OT or the afterlife. This is the "dispensation" if you will, of Grace and many Christians readily accept it but they don't give it."

Guy 1. "Well I was saved from my former life and practices of whatever it was you found out about me."

Guy 2. "Given your position certain people would not see it that way."

Guy 1. "Well those types are just vengeful enemies of the church."

Guy 2. "Huuummmm. Interesting. So you repented and accepted Christ, turned you life around and that past stuff in your opinion needs not answer to secular law if secular law ever found out about it?"

Guy 1. "Well it depends on the situation. A person of my standing and my contributions to society and to the community would obviously be off the hook."

Guy 2. "You are rationalizing. Sin is sin whether it is a little white lie or murder. It's all the same under God under the new covenant. It is no longer about the letter of the law but about disobedience itself. I appears you are picking and choosing which rules you lay at others doorstep and which rules you accept that apply to you. You are holding your past sins in comparison to others sins and then deciding that they should be punished here and now, 100% without mercy but you receive full mercy and full forgiveness for your sins when you and et al are or were the same sinners. Isn't that a bit self serving not to mention hypocritical?"

Guy. 1 "No not at all."

Guy. 2 "You say that secular law is of God but yet you condemn so much of secular law as the work of the Devil such as abortion and same sex civil unions and teaching children sex in health class in grade school and a host of other things that are in secular law but rub against your beliefs so how can you have secular law to be the work of God and the work of the Devil at the same time?"

Guy. 1 "It's kind of hard to explain."

Guy. 2 "You mean impossible to explain don't you? It seems to me that you are again picking parts of secular law that you fancy as far as your view of God is concerned then you also selects parts of it that aren't to your fancy as far as your view of God is concerned. You are the decider apparently but there are thousands of you deciders of whom none agree so where does it end? Given that, aren't you and these others defining what is of God and what is of the Devil according to your own pleasure and or convenience?"

Guy. 1 "No."

Guy. 2 "I think you are. You obviously support the killing of Christians for past crimes but yet you are off the hook for your infractions."

Guy. 1 "When did I say I supported the killing of Christians for their past sins?"

Guy. 2 "You plainly allude to the idea there is no mercy on the death penalty thus making the death penalty not subject to Christian mercy thus making the death penalty absolute."

Guy. 1 "Just how do you propose I would employ such a crooked scenario?"

Guy. 2 "Many of these executed men and women who were on death row got to the point that they realized their evil, accepted Christ and received salvation. You, without mercy and supporting an absolute death penalty that has no provisions for repentance as you apply your theology, is just the same situation had you yourself marched that Christian prisoner to the execution room, strapped them in and threw the switch yourself."

Guy. 1 "Hogwash. You can't lay that on me."

Guy. 2 "Oh but I do. And so does God. You showed no mercy so therefore you will receive no mercy at the judgment. Not only that, many innocent men and women, Christian or not, have been executed only for evidence to show later that they were innocent. Your anti mercy position makes the blood of those innocent people, people who by your blessing were murdered by the state, to be on your hands and for that also you will stand accountable for at the judgment when in fact both of those things that you will have to answer for at the judgment could have been avoided had you only practiced the same mercy that Christ bestows upon you, in this case putting those people away for life."

Guy 1 walks out the door in a huff.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 12:41 AM
I will just say this because I have argued this ad infinitum....

You cannot be a Christian within in God's Will in this Dispensation of Grace and be pro-choice and pro-death penalty.

IMHO

wrong wrong wrong

IMHO

TrustingFollower
Feb 12th 2008, 01:50 AM
That doesn't pan out.

It was not God that used the death penalty to kill Jesus. It was the Jews that demanded blood and then the Romans gave in to the mob scene so it was those two parties who did it.

They were not being controlled by God like robots to serve God.

For the crucifixion to come to pass God took His hand of protection away (Jesus asked why this was as He hung on the cross) and then what happened happened but it was not God that did it.

By saying that God used the death penalty to kill Jesus when in fact Jesus was not guilty of charges because he spoke the truth when he said (MT 27:11 And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.) so according to your position or proposition of God using the death penalty on Jesus, God murdered an innocent man, not only that, given the trinity, you are saying God committed suicide, worse, a murder/suicide.

The crucifixion simply cannot be used to support the death penalty.
Who beat our lord, the government or the people? Who carried out the final punishment and nailed him to the tree, the government or the people?

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 02:06 AM
The government carried out the punishment.
The people pressured it to.

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 02:27 AM
The government carried out the punishment.
The people pressured it to.Exactly like "people" are pressuring the government to do the opposite these days :rolleyes:

We never learn and allow our opinions to out weigh the will of God for governments. Since governments are God's enforcers of His wrath I don't understand why so many can read verses 1-7 of Romans 13 and fail to see what these verses mean and then can fall victim to v2.

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 02:29 AM
Exactly like "people" are pressuring the government to do the opposite these days :rolleyes:

We never learn and allow our opinions to out weigh the will of God for governments. Since governments are God's enforcers of His wrath I don't understand why so many can read verses 1-7 of Romans 13 and fail to see what these verses mean and then can fall victim to v2.

You got it ;)
Fifteen characters they should really put it down to ten

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 02:38 AM
Exactly like "people" are pressuring the government to do the opposite these days :rolleyes:

We never learn and allow our opinions to out weigh the will of God for governments. Since governments are God's enforcers of His wrath I don't understand why so many can read verses 1-7 of Romans 13 and fail to see what these verses mean and then can fall victim to v2.


Nazi Germany
Communist China
Communist Russia
Imperial Japan
Fascist Italy
Despots Cambodia
Despots Uganda
Heck, I'll just lump most all Africa together here
Might as well toss in Southern Europe (Balkans)

Sure lets talk governments as God's enforcers.....

Iran
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Afghanistan
Pakistan
India
Thailand
Burma (Myanmar)
Indonesia
etc
etc
etc
etc


Nice examples eh? We are supposed to be a Christian Nation who understands the sanctity of life.

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 02:45 AM
Nazi Germany
Communist China
Communist Russia
Imperial Japan
Fascist Italy
Despots Cambodia
Despots Uganda
Heck, I'll just lump most all Africa together here
Might as well toss in Southern Europe (Balkans)

Sure lets talk governments as God's enforcers.....

Iran
Iraq
Saudai Arabia
Afghanistan
Pakistan
India
Thailand
Burma (Myanmar)
Indonesia
etc
etc
etc
etc


Nice examples eh? We are supposed to be a Christian Nation who understands the sanctity of life.This is always brought up also so lets address it again.

A government is run by humans, humans have free will and turn the good that God intends to evil. So other governments have to be used by God as v4 states and take the other governments down.

Evil is evil, large (another nation such as all the ones you mentioned) or small (a murderer) and a government is God's instrument to crush this evil these days. During the OT period God used His power quite openly but today in the new covenant days He desires faith in Jesus and can't have faith in a God who tosses fire or lightning down on evil. So He uses governments and what governments are to do is outlined in those verses from Romans 13:1-7.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 02:59 AM
So He uses governments and what governments are to do is outlined in those verses from Romans 13:1-7.

God doesn't need governments. T. Jefferson said that even a revolution is a good thing every now and again.

Governments that execute citizens or prosecute campaigns of terror and evil are not under God's Dispensation of Grace.

They are outside His Will and destined to fail.

IMHO

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 03:01 AM
That's right, but the United States is always left out.
Never mind its moral failings.

Double standard.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 03:05 AM
That's right, but the United States is always left out.
Never mind its moral failings.

Double standard.

No Sir,,,, USA included... that is what i am saying.

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 03:05 AM
God doesn't need governments. T. Jefferson said that even a revolution is a good thing every now and again.

Governments that execute citizens or prosecute campaigns of terror and evil are not under God's Dispensation of Grace.

They are outside His Will and destined to fail.

IMHOSo have you crossed those verses out of your Bible to :confused

Seems many Christians these days are doing that ;)

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 03:08 AM
So have you crossed those verses out of your Bible to :confused

Seems many Christians these days are doing that ;)

No bro, I just disagree on your take of those verses in context.

I know you think it is ok to put criminals to death. I do not. It is just a minor difference of opinion. :)

I love my country and I'd defend her with my life...... but I would never under premeditation "pull the switch" on a citizen criminal.

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 03:14 AM
No Sir,,,, USA included... that is what i am saying.

Interesting the countries you listed.
You inferred quite the opposite. Rather than listing:

United States
Canada
Britain
Sweden
Finland
Norway
Denmark
Spain
France
Germany
Belgium

You opted for the very obvious 'axis of evil' countries and those countries which are viewed in an extremely negative light.

But, it's your choice what you want to list. . . .

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 03:14 AM
I know you think it is ok to put criminals to death. I do not. It is just a minor difference of opinion. :)I have absolutely no problem with this. When a Christian ups this to a level of rebellion where they try to end the governments purpose as God has intended it, then I'll speak out and remind them of the verses in Romans and emphasize v2.



I love my country and I'd defend her with my life...... but I would never under premeditation "pull the switch" on a citizen criminal.Defend her with your life? Do I assume that means you'll take life in this effort to defend this country or do you mean you'll turn the other cheek and take a bullet for nothing? Just asking cause what you said leaves the imagination wide open for interpretation.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 03:20 AM
I have absolutely no problem with this. When a Christian ups this to a level of rebellion where they try to end the governments purpose as God has intended it, then I'll speak out and remind them of the verses in Romans and emphasize v2.

Defend her with your life? Do I assume that means you'll take life in this effort to defend this country or do you mean you'll turn the other cheek and take a bullet for nothing? Just asking cause what you said leaves the imagination wide open for interpretation.


I serve this country bro. I would take a bullet and give 1000. I am just saying that the execution of a citizen is far different than defending oneself, ones family, or ones country in combat.

We have places where the degenerates can go and jobs they can do. We do not need to be executing human beings after the fact. IMHO

TrustingFollower
Feb 12th 2008, 03:23 AM
This is always brought up also so lets address it again.

A government is run by humans, humans have free will and turn the good that God intends to evil. So other governments have to be used by God as v4 states and take the other governments down.


I agree with Slug here, God uses governments to impose his will on other governments. With that in mind I think God used the US government to take down a evil government run in Iraq. With God's help in this matter the people in Iraq are indeed being freed from their oppression.

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 03:24 AM
I believe it was George Patton who said;
The object of war is not to die for your country, but make the other bastard die for his

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 03:27 AM
I serve this country bro. I would take a bullet and give 1000. I am just saying that the execution of a citizen is far different than defending oneself, ones family, or ones country in combat. Ah, cool :pp

I run a ministry website you might be interested in if you haven't already checked it out.

As for execution of criminals, as I said... I can understand a difference of opinion. I stated in the previous post why I speak up when an opinion leads to rebellion of God's will for a government.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 03:29 AM
Ah, cool :pp

I run a ministry website you might be interested in if you haven't already checked it out.

As for execution of criminals, as I said... I can understand a difference of opinion. I stated in the previous post why I speak up when an opinion leads to rebellion of God's will for a government.


yeah, im sure we have much more in common than you think.

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 03:32 AM
I agree with Slug here, God uses governments to impose his will on other governments. With that in mind I think God used the US government to take down a evil government run in Iraq. With God's help in this matter the people in Iraq are indeed being freed from their oppression.Exactly the reason why God used the terrorists against this government on 9/11. Clinton NEVER used the authority to wage war against evil and basically did a few slaps on the wrists against evil. So God put a president who would be obedient and then God allowed such an attack to get Bush on the ball and get our war machine rolling.

chivalrous
Feb 12th 2008, 04:18 AM
We can fight evil without war.

I think in WWII, God was on our side.

But in 2003, America attacked Iraq.
Iraq was peaceful for many years before that.
I don't think God is on our side for this one.

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 04:30 AM
Iraq was peaceful for many years before that.
Define peaceful concerning Iraq so we can understand you.

I was in Iraq and drove by mass graves where Saddam peacfully slaughtered whole villages of all the adult men because a man spoke badly of Saddam to an undercover secret policeman of the Baath Party that happened to be passing through. Then when the man ran away and went into hiding Saddam sent in his Republican Guard to force the people to tell them where the man went. They didn't know, so a few thousand died instead.

I have also talked with Iraqis who were tortured and spent years in prison and they still don't know the reason for their incarceration.

Ya really ought to visit Iraq and talk with the people who suffered under Saddam, might open your eyes to reality.

Athanasius
Feb 12th 2008, 04:38 AM
We can fight evil without war.


I'd hate to bring up God's means in the Old Testament.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 04:45 AM
Exactly the reason why God used the terrorists against this government on 9/11....( snip just clinton stuff ).... God allowed such an attack to get Bush on the ball and get our war machine rolling.

Ok bro, with all due respect I have a serious issue with you here. God did NOT use terrorists against innocent citizens to get our war machine rolling.

This is an absolute and fundamental misunderstanding of God's nature in this Dispensation of Grace. What those terrorists did on 9/11 was of their own doing facilitated by Satan's deception and the hate fostered by Islamic extremists who had those souls brainwashed in an idealology of hatred.

GWB and the American military people responded directly with more firepower and an even further reach in less time that had the Russian High Command and Europe shaking in their boots.... China too.

Like Japan's Admiral at Pearl Harbor said, "All we have done today I fear, is to wake a sleeping giant."

To think that God used this event to start a cultural war that will last well into the next decade is preposterous and goes against the very nature of the Creator Himself.

Yes, He allowed it to happen. Maybe that is what you meant. He did not allow it for war. Perhaps, he allowed it to open our eyes to our own decadence, debauchery, and lasciviousness. We were living in a world of complacency. We were not vigilant as a nation. We have not been good stewards of our wealth.

I know you have served in our beloved Armed Forces, and I for one am greatful. I myself since 9/11 have been directly involved with the GWOT and have seen first hand more violence than one should see in 100 lifetimes.

Let me tell you one thing.... God weeps for us... all of us... all mankind. I will defend God, my family, and my country; but I will not defend the notion that God causes war... as that is a man-made creation.

War is evil incarnate, and nobody wins.... generations suffer.

While in some cases it must be and is possibly the lesser outcome of evil, it is evil nonetheless.

There is no military solution. The perfect Love of the Lord of Hosts is the solution. Until we understand that, governments will rise and fall.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 04:52 AM
I agree with Slug here, God uses governments to impose his will on other governments. With that in mind I think God used the US government to take down a evil government run in Iraq. With God's help in this matter the people in Iraq are indeed being freed from their oppression.


and over 1.2 M Iraqi women and children are dead.

napsnsnacks
Feb 12th 2008, 04:59 AM
Interesting the countries you listed.
You inferred quite the opposite. Rather than listing:

United States
Canada
Britain
Sweden
Finland
Norway
Denmark
Spain
France
Germany
Belgium

You opted for the very obvious 'axis of evil' countries and those countries which are viewed in an extremely negative light.

But, it's your choice what you want to list. . . .

For what it is worth all nations regardless of moral or religious standing all practice or practiced the same bloody murder, the same war, the same genocide, the same everything but one has the gall to stand up and say it is better that the rest when they are all the same and practice the same mass slaughter in the different names if their God and the pagan nations did the same in the name of no god at all.

This is all the pot calling the kettle black.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 05:03 AM
Interesting the countries you listed.
You inferred quite the opposite. Rather than listing:

United States
Canada
Britain
Sweden
Finland
Norway
Denmark
Spain
France
Germany
Belgium

You opted for the very obvious 'axis of evil' countries and those countries which are viewed in an extremely negative light.

But, it's your choice what you want to list. . . .

Yes, and many more though I didn't feel I had to be politically correct and list the globe. It was the point sir, and the examples I gave are quite good ones.

JMN
Feb 12th 2008, 05:35 AM
Politics, isn't the thead about the death penalty and not politics for or against?

Slug1
Feb 12th 2008, 10:58 AM
but I will not defend the notion that God causes war... as that is a man-made creation.

War is evil incarnate, and nobody wins.... generations suffer.I respect your opinion cause we all have no true understanding of God's overall method to reach His plans.

The part I quoted about however does counter most of God's method to secure a land for His people. War and killing 'is' the method used to take everything God gave to them. This included the slaughter of the men, woman, children, and even the animals of the nations that the Hebrews wiped out.

Then whenever the Hebrews rebelled against God, God had evil nations roll right in and slaughter and enslave the Hebrews once again for a time being. It went back and forth until 1948. To this day it continues, as Israel fights to hold what God gave them.

War will be waged by Jesus when He returns.

BTW, the people of Iraq now have a future when before they didn't unless you were part of Saddam's killing machine.

Ya mentioned earlier a bunch of evil nations so consider this as what I mean when "man" goes against God's will. Saul waged war for God and when he decided to go against God's will, what happened. This is what I mean when a nation uses their authority for personal use (Even King David was guilty of this but he repented) and/or for evil, and/or against God's will... God will raise up another to destroy it. This is a time for war and God will raise up forces to get us back on track and obedient to His will. If the next president pulls us back off the offense, expect terrible attacks to get the people of the US to get the president back on the offense and within God's will again.

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 03:33 PM
Ok bro, with all due respect I have a serious issue with you here. God did NOT use terrorists against innocent citizens to get our war machine rolling.

This is an absolute and fundamental misunderstanding of God's nature in this Dispensation of Grace. What those terrorists did on 9/11 was of their own doing facilitated by Satan's deception and the hate fostered by Islamic extremists who had those souls brainwashed in an idealology of hatred.

Might want to read Habbakuk. Not saying that is the case in this situation, but it wouldn't be the first time God has done something like that.


GWB and the American military people responded directly with more firepower and an even further reach in less time that had the Russian High Command and Europe shaking in their boots.... China too.

It was a little slow, but it was the right thing to do.


While in some cases it must be and is possibly the lesser outcome of evil, it is evil nonetheless.

There is no military solution. The perfect Love of the Lord of Hosts is the solution. Until we understand that, governments will rise and fall.

Again, might want to read Habbakuk 1 and Rev and Joshua. There is a good side in war and Jesus will be leading it in Rev. like he did in Joshua.

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 03:35 PM
A large part of the issue is that so many pro death penalty proponents who are Christians say that the death penalty found in secular law exists because secular law and secular government do such and institute such on behalf of God.

This simply cannot be because a secular institution is not capable of serving God just like an atheist cannot serve God because they don't believe in it or honor it.

Surely if Satan who adamantly knows of the reality of God and doesn't deny it but at the same time does not serve Him neither can secular law that does not believe in or honor God serve God.

Nor can it be proven that any nation under secular law adopted the death penalty into its system from the bible or any other holy book.

The same goes for laws against stealing, lying (perjury and fraud) of which there is no proof that these points of secular law were adopted from the bible.

If it could be proven that these items were adopted into secular law from the bible they still err by picking an choosing which parts and pieces of OT law that they wish to have as laws of the land or not.

It is secular law picking and choosing of what it will honor and which it will not and in that acts serves itself and not God, then proposing these actions to a mostly Christian population that it is a Godly thing. In definition, secular government in any claims by the government or Christians saying the death penalty was adopted straight out of the bible do lie out of ignorance because the death penalty was stolen from God instead of instituting it on behalf of God or else they or that would possess the whole of OT law, not just a piece of it that makes their life easier.

With that out of the way...

US secular law is based upon Roman law in almost every respect including the political structure.

We didn't borrow it from the bible we copied it from the Romans and you know the attitude the Romans had against the Christians.

So, as far as motivation goes and why our government desired to have the death penalty, was it because they honored and respected God and OT law?

Far from it.

We use that premise now because it is convenient but originally this was not instituted as law for any Creationist reasons.

You wrote this in response to Romans 13. But I still can't see the connection. How does one deal with Romans 13 when saying government doesn't have the obligation to carry out God's wrath on evil doers?

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 03:38 PM
Nazi Germany
Communist China
Communist Russia
Imperial Japan
Fascist Italy
Despots Cambodia
Despots Uganda
Heck, I'll just lump most all Africa together here
Might as well toss in Southern Europe (Balkans)

Sure lets talk governments as God's enforcers.....

Iran
Iraq
Saudi Arabia
Afghanistan
Pakistan
India
Thailand
Burma (Myanmar)
Indonesia
etc
etc
etc
etc


Nice examples eh? We are supposed to be a Christian Nation who understands the sanctity of life.

These are great examples for why a government such as the US should take view of Romans 13 and come against said countries when they do evil to US citizens.

It's God's pattern. He raised up the Chaldeans and used them. Then he turned around and did away with them.

St_Michael
Feb 12th 2008, 03:49 PM
It was a little slow, but it was the right thing to do.






I should have clarified that our lightning fast response was Afghanistan, and that shocked militaries around the globe.

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 04:24 PM
I should have clarified that our lightning fast response was Afghanistan, and that shocked militaries around the globe.

I knew you were talking about Afghanistan. It was incredibly fast for modern armies. But still slow because it didn't occur the next moment. That was the point I was trying to make. ;)

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 04:36 PM
Here's a passage worthy of discussion in how God uses the enemy at times. I am going to start with a verse that is misunderstood by many. It is a great verse. God is speaking to Habakkuk.

Hab 1:5

5 " Look among the nations! Observe!
Be astonished! Wonder!
Because I am doing something in your days —
You would not believe if you were told.
NASU

Many read this passage and say "what great revival will break out". But that is not what God is speaking about. He says that what he is about to do will astonish folks, it will amaze them! It is so amazing, that many will not believe it even if though he is telling them he is going to do it. In other words, God is about to do something and reveal his character, but many will not believe it when they see it. What is this great thing he is going to do?

Hab 1:6-10
6 "For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans,
That fierce and impetuous people
Who march throughout the earth
To seize dwelling places which are not theirs.
7 "They are dreaded and feared.
Their justice and authority originate with themselves.
8 "Their horses are swifter than leopards
And keener than wolves in the evening.
Their horsemen come galloping,
Their horsemen come from afar;
They fly like an eagle swooping down to devour.
9 "All of them come for violence.
Their horde of faces moves forward.
They collect captives like sand.
10 "They mock at kings,
And rulers are a laughing matter to them.
They laugh at every fortress,
And heap up rubble to capture it.


God raised up an evil people to capture and take what was not theirs! They were evil and violent and He raised them up!!! However, he will not hold them innocent for what they do.

Hab 1:11
11 "Then they will sweep through like the wind and pass on.
But they will be held guilty,
They whose strength is their god."
NASB

Why would he raise up such people? Why would he bless the wicked for a time so that they could bring violence on people? Why would God allow those who are more wicked to swallow up those who are more righteous? Habakkuk asked the same exact question.

Hab 1:13
13 Thine eyes are too pure to approve evil,
And Thou canst not look on wickedness with favor.
Why dost Thou look with favor
On those who deal treacherously?
Why art Thou silent when the wicked swallow up
Those more righteous than they?
NASB

But he also answered it.

Hab 1:12

12 Art Thou not from everlasting,
O Lord, my God, my Holy One?
We will not die.
Thou, O Lord, hast appointed them to judge;
And Thou, O Rock, hast established them to correct.
NASB

He appoints them to correct. They are raised up in order to correct those that they swallow up. However, just as he raised them up and used them as a rod, he will also break them.

Let's get past this notion that God will not use war to further his purposes. He will raise up evil to judge the righteous. Then he will judge the evil for what they did. Often he will do it through the righteous armies that were captured by the evil ones to begin with. The book of Judges is full of such stories. We see the same thing playing out in Revelations.

AliveinChristDave
Feb 12th 2008, 06:08 PM
Dave,

God commands us to submit to government in Romans 13.



We need to take a stand for our faith when pushed into a corner, but in the mean time we need to submit to the authority having jurisdiction.
That's exactly what the propagandist want us to believe.
If you wait until you are pushed into a corner to take a stand, you will fail under pressure.

Brother Mark
Feb 12th 2008, 06:35 PM
That's exactly what the propagandist want us to believe.
If you wait until you are pushed into a corner to take a stand, you will fail under pressure.

Daniel didn't and he waited until he was pushed into a corner. Same with the three Hebrew children.

napsnsnacks
Feb 12th 2008, 07:38 PM
Anyone ever notice the overwhelming application being applied by a wide variety of people and sources, not only here on the board but for most if not all of our lives everywhere else both in and out of the church, of God behind behind evil, using evil, His weapon, His tool, providing the illusion that evil is Gods method of doing business with man, in the exact same context as if the perpetrators of this evil in our world did not even exist or had any free will in doing what they do and even so far as if there was no Adversary known as Satan?

Something that so greatly hides the work of Satan and conceals the source of evil can only have one source and that is the same source that has worked so hard in our society and in theological circles to hide itself.

Yeah, the Devil.

This is only one of several reasons why secular government and even terrorists and terrorism are painted to look like Gods pet projects.

Subsequently that leads to a no mercy policy and no mercy means lack of love and no love means no Holy Spirit because one of many verses stating the many attributes of God, one is "God is love."

I really believe that if believers and the church as a whole does not stop attributing evil to God then they will be the first ones to bear the brunt of His "wrath" because judgment begins at the House of God.

When this happens, God finally removing His hand of protection, then the enemies of the church do what they want to it and them, of their own free will, what they have wanted to do all along, it will be passed off as wrongful persecution of the church when it is a simple matter of God no longer keeping the enemies of the church at bay because many of those who He protects forever put Him in league with the Devil.