God's Will Before the Firing Squad
- Thread starter PAC-fit
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Considering your post was indeed in response to the pastor, I considered tipping the scales with the unaccountable "FREE WILL". Due to this thread's concern, I'll assume you wish doesn't apply to anything concerning us?
I still have no idea what you're asking, as your language appears foreign to me, but I'm going to throw out an answer anyway.
Personally, I believe governments (good and bad) are established by God to appeal to His people at the time that He needs/wants it to.
Good governments protect the people from bad people.
Bad governments prove why we need a Savior and how no earthly government is capable of meeting the needs of all the people, much less God's people.
When governments become corrupt in the world, more people actually turn to God than when they are not.
As for corporal punishment, it too can be used for justice or to commit evil, depending on who the punisher is and why they are punishing.
God allows both to happen, to either bring judgement and/or to draw people closer to Him, hoping they will seek Him in an unfair and corrupt world.
--
God Himself is the One that required capital punishment because of seedtime and harvest - man reaps what he sows.
The idea is that a person tat murders someone should be put to death as punishment which is a deterrent from others committing murder because they will not want to be put to death themselves so they refrain from murdering people.
Now that the death penalty is not enforced much anymore, the murder rates have gone way up so it's better for society to enforce capital punishment which helps keep murder rates down which helps protect society.
God cannot be mocked, what we sow is what we reap - Gal 6:7,8
This is His will as this is the operating system of His Kingdom.
He even tells us all throughout His Word to choose to do right, to sow to the Spirit so we reap life.
That's a total waste of money. When someone is convicted of cold blooded murder they should be given 2 years for appeals to make sure they were not wrongly convicted and then after that they need to be whacked.
Yeah they should have injected that lady with a big shot of fentanyl.
That would have done the trick no problem.
The general Christian-church culture (and myths) of the US clouds our understanding when we read Romans 13 from the perspective of an American: saying that national governmental powers are necessarily good people for God's purpose.
I doubt few of us, however, would argue that the government over a North Korean, an Iranian, or a Chinese believer is actually "a terror to evil works" and "God’s minister to you for good".
God can establish the basest of men to rule over people, evil men to rule over people, and corrupt men to rule over people because of the corruption of their own hearts. God can allow the people to choose their own leaders apart from Him (motions broadly at a democratic republic) as judgment upon themselves.
This portion of scripture actually deals with leadership among the saints. Evidence of this can be found in the epistles where the apostles command the saints to do various things in accordance with God's plan. Paul does this. Peter, John, Timothy, and Silvanus, too. That is why such care is given when acknowledging elders among the people of God and the instruction to not lay hands on anyone quickly, a sign of commission and empowerment from the greater to the lesser.
I doubt few of us, however, would argue that the government over a North Korean, an Iranian, or a Chinese believer is actually "a terror to evil works" and "God’s minister to you for good".
God can establish the basest of men to rule over people, evil men to rule over people, and corrupt men to rule over people because of the corruption of their own hearts. God can allow the people to choose their own leaders apart from Him (motions broadly at a democratic republic) as judgment upon themselves.
This portion of scripture actually deals with leadership among the saints. Evidence of this can be found in the epistles where the apostles command the saints to do various things in accordance with God's plan. Paul does this. Peter, John, Timothy, and Silvanus, too. That is why such care is given when acknowledging elders among the people of God and the instruction to not lay hands on anyone quickly, a sign of commission and empowerment from the greater to the lesser.
The problem wasn't the chemical they used; it's that they weren't competent enough to administer it correctly.
She requested a firing squad; which would have been sufficient if they had done it the first time.
Now, the state has botched her execution twice. Maybe she should be the one in charge and they should get "lethal" injections.
Below you will find an example of what this thread's general direction is concerned with, which remains centered on each of our opinions of Romans ch 13:1-5 and in regards to lethal force by God's will. Would be interesting in hearing yours.
When I read verse 3 "ruler" and verse 7 "Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due", I see government, not church leadership. Even when I read this in other translations, it doesn't come across that way either.
When I chose to ask my A.I. assistant, which way it went, this is what it said:
Romans 13:1-5 is explicitly about civil government, not church leadership. The passage commands believers to submit to "governing authorities" because they are instituted by God to maintain social order, punish wrongdoers, and reward those who do good.
While some interpret the text as referring to church leaders, this view is widely rejected for several key reasons:
- The Sword: Church leaders do not "bear the sword," a metaphor for the state's power to enforce laws and punish evil, which is exclusive to civil authority.
- Institutional Distinction: The Bible treats the church and the state as separate institutions with distinct roles; confusing them is considered unbiblical.
- Contextual Clues: The passage references paying taxes and tribute, duties owed to the state, and parallels with 1 Peter 2, which explicitly names kings and governors.
Otherwise, I have already answered the question in my previous post.
--
In my last post, my final statement said:
"God allows both to happen, to either bring judgement and/or to draw people closer to Him, hoping they will seek Him in an unfair and corrupt world."
As for whether or not it's "God's will", I would say that EVERYTHING that happens plays a role in God's plan as it is written, and He uses it to ultimately fulfill His will.
Yeah.
Paul, as a servant of the Lord, used such language as:
"What do you want? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness?"
Any "pastor" using that phrasing would empty at least half the pews.
Paul would go on to give direction to the saints in the matter of one bragging about sexual immorality:
"In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
To summarize his admonishment:
"But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person."
We should note: this was not someone protecting their ministry or ordering the removal of one who disagreed with Paul. This was God's sent one protecting those over whom he had authority.
Regarding this line:
I can find no example in the New Testament where a person was rightfully killed at the hands of Jesus or any of His disciples. Sure, the Spirit moved on some to kill them, but man's hands remained out of the fray. I think Jesus was clear "If my kingdom were of this world, my people would fight." But His kingdom is not of this world and our enemy is not flesh and blood.
The New Testament tells you that Jesus Himself returns with the Wrath of God to enact judgement on the earth. That's why all of the souls in Revelation that sit under His altar asking Jesus how long before He takes revenge for the blood of the martyrs. He'll be doing just that when He returns.
Here's more detail of what I am saying from A.I....
2 Thessalonians 1:7–9 describes Jesus being revealed from heaven with mighty angels in flaming fire to inflict vengeance on those who do not know God, resulting in eternal destruction. Revelation 19:15 depicts Christ treading the winepress of the fierce wrath of God, striking the nations with a sword from his mouth to execute judgment. Revelation 6:9–10 records the souls of martyred saints crying out from under the altar for God to judge and avenge their blood on those who dwell on the earth. Revelation 16:6 notes that God gives blood to drink to those who have shed the blood of saints and prophets, as they are worthy of this retribution. Isaiah 66:15–16 prophesies that the Lord will come in fire and chariots like a whirlwind to render His anger with fury and judge all flesh.
--
From my AI/SI assistant:
"The text certainly establishes the permissibility of possessing a sword, but the New Testament does not give us a developed doctrine saying:
That conclusion may be argued from broader biblical principles, but it shouldn't be presented as though Jesus explicitly stated it.
The strongest textual case is therefore somewhat narrower:
Jesus did not teach that the possession of a sword was intrinsically incompatible with discipleship.
He did teach Peter not to employ the sword to prevent Jesus' arrest.
Romans 13 assigns civil government a distinctive authority to wield the sword in executing judgment.
Those three propositions can simultaneously be true.
And that, I think, is precisely where the quoted assertion needs more careful wording. It is one thing to say “the church is not the Romans-13 civil magistrate.” It is another to turn that into “therefore physical force is exclusively the province of civil government.” The latter requires an additional biblical argument that the quoted statement, by itself, hasn't supplied." - ChatGPT
The reason Paul says that is because the Bible tells us that Jesus will come with a "rod of iron" to judge the nations AND then rule over them directly to prove that He is God.
Here is scripture from A.I. to back up what I am saying:
- Zechariah 14:9 – "And the LORD will be king over all the earth. On that day the LORD will be one and his name one."
- Revelation 2:27 – "and he will rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received authority from my Father."
- Revelation 12:5 – "She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne."
- Revelation 19:15 – "From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty."
I think I just answered these arguments in my last two posts.
At this point in time are we just to sit idle until Jesus returns to enact judgement on everyone? That's what you're really asking, isn't it? It really doesn't matter. God allows what He wills to happen until He returns to enact His own judgement.
---
While that is true, it does not remain - unrelated from the words of the Master. For did He fail when delivering such depth of of commentary on imprisoned punishment, while not refusing ownership of weaponry?
Yes, the story is they failed to find her vein and the drugs went in to her muscle rather than her vein so the drugs could go directly in to her blood stream.
With a large shot of fentanylm it makes no difference where the drugs are shot in to a person. They will die shortly after the shot.
At any rate she is still under the order of death so they need to finish the job.
You're saying the ordinance of God should be killed instead of this murderer?
They that resist the ordinance of God shall receive to themselves damnation.
Romans 13:1-4
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For 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.
1 Peter 2:13,14
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
I don't understand your comment. Can you reword it?
If you're talking about the order to "take a sword" as the disciples were sent, it was a tool useful in the wilderness, especially for wild animals. The only disciple who used a sword on a fellow human was rebuked and the victim was healed by the Lord. Other than that, zilch, zero, nada about a disciple of the Lord even striking another person.
We don't need the stuff in our country.
By the looks of things, they would be just fine.
Being ordained doesnt mean you can't screw up; and they obviously have screwed up this very basic rudimentary government responsibility.
Apparently we do for executions. It's quite good for that.
Yes, mistakes happen. Now they need to make sure to kill her proper this time which is why I was saying use fentanyl
Dying by fentanyl is like going to sleep. It's quick, painless, and effective because it makes people so dead they don't come back from death which is what this lady deserves.
If they don't have any fentanyl on hand they can use some bullets. Those work really well too.