Featured Did God Approve the Death penalty to have Jesus Killed By it?

Really? You are going to use our Lord Jesus Christ's death on the cross as an example of God being in favor of the death penalty?:tear:

Wouldn't it be a better example of why Christians shouldn't support the death penalty... that an innocent man was put to death?

 

I think it is pretty obvious that God is in favor of the death penalty. He commands it. "Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed"

He did use the concept of the death penalty to effect Christ's crucifixion, but take note that Christ was put to death illegally, both in regards to the laws of both the Jews and the Romans. Christ's death was essentially a lynching by the Jewish mob, but they got the Romans to do it for them, since the Romans were the ones in control of the area at the time. Neither the Jews nor the Romans had any real basis for his condemnation.

 

What kind of question is that?

 

Their reasoning made it was an unrighteous murder. And that's the only type of decision humans can make when it comes to life and death as we're all guilty of sin that is punishable unto death.

You mention that the Romans executed Jesus with seemingly no regard for the fact that Jesus hadn't done anything wrong. Thus, to mention it supports the teachings of Scripture that show that we are NOT to make such a decision because only God is capable of making such a righteous decision.

But as in the OT, it was once again GOD making the decision to RIGHTEOUSLY give His life.. They could not have taken it had He not RIGHTEOUSLY given it.

 

yes, GOD did. Not man.

Because He's capable of making the righteous judgment to do so. Man isn't.

Unrighteously by men as He had done nothing wrong.

You break one, you broke them all. Are you any less deserving of death than these criminals you're describing?

 

So you don't deserve to be put to death for your sin? That was the point of the other thread. Christian snobbishness where we think our sin, forgiven or not, is any less unHoly in the face of God than the sin of the murderer.

I didn't say it merited the same punishment. I said in the other thread, as Christians who have been GRACEFULLY forgiven, we should be the last ones advocating punishment unto death for ANYONE who in committing any sin is only breaking the same law for which God has GRACEFULLY forgiven us.

It's downright hypocritical to hop up on our moral high horse and start pointing at folks "really bad sins" as though ours don't also merit death.

As God's amazing grace has forgiven US, the default of the Christian should always be love and forgiveness.

 

In the Pentatuch, God ordained capital punishment for many different sins, but NOT for others.

The general statement given to Noah at the time of the Disembarkment was that murder is to be punished by death. Since it was given to Noah, it was understood to be law for all his descendents. that's you and me both, cousin!

 

That's authoring confusion. We are to preach Scripture.. Scripture shows Jesus fulfilling the Law, not undoing it. As such, the death penalty is still law. But NT Scripture shows that we are ALL equally guilty of breaking the WHOLE law. And thus, the words of Christ when the woman was caught in adultery.

We are allowed to punish. But Scripture shows that God HAS NOT, because we're incapable of righteously doing so, given us the right to punish unto death.Only HE is capable of doing that.

 

So God delegated the duty of punishment unto death for murderers to the same government that's okay with women murdering babies in the womb? but the government doesn't murder them because they don't consider abortion murder?

That makes no sense and authors confusion that is NOT of God.

The fact that the same government that you say God delegated this right too allows one type of murder but not another continues to highlight why God would NOT have entrusted a RIGHTEOUS decision of life and death into the hands of sinful men.

He can make the call. We cannot.

 

What exactly does "universal rule" mean? Is that an "absolute rule" that must be exercised on every occasion?

In Gen. 9, God stated that whoever sheds blood (commits murder?, homicide?, manslaughter?) He will require that person's blood by another man. You say it is a "universal rule", but what exactly does it mean?

The text does not specifically say "murder" as we understand it today. It doesn't even say "thou shalt not kill". It says "sheds blood".

Gen. 9 is most likely a reference to the ancient near east practice of the "blood avenger".

 

If God did not delegate it to human government, than how can He have delegated any type of punishment to human government? In fact, the delegation of the death penalty for murder is probably the most important function of human government.

The fact that governments are corrupt and that sinful people are in power in the United States government does not mean that they do not have the authority to put someone to death. And actually it is the individual states, not the federal govt, that really has the authority to do it.

The fact that state, local, and federal governments have abandoned the ways of God is a very sad fact and could mean that they have usurped authority not granted to them, ie, allowing abortions to take place.

 

God is o.k. with the notion of Capital Punishment....but, Christ's death on the cross is absolutely no argument in favour of it. I'm pro-death penalty, but I cannot comprehend how Christ's death on the cross is an argument for it.

Yes, and the act was called sinful by God.
Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
The crucifixion of Jesus by the material agents God used...was a sinful act. For Peter to say they also "slew" him was to suggest murder. This argument does nothing to justify the Death penalty.

The argument for the Death penalty rests clearly and un-challenged by Genesis chapter 9 and even the implication that it was justified by Cain's murder of Abel and the injunction spoken there and repeated by the Apostle Paul. But this line of argument is non-sequitor.