RWDT XII - 12 Step program to get Right.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The sovereign sparing the evil from the worst punishments is an icon of God's mercy to sinners and is itself a divine mystery don't @ me

God shows mercy but he also punishes, and executing God's wrath is the sovereign's office, that's precisely and definitively distinguishes him from his subjects in his duty as a Christian.

Aye, He punishes, but while He is a dreadful judge, His mercy is infinite, and those who repent are forgiven. This is why Emperors have often granted clemency to those sentenced to death.

[Fahran]

Except me apparently, Miss "Everyone here but me supports the death penalty."

I made a mistake and I'm sorry for assigning to you an opinion you did not hold. I'm sincerely sorry.

[The Parkus Empire]

God shows mercy but he also punishes, and executing God's wrath is the sovereign's office, that's precisely and definitively distinguishes him from his subjects in his duty as a Christian.

Aye, He punishes, but while He is a dreadful judge, His mercy is infinite, and those who repent are forgiven. This is why Emperors have often granted clemency to those sentenced to death.

But seldom as a rule.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Except me apparently, Miss "Everyone here but me supports the death penalty."

I made a mistake and I'm sorry for assigning to you an opinion you did not hold. I'm sincerely sorry.

I was just bullying, don't take it so seriously as asking for an apology.

[Fahran]

I made a mistake and I'm sorry for assigning to you an opinion you did not hold. I'm sincerely sorry.

I was just bullying, don't take it so seriously as asking for an apology.

See? Too much credit.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Aye, He punishes, but while He is a dreadful judge, His mercy is infinite, and those who repent are forgiven. This is why Emperors have often granted clemency to those sentenced to death.

But seldom as a rule.

Because we will be judged according to how we judge, it is in the ruler's best interest to deal mercifully so that he will be dealt with mercifully.

[The Parkus Empire]

But seldom as a rule.

Because we will be judged according to how we judge, it is in the ruler's best interest to deal mercifully so that he will be dealt with mercifully.

This is a liberal fallacy which makes the judgement of a ruler univocal with the judgement of a non-ruler. This is sheer nonsense, since non-rulers are forbidden from judging, whereas rulers are ordered to judge and dispense God's wrath. Your logic is essentially the same as saying Moses shouldn't have inflicted the plagues on Egypt because even though God charged him with this, he would have been a better follower of God if he didn't go it.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Because we will be judged according to how we judge, it is in the ruler's best interest to deal mercifully so that he will be dealt with mercifully.

This is a liberal fallacy which makes the judgement of a ruler univocal with the judgement of a non-ruler. This is sheer nonsense, since non-rulers are forbidden from judging, whereas rulers are ordered to judge and dispense God's wrath. Your logic is essentially the same as saying Moses shouldn't have inflicted the plagues on Egypt because even though God charged him with his, he would have been a better follower of God if he didn't go it.

The ruler acts as an icon of God, dealing justice and forgiveness according to station, giving mercy as such is an icon of God granting mercy, the point stands. When a non-ruler gives mercy, it is spiritually beneficial for them only, when a ruler grants mercy, it is an icon of salvation, and therefore even more holy.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

This is a liberal fallacy which makes the judgement of a ruler univocal with the judgement of a non-ruler. This is sheer nonsense, since non-rulers are forbidden from judging, whereas rulers are ordered to judge and dispense God's wrath. Your logic is essentially the same as saying Moses shouldn't have inflicted the plagues on Egypt because even though God charged him with his, he would have been a better follower of God if he didn't go it.

The ruler acts as an icon of God, dealing justice and forgiveness according to station, giving mercy as such is an icon of God granting mercy, the point stands. When a non-ruler gives mercy, it is spiritually beneficial for them only, when a ruler grants mercy, it is an icon of salvation, and therefore even more holy.

Do Christians view a ruler as a "hand of God" so to speak?

[The Parkus Empire]

This is a liberal fallacy which makes the judgement of a ruler univocal with the judgement of a non-ruler. This is sheer nonsense, since non-rulers are forbidden from judging, whereas rulers are ordered to judge and dispense God's wrath. Your logic is essentially the same as saying Moses shouldn't have inflicted the plagues on Egypt because even though God charged him with his, he would have been a better follower of God if he didn't go it.

The ruler acts as an icon of God, dealing justice and forgiveness according to station, giving mercy as such is an icon of God granting mercy, the point stands. When a non-ruler gives mercy, it is spiritually beneficial for them only, when a ruler grants mercy, it is an icon of salvation, and therefore even more holy.

Romans 13 doesn't say a ruler's job is to dispense mercy, but wrath. Mercy, eleos, is of course the mission of all Christians. What distinguishes a ruler from other Christians is not the office of mercy, but the office of wrath.

A ruler granting mercy does not have anything to do with salvation, really. A ruler could not punish someone at all, and he could go to hell, whereas a ruler could put someone to death, but if he repented before execution, he would be saved. From Paul's perspective in fact someone's death is often salvific.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The ruler acts as an icon of God, dealing justice and forgiveness according to station, giving mercy as such is an icon of God granting mercy, the point stands. When a non-ruler gives mercy, it is spiritually beneficial for them only, when a ruler grants mercy, it is an icon of salvation, and therefore even more holy.

Romans 13 doesn't say a ruler's job is to dispense mercy, but wrath. Mercy, eleos, is of course the mission of all Christians. What distinguishes a ruler from other Christians is not the office of mercy, but the office of wrath.

A ruler granting mercy does not have anything to do with salvation, really. A ruler could not punish someone at all, and he could go to hell, whereas a ruler could put someone to death, but if he repented before execution, he would be saved. From Paul's perspective in fact someone's death is often salvific.

Yes, his job is to dispense wrath, which is precisely why his mercy is holy.

Don't make me bring out my quantum blackpill about salvation and mercy, Parkus, you don't want that!

[The Parkus Empire]

The ruler acts as an icon of God, dealing justice and forgiveness according to station, giving mercy as such is an icon of God granting mercy, the point stands. When a non-ruler gives mercy, it is spiritually beneficial for them only, when a ruler grants mercy, it is an icon of salvation, and therefore even more holy.

Do Christians view a ruler as a "hand of God" so to speak?

They view rulership as the office of dispensing God's wrath, at least Paul does. Indeed that is the only function unique to rulers.

[Fahran]

Do Christians view a ruler as a "hand of God" so to speak?

It depends on the Christian to a significant extent. Tolstoy certainly would not have for instance.

[The Parkus Empire]

Romans 13 doesn't say a ruler's job is to dispense mercy, but wrath. Mercy, eleos, is of course the mission of all Christians. What distinguishes a ruler from other Christians is not the office of mercy, but the office of wrath.

A ruler granting mercy does not have anything to do with salvation, really. A ruler could not punish someone at all, and he could go to hell, whereas a ruler could put someone to death, but if he repented before execution, he would be saved. From Paul's perspective in fact someone's death is often salvific.

Yes, his job is to dispense wrath, which is precisely why his mercy is holy.

Don't make me bring out my quantum blackpill about salvation and mercy, Parkus, you don't want that!

There is nothing holy about mercy if it is a defiance of your duty, I would think the Sacrifice of Isaac would make this clear.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Yes, his job is to dispense wrath, which is precisely why his mercy is holy.

Don't make me bring out my quantum blackpill about salvation and mercy, Parkus, you don't want that!

There is nothing holy about mercy if it is a defiance of your duty, I would think the Sacrifice of Isaac would make this clear.

Then is God defying His duty when he dispenses mercy? Mercy is a higher office than wrath.

[The Parkus Empire]

There is nothing holy about mercy if it is a defiance of your duty, I would think the Sacrifice of Isaac would make this clear.

Then is God defying His duty when he dispenses mercy? Mercy is a higher office than wrath.

God has no duty to anyone.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Then is God defying His duty when he dispenses mercy? Mercy is a higher office than wrath.

God has no duty to anyone.

True. However, I have to say I fundamentally disagree with your view of rulership, there are numerous references to Emperors acting in persona Christi.

[The Parkus Empire]

God has no duty to anyone.

True. However, I have to say I fundamentally disagree with your view of rulership, there are numerous references to Emperors acting in persona Christi.

Yeah, and Christ judges. And if Christ is God, he also dispenses wrath, like serious, heavy wrath, and he often charges people to represent him in this capacity. Moses was one, Elijah was another. That is the job of rulers, it is indeed what distinguishes them from everyone else. That duty to dispense God's wrath. Now if you are not charged with dispensing God's wrath, then not only is mercy preferable, judgement and wrath are sins. But if you are charged with dispensing God's wrath, then saying, "No, mercy is better," is simply shirking your duty, it would be like if Abraham refused to sacrifice Isaac because "mercy is better".

[United Muscovite Nations]

True. However, I have to say I fundamentally disagree with your view of rulership, there are numerous references to Emperors acting in persona Christi.

Yeah, and Christ judges. And if Christ is God, he also dispenses wrath, like serious, heavy wrath, and he often charges people to represent him in this capacity. Moses was one, Elijah was another. That is the job of rulers, it is indeed what distinguishes them from everyone else. That duty to dispense God's wrath. Now if you are not charged with dispensing God's wrath, then not only is mercy preferable, judgement and wrath are sins. But if you are charged with dispensing God's wrath, then saying, "No, mercy is better," is simply shirking your duty, it would be like if Abraham refused to sacrifice Isaac because "mercy is better".

If the ruler is acting in persona Christi, then mercy is a part of dispensing wrath inherently. Moreover, putting someone to death takes away their ability to repent of their crimes, and therefore usurps God's role by attempting to damn someone to Hell.

[The Parkus Empire]

If the ruler is acting in persona Christi, then mercy is a part of dispensing wrath inherently.

But not grounds to shirk dispensing the wrath.

Moreover, putting someone to death takes away their ability to repent of their crimes,

Quite wrong, last rites are and almost always have been permitted to those about to be put to death. Even under Franco those about to be executed were offered last rites.

[United Muscovite Nations]

If the ruler is acting in persona Christi, then mercy is a part of dispensing wrath inherently.

But not grounds to shirk dispensing the wrath.

Moreover, putting someone to death takes away their ability to repent of their crimes,

Quite wrong, last rites are and almost always have been permitted to those about to be put to death. Even under Franco those about to be executed were offered last rites.

God's mercy is infinite, and granted to those who sincerely repent, therefore, if someone sincerely repents after being sentenced to death, they should be given clemency.

What if the accused is not currently a Christian? Would you wait until they are a Christian and kill them with the last rites then?

[The Parkus Empire]

God's mercy is infinite, and granted to those who sincerely repent, therefore, if someone sincerely repents after being sentenced to death, they should be given clemency.

Whether someone sincerely repents is something only God knows.

What if the accused is not currently a Christian? Would you wait until they are a Christian and kill them with the last rites then?

God certainly never had the approach of "more leniency for idolaters", at least in terms of temporal punishment. The judgement after death is another matter.

[Painisia]

Over 300 000 children were stolen during Franco`s rule in Spain. Now, Franco is in my worst dictator list.

[United Muscovite Nations]

God's mercy is infinite, and granted to those who sincerely repent, therefore, if someone sincerely repents after being sentenced to death, they should be given clemency.

Whether someone sincerely repents is something only God knows.

What if the accused is not currently a Christian? Would you wait until they are a Christian and kill them with the last rites then?

God certainly never had the approach of "more leniency for idolaters", at least in terms of temporal punishment. The judgement after death is another matter.

If anything, as you once said, a Christian should be held to a higher standard than an ignorant idolater.

[The Parkus Empire]

Whether someone sincerely repents is something only God knows.



God certainly never had the approach of "more leniency for idolaters", at least in terms of temporal punishment. The judgement after death is another matter.

If anything, as you once said, a Christian should be held to a higher standard than an ignorant idolater.

But that doesn't give non-Christians more license.