Bible says so? The Christian voices backing — and rejecting — Hegseth's execution livestream

When the Pentagon announced it would livestream the firing squad execution of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan, the reaction from many faith leaders was swift condemnation. But inside the church circles that shaped Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the announcement landed as something closer to a fulfillment.

I support the Pentagon's decision to livestream the execution of mass-murderer Nidal Hassan. Capital punishment is commanded by God in Genesis 9:6 to remind people of the sanctity of human life. The more people that can see that truth illustrated through a public execution, the better.— Robert Jeffress, Southern Baptist pastor, Dallas

President Trump circulated Jeffress's statement on social media. William Wolfe, who served in the first Trump administration and now leads a group aimed at moving the Southern Baptist Convention in a more Trumpian direction, was equally direct: "For the record, I support this — because the Bible tells me so," he posted on X, according to the Washington Examiner.

The planned execution — scheduled for December 3 at Fort Hood — would be the first military execution by firing squad since World War II. Hegseth's decision to make it public has drawn fierce criticism from Catholic, mainline Protestant, and many evangelical leaders. But a connected network of Christian nationalist voices has rallied behind it, framing the livestream not as spectacle but as scripture.

That network runs directly through Hegseth's own church. Brooks Potteiger, described by Word & Way as Hegseth's longtime pastor who has preached three times at Pentagon worship services Hegseth hosts, went further than most. When someone on X suggested that a pastor preach an "execution sermon" to Hasan before the firing squad opens fire, Potteiger responded: "I like this idea. I think I will." It remains unclear whether Hegseth will invite him to do so.

Public executions are biblical. Therefore, public executions are good. Therefore, we should bring back public executions.— Joshua Haymes, podcaster and former pastoral intern at Hegseth's church

Haymes made that declaration last year on a podcast he co-hosted with Potteiger, according to Word & Way, which noted it reported on these arguments before Hegseth's announcement. Hegseth, Haymes, and Potteiger are all part of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, a denomination founded and led by Doug Wilson, a self-described Christian nationalist and "paleo-Confederate" pastor based in Idaho.

I prefer public executions to those conducted in the recesses of a prison somewhere in the middle of the night. Executions in the Scriptures were public.— Doug Wilson, pastor and CREC founder

Wilson added a caveat: if the execution "turns into a circus, and a ghoulish atmosphere develops," that would undermine the case for it. But he stopped well short of opposing the plan.

The biblical case being made rests on two main pillars. The first is Genesis 9:6 — "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed" — a pre-Mosaic command to Noah that many Christians across traditions consider timeless. The second is Deuteronomy 21:21, cited by commentator Megan Basham among others: "Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death... All Israel will hear of it and be afraid." Basham argued this shows "a reason to demonstrate the wages of evil acts," according to the Washington Examiner.

Critics of that reading — including some who support capital punishment — say the argument collapses under scrutiny. The Washington Examiner noted that nearly every branch of Christianity has long held that Mosaic civil law, which prescribed stoning not just for murder but for adultery, blasphemy, and children's disobedience to parents, was binding on the ancient Hebrew theocracy, not on modern nations. The Church of England's articles state plainly that the civil precepts of Mosaic law "ought not of necessity to be received in any commonwealth."

Word & Way made a sharper point: the Bible says nothing about livestreaming, and the verses invoked say nothing about firing squads. "Livestreaming executions is not required by the Bible because livestreaming is not something the Bible even addresses," the outlet observed, calling the "biblical" framing selective rather than literal.

Protestant ethicist Matthew Lee Anderson of Baylor University argued the problem runs deeper than proof-texting.

As a rule, human beings should never film or televise (much less 'livestream') another person's death — regardless of whether they are being executed in the name of justice or not. The respect we owe to life is inherently degraded when we film people dying.— Matthew Lee Anderson, Protestant ethicist, Baylor University

Broadcasting death dehumanizes the offender and, ironically, so destroys the very rational basis that is required to make punishment just. It intrinsically participates in the barbarism that terrorism thrives on.— Matthew Lee Anderson, Protestant ethicist, Baylor University

Anderson also addressed the Old Testament precedent directly, arguing that "the formative power of being required to participate by way of stoning is different in kind than that of viewing others killing" — a distinction he said even the Pharisees grasped in John 8, when Jesus confronted them over their desire to stone an adulteress.

Evangelical commentator Erick Erickson, who said he supports the death penalty, called public executions "soul-twisting" and cited Proverbs 24:17 — "Do not gloat when your enemy falls" — alongside early church father Tertullian, who wrote of Roman public executions: "It is good, no doubt, to have the guilty punished... And yet the innocent can find no pleasure in another's sufferings." Erickson also argued the livestream would inspire other suicidal terrorists and erode public support for capital punishment, according to the Washington Examiner.

The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned the proposed livestream as "a barbaric promotion of a culture of death" that will "further undermine the moral fabric of our nation and be a blight on the conscience of its people," according to the Washington Examiner. The Washington Examiner noted that Catholic teaching has moved against all capital punishment over the past forty years, making the Catholic position less persuasive to many evangelicals who hold the more traditional Christian view that murder can justify execution — but that even within that tradition, the case for broadcasting it remains contested.

Southern Baptist theologian Albert Mohler, who supports capital punishment, has also opposed the livestreaming plan, according to Word & Way — illustrating that the fault line is not simply between those who accept or reject the death penalty, but between those who see public spectacle as a feature and those who see it as a corruption.

Whether the execution will actually be livestreamed remains unresolved. What is clear is that the debate has surfaced a strain of Christian nationalist theology — centered in Hegseth's own denominational world — that has been building for years, and that now has a direct line to the Pentagon.

Why it matters — The debate reveals that Hegseth's execution plan is not an isolated decision but the public expression of a theology that has been developing inside his own denominational world — and that now has institutional power at the Pentagon.

Reported by wordandway.org, washingtonexaminer.com