God’s law versus secular law. Which is moral?

[French Patriot]

God’s law versus secular law. Which is moral?

Our literature is rife with criticisms of God’s laws denouncing them as immoral.

This is mostly done by non-believers and secular law makers and even many believers. The whole world has rejected the morality of God’s law.

Satan shall deceive the whole world. That is scripture.

Believers say that God’s laws are moral; yet very few believers are trying to push for adoption of God’s laws by secular governments.

If believers believed that God’s laws are moral, it follows that they would be trying to have them implemented by governments. Strangely, they do not.

Can a believer believe in God yet not believe in his laws?

No believer is living by God’s law.

If believers believe in God’s laws, should believers be living by them?

Law without punishment is impotent law.

Should believers demand that secular law use God’s punishments where those few laws are basically identical?

Regards

DL

Edited November 15, 2012 by French Patriot

[Mighty AC]

You're right believers do not live by all of their god's laws. Generally, they cherry pick the directives from holy books that jive with secular law and morality. For example most Christians (except maybe this republican) do not support the death penalty for rebellious children despite the guidelines laid out in Deut 21:18-21. Morality stems from people and not holy books.

[Guest]

God's law is irrelevant. Who cares?

Might as well worry about Peter Rabbit's laws.

[The_Squid]

You are perfectly within your rights to live by "God's laws", (as long as they are not illegal or harm others).... but why should I?

[Merlin]

God's law is irrelevant. Who cares?

Might as well worry about Peter Rabbit's laws.

It seems that most of the 10 commandments are current laws or have been laws in recent times. To simply wipe away the impact of the Bible has had on our society because it makes people uncomfortable isn't honest.

[Guest]

It seems that most of the 10 commandments are current laws or have been laws in recent times. To simply wipe away the impact of the Bible has had on our society because it makes people uncomfortable isn't honest.

That's not the point at all. If God says don't kill, that's not the reason why we don't kill. We don't kill because it's wrong, period. God says don't worship idols or covet wives (or something like that. It's been a while) but many do. And they are are ok to do so.

[TimG]

It seems that most of the 10 commandments are current laws or have been laws in recent times.

Does 3 out 10 mean most?

1. You shall have no other Gods but me.
   
2. You shall not make for yourself any idol, nor bow down to it or worship it.
   
3. You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God.
   
4. You shall remember and keep the Sabbath day holy.
   
5. Respect your father and mother.
   
6. You must not kill.
   
7. You must not commit adultery.
   
8. You must not steal.
   
9. You must not give false evidence against your neighbour.
   
10. You must not be envious of your neighbour's goods.
    

Edited November 15, 2012 by TimG

[Guest]

Does 3 out 10 mean most?

Ah. Not wives then?

[TimG]

We don't kill because it's wrong, period.

That is not true. Killing is fine. The motivations matter. i.e. if it was an 'accident' killing is fine unless there was negligence. Killing innocent people when you take out a terrorist is fine. Killing in self defense is fine. Killing by police officers to protect the public is fine. Killing a fetus is fine since the rights of the women are a higher priority (we get into the definition of life here).

[Guest]

That is not true. Killing is fine. The motivations matter. i.e. if it was an 'accident' killing is fine unless there was negligence. Killing innocent people when you take out a terrorist is fine. Killing in self defense is fine. Killing by police officers to protect the public is fine. Killing a fetus is fine since the rights of the women are a higher priority (we get into the definition of life here).

Yes, that's all true. I was being a bit general in that we do have at least one law that agrees with the Ten Commandments.

Stealing and false evidence too, I see.

Edited November 15, 2012 by bcsapper

[Merlin]

Does 3 out 10 mean most?

My guess is that you're very young and don't remember or weren't alive when many of these things were against the law.

Read my post again please it clearly states present laws or laws from our recent past.

Blashphemy is still against the law if my memory serves me correctly or it is no longer it certainly was in my lifetime.

Sunday Shopping was banned in Canada in my lifetime as well it was only with the last 20 years or so that stores were allowed to be open on Sundays.

Adultry was also against the law for a long time as well and may still be on the books, I'm not sure.

That's six for sure. Like it or not Canada was founded on Christian principals. Read the Constitution God is mentioned there and God is in our national anthem as well.

[Mighty AC]

Laws long predated the multiple versions of the 10 commandments; which, themselves seem to have been inspired by chapter 125 of the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The Code of Ur-Nammu is apparently the oldest known, surviving code of laws. It listed crimes and the associated punishment and managed to deal with things like bodily damage, murder, robbery, adultery and rape. So Canada may have been founded by those with Christian principals, but it seems likely that the Christian users manual borrowed heavily from other man made sources.

[wyly]

laws are based on behavioural customs of sapiens required for the group to survive...all social animals have their rules of behaviour what man has done differently is write them down

[cybercoma]

That is not true. Killing is fine.

Killing is never "fine." Sometimes it is justifiable. But it is never fine.

[cybercoma]

There's a number of different legal theories: Natural Law, Legal Positivism, Legal Realism, etc.

I would suggest checking those things out and what they mean, if anyone is interested.

[TimG]

Killing is never "fine." Sometimes it is justifiable. But it is never fine.

You are splitting hairs. Someone dies at the hands of another and society will not sanction them for their action.

[cybercoma]

I may be splitting hairs, but I find it disturbing that you would say killing is sometimes "fine" as opposed to "justified" or "sanctioned."

[Sleipnir]

God’s law versus secular law. Which is moral?

Key word here is 'God's law' as it can be defined in two ways. Anthropogenic or non-anthropogenic versions of God's law.

God's law in term of....

1) Anthropogenic = human activity (bible, koran, torah, etc).

2) Non-anthropogenic = non-human activity (naturalism, pantheism, deism, etc).

Edited November 16, 2012 by Sleipnir

[TimG]

---

Edited November 15, 2012 by TimG

[French Patriot]

God's law is irrelevant. Who cares?

Might as well worry about Peter Rabbit's laws.

I agree.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

You're right believers do not live by all of their god's laws. Generally, they cherry pick the directives from holy books that jive with secular law and morality. For example most Christians (except maybe this republican) do not support the death penalty for rebellious children despite the guidelines laid out in Deut 21:18-21. Morality stems from people and not holy books.

Yes. Christians do not live by biblical law and most admit to not wanting to be as barbaric as they would have to be to do so.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

You are perfectly within your rights to live by "God's laws", (as long as they are not illegal or harm others).... but why should I?

If a Christian, because scriptures say you should.

If you are not, then they should be ignored.

I find it strange that Christians, even when there is no conflicting secular law still ignore God's law. Divorce for instance where 50 odd % of Christians divorce against God's law.

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

That is not true. Killing is fine. The motivations matter. i.e. if it was an 'accident' killing is fine unless there was negligence. Killing innocent people when you take out a terrorist is fine. Killing in self defense is fine. Killing by police officers to protect the public is fine. Killing a fetus is fine since the rights of the women are a higher priority (we get into the definition of life here).

We lay negligent homicide charges against J Ws who deny what would keep their children alive and who die when they negligently keep blood from their children.

Yet God is praise for doing the same thing to Adam and Eve when he negligently let them die by locking away what would keep them alive. The tree of life.

Is God guilty of negligent homicide?

If so, is he fit to give us laws?

Regards

DL

[French Patriot]

Key word here is 'God's law' as it can be defined in two ways. Anthropogenic or non-anthropogenic versions of God's law.

God's law in term of....

1) Anthropogenic = human activity (bible, koran, torah, etc).

2) Non-anthropogenic = non-human activity (naturalism, pantheism, deism, etc).

I KIS for Christians.

Regards

DL

[Sleipnir]

That thread is the exact same as

http://www.canadaka.net/forums/religious-issues-f68/god-s-law-versus-secular-law-which-is-moral-t103147.html

The topic anyway.