Godís law versus secular law. Which is moral?


French Patriot
#1
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
 
DaSleeper
+1
#2
Some remedial reading for Ya.....
forums.canadiancontent.net/fu...fic-proof.html (external - login to view)
 
gerryh
+1
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by French PatriotView Post

Godís law versus secular law.Which is moral?

Our literature is rife with criticisms of Godís 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 Godís law.

Satan shall deceive the whole world. That is scripture.

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

If believers believed that Godís 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 Godís law.

If believers believe in Godís laws, should believers be living by them?

Law without punishment is impotent law.

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

Regards
DL

Wow, still trying to blame God for mans laws and misinterpretations I see.
 
karrie
+3
#4
Which is moral?

Morality is s sticky concept. But I would have to say that secular law has the greatest chance of being the most moral. 'God's laws' as many of the religious see them (Leviticus primarily), are a collection of rules often designed to help ensure order and health in an era before common law, education, running water and medical care. They were then translated, retranslated, and translated yet again, to be handed down as the version we have today. To follow them blindly as law is to ignore the mental capacity we possess to evaluate.

So yes, 'secular' law has the most chance of being critically thought out, thus 'moral' in my books.
 
Cliffy
+4
#5  Top Rated Post
Morality is a code of ethics. It varies from culture to culture. Religion is just a cultural preference. From my experience, Catholics, in general, are more capable of critical thought than many others, particularly Islam and the born againers who tend more toward blind faith in what others tell them. One does not need religion to have a code of ethics of course but those with blind faith can't seem to wrap their minds around that concept. Secular laws are just as corruptible, as there are too many conflicting codes of ethics within secular society (which includes religious and non-religious belief systems) to warrant mass agreement. In the end, it is only personal morality or ethics that matter anyway. As Bob Dylan once said, it takes an honest man to live outside the law.
 
EagleSmack
+1
#6
Hey the "Hunter" has returned with another anti-religion rant.

Do you have any other prehistoric views to share.

Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

Which is moral?

Morality is s sticky concept. But I would have to say that secular law has the greatest chance of being the most moral. 'God's laws' as many of the religious see them (Leviticus primarily), are a collection of rules often designed to help ensure order and health in an era before common law, education, running water and medical care. They were then translated, retranslated, and translated yet again, to be handed down as the version we have today. To follow them blindly as law is to ignore the mental capacity we possess to evaluate.

So yes, 'secular' law has the most chance of being critically thought out, thus 'moral' in my books.

Hey Karrie... shouldn't you be out gathering stuff for us hunters?
 
Spade
+3
#7
All laws are man made. Them whats believes them-there gods direct our codes have holey minds! Saying it's gods' wills is clever tomfoolery!
PS
To find out what the gods really want:
Send 20.00$ Canadian (real money only) to-
Spade
General delivery
Aether Island
(No snakes will be killed in the divination process)
 
L Gilbert
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by French PatriotView Post

Godís law versus secular law.Which is moral?

Our literature is rife with criticisms of Godís 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 Godís law.

Satan shall deceive the whole world. That is scripture.

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

If believers believed that Godís 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 Godís law.

If believers believe in Godís laws, should believers be living by them?

Law without punishment is impotent law.

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

Regards
DL

It's up to people to decide. To believe in gods' laws as being moral, one must have faith that there really iare gods in the first place and accept whatever interpretations that are offered by these gods as to what is moral. If people have no faith that there are gods, then whatever people consider to be moral is decided by those people. And what people consider to be moral is what they feel is right.
 
talloola
#9
secular law is 'it', without secular law we would be in big trouble. Too bad all people can't be
honourable,honest,considerate and kind, which are natural human traits that allow one to live a
life that really needs no laws, but it doesn't seem to work like that, so the human, being a
highly intelligent species, drew up laws to protect those who are affected by the unlawful. It
certainly doesn't work perfectly, no such thing as perfection.

morality has nothing to do with religion, there are immoral people in both non religious and religious
people, many of the religious obey their religions because of guilt, and many people obey the secular
laws because they don't want to go to jail.

I think most people are good and don't have to worry about
either secular or religious laws, they have their own natural intelligence and balance in their lives.
 
Cliffy
#10
Or... there is natural law. To me, it trumps all others.

 
MHz
#11
Romans 13 give us the rules for following the 'States' law as the Government of any nation is the servant mentioned in that chapter. Taxes being one such item and respect for their authoritative figures. That certainly doesn't involve any sort of worship that would break the 1st law Jesus left us and the 2nd law doesn't break any laws that Rome had in place or what most nations have today although some are not protecting the citizens as well as they could and some are evil themselves in that they inflict damage on the ones they are supposed to be protecting, an act they will pay dearly for when the 7th trump sounds.

You do get around don't you?
 
L Gilbert
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Romans 13 give us the rules for following the 'States' law as the Government of any nation is the servant mentioned in that chapter. Taxes being one such item and respect for their authoritative figures. That certainly doesn't involve any sort of worship that would break the 1st law Jesus left us and the 2nd law doesn't break any laws that Rome had in place or what most nations have today although some are not protecting the citizens as well as they could and some are evil themselves in that they inflict damage on the ones they are supposed to be protecting, an act they will pay dearly for when the 7th trump sounds.

You do get around don't you?

The point is that we don't really need any "rules" from some religion.
BTW, respect is best earned, not bestowed because of some sense of entitlement.
 
karrie
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Romans 13 give us the rules for following the 'States' law as the Government of any nation is the servant mentioned in that chapter. Taxes being one such item and respect for their authoritative figures. That certainly doesn't involve any sort of worship that would break the 1st law Jesus left us and the 2nd law doesn't break any laws that Rome had in place or what most nations have today although some are not protecting the citizens as well as they could and some are evil themselves in that they inflict damage on the ones they are supposed to be protecting, an act they will pay dearly for when the 7th trump sounds.

You do get around don't you?

If you've read any of his posts you'll probably realize that claiming authority from the bible will likely not fly with him. He's not a fan of the biblical God.
 
MHz
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

If you've read any of his posts you'll probably realize that claiming authority from the bible will likely not fly with him. He's not a fan of the biblical God.

Me and DL have chatted before I'm quite familiar with his beliefs as he is with mine.
 
L Gilbert
#15
Who is DL?
 
karrie
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Who is DL?

FP.... he signs off DL
 
L Gilbert
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

FP.... he signs off DL

Oh. Thanks.
 
MHz
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

The point is that we don't really need any "rules" from some religion.
BTW, respect is best earned, not bestowed because of some sense of entitlement.

In Romans 13 christians are told to obey the law of the nation they are in. The beloved disciple wrote Revelation from prison, arrested not for being a rebel to Rome but because she was Jewish and the Jews in Jerusalem went into revolt mode some Rome arrested many Jews so the revolt could not spread.
 
L Gilbert
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

In Romans 13 christians are told to obey the law of the nation they are in. The beloved disciple wrote Revelation from prison, arrested not for being a rebel to Rome but because she was Jewish and the Jews in Jerusalem went into revolt mode some Rome arrested many Jews so the revolt could not spread.

So that means even Christians can't figure out how to be decent humans without being told? lmao
Like I said, we don't need religions to help us figure it out. Well, we rational people anyway.
 
Spade
+1
#20
What bothers me about the last few rules

“You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbour's.”

Is that it leaves women off the hook.

There is no mention of neighbours' husbands or handymen.
 
L Gilbert
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

What bothers me about the last few rules

“You shall not covet your neighbour's house; you shall not covet your neighbour's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbour's.”

Is that it leaves women off the hook.

There is no mention of neighbours' husbands or handymen.

Yeah. That, too. Reminds me of the bit about "men shall not lie with men as they do with their wives" thing. Kinda lets lesbians and female bis off the hook.
 
MHz
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

So that means even Christians can't figure out how to be decent humans without being told? lmao
Like I said, we don't need religions to help us figure it out. Well, we rational people anyway.

Jews have the 10 Commandments (equal to the 2 Christian Laws) plus more the 600 dietary and morality laws, you saying they are not capable of existing on their own?
 
L Gilbert
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Jews have the 10 Commandments (equal to the 2 Christian Laws) plus more the 600 dietary and morality laws, you saying they are not capable of existing on their own?

On drugs again? Or your comprehension issues popping up again? No. I am saying they don't need some religion to tell them what they should consider to be "godd".
 
MHz
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Yeah. That, too. Reminds me of the bit about "men shall not lie with men as they do with their wives" thing. Kinda lets lesbians and female bis off the hook.

Better look up all the adultery laws rather than taking 1 and thinking is covers what all 600 cover. Plus men were the 'rulers' in those days aind they were 'talked to' by God and by God's (male only) Prophets.

Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

On drugs again? Or your comprehension issues popping up again? No. I am saying they don't need some religion to tell them what they should consider to be "godd".

So basically you are telling Jews to abandon their religion entirely. I don't see that happening really, for them or anybody else so who is on drugs? Atheists have no moral practices that 'trump' any religion, do something against their laws and you pay the price as determined bty the courts.
Covet does not mean steal, it means to be envious of. If you aren't on drugs you should probably start.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Better look up all the adultery laws rather than taking 1 and thinking is covers what all 600 cover.

Really? With the exception of the commandments which display arrogance and intolerance (the first 4) I think one would suffice: the one about treating others as though we'd like to be treated.
Quote:

Plus men were the 'rulers' in those days aind they were 'talked to' by God and by God's (male only) Prophets.

Well, mostly men ruled, but there were such people as Cleopatra, Hatshepsut, Olympias, etc.
And men made their gods in their own image (or would have liked to).

Either way, rational humans still don't need religion to figure out what's good or bad.
 
Spade
+1
#26
Notice that "wife" was placed between "house" and "manservant". Priorities, priorities!
The good book's rules were really plagiarized from Hammurabi's Code.
 
MHz
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

The good book's rules were really plagiarized from Hammurabi's Code.

So if God had the Laws (even the changes that dropped the 600+)in mind even before the heaven was created but not published because they have specific start/stop dates does your theory still apply.
Were fallen angels under the law given in Re:21 and is it by those laws that God judged the world to be 'full of evil' because the only law man was under was the one about the tree (that far back)?

Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post


Either way, rational humans still don't need religion to figure out what's good or bad.

Then why are there any laws or courts if men can figure it out and follow it all on their own?
 
L Gilbert
+1
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Then why are there any laws or courts if men can figure it out and follow it all on their own?

Because the rational ones figured it out and made those laws and courts. DUH
 
MHz
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Because the rational ones figured it out and made those laws and courts. DUH

The Bible gives us a pretty clear example of what it is talking about, which part do you see as being irrational?

Jas:2:8:
If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,
ye do well:

Jas:2:14:
What doth it profit,
my brethren,
though a man say he hath faith,
and have not works?
can faith save him?
Jas:2:15:
If a brother or sister be naked,
and destitute of daily food,
Jas:2:16:
And one of you say unto them,
Depart in peace,
be ye warmed and filled;
notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
Jas:2:17:
Even so faith, if it hath not works,
is dead,
being alone.

The typical good Samaritan in this day and age, is he operating from the law above or following a universal government law?
 
L Gilbert
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

The Bible gives us a pretty clear example of what it is talking about, which part do you see as being irrational?

Jas:2:8:
If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,
ye do well:

Jas:2:14:
What doth it profit,
my brethren,
though a man say he hath faith,
and have not works?
can faith save him?
Jas:2:15:
If a brother or sister be naked,
and destitute of daily food,
Jas:2:16:
And one of you say unto them,
Depart in peace,
be ye warmed and filled;
notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
Jas:2:17:
Even so faith, if it hath not works,
is dead,
being alone.

The part I see as being irrational is the one about we humans needing the belief or faith in religious things in order to figure out what is good or bad. I thought I had made that pretty clear.

Quote:

The typical good Samaritan in this day and age, is he operating from the law above or following a universal government law?

I'd say neither. He's probably following his own nature.
 

Similar Threads

1
Moral Relativism - What's It All About?
by sanctus | Feb 2nd, 2007
no new posts