• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Should religion be about the Law or the Letter?

MisterLogical said:
Okay, but no one is saying that religion should be influencing laws.
Click to expand...

Except for one thing.

There are a lot of laws in America that are influenced by religion, and even an amendment to the American constitution, as in Prohibition.

The American civil war was justified by using the Bible, for both the north and the south.

And so on.

So I'd say that was an erroneous assertion.
 
Ancient Herald said:
Except for one thing.

There are a lot of laws in America that are influenced by religion, and even an amendment to the American constitution, as in Prohibition.

The American civil war was justified by using the Bible, for both the north and the south.

And so on.

So I'd say that was an erroneous assertion.
Click to expand...

That is still a little off topic, as none of this was referencing that but alright.

The letter vs the spirit of the law is an expression

The expression means that should we follow exactly what the rule says regardless of context, or should we we figure out what the law was meant to prevent and use it that way

Why I used the earlier example of a kid being arrested as a child sex offender for having nudes of themselves. That is the letter of the law, while ignoring the spirit of it.
 
Paleocon said:
It's a valid argument, you just don't understand it.

The correct answer was yes. The follow up would be should it be illegal to encourage someone to break the law. The answer again is yes. From those two it follows that it should be illegal for a kid to take nudes of themselves.
Click to expand...

But you changed the premise.

A 13 year old who took nude pictures of himself - should he be arrested?

I don't think we even arrest teens who post their own nude pics on their facebook! Do we?
 
tosca1 said:
What is Socratic method?
Click to expand...

Asking a person asserting a proposition a series of questions in order to get them to realize the error of their assertion.

tosca1 said:
But you changed the premise.

A 13 year old who took nude pictures of himself - should he be arrested?

I don't think we even arrest teens who post their own nude pics on their facebook! Do we?
Click to expand...

That was his example. And yes, there have been a number of teenagers arrested for taking nude pictures of themselves.
 
Paleocon said:
Asking a person asserting a proposition a series of questions in order to get them to realize the error of their assertion.

That was his example. And yes, there have been a number of teenagers arrested for taking nude pictures of themselves.
Click to expand...



I don't think so. There's been charges laid on teenagers who'd either posted nude pics of others, or teens who sent nude pictures of themselves to others.....but not any one who simply posted a nude picture of himself/herself on his/her own facebook.
 
MisterLogical said:
Biblical law
Click to expand...


Then, I'd say that it's the spirit of the law that's important.

Jesus had summed up the Commandments in two: Love of God and Love of neighbors. So, it's about love.
Love entails so many things (OBEDIENCE, compassion, empathy, willingness to help and protect, etc..,)....by showing love, we automatically follow the written law without having to know in details about murder, theft, slander, etc..,

Furthermore, Christians (by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit) reflect Christ living in us, working in us, and working through us. We are free from the Mosaic Law, and instead we are under the Law of Christ which is to love God with all our being, and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves.




The Law is the issue that has to be dealt with in order to bring us into a right relationship with God.

"Know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified" (Galatians 2:16). This passage reveals that the Law cannot justify or make righteous any man in God’s sight, which is why God sent His Son to completely fulfil the requirements of the Law for all those who would ever believe in Him.

Christ became the end of the Law by virtue of what He did on earth through His sinless life and His sacrifice on the cross. So, the Law no longer has any bearing over us because its demands have been fully met in the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith in Christ who satisfied the righteous demands of the Law restores us into a pleasing relationship with God and keeps us there. No longer under the penalty of the Law, we now live under the law of grace in the love of God.


What does it mean that Christians are not under the law?



Romans 10:4
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.


Galatians 2:16
16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
 
Last edited:
MisterLogical said:
Should religion be about the Letter or the Spirit of the Law?
Click to expand...

I think Biblical Law is incredibly important. Without a thorough understanding of the Law you only have a limited basis for asserting what the principles that are allegedly being evinced. It very quickly becomes a proliferation of 'I believe X for Y reasons', or in other words a general 'this makes me feel good' approach to the religion.
 
Paleocon said:
Give me a case where you think they do, and I will show that you do not comprehend either.
Click to expand...

Mark 12:[38] And in his teaching he said, "Beware of the scribes, who like to go about in long robes, and to have salutations in the market places
[39] and the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at feasts,
[40] who devour widows' houses and for a pretense make long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation."
[41] And he sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the multitude putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums.
[42] And a poor widow came, and put in two copper coins, which make a penny.
[43] And he called his disciples to him, and said to them, "Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury.
[44] For they all contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living."
Click to expand...

God told the Jews to tithe, and Jesus notice that although this woman gave a lower sum than the rich, she actually gave more. The point is it wasn't the amount that mattered, but what she showed in her heart through her giving.
 
American. Off the mark. How am I?
 
Last edited:
American said:
God told the Jews to tithe, and Jesus notice that although this woman gave a lower sum than the rich, she actually gave more. The point is it wasn't the amount that mattered, but what she showed in her heart through her giving.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I'm not sure how this is a reply to my post though.
 
Religion shouldn't be about law at all.

It is not the government's job to see to our souls.

That is the job of the Church.
 
Depends on how you define "law."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom