Man's Law vs. God's Law

[weishaupt1776]

continued from http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread...3&page=4&pp=10
According to Biblical Law, the only laws which apply to the Sovereign are
ones dealing w/situations in which life, liberty, and/or property(LLP) is being violated, threatened, jeopardized, etc. . .by another (sovereign or not). This Biblical Concept translated into the English Common Law, and It was theorized that the Constitution would guarantee common law protections from LLP violations by the government or that the gov would ensure that justice would be served on those who committed such LLP violations on another.

It is a maxim of law that any statute or prima facie law passed which abrogates common law MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED within it's narrowly defined context limited to whatever terms there are for it.

Even to this day, extreme punishments for murder or other crimes against people are decided under common law absent constitutional or statutory provisions

[weishaupt1776]

Continued from another thread

Originally Posted by buck09

When you say Biblical Law, which laws are you to specifically referring to?

For example, I got roasted on another topic when everybody here got behind another person who wanted to get out of testifying against a thief, yet it says:

"If anyone sins in that he hears a public adjuration to testify, and though he is a witness, whether he has seen or come to know the matter, yet does not speak, he shall bear his iniquity;" Lev 5:1.

Seems to me that the person who had their tools stolen had "come to know the matter" yet people here, derided me for having the audacity to tell him that it would be wrong for him not to testify.

Does that law apply?

How about Lev 18:19? That's part of God's law - should men be found guilty of having relations with their wives during their menstrual cycle? (And before you say that part of the law has expired, let me remind you that there are prohibitions against sexual immorality that can *only* be found in this chapter, so can't be picky-choosy about it either...)

How about stoning people who visit fortune-tellers?

The reason I ask, is because if you are consistent in your view that the forms of law you mentioned are binding on all men, then you also should be following these moral laws as well.

[weishaupt1776]

Continued from another thread[b]

Originally Posted by buck09

When you say Biblical Law, which laws are you to specifically referring to?

I am of the belief that anything done that is contrary to basic, natural,human rights ortheir LLP is codified as being a violation of God's Law

Originally Posted by buck09

For example, I got roasted on another topic when everybody here got behind another person who wanted to get out of testifying against a thief, yet it says:

"If anyone sins in that he hears a public adjuration to testify, and though he is a witness, whether he has seen or come to know the matter, yet does not speak, he shall bear his iniquity;" Lev 5:1.

Seems to me that the person who had their tools stolen had "come to know the matter" yet people here, derided me for having the audacity to tell him that it would be wrong for him not to testify.

Does that law apply?

If that really was the case, then I would say yes it does apply. However, since it was on his own stuff and he didn't press charges, I am not sure if their are provisions for any exemptions Biblical, Common Law, or otherwise

Originally Posted by buck09

How about Lev 18:19? That's part of God's law - should men be found guilty of having relations with their wives during their menstrual cycle? (And before you say that part of the law has expired, let me remind you that there are prohibitions against sexual immorality that can *only* be found in this chapter, so can't be picky-choosy about it either...)

Although I agree that the above is valid today, I also brought up the fact that the Common Law & Constitution dealt w/
LLP protections & violations and I should 've specified that they we're NON-consensual violations, threats, etc . . done against the persons will.
Personally, the idea of menstrual sex makes my stomach turn just reading about it. However, all of God's law cannot be kept. He put the law there to show how short we fall of absolute perfection (see Gal 3:22-26/James 2:10). Man, in his limited capacity, established the common law, which narrowed down God's law to LLP protections. But who knows, there could be an Old English Common Law against such activity which America failed to realize. Remember the Constitution was a restatement of mainly LLP protections, so if the menstrual sex was consenual, then it is not prosecutable. I also am not sure what the penalty provisions were in the Bible for such an act, either

Originally Posted by buck09

How about stoning people who visit fortune-tellers?

The reason I ask, is because if you are consistent in your view that the forms of law you mentioned are binding on all men, then you also should be following these moral laws as well.

I do, through the spirit, follow as much morale established in the Bible as much as possible.
If you really take the time to study Gal3 & James 2, youd see what i was talking about. The Law of The Spirit Of Life is found in Romans 8, which deals w/overcoming sin in the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit and not through man's limited & futile efforts

With respect to the fortune tellers thing, I was an occultist prior to being washed in the Blood Of Christ. I find those practices to be extremely detrimental & object to them at all times. As far as The Law here, though, since it does not constitute a direct LLP violation, then it is not prohibited

Read www.CATfreedom.com and you will see the truth. After reading it if you know the Bible and Believe you will understand.

Bobbie

Originally Posted by faithchris

Read www.CATfreedom.com and you will see the truth. After reading it if you know the Bible and Believe you will understand.

Bobbie

Read it. That has little to nothing to do with the topic being discussed. In adition to being loonies in general, they're also way far afield on Christian doctrine.

Sorry, I gotta call them like I see them - if I had time, I'd put together a cretified affidavit of loonyness and have them served with it.

;-)

Your intitled to your opinion that is what makes the world go around and all else confusing as heck sometimes. I will say that what I was reading here and what was on the other thread are different so I do apolize for that. I just happened on the other thread just now. However, I don't think you really read it and studied it is all I will say to that and if you have read and studied it then please explain your position.
Thanks Bobbie

As far as the other thread it is very good and thanks to all whom put the information together.

Originally Posted by buck09

Read it. That has little to nothing to do with the topic being discussed. In adition to being loonies in general, they're also way far afield on Christian doctrine.

Sorry, I gotta call them like I see them - if I had time, I'd put together a cretified affidavit of loonyness and have them served with it.

;-)

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Weis

I am of the belief that anything done that is contrary to basic, natural,human rights ortheir LLP is codified as being a violation of God's Law

Originally Posted by Buck

What basic, natural, human, rights are there besides God's law?? The whole concept of "natural rights" is man-centered idoltry. Any "rights" one claims not given by God are a violation of the 1st commandment, no?

In addition, where does the Bible explicitly state that God's law only applys to your life, liberty or property? If someone comes to harm and you had the ability to stop it and you don't you are just as guilty. In a case like that neither *your* life, *your* liberty or *your* property is at stake, yet you have still sinned.

Frankly, I find this me-centered interpretation of God's law to be *very* distrubing.

Originally Posted by Weis

If that really was the case, then I would say yes it does apply. However, since it was on his own stuff and he didn't press charges, I am not sure if their are provisions for any exemptions Biblical, Common Law, or otherwise

Originally Posted by Buck

That law does not differentiate between your stuff and your neighbor's stuff. Since he had knowledge of the sin, he was violating that specific biblical law, in addition to the general command to "love your neighbor". By his inaction, he is guilty of the sin.

Originally Posted by Weis

Personally, the idea of menstrual sex makes my stomach turn just reading about it. However, all of God's law cannot be kept. He put the law there to show how short we fall of absolute perfection (see Gal 3:22-26/James 2:10).

Originally Posted by Buck

Sorry, but that's a total cop-out and a slippery slope argument. What violations of God's law do we let slip because "we can't keep them all" and which ones do we punish?? Sorry, but if God's law is normative for all men, then you are responsible and should be punished for everything from murder to menstural sex, right? Does God differentiate? (Answer: no) does he allow us to break some of His laws and not others?

Originally Posted by Weis

Man, in his limited capacity, established the common law, which narrowed down God's law to LLP protections.

Originally Posted by Buck

Well then, it's obvious that man errored in the creation of common law if he decided only to use part of it right? Wouldn't the proper course of action be to enforce common law *and* the rest of God's law they threw out?

Originally Posted by Weis

The Law of The Spirit Of Life is found in Romans 8, which deals w/overcoming sin in the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit and not through man's limited & futile efforts.

Originally Posted by Buck

True, but that still means that people here on earth have to be punished for violating God's law. If we neglect this duty, we are sinning as well, right?

Originally Posted by Weis

With respect to the fortune tellers thing, I was an occultist prior to being washed in the Blood Of Christ. I find those practices to be extremely detrimental & object to them at all times. As far as The Law here, though, since it does not constitute a direct LLP violation, then it is not prohibited.

Originally Posted by Buck

Again, God's law is *not* limited to LLP. That's obvious from a cursory reading of either testament. By putting this thoughly UNBIBLICAL limitation in place, it allows you to pick and choose among which of God's laws you want to follow and which ones you don't. Let's assume, however, that your LLP limitation is correct. I could argue that the fortune teller is depriving a person of their property, since fortune telling is a form of fraud. In addition, a person who relies on a fortune-teller is putting their OWN life at risk by following false Gods. (They also can put other's lives at risk, if they tell others to get their fortune told, instead of worshipping the one true God.)

Therefore, under God's law, both the fortune teller, and the person who pays them violates your LLP concept and should be punished according to God's word. (Stoning for the person who went there, and the fortune-teller has to pay 3-fold restitution - you can't stone her, like God's law says, if your made-up notion of LLP is in place to limit which laws get followed and which ones don't.)

See, that's the real problem here. People love to spout things like "God's law" but when you get down the the particulars, there's all kinds of hand-wringing, backpeddaling and qualifications put in place because, frankly, people are TOO AFRAID to think of what it would actually mean to them if they had to obey all of God's law.

__________________

[weishaupt1776]

reply on page 2

Buck if what you say is true than (You are saying God made it impossible to go to heaven to be with him) none of us have a chance. Since I do not believe that and realize if we defend ourselves and that may mean take a life "Thou shalt not kill" or looking at a handsome man would make me a sinner etc. etc. God knows we are human and he knows what we live with and what is going on as long as we choose to make the best choices that we are faced with by what his teachings are than I am sure he will understand. If not than in hell we shall all be in the end.

Bobbie

[BoyntonStu]

""Since I do not believe that and realize if we defend ourselves and that may mean take a life "Thou shalt not kill" "

Sorry, you have it incorrect. "Though Shall Not Murder" is the correct translation of the Hebrew.

Defense of one's life is not a violation of any Commandment that I know of.


I am so disappointed that even though there is not a single clegyman that I ever met that did not disagree with what I have just written, they absolutely refuse to correct the obvious error.

This error has caused too many nice folks to needlessly give up their lives.

The part that I dislike the most about most Christian leaders is their lack of faith in the people to accept corrections of the clergymen's errors.

Have faith is all most know what to say.

BoyntonStu