Moral Law vs Civil Law

I drive an 18 wheeler, and at times on one of the Los Angeles freeways, it would be immoral/dangerous to drive 55 which is the posted limit. I often find I'm traveling 65 or a little more, in order to "feel" the safest, for others and myself. And believe me the police don't interfere.

 

Just like yours.

 

In fact, I would say that civil disobedience is at times mandatory in order to adhere to moral law.

 

Seems to me that some think the Civil Law is the Law of God and the Commandments are just some "outdated" material.

 

Sad but true Br Bob!

 

D.L Moody had a good sermon on the authority of the Ten Commandments today -- I am happy to post the link if you like.

 

I read it Bob.

 

Civil Law is supposed to be based upon the last 6 of the Ten Commandments, the commandments that have to do with how to love our neighbor.

The first 4 commandments, having to do with how we worship God, the Government has no right to interfere with. That is a matter between you and God, your own conscience.

Claudia

 

Well said according to today's mores.
What you really mean is this:
It's ok to break the law because every one else is doing it.
If everyone else is committing adultery that makes is right also.
If every student cheats on their exams that is the moral thing to do.
If every driver speeds that is the moral thing to do.
Break the law if every one else breaks the law. That is what our siciety has come to. Abortion is right because "everyone does it." That is the way our young people think today. And you wonder why! Who is setting the example??

 

OK, would you have me drive 55MPH, when so doing would increase, by a lot, the probability of an accident?

And the accusational/or maybe confrontational tone of the rest of your diatribe, angers me.

Peace be on you, as I respect your opinion on most issues a great deal.

 

I am not trying to be deliberately confrontational, but just pointing out the facts.
How can I conscientiously stand in front of the pulpit and preach to my congregation avoid sin, to keep the law, if I am a hypocrite that deliberately breaks the law? My children, who tralvel with me all the time will see right through that. It it is ok for father to sin and go against his own convictions, then his convictions don't mean much. I believe many pastors have had children go astray for precisely those reasons--hypocrisy in the home--preaching one standard and living another.

The basic religious foundation of every educational institution in America is humanism. Our children are bombarded with it on a daily basis. Humanism teaches that there are no absolutes. Are we going to teach that very principle and reinforce it by our own actions. The Ten Commandments are absolutes. There are many absolutes in the Bible. We beleive in absolutes. But the only absolute in humansism is "there are no absolutes." It is a philosophy of relativism which leads to anarchy. We don't have the right to set our own laws. Laws were not made to be broken (contrary to some people's thinking).

When I keep the speed limit, and see vehicles zoom past me, I often see those same vehicles pulled over and fined or ticketed for their crime. I don't have any speeding tickets. I may have to drive in the right lane of the highway, but that doesn't bother me. What does bother me is large trucks who refuse to keep the speed limit and are passing most of the vehicles on the hiway in the left lane of the hiway. Usually the sign says: "Trucks use right lane."

Statistics (in our province) say that speeding is the #1 cause of road accidents. Should we also be a contributing factor to that statisitic by breaking the law? One can rationalize all they want by thinking they are driving more safely by speeding, but I don't buy it. Just because everyone else is doing it doesn't make it right.

 

How would that be so, considering scriptural commands for slaves to obey their earthly masters? Obviously runaway slaves were not doing that and those hiding them or helping them escape were abetting a violation of scriptural command. The slave owners, of course, came enormously short of accepting their slaves as even human, much less as brothers, as in the case of Philemon and Onesimus.

Or is abetting a violation not itself a violation? That is the reason I stopped giving loans to a bunch of guys I worked with 20+ years ago in this wood shop; I had ample evidence they were buying joints with it; even seen them smoke them on the premises. So I 'turned away from those who wanted to borrow,' even though Jesus clearly said to not do that, in order to avoid abetting a violation of civil [illegal drug] and moral [intoxication] law.

In both examples above, there are principles to 'weigh,' and we have none but our own reason for the solutions.

 

Rahab is counted among the blessed saints of Heb 11 for lying to the people of her city and hiding the spies from Israel.

She said that all her city was in fear having heard what the great God of Israel had done to the Egyptians.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Is there not a danger in being too conscious of following the letter of the law -- moral or civil?

 

The Bible never complains "they have followed My Word TOO WELL! They need to back off a bit and mix in more rebellion" -- agreed?

What we DO find is that OBEDIENCE is not a substitute for FAITH nor a means of salvation EVEN when it is obedience to "Love your Neighbor" Lev 19:18.

And that point keeps getting made time after time in the NT and OT.

In Christ,

Bob

 

If many truckers would agree to drive the speed limit then there would be some changes i the law made.