0
funjumper101

Freedom OF religion means freedom FROM religion

Recommended Posts

Quote

that's a lot of fluff about yourself without really addressing the questions you posed.



Not really... maybe it will make more sense with, the “religion of America.” I pretty much believe what the Founders believed. I might be able to get to it tonight... I’ll try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong wrong wrong wrong.

And I see you like to take afternoon naps... are you five?

:)
Yeeaaaa... ok... back to our friend, Wiki. Lets take a look at George II... the ruling king before the DOI:

“He was the last British monarch to have been born outside GB, and was famous for his numerous conflicts with his father and, subsequently, with his son. As king, he exercised little control over policy in his early reign, the government instead being controlled by Great Britain's parliament. Before that, most kings possessed great power over their parliaments. He was also the last British monarch to lead an army in battle.”

So yes... you are factual correct that there was a Parliamentary Democracy (a form of government that always leads to tyranny) in place in GB at the time of the Revolutionary War and the DOI. However, up until right before those things, the King “possessed great power over their parliaments,” essentially being oppressive either way.

Regardless of those facts, I was establishing, that when power comes from God... in GB under a king (prior to having the form of government that always leads to tyranny) the King had a divine right to rule and his power came directly from God, so he could then control the people. In a Parliamentary Democracy, there is no concern of God, whether leaders believe in a creator or not. It is a Nation of Men... a nation where the majority rules... which leads to mob rule, which always leads to tyranny.

In a Republic... as George Washington said, “We are a nation of laws, not of men.”

I was stating that with God, the Founder’s changed that equation. They did so through Natural Law, rights and power from God, go directly to the people. Natural Law was around long before GB adopted, a form of government that always leads to tyranny. ;)

Either way... GB today, is not a free nation. Google: Daniel Hannan.

So really... the point you are trying to argue, makes about as much sense as banging your head against the wall when you’re bored. It is fun though ey?! :P

And if that’s too much to take in... have a juice box, take a nap, and then post a question.

I’ll respond when I can...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think most people on here who "make such a big deal about it" are doing it more out of boredom.



A constitution of government once changed from freedom, can never be restored, liberty, once lost, is lost forever. John Adams to Abigail Adams... July 7th, 1775

Well... I’m not bored. I’m actually really busy, and wish I had more time to read, and educate myself in history. Many books sit unread in my room. Wish I had more time to post too...

Anyone see John Adams... on HBO?

He was in France, trying to muster support for the Revolution. He was asked if he had been to the Opera... replied that he didn’t have time, that his profession gave him little free time for the finer arts. He was laughed at... he then replied:

“I must study politics and war, that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy, natural history and naval architecture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, tapestry, and porcelain.”

Freedom can be lost... nations like America do not survive when the people forget their history... because there are those, that wish to destroy our constitution, brick by brick.

And it started long before Bush and Obama...

I don’t want children... but I would like my sister’s children to be free.

This topic matters... and everyone always comes back to the same thing... religion.

Its not about religion... its about God. Natural law...

Without God… your rights come from Men… and when your rights come from Men, you have tyranny… you will always have oppression.

Power Corrupts... Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Regardless of those facts, I was establishing, that when power comes from God... in GB under a king (prior to having the form of government that always leads to tyranny) the King had a divine right to rule and his power came directly from God, so he could then control the people. In a Parliamentary Democracy, there is no concern of God, whether leaders believe in a creator or not. It is a Nation of Men... a nation where the majority rules... which leads to mob rule, which always leads to tyranny.



So... a King's right to control the populace isn't Tyranny, as long as someone says it's from God - but the right of a democratically elected Parliament to rule is Tyranny, as long as no-one says it's from God?

Quote

I was stating that with God, the Founder’s changed that equation. They did so through Natural Law, rights and power from God, go directly to the people.



Apart from the fact that a Creator is mentioned in the Declaration, in what way do you think that American citizens actually possess God's power to rule themselves in a way that Uk citizens don't?

Quote

Natural Law was around long before GB adopted, a form of government that always leads to tyranny.



Lot's of Parliaments around in Europe at the moment, not so much tyranny though...
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My questionable logic...? Hehe... well, the things I have spoken about here, is the logic of the Founders. I’m glad you think you are smarter than them... I’m not.

And most of your questions are already answered... no one knows... we have finite minds. What created the creator, what created the singularity within the “big bang”, those are both infinite answers... can’t help ya... wish I knew. I’m not worried about the specifics till death, but I am concerned with Natural Law... history and preserving the Republic.

Quote

Nowhere in history can one name any state, of any form (except for the ones still going) that has not ended in tyranny or invasion.



One place... America... as a Republic... before Teddy, Wilson and FDR.

Are you kidding? We are ending in tyranny right now... but it can be stopped.

Quote

Depends on what arms and in what situations. Just like your country.



You are not allowed to own a fire arm... plain and simple. Yet you used too...

Our Founders gave us the constitution... so that we would never again need to pick up muskets. However, if needed... they gave us the 2nd amendment to protect ourselves.

I don’t need a 50cal... my glock and AR-15 are just fine. Two things you can’t own where you live. Riiight?

Quote

Right. So when the Gov't makes an unconstitutional law God comes down and smites them, does he?



Nope... read the words of the Founders. Without an educated public, the Republic will fail... the constitution is only a document, its takes the power of the people, to protect it.

If the people don’t know what their rights are... or how to protect the constitution... those in power, will completely disregard it. Patriot Act? Bush? Obama? Yeeaaaa...

Quote

So... a King's right to control the populace isn't Tyranny, as long as someone says it's from God



However, up until right before those things, the King “possessed great power over their parliaments,” essentially being oppressive either way.

As my 8th grade English teacher would say... when someone asked a stupid question... reading is fundamental. Both are oppressive...

Quote

Apart from the fact that a Creator is mentioned in the Declaration, in what way do you think that American citizens actually possess God's power to rule themselves in a way that Uk citizens don't?



Because a majority ruling by your parliament, can take away any of your “rights.” Not here... congress cannot take away any rights, they have no power... the people have the power. Nor can congress create rights... rights only come from God... rights come from our humanity.

Quote

Lot's of Parliaments around in Europe at the moment, not so much tyranny though...



Care to tell me what is going on Greece right now? And how they just lost their voting rights within the EU... hmmm... they now have no right to vote... taken by a majority vote of other Parliamentary Democracies...

Interesting...

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

One place... America... as a Republic... before Teddy, Wilson and FDR.

Are you kidding? We are ending in tyranny right now



So your natural law and rights from God actually have no affect at all, then?

Quote

You are not allowed to own a fire arm... plain and simple.



Plainly and simply wrong.

Quote

Nope... read the words of the Founders. Without an educated public, the Republic will fail... the constitution is only a document, its takes the power of the people, to protect it.



That's the second time this post that you've stated the law and the power has absolutely nothing to do with God.

Keep your story straight.

Quote

Because a majority ruling by your parliament, can take away any of your “rights.” Not here... congress cannot take away any rights, they have no power... the people have the power. Nor can congress create rights... rights only come from God... rights come from our humanity.



Except that, realistically and functionally, our Parliament cannot take away 'any' of our rights, and your Congress can take away ones that it shouldn't. As you've just said. God doesn't seem too bothered, though.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Without God… your rights come from Men… and when your rights come from Men, you have tyranny… you will always have oppression....

Nope... read the words of the Founders. Without an educated public, the Republic will fail... the constitution is only a document, its takes the power of the people, to protect it.



Absolute contradiction contradicts, absolutely.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abolutely with you Jakee - as a former UK resident and holder of a burgundy as well as dark-blue passport, I can back you up on the 'you can't own a gun in the UK' thing. One might not be able to easily own a firearm but it is possible, legal and I've done it in the UK.

For those interested in pure thought approaches to why we are here, and why what we see is seemingly just perfect for our needs (y'know, the sort of thing which makes people think there might be a god), I suggest reading something on the anthropic pricinple (starting with the weak version, which is a truism by any standard although it asserts nothing). Whilst occasionally hijacked by creationists and manipulated to support their arguments, it is an excellent starting point for a rational discussion on the subject.

Also, the excellent book 'The Goldilocks Enigma' by Paul Davies goes to great lengths to explore the matter fairly, giving mind to theists as well as non-theists in the exploration of the nature of existence. If you don't own a copy you're missing out, whichever side of the theism fence you sit on.

I rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Care to elaborate on Cicero, and the Founders?

Sure. Before we start on Cicero, though, there's an important point to bring up about him. From the Encyclopedia of Religion:

===============
In discussions of Cicero and religion one should avoid the temptation to anachronistically confuse what may be defined as the religion of the ancient Romans with the common idea of religion in modern times, and one should be careful to distinguish what might be termed ancient "personal religion" from public and private devotion and cult (sacra publica, sacra privata). Personal religion for a man of learning such as Cicero meant philosophical speculation. For him, investigation into the nature of the gods and personal opinion on divinity belonged to the sphere of philosophy, while "religion" indicated an official institution with the purpose of paying homage to the essential values of the res publica.
===============

So Cicero's references to God in his philosophical writings were intended as a reflection on philosophy rather than a reflection on religious worship and observation, much the same way scientists considered themselves "natural philosophers" during Newton's time (although they did not practice what we would consider philosophy today.)

But anyway -

In Cicero's writings he often refers to 'the Gods' since at the time most Romans had a polytheistic religion. Indeed, one of his discourses was "On the Nature of the Gods" and explicitly rejects the coming Christian view of God (i.e. God is all powerful, loves people, and after death rewards the good and punishes the bad.)

This is the problem with basing any form of government on anything that someone believes God tells them. There are just too many different gods. In Cicero's case, his writings were not invalidated just because rejects the God you believe to be the real one - indeed, he is careful to make it clear that his views on law and government do not require any specific God, spirit or other supernatural force for their validity.

For a good discussion of what the Founding Fathers thought of religion, I highly recommend "The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America" by Frank Lambert. He uses their own writings to explain their positions on religion and the influence it had on their work on the Constitution and early government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Bill.

After dmcoco suggested reading about cicero, I spent last night doing just that. None of it seemed to support the idea that he believed in any god, and certainly not the christian god. His references were always to "the gods". He also seemed to embrace epicureanism for at least a part of his life, and therefore no god, or gods.

Glad to see someone else got the same impression.



Say what you mean. Do what you say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is the problem with basing any form of government on anything that someone believes God tells them. There are just too many different gods.



In addition since no diety has ever contradicted, agreed, or denied what one has supposedly been told, there is no way to confirm/deny what they say is true.

The foundation then has to be blind faith which is no foundation to base anything logical off of.
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup... you got me! I'm just a dumb dumb dummy... I have no idea what the hell I'm talking about.

Sigh... damn, you really put me in my place.

Yeeeeaa, NO. ;)

First of all... I did say I was quite busy and wished I had more time to post, did I not?

Thankfully, I completed all my paramedic field requirements on Sunday... and completed a shit load of Patient Assessment reports yesterday. Big relief to be done! Now I just have to study for National Registry testing... but I’ll have much more time now, since the majority of my free time will not longer be spent in a fire house.


Ok... guns in the UK. Lets go back to that beloved wiki:

To obtain a firearm certificate, the police must be convinced that a person has "good reason" to own each gun, and that they can be trusted with it "without danger to the public safety or to the peace". Under Home Office guidelines, gun licenses are only issued if a person has legitimate sporting or work-related reasons for owning a gun. Since 1946, self-defense has not been considered a valid reason to own a gun.

The current licensing procedure involves: positive verification of identity, two referees of verifiable good character who have known the applicant for at least two years (and who may themselves be interviewed and/or investigated as part of the certification), approval of the application by the applicant's own family doctor, an inspection of the premises and cabinet where guns will be kept and a face-to-face interview by a Firearms Enquiry Officer (FEO) also known as a Firearms Liaison Officer (FLO). A thorough background check of the applicant is then made by Special Branch on behalf of the firearms licensing department. Only when all these stages have been satisfactorily completed will a license be issued.


Wow! That sounds like your country is bursting with freedom!

Here in Virginia... I can go down to the gun shop right now, and be home with a Glock in about 30 min. A quick background check is required, to ensure I have neither broken the laws of the Republic, nor the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, but that’s it... and I can also keep it loaded under my pillow if I so please.

It is an individual's right... not a privilege. If I violate the law or some else’s rights, than that changes.

Unlike you, we are innocent until proven guilt. The VA Tech shooting never would have happened had warning signs been followed. He had every right to purchase a gun... he had violated no laws. Did he need serious help long before the incident, and was it wildly obvious? Yup!

And I don’t agree with licensing of any kind. Why? Because then the tyrant knows where all the guns are... that is the reason for the second amendment. It was out of fear of an oppressive government... but self-defense is more than reasonable here also.


The Encyclopedia of Religion... hmm. Philosophical speculation... okay... whatever.

That entire paragraph is irrelevant to the subject at hand... and after reading it many times, I can find so many things problematic with it... but again, irrelevant, because...

“In discussions of Cicero and religion…” See, right there is the problem... Religion.

As said above... religion, whether it is ancient or modern, is a way to interpret god, a creator, a higher power of some form. You don't need religion to have God, or Gods. One can, speculate, about the existence of God, without having a structured system of ideas and/or beliefs... a religion.

Your next three paragraphs... interesting that you decide to continue on about Cicero and, religion, when I clearly brought him up in regards to Natural Law... and nothing you posted had anything to do with Natural Law.

People do write different things, at different periods in their life. Trying closer to his death... and focus on Natural Law.

Quote

I highly recommend "The Founding Fathers and the Place of Religion in America" by Frank Lambert.



Have you read it? What does it say about Natural Law? If it says nothing... it’s incomplete and a complete waste of time... and I would also question its validity.

While you try again... I’ll start typing as well... about Natural Law.

Oh and, just a side note... Natural Law has nothing to do with Christianity.

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ok... guns in the UK. Lets go back to that beloved wiki:

To obtain a firearm certificate, the police must be convinced that a person has "good reason" to own each gun, and that they can be trusted with it "without danger to the public safety or to the peace". Under Home Office guidelines, gun licenses are only issued if a person has legitimate sporting or work-related reasons for owning a gun. Since 1946, self-defense has not been considered a valid reason to own a gun.

The current licensing procedure involves: positive verification of identity, two referees of verifiable good character who have known the applicant for at least two years (and who may themselves be interviewed and/or investigated as part of the certification), approval of the application by the applicant's own family doctor, an inspection of the premises and cabinet where guns will be kept and a face-to-face interview by a Firearms Enquiry Officer (FEO) also known as a Firearms Liaison Officer (FLO). A thorough background check of the applicant is then made by Special Branch on behalf of the firearms licensing department. Only when all these stages have been satisfactorily completed will a license be issued.



So you acknowledge that you are quite simply wrong. That's a good start.

Now how about you address the glaring contradictions in your argument about legitimate power only stemming from God but actually having nothing to do with god?
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, I can admit I was wrong, to a degree... you can indeed own a firearm, its just ridiculously difficult and is an extreme invasion of personal privacy, by American standards. In speaking to UK BASE friends I knew it was, possible, but the circumstances for owning one were so extremely limited, which is why the majority of the population do not own a firearm... which is why I said what I said.

So, if you’re not police or some form of security... not a hunter (do they even still allow any of that there? Serious question... cause Cast Sunstein is trying to end hunting here... and fishing... yea... Nudge... hmm, no thanks Cast), and if self-defense is not adequate? Well, what is the point of a gun? What is legitimate sporting? Is it just a wording game? I say I wanna be a good target shooter and shoot every weekend... spend all my money on bullets. Is that good enough?

Well... let’s give time for an explanation on Natural Law... I’m patient. And with the proper explanation, it will clarify your twisting of my words.

Natural Law is God’s Law. It has everything to do with God... just not religion.

Separation of “church” and “state”, yes... but you can't separate God from the Republic... because your unalienable rights come from God... Natural Law.

Religion is essential to maintaining a moral and virtuous Republic. Any religion... and to the founders, it was the “religion of America.” Regardless of their own, “personal” religions...

It’s going to come, I promise... but for now... billvon, the mic is all yours bro.

Cicero and Natural Law...?

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Well... let’s give time for an explanation on Natural Law... I’m patient.



Why do you need time? If you know what your talking about, explain it now.

Quote

And with the proper explanation, it will clarify your twisting of my words.

Natural Law is God’s Law. It has everything to do with God... just not religion.

Separation of “church” and “state”, yes... but you can't separate God from the Republic... because your unalienable rights come from God... Natural Law.



What twisting? And why are you pointing out the difference between god and religion? That has nothing to do with the glaring holes and contradictions that I've pointed out in your argument.
Do you want to have an ideagasm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t need more time... I am giving Billvon time, because he answered the wrong question.
Billvon, do you wish to respond, about Natural Law? Or no? Anything in that book?

Quote




:)
It’s about the rights of Man, vs. the rights of Men.

It’s about the American Revolution, vs. the French Revolution.

Big differences...

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Natural Law is God’s Law.

If you want to define "God" as "nature" then sure, that works. Sort of a superficial definition though.

>Separation of “church” and “state”, yes... but you can't separate God
>from the Republic... because your unalienable rights come from God...
>Natural Law.

You can't separate our government from natural law - but you can sure separate any of the thousands of personal or institutional beliefs about God from government, and prohibit the government from making law based on them. Which the Constitution, explicitly, does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1st PRINCIPLE

The Only Reliable Basis for Sound Government and Just Human Relations Is Natural Law


Most modern Americans have never studied Natural Law. They are therefore mystified by the constant reference to Natural Law by the Founding Fathers. Blackstone confirmed the wisdom of the Founders by stating that it is the only reliable basis for a stable society and a system of justice. Then what is Natural Law? A good place to seek out the answer is in the writings of one of the American Founders’ favorite authors. Marcus Tullius Cicero.

The Life and Writings of Cicero

It was Cicero who cut sharply through the political astigmatism and philosophical errors of both Plato and Aristotle to discover the touchstone for good laws, sound government, and the long-range formula for happy human relations. In the Founders’ roster of great political thinkers, Cicero was high on the list.

Dr. William Ebenstein of Princeton says:
The only Roman political writer who has exercised enduring influence throughout the ages is Cicero (106-43 B.C.).... Cicero studied law in Rome, and philosophy in Athens… He became the leading lawyer of his time and also rose to the highest office of state [Roman Consul].
....Yet his life was not free of sadness; only five years after he had held the highest office in Rome, the consulate, he found himself in exile for a year.
....Cicero nevertheless showed considerable personal courage in opposing the drift towards dictatorship based on popular support. Caesar was assassinated in 44 B.C., and a year later, in 43 B.C., Cicero was murdered by the henchmen of Anthony, a member of the triumvirate set up after Caesar’s death.

So out of Cicero’s maelstrom of turbulent experience with power politics, plus his intense study of all forms of political systems, he wrote his landmark book on the Republic and the Laws. In these writings Cicero projected the grandeur and promise of some future society based on Natural Law.

The American Founding Fathers obviously shared a profound appreciation of Cicero’s dream because they envisioned just such a commonwealth of prosperity and justice for themselves and their posterity. They saw in Cicero’s writings the necessary ingredients for the model society which they eventually hoped to build.

Cicero’s Fundamental Principles

To Cicero, the building of a society on principles of Natural Law was nothing more nor less than recognizing and identifying the rules of “right conduct” with the laws of the Supreme Creator of the universe. History demonstrates that even in those nations sometimes described as “pagan” there were sharp, penetrating minds like Cicero’s who reasoned their way through the labyrinths of natural phenomena to see behind the cosmic universe, as well as the unfolding of their own lives, the brilliant intelligence of a supreme Designer with an ongoing interest in both human and cosmic affairs.

Cicero’s compelling honesty led him to conclude that once the reality of the Creator is clearly identified in the mind, the only intelligent approach to government, justice, and human relations is in terms of the laws which the Supreme Creator has already establish. The Creator’s order of things is called Natural Law.

A fundamental presupposition of Natural Law is that man’s reasoning power is a special dispensation of the Creator and is closely akin to the rational and reasoning power of the Creator himself. In other words, man shares with his Creator this quality of utilizing a rational approach to solving problems, and the reasoning of the mind will generally lead to common-sense conclusions based on what Jefferson called “the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God” (The Declaration of Independence).

Let us now examine the major precepts of Natural Law, which so profoundly impressed the Founding Fathers.

Natural Law is Eternal and Universal

First of all, Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.”
Then he says:

True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions… It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish it entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.

In these few lines the student encounters concepts which were repeated by the American Founders a thousands times. The Law of Nature or Nature’s God is eternal in its basic goodness; it is universal in its application. It is a code of “right reason” from the Creator himself. It cannot be altered. It cannot be repealed. It cannot be abandoned by legislators or the people themselves, even though they may pretend to do so. In Natural Law we are dealing with factors of absolute reality. It is basic in its principles, comprehensible to the human mind, and totally correct and morally right in its general operation.

To the Founding Fathers as well as to Blackstone, John Locke, Montesquieu, and Cicero, this was a monumental discovery.

The Divine Gift of Reason

To Cicero it was an obvious and remarkable thing that man had been endowed with a rich quality of mind that does not exist among other forms of life except in the most miniscule proportions. Between man and other creatures there is a gigantic gap insofar as mental processes are concerned. Cicero as well as the Founders viewed this as a special, divine endowment from the Creator. Cicero wrote:

The animal which we call man, endowed with foresight and quick intelligence, complex, keen, possessing memory, full of reason and prudence, has been given a certain distinguished status by the Supreme God who created him; for he is the only one among so many different kinds and varieties of living beings who has a share in reason and thought, while all the rest are deprived of it. But what is more divine, I will not say in man only, but in all heaven and earth, than reason? And reason, when it is full grown and perfected, is rightly called wisdom. Therefore, since there is nothing better than reason, and since it exists both in man and God, the first common possession of man and God is reason. But those who have reason in common must also have right reason in common. And since right reason is Law, we must believe that men have Law also in common with the gods. Further, those who share Law must also share Justice; and those who share these are to be regarded as members of the same commonwealth. If indeed they obey the same authorities and powers, this is true in a far greater degree; but as a matter of fact they do obey this celestial system, the divine mind, and the God of transcendent power. Hence we must now conceive of this whole universe as one commonwealth of which both gods and men are members.

No prophet of the Old Testament or the Gospel teachers of the New Testament ever said it any better.
The First Great Commandment

Cicero had comprehended the magnificence of the first great commandment to love, respect, and obey the all-wise Creator. He put this precept in proper perspective by saying that God’s law is “right reason.” When perfectly understood it is called “wisdom.” When applied by government in regulating human relations it is called “justice.” When people unite together in a covenant or compact under this law, they become a true “commonwealth,” and since they intend to administer their affairs under God’s law, they belong to his commonwealth.

Thus Cicero came to what Jews and Christians call the first great commandment.

It will be recalled that a lawyer tried to discredit Jesus by asking him, “Master, which is the great commandment in the Law?” Of course, there were hundreds of commandments, and the question was designed as a clever stratagem to embarrass Jesus. But Jesus was not embarrassed. He simply replied: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment.”

The lawyer was amazed by this astute and ready response from the Galilean carpenter. But Jesus was not through. He added: “And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:36-40)

The astonished lawyer simply replied: “Well, Master, thou hast said the truth!”

Jesus had picked out what he considered to be the foremost commandment of Deuteronomy 6:4-5, and then selected what he considered to be the second most important commandment clear over in Leviticus 19:18.

The Second Great Commandment

It is interesting that Cicero, without being either a Christian or a Jew, was able to discover the power and fundamental significance of obedience, not only to the first great commandment, but to the second one as well. His great mind instinctively led him to comprehend the beauty and felicity of what Jesus had identified as the second great commandment: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”

Dr. William Ebenstein comments on this rather fascinating insight among Cicero’s writings by saying:
There is another note, too, in Cicero that points forward, toward Christianity, rather than backwards, to Plato and Aristotle: Cicero’s consciousness of love as a mighty social bond.

Cicero raises this point in connection with his discussion of Justice. He points out that Justice is impossible except under the principles of God’s just law... “For these virtues originate in our natural inclination to love our fellow-men, and this is the foundation of justice.”

So to Cicero, the glue which holds a body of human beings together in the commonwealth of a just society is love - love of God; love of God’s great law of Justice; and love of one’s fellow-men which provides the desire to promote true justice among mankind.

All Mankind Can Be Taught God’s Law or Virtue

Cicero projected throughout his writings a particularity optimistic view of the potential improvement of human beings by teaching them the elements of virtue through education. He wrote:

Out of all the material of the philosophers’ discussion, surely there comes nothing more valuable than the full realization that we are born for Justice, and the right is based, not upon men’s opinions, but upon Nature. This fact will immediately be plain if you once get a clear conception of man’s fellowship and union with his fellow men... However we may define man, a single definition will apply to all. This is a sufficient proof that there is no difference in kind between man and man... IN FACT, THERE IS NO HUMAN BEING OF ANY RACE WHO, IF HE FINDS A GUIDE, CANNOT ATTAIN TO VIRTUE.

Legislation in Violation of God’s Natural Law Is a Scourge to Humanity

We cannot complete our review of Cicero’s discourse on Natural Law without including his warning against legislators who undertake to pass laws which violate the “laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Cicero wrote:

But the most foolish notion of all is the belief that everything is just which is found in the customs or laws of nations... What of the many deadly, the many pestilential statutes which nations put in force? These no more deserve to be called laws than the rules a band of robbers might pass in their assembly. For if ignorant and unskilled men have prescribed deadly poisons instead of healing drugs, these cannot possibly be called physicians’ prescriptions; neither in a nation can a statute of any sort be called a law, even though the nation, in spite of being a ruinous regulation has accepted it.

All Law Should Be Measured Against God’s Law

Cicero then set forth the means by which people may judge between good and evil laws. All laws must be measured by God’s Law, which is described by Cicero as follows:

Therefore Law [of the Creator] is the distinction between things just and unjust, made in agreement with that primal and most ancient of all things, Nature; and in conformity to Nature’s standard are framed those human laws which inflict punishment upon the wicked and protect the good.

Cicero also emphasized that the essence of an evil law cannot be mended through ratification by the legislature or by popular acclaim. Justice can never be expected from laws arbitrarily passed in violation of standards set up under the laws of Nature or the laws of the Creator. Here is his argument:

But if the principles of Justice were founded on the decrees of peoples, the edicts of princes, or the decisions of judges, then Justice would sanction robbery and adultery and forgery of wills, in case these acts were approved by the votes or decrees of the populace. But if so great a power belongs to the decisions and decrees of fools that the laws of Nature can be changed by their votes, then why do they not ordain that what is bad and baneful shall be considered good and salutary? Or, if a law can make Justice Injustice, can it not also make good out of bad?

Cicero’s Conclusion

It was clear to Cicero as he came toward the close of his life that men must eliminate the depravity that had lodged itself in society. He felt they must return to the high road of Natural Law. They must pledge obedience to the mandates of a loving and concerned Creator. What promise of unprecedented grandeur awaited that future society which would undertake it! He wrote:

As one and the same Nature holds together and supports the universe, all of whose parts are in harmony with one another, so men are united in Nature; but by reason of their depravity they quarrel, not realizing that they are of one blood and subject to one and the same protecting power. If this fact were understood, surely man would live the life of the gods!

The American Founders believed this. They embraced the obvious necessity of building a highly moral and virtuous society. The Founders wanted to lift mankind from the common depravity and chicanery of past civilizations, and to lay the foundation for a new kind of civilization built on freedom for the individual and prosperity for the whole commonwealth. This is why they build their system on Natural Law.

Examples of Natural Law

It may be surprising, even to Americans, to discover how much of their Constitution and their lifestyle is based on principles of Natural Law. For example:

The concept of UNALIENABLE RIGHTS is based on Natural Law.
The concept of UNALIENABLE DUTIES is based on Natural Law.
The concept of HABEAS CORPUS is based on Natural Law.
The concept of LIMITED GOVERNMENT is based on Natural Law.
The concept of SPERATION OF POWERS is based on Natural Law.
The concept of CHECKS AND BALANCES to correct abuses by peaceful means is based on Natural Law.
The right of SELF-PRESERVATION is based on Natural Law.
The right to CONTRACT is based on Natural Law.
The concept of JUSTICE BY REPARATIONS or paying for damages is based on Natural Law.
The right to BEAR ARMS is based on Natural Law.
The principle of NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION is based on Natural Law.

These few examples will illustrate how extensively the entire American constitutional system is grounded in Natural Law. In fact, Natural Law is the foundation and encompassing framework for everything we have come to call “People’s Law.”

This is precisely what Thomas Jefferson was talking about when he wrote in the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

These well-remembered phrases from America’s initial charter of liberty are all primary pre-suppositions under the principles of Natural Law.

D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Most modern Americans have never studied Natural Law.



Mostly because you can't study something very well that doesn't really exist the way you've wanted to define it.

Prove to me there is a "creator" and only then will I be willing to accept the idea that "The Creator’s order of things is called Natural Law."

Prove to me "the creator" somehow made these ideas known to man and that man didn't just make them up all on his own.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0