Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

[Greatest I am]

Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

Some Muslim communities run with Sharia law. Other nations with a high Muslim population promote Sharia. It would seem from this phenomenon that Muslim law can be used to run a society as it does so in a few countries.

I know of no country that uses Christian or biblical law and have not heard of any Christian effort to have their law accepted in their nation.

This indicates that either Muslims are more religious than Christians, or Christians know that their laws would never be accepted as the law of the land.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of nations have rejected both sets of religious laws for a more secular approach to law and governance.

Briefly ---

Which of these three sets of laws do you think are superior and why?

Regards
DL

 

[billvon]

Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

They do; it's called Western law. It is founded on Christian principles. Even the documents that we used to establish law in this country refer to God. It hasn't been until relatively recently (1950 or so) that US courts have stopped using "it's what God would have wanted" to decide cases.

 

[wegs]

Hello;

Matthew: 15-22 becomes the 'first' building block with which Christians formed the belief that Jesus was suggesting separation of Church and State.

And I for one, like it that way. lol

Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

Some Muslim communities run with Sharia law. Other nations with a high Muslim population promote Sharia. It would seem from this phenomenon that Muslim law can be used to run a society as it does so in a few countries.

I know of no country that uses Christian or biblical law and have not heard of any Christian effort to have their law accepted in their nation.

This indicates that either Muslims are more religious than Christians, or Christians know that their laws would never be accepted as the law of the land.

Meanwhile, the vast majority of nations have rejected both sets of religious laws for a more secular approach to law and governance.

Briefly ---

Which of these three sets of laws do you think are superior and why?

Regards
DL

 

[spidergoat]

Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

It's called the enlightenment. It improved society in a way that centuries of Christian rule never did.

 

[Gage]

They do; it's called Western law. It is founded on Christian principles. Even the documents that we used to establish law in this country refer to God. It hasn't been until relatively recently (1950 or so) that US courts have stopped using "it's what God would have wanted" to decide cases.

+1 It's ingrained in us, we've become desensitized to it.

 

[wegs]

They do; it's called Western law. It is founded on Christian principles. Even the documents that we used to establish law in this country refer to God. It hasn't been until relatively recently (1950 or so) that US courts have stopped using "it's what God would have wanted" to decide cases.

I completely hadn't thought along these lines, because as Gage's post points out...we have grown desensitized to it.
Despite my own beliefs, Ive never believed in "faith" or a "majority religion" becoming part of a governing set of laws. There is too much danger in that.

As always, billvon, you illuminate important points and get me to think.

 

[Greatest I am]

They do; it's called Western law. It is founded on Christian principles. Even the documents that we used to establish law in this country refer to God. It hasn't been until relatively recently (1950 or so) that US courts have stopped using "it's what God would have wanted" to decide cases.

Most of the Ten Commandments are in the Book of the Dead.
Nothing in Christianity is unique in terms of moral values. A lot is immoral in fact.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

Hello;

Matthew: 15-22 becomes the 'first' building block with which Christians formed the belief that Jesus was suggesting separation of Church and State.

And I for one, like it that way. lol

If only it were true.

It may have been written as the first building block but we both know that the churches and religions went from there to controlling most governments to the point like England Germany and France, the government had to fight back. Religions became too powerful.

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

It's called the enlightenment. It improved society in a way that centuries of Christian rule never did.

Are you saying enlightened Christians know that their laws suck?

Or that secularism had to teach them what good laws where?

Regards
DL

 

[billvon]

Most of the Ten Commandments are in the Book of the Dead.

And still appear on some US courthouses.

 

[spidergoat]

And still appear on some US courthouses.

The facade of a courthouse is not a legally binding document.

 

[spidergoat]

Are you saying enlightened Christians know that their laws suck?

Or that secularism had to teach them what good laws where?

Regards
DL

Yes, both.

 

[Greatest I am]

Yes, both.

20/20

Regards
DL

 

[Greatest I am]

And still appear on some US courthouses.

Not surprising given the heritage.
They are still a plagiarized set of rules.

Regards
DL

 

[Yazata]

Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

Christianity isn't a legalistic religion in the same way that traditional Judaism and Islam are. Christianity doesn't possess a detailed law governing all aspects of life. Christian clergy aren't primarily jurists and legal scholars.

 

[Yazata]

They do; it's called Western law.

I think that the source of most Western law is ancient Roman law, extensively modified by Germanic tribal tradition in the early medieval period.

Even the documents that we used to establish law in this country refer to God.

In the late 18th century, when the United States was established, the issue was defending the 'bottom-up' rights and liberties of individual citizens in the face of the 'top-down' power of the state, personified by the monarch. (Today, the issues haven't changed very much.)

The founders of the United States were opposing the traditional idea that all rights and powers flow downwards from the absolute monarch, in whom all soverignty resides. In that kind of scheme, individuals only possess those rights and liberties that the monarch condescends to let them exercise, subject to the monarch rescinding them whenever he desires.

In place of this theory of absolute monarchy, the American founders substituted the idea that each individual receives his or her rights and liberties direct from God himself. The monarch has no say in that. Soverignty resides in the people themselves, and the state only exists dependent on the people's will, so as to fulfill their purposes.

That kind of idea ultimately derives from classical scholarship and from the model of the kind of popular democracy that once existed in ancient Athens.

 

[Greatest I am]

Christianity isn't a legalistic religion in the same way that traditional Judaism and Islam are. Christianity doesn't possess a detailed law governing all aspects of life. Christian clergy aren't primarily jurists and legal scholars.

True. They are more like con men out to fleece and butcher sheep.

Regards
DL

 

[GeoffP]

Laws based on Christianity don't suck wholesale. Murder is bad. Stealing is bad. But there are many elements wedded, obviously, to belief and the maintenance thereof. Those are the ones to dodge.

 

[billvon]

The facade of a courthouse is not a legally binding document.

Correct. However, it speaks to which principles the courthouse chooses to espouse.

 

[Greatest I am]

Laws based on Christianity don't suck wholesale. Murder is bad. Stealing is bad. But there are many elements wedded, obviously, to belief and the maintenance thereof. Those are the ones to dodge.

Like stoning fornicators and unruly children. Yes.

Regards
DL