The Bible isn't the original source of American law

[dbphoenix]

Those 'biblical truths' were around long before the bible ever was. It is simply absurd to suggest English Common Law drew from any Biblical "Law". What Biblical Law? That you should be put to death for not observing the Sabbath, or children should be killed for disobeying their parents? Or maybe thou shalt not kill, which was in any case law over a thousand years before the Bible was even thought of.


Thomas Jefferson describes how those clergy in the form of one organized zealous religion or other have ever sort to insinuate themselves, the Bible God or religion into everything, in whatever form, for no other reason than to seek pious advantage.

[King]Alfred, in the preface to his laws, says they were compiled from those of Ina, Offa, and Aethelbert, into which, or rather preceding them, the clergy have interpolated the 20th , 21st , 22nd , 23rd and 24th chapters of Exodus, so as to place Alfred's preface to what was really his, awkwardly enough in the body of the work. An interpolation the more glaring, as containing laws expressly contradicted by those of Alfred. This pious fraud seems to have been first noted by Howard, in his Contumes Anglo Normandes (188), and the pious judges of England have had no inclination to question it,.... Thomas Jefferson

You'll remember that the religious right likes to stick its fingers in its ears and sing LaLaLa.

Should I point out the lack of evidence that Moses even existed? Probably not.

 

[jem]

1. I already responded to that question... I gave you blackstone and the U.S. supreme court bulding itself... I asked you for authorities with weight and you produced none... Its almost as if you leftists don't comprehend why one has or did have to swear an oath on the bible in every courtroom in america.

2. I just told you I am now responding to stu's question...

I knew you were projecting when you posted that crap about perceptual filters... you do not even acknowledge the basic fact... I responded to Stu.

None of which has anything to do with whether or not the bible is the original source of American law.

 

[dbphoenix]

1. I already responded to that question... I gave you blackstone and the U.S. supreme court bulding itself...

And I responded with all the other religious figures, including Hammurabai, who are portrayed there, all of whom are noted in the article.

I asked you for authorities with weight and you produced none... Its almost as if you leftists don't comprehend why one has or did have to swear an oath on the bible in every courtroom in america.

Authorities? Trying scanning the Constitution with Ctrl+F and look for references to the Bible or the 10C.

As for swearing an oath on the bible, what does that have to do with the Constitution?

 

[CaptainObvious]

Those 'biblical truths' were around long before the bible ever was. It is simply absurd to suggest English Common Law drew from any Biblical "Law". What Biblical Law? That you should be put to death for not observing the Sabbath, or children should be killed for disobeying their parents? Or maybe thou shalt not kill, which was in any case law over a thousand years before the Bible was even thought of.


Thomas Jefferson describes how those clergy in the form of one organized zealous religion or other have ever sort to insinuate themselves, the Bible God or religion into everything, in whatever form, for no other reason than to seek pious advantage.

[King]Alfred, in the preface to his laws, says they were compiled from those of Ina, Offa, and Aethelbert, into which, or rather preceding them, the clergy have interpolated the 20th , 21st , 22nd , 23rd and 24th chapters of Exodus, so as to place Alfred's preface to what was really his, awkwardly enough in the body of the work. An interpolation the more glaring, as containing laws expressly contradicted by those of Alfred. This pious fraud seems to have been first noted by Howard, in his Contumes Anglo Normandes (188), and the pious judges of England have had no inclination to question it,.... Thomas Jefferson

Well, here you go. You're making my point about zealots, and missing it about everything else. Your anti-religion bias is so completely overwhelming you cannot see the facts when they are clearly presented to you. The Founders were trying to strike a balance. They, unlike yourself, knew that religion isn't all good or bad, not simply black and white, and neither is secularism. Rational people see the need for some of both.

 

[jem]

all you do is throw up straw men.
No one stated the constitution contained the 10 commandments.

and arguing there were other influences includin hammurabi's is not the issue and no one denies there are other influences.

to get back to the point... the bible is the source of much of the laws in our judeo christian tradition of laws. as it was the foudation for courts of equity and a large part of common law.

honoring contracts... not bearing false witness, not harming people, not killing or murdering or stealing is the bedrock of our legal system.

now if you wish to claim that biblical foundation is not really biblical have at it.

And I responded with all the other religious figures, including Hammurabai, who are portrayed there, all of whom are noted in the article.



Authorities? Trying scanning the Constitution with Ctrl+F and look for references to the Bible or the 10C.

As for swearing an oath on the bible, what does that have to do with the Constitution?

 

[dbphoenix]

Only leftist trolls deny that.

And people who can't read.

 

[jem]

for leftists who did not read to this... I will post this again.
9 of 13 colonies not only had all sorts of ties to belief in God... they had established churches.

last time I checked, according to both hands and feet... that is a majority.





http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2011/06/did-america-have-a-christian-founding

An extensive survey of early colonial constitutions and laws reveals many similar provisions. As well, at least nine of the 13 colonies had established churches, and all required officeholders to be Christians—or, in some cases, Protestants. Quaker Pennsylvania, for instance, expected officeholders to be “such as possess faith in Jesus Christ.”[12][/quote]

 

[dbphoenix]

for leftists who did not read to this... I will post this again.
9 of 13 colonies not only had all sorts of ties to belief in God... they had established churches.
last time I checked, according to both hands and feet... that is a majority.
http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2011/06/did-america-have-a-christian-founding
An extensive survey of early colonial constitutions and laws reveals many similar provisions. As well, at least nine of the 13 colonies had established churches, and all required officeholders to be Christians—or, in some cases, Protestants. Quaker Pennsylvania, for instance, expected officeholders to be “such as possess faith in Jesus Christ.”[12]

You're really not concerned about the topic of this thread, are you?

 

[jem]

You're really not concerned about the topic of this thread, are you?

I wrote this...


..."to get back to the point... the bible is the source of much of the laws in our judeo christian tradition of laws. as it was the foundation for courts of equity and a large part of common law.

honoring contracts... not bearing false witness, not harming people, not killing or murdering or stealing is the bedrock of our legal system.

now if you wish to claim that biblical foundation is not really biblical have at it."



====
then you db trolled out some out of context comment.

 

[stu]

The Founders were trying to strike a balance. They, unlike yourself, knew that religion isn't all good or bad, not simply black and white, and neither is secularism. Rational people see the need for some of both.

What balance exactly? They excluded religion itself from being the basis on which law is made or judged. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion -in all real and practical sense and purposes, that excludes any religion from establishing itself in law or government and quite rightly too, both for the religiously inclined and everyone else's sake.

That is the very definition of secular law and it is the effective balance as the Founders very wisely knew.