How much faith does God want from us?

[_Gunnar]

It is difficult to understand why courts throughout the world don't accept 'God told me to do it' as a valid defence...

This brings up another weighty consideration. Imagine a criminal trial in which the Jury foreman announced, when the jury came back from deliberation, that they all came to a decision about the defendant's guilt or innocence only after fasting and praying about it, and receiving an answer via the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. I think we can be pretty sure that even in a Utah courtroom, presided over by a Mormon judge, with all the jurors also being active Mormons, a mistrial would have to be declared--and justifiably so! Suppose you were the defendant in that situation, and knew that you were innocent? Would you be comfortable with the idea of your guilt or innocence being decided in that way by the jury? I think not!

[_Drifting]

It is difficult to understand why courts throughout the world don't accept 'God told me to do it' as a valid defence...

This brings up another weighty consideration. Imagine a criminal trial in which the Jury foreman announced, when the jury came back from deliberation, that they all came to a decision about the defendant's guilt or innocence only after fasting and praying about it, and receiving an answer via the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. I think we can be pretty sure that even in a Utah courtroom, presided over by a Mormon judge, with all the jurors also being active Mormons, a mistrial would have to be declared--and justifiably so! Suppose you were the defendant in that situation, and knew that you were innocent? Would you be comfortable with the idea of your guilt or innocence being decided in that way by the jury? I think not!

Yes, we find the defendant guilty because we have all had a feeling, albeit different feelings, that he is guilty despite the evidence.

[_PrickKicker]

Yes, we find the defendant guilty because we have all had a feeling, albeit different feelings, that he is guilty despite the evidence.

True
Even in this day and age it can and sometimes does go that way.
Even with Juries, the judge will often sum things up in his opinion, before they go away to deliberate their verdict.
Which more often than not will lead the jury.

The British legal system is a one sided system of corruption.
The Crown prosecution service will side with agents of the state, at every opportunity.
demanding payment or imprisonment for stupid cases, like parents found guilty of bad parenting,
and then sentenced to prison for being unable to coerce their child to attend school.

and in America, It all depends on how well your brief presents your case.


Do 'Common Judges in Israel' / Bishops need evidence? or just a willing person to plead Guilty?
What about High Councillors in Church courts?
Or is all about the Holy Ghoul?

[_Themis]

I am no Christ.
In fact these days I am Anti,
Until he shows his face, then I will fall down on my knees like everyone else.

Matthew 7:1
Matthew 23:27 This one is particularly apt.

Peace & Love

Subby makes me laugh. His second quote has nothing to do with the topic since no one is claiming to be Christ, and the second shows he is a very black and white thinker. On other threads he has demonstrated a lack of understanding of what doubt means.http://www.thefreedictionary.com/doubt

[_Jason003]

A very relevant question we should all ask ourselves is "Who is more likely to ask us to accept something on faith alone, one who is telling us the truth, or one who is knowingly telling us untruths that are admittedly not backed up by verifiable evidence, and who therefore wishes to discourage skeptical and honest scrutiny of one's claims?" The blazingly obvious and only reasonable answer to that question is "the latter!"

Nothing should arouse our internal "baloney detectors" to a higher state of alert than claims (especially religious claims) that can admittedly only be accepted on faith--no matter what the source of such claims. Despite what Paul says about faith in the New Testament, it is total nonsense to claim that faith, in itself, is evidence or an acceptable substitute for evidence.

I unequivocally reject the nonsense that a just and reasonable God would tell us to believe something, and then deliberately make it harder to believe by withholding or obscuring supporting, objective evidence, or especially by creating seemingly contrary evidence, merely to "test our faith."

+1