2

The above include the use of online platforms, employment contracts, and other official documents.

When signing up to use online platforms the user is required to agree to a set of terms which includes an agreement not to do anything illegal. Since what is legal is not always moral and vice versa, how can a Christian agree to such terms? Similarly, the residence permit application for China contains a box the applicant is required to tick that they will obey the law of China, which includes restrictions on speech and an injunction to have "religious" meetings only in government sanctioned buildings.

Arno
  • 21
  • 2
  • Welcome to Christianity.SE! and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the [tour] to understand how the site works and how it is different than others. I would also recommend reading the Help Center's sections on asking and answering questions. – agarza Sep 11 '23 at 13:46
  • "an agreement not to do anything illegal" — Unless the penalty for violating this agreement is worse than for the illegal act itself, it's a rather meaningless agreement. – Ray Butterworth Sep 11 '23 at 17:44
  • Thank you for the welcome. – Arno Sep 12 '23 at 13:07
  • I am not concerned with the possible legal consequences. What concerns me is whether or not it would be a sin to tick a box or sign a contract if one does not intend to keep all of the laws or conditions. – Arno Sep 12 '23 at 13:09
  • Typically, when we say that legality and morality are not equivalent, we mean that, often, the civil law permits behavior that is immoral. Far more rarely, the civil law compels immoral behavior. In most countries, I don't believe the civil law compels immoral behavior, so I don't think this would be an issue. In case a civil law does compel immoral action, the Christian ought not abide that law, since "an unjust law is no law at all." This would include unjust compulsion inherent in a EULA agreement, if any such compulsion exists. If the Christian knows, he should not agree to such rules. – jaredad7 Sep 13 '23 at 15:25
  • "Not to do anything illegal" - which rules of Christianity require you to do something illegal? Can't you just resolve not do anything which is either illegal or immoral (with respect to Christianity? – komodosp Sep 14 '23 at 08:52

3 Answers3

2

Some terms of agreement can be utterly meaningless because there is no definition of what "the law" means. Neither is it stated what "doing anything illegal" means. Such vague phrases would never stand up in a Court of Law, unless there was detailed 'small print' exclusion (or inclusion) clauses. As an example, here in Britain various Water companies and the Government are being accused of breaking the law which clearly stipulates that water discharged from the Water plants into rivers and the sea can only be done in "exceptional rainfall" events; that is because effluent is in the untreated discharged water which pollutes the rivers and the sea. But despite an apparently mountainous pile of evidence that various Water companies have violated this legal point time and again, the Government is saying that there are different "interpretations" as to what the law means here!

Now, you ask about contractual agreements that conflict with Christian beliefs. First, different Christians have different views of what would conflict with Christian beliefs. Some have no problem with ticking a box attached to a vague statement about keeping to the law of the land, but would not tick a box to agree with a statement, such as, "I will never write or speak about the God and the Christ of Christianity."

Another point is that hardly anybody knows all the laws or illegalities of the land they are living in. While ignorance of the law is no excuse in a Court of Law, a person may, in all good conscience, have ticked such a general-statement box because they have been law-abiding citizens all their life, and have no intentions of breaking any laws. They would tick such a box with hardly a second's consideration. But the anonymous people who drew up the agreement may have had more particular points in mind that they have not specified (except in mouse-muck small-print exclusion clauses), and which hardly anybody would understand, even if they read them.

Also, you state that "what is legal is not always moral and vice versa, [so] how can a Christian agree to such terms?", but this is to enter into a grey area where individual conscience has to apply. Christians are told in the Bible to obey the ruling authorities, except when those authorities expect them to violate God's laws (Romans 13:1-8). They know that they will answer to God for that, and so we cannot tell others what they should, or should not do with regard to contractual agreements. Christians know that something legal in a country might actually be immoral, but in a Court of Law, it's always what is legal that matters. They could decide, however, that God's moral standards are what they go by.

Finally, governments that are out to control Christianity, with a view to effectively silencing Christians, is another matter. Online platforms are also global, not national, so that throws the whole matter of sticking to the law up in the air. If a Christian's conscience is clear about agreeing to certain terms in order to spread the gospel, or to counteract misinformation and disinformation about Christianity, that is between them and God. If their conscience is troubled, they would not go ahead.

The short answer to your question, "How can a Christian agree to such terms?" is that each individual Christian has to decide which terms they can agree to, and which they cannot.

Anne
  • 29,661
  • 1
  • 34
  • 116
  • 1
    Anne, thank you for your response. The other question is, if an unjust law is no law, could unjust stipulations in contracts merely be ignored? – Arno Sep 14 '23 at 06:57
  • @Arno It's a contradiction in terms to say "an unjust law is no law". A law is a law, is a law. Many people use the excuse that laws which enable their legally required tax money to be used for some things they say are unjust disobey that law and have to bear the consequences from the legal establishment. There have always been unjust laws but Christians are not given the luxury of picking and choosing those that they then claim entitles them to break them. Yes, they must do that when laws violate God's laws, but not due to claiming those laws are not laws. – Anne Sep 14 '23 at 10:34
  • Business contracts that are not enshrined in the law of the land obviously do not have legal weight as has those that are, but if they are legally recognised, any decision to ignore them is done at the individual’s decision, due to their conscience. If their conscience is clear before God, they may feel they can do that. Others might decide not to enter into that contract, full stop. Nobody should tell anybody else what they should, or should not do in such a situation. – Anne Sep 14 '23 at 10:42
2

If I break the law of a country then I will be punishable by the Government of that country. And I accept that as being the rule of law.

Therefore I am fully aware that if I choose to break a rule, I shall be punished.

And I accept that 'law' - that if I break a rule, I can be punished.

And, therefore, I tick the box, as a lawkeeper who accepts the consequences of any future law-breaking I may commit.

And I tick the box in good conscience, before God who made me.

Thus, if I choose to worship my God and the consequence of my worship is that I will be punished, I accept that situation as a law-keeper.

(Or I may prefer to leave such a country and find somewhere else to live.)

Nigel J
  • 25,017
  • 2
  • 26
  • 63
  • Nigel, ticking a box to obey the law or signing an employment contract that contains a vow/s that aim to bind the signee to courses of action or omission that may be immoral, seems to be making a sinful vow. In such a case how can one tick the box in good conscience? – Arno Sep 16 '23 at 07:26
  • @Arno The term 'obey the law' is ambiguous. I am 'obedient to law' if I accept its consequences. I very much doubt that box-tickers have memorised thousands of laws and sub-laws and amendments. Nor would box-makers expect them to. It is simply an administrative way of entrapping people into future obligation. – Nigel J Sep 16 '23 at 11:54
  • What obligation could that be since one may be held accountable by the authorities whether you agreed or not. What could the purpose be other than to place a moral obligation on the person ticking the box, in a country such as China where courts are placed under the authority of the Chinese Communist Party? I can't see any legal purpose for the tick box in this case. – Arno Sep 16 '23 at 16:01
-2

A Christian, just like anybody else, can check a box without agreeing to that what the person who drew the box says you agree to when checking the box. As checking the box is not an expression of agreement, but a forced step to get access to a service, there is no legal relevance to the checking of the box.

ABM K
  • 1,572
  • 12
  • Do you have references for the countries where that argument applies? (Generally, taking legal advice from an anonymous web posting isn't a good idea.) – Ray Butterworth Sep 11 '23 at 17:39
  • I did not intent to give legal advice, I try to answer the question "how can a christian...". AFAIK the rule that "coerced consent" is no consent at all applies to all western countries with rule of law. I would imagine it applies to alle countries with true rule of law, but I don't know that for sure – ABM K Sep 12 '23 at 14:58
  • I wasn't disagreeing with this answer. I was pointing out how it could be improved (and why people might not accept it as a good answer). With its current wording, I can't up-vote it, but with supporting references I might. – Ray Butterworth Sep 12 '23 at 15:04
  • 1
    :) I understand and appreciate that, but if and when I add legal references, I will do so as a professional. And tbh that would be really a lot of work. More than I wish to do, for something that in my opinion only adds very little for the person who posed the question. – ABM K Sep 12 '23 at 15:20
  • Your consent is not coerced when you check the box. You can check the box or not check the box. – DJClayworth Sep 15 '23 at 23:23