ABSTRACT
This paper argues that political order is shaped not by the presence of religious law as such, but by how a tradition understands the nature of law itself, its source, scope, and relation to moral obligation. Different theological conceptions of law generate different political architectures. Where law is embedded in cosmic order, political authority tends toward sacral continuity rather than moral accountability. Where law is understood as transcendent moral judgment, binding rulers as well as subjects, political power becomes limited and corrigible. Where law is relocated to conscience and universalized beyond political belonging, authority is restrained even as moral claims expand. And where law is conceived as a comprehensive divine command integrating governance, morality, and salvation, political order tends toward juridical centralization and resistance to external moral critique. Through a comparative analysis of pre-biblical societies, biblical Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and modern secular systems, the paper shows how certain understandings of law produce authoritarian or closed political orders, while others generate moral frameworks capable of global diffusion and broad legitimacy.
Download Below