But as stated earlier, which god?

It's a matter of which set of rules you consider valid, appropriate and/or that you know about.

You have your list of sins, and other groups have theirs... it's all a matter of what code you adhere to through choice or upbringing.

Actually, I believe a sin is a sin, regardless what their religion states. And apparatnly, since Heath considers himself a chrstian, and I said there is a contradiction between our beliefs, I would say we would call the other wrong in beliefs.


But GHO, in a simple comparison, I'm in Canada. Even if I don't believe in Canadian laws, and I break one, I'm still held to those laws, regardless of my belief. According to God, breaking one of his laws makes the law breaker a sinner. Breaking a law in a country is a criminal. The comparison is, belief or lack of belief does not change the law. Gods laws says a variety of things. If you disobey his law, you are a sinner. If you disobey a law in Canada, you are going to be punished. Belief does not change a law.

Just for clarification purposes, I don't know about other religions, but our religion has things broken down as follows: commandments, counsel, and policy.

Commandments are the absolutes:  "thou shalt" and "thou shalt not"

Counsel are statements of principles.  They recognize god-like principles but do not say what exactly is sin or not sin.  A statement made in our church is: "We teach correct principles and let people govern themselves."

Policy is the type of thing as organizational structure, etc.  It is just the way things are done to make things work, not really related to any right or wrong per se.


Example:  LDS Counsel:  The body is a tabernacle where the soul dwells and should be treated with respect and taken care of.  Commandments:  This means particularly that certain activities are not done, such as consumption of alchohol or use of tobacco.  People have interpreted the counsel to mean that they should exercise and maintain strong physical bodies.  How far to take this principle is up to the individual and generally determined through personal prayer.

However, a Canadian law is only valid in Canada (and whatever they have extradition treaties with), and a totally contradictory law can be enforced elsewhere.

Thus the law is only valid in some areas, and from a certain POV. Laws are relative not absolute. A lawbreaker is only a crimminal within a certain juristiction

If you disobey a law in Canada, you are going to be punished if the Canadian authorities can get you. Go somewhere that that law is not enforced/believed in and you go free, or can even be rewarded.

Eg a terrorist bomber from Arabia would be a crimminal in Canada but may be a public hero in his own country. (A simplistic hypothetical situation this, but you get the idea no doubt.)

Thank you, you have provided another way of making my point. 8)



Heath, that's only a matter of how your particular social group looks at things, and has no bearing on the moral stance of others (unless they are concerned with how you percieve them.)

Wrong.  The principles are eternal and unchangeable.  Commandments set guidelines that even the lowest common denominator can follow as a minimum rule.  The goal is for each individual to receive personal revelation to make improvements and increase his standard with a level he can personally achieve on a path toward the Kingdom of God.  Although we each forge our paths separately, we will be judged according to our own capabilities with relationship to eternal principles, not according to the vagaries of our imagination and a path of moral degredation.

Well, if God can create the world, create life from nothing, and is all powerful, I think God, is authority over the entire universe, never mind a country border.

But that's only a consideration for those that subscribe to your religion.
You may think it is universal, and the others of your religion, but no-one else does.

I think the point rogue's making is that it doesn't matter what people think.  The truth is the truth.  More or less people believing in something won't make something more or less true.

And where does thinking a countries rules cannot rule over you get ya?
About the same, thinking doesn't change much.

Just for the sake of preserving the analogy, if I break Canada's law, I cannot go to Canada without being punished.  Likewise, if you break God's law, you cannot go to the Kingdom of God without forgiveness of that sin.

GM: edited due to insult
This message was last edited by the GM at 04:06, Wed 14 July 2004.

The Kingdom of God has nothing to do with established religion.  It is a set absolute standard.  "No unclean thing may enter into the Kingdom of God."  There is established religion to help meet those standards and partake of the necessary ordinances by one with the proper authority.  It really has nothing to do with POV.

What has to do with POV is the access people have to forgiveness.

Sorry, don't understand that last post Rogue.

Yes Heath, you are not acceptable within that religion but it doesn't have any effect elsewhere.

The point being that it is all relevant to your POV.
Christians think that certain actions have certain supernatural consequences, you believe it is true and affects everybody, the rest of us don't.
I can't help it if Christianity thinks it speaks for everybody.

I don't eat people, I have a morally based abhorrence for the concept, but there are cultures where it is perfectly acceptable, even required.
In my situation it is expected and acceptable not to eat people, in theirs it it is expected and acceptable  to eat people.

Neither is wrong, neither is right except by POV, morality as an absolute is perfectly neutral.



I still don't think that was insulting, and wasn't meant to be, but hopefully this is acceptable.



Heath it is just that that is the christian POV and has no influence over any other viewpoint. The rest of the world disagree's and you have nothing to make your POV more valid/accurate/superior to any other.

I was saying not believing in a law doesn't change it exists. And God's law is not held back by borders.



I understand you do not want to insult.

I was using your analogy, that in different areas, the law doesn't exist.

The same is true of different moral codes, the 'wrongness' of something does not exist in a different moral framework.

The influence of any god halts with the belief of any followers.

'gods law' as you put it only extends as far as christianity.

How do you step outside the universe? God's law exists everywhere.

GM:Deleted due to insult
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:13, Wed 14 July 2004.

Rogue, put aside your faith for a second and take a look at what you are saying.  Put yourself in the place of a non-Christian whom you might be talking to.  You are talking to him about your god's laws extending throughout the universe and he is saying the exact same thing to you about his god.  Each have different commandmants and rules to live by (though some are likely the same), but neither of you can convince the other you are correct beyond any shadow of a doubt.

The biggest problem I have with most religions, and Christianity in particular, is that adherants often have the attitude that, "I am right because God tells me I am right - therefore, you must be wrong."  Has is not ever occured to anyone that all paths might lead to the same place, just with differing scenery along the way?

God is a very loving and patient God. His laws exist, regardless of my or anyone's beliefs. God is God. Science has to fall back on many things, including limitations of knowledge. God goes beyond man. The bible has prophecy that man cannot know, but none the less are written down by man. The accuracy of these prophecies are very uncanny. If it was once, or twice, even I would say "lucky guess", but with so many, it's beyond that, it's knowledge of something not knowable by man.

Has it occured to me that different paths lead to God. Sure, somewhat, but then with so many religions that beliefs depend on them being the right way, I realized that there can't be multiple paths. Because that would mean God is behind trying to turn people against themselves. Think of it this way, many wiccans accuse catholics for the witch trials, but if that is a command of God, then God is trying to kill his followers. Does that sound like God wants followers?

If there is a right way, obviously, there must be a wrong way.
This message was last edited by the GM at 15:59, Wed 14 July 2004.

Which is why I am not a Christian.  I can't tell someone definitively that they are wrong when I cannot be certain beyond reasonable doubt that I am right.

I am certain beyond reasonable doubt.

Actually, you don't have to tell anyone they are wrong to be christian. Is that the only thing holding you back? My wife almost never talks about other religions. She's quite comfortable just reading the bible, going to church, etc...

So if that's the only thing, don't let that hold you back. Technically the term I could be called is an apologetic. (using the bible to refute misinformation). And to be a christian, you don't have to say "you're wrong to anyone"

I have got a few more reasons then just that for walking away from Christianity.  I did my own searching and it led me away from the Christianity and the bible altogether.  For a long time before I found Buddhism, I hoovered somewhere between athiesm and agnosticism .  I found the path on which I belonged, where things could be explained or at least reasoned without having to fall back onto divine providince.  I took the Buddha's advice and found my own light, and if that is viewed as 'wrong' by anyone - well, that would be their problem.  :)

That's one reason why I'm a non-denominational Christian. It is because of the fact that most Christians, including Catholics, extend the laws to judge people beyond the Christian religion. They may not say, "You're wrong!" but the implication is still there. I believe that this stance causes friction between religions and religious denominations. It defeats the purpose of the law: to promote harmony between all peoples; That all things be done because we love God and we share this love with our neighbors.

I love my God and  believe him to be a loving and merciful Father. I cannot believe it of my Father God to condemn a man because he worships (God) differently.

I am also certain beyond reasonable doubt that when a person lives in love, he lives in God and God will always be with him, no matter what religion he is. And by this belief, my faith stands.

Jesus extended the law to all, not just jews or christians.
Actaully Jesus did this as well, and told people they were wrong, even when they were part of groups who were backbones of the community. Biblically speaking it says to refute anyone who calls themselves christians, and doesn't follow scripture. And it specifically says that if you go back with believers, (followers of Christ who follow Jesus's commands) to refute and show where they are wrong, and that person does not ask for forgiveness, they are supposed to be kicked out of the church.
I think this harmony thing you think of is nice, but not when it allows a man to sin. Remember Jesus didn't come to bring peace, but judgement. If a man did not know he was wrong, then he would not know to turn to God and Jesus.

I understand why you want peace. But your feelings are not from scripture.

From the Words of God, that is shown otherwise. I understand you want peace, but you can't trust your feelings. Feelings can and do mislead us, often. Hitler felt it was ok to kill jews.

God is always with us. But we can't just say what God is. God is not contained by our words, or beliefs.

Then I will allow Jesus to judge me and I will accept His judgement. I cannot judge my neighbors for Him. I can only show them that God's love extends to all and that love brings joy and peace of mind.



Not very neighborly of him.



*shrug* I have faith in His goodness and mercy, that's all. If I'm wrong, then it is sad indeed, for I would have been worshipping the wrong God, then.