No, I do not believe I have the right to decide what is absolute. I believe that only God decides that. So I would not push my own opinions on others. However, I would feel comfortable sharing with anyone who was interested, what God says about a particular subject, to the best of my knowlege.

You ARE pushing your opinion on everyone when you suggest that they are subject to your God. A Muslim doesn't give a hoot about our God.

Sorry, I thought you were asking a facetious or rhetorical question. To my knowlege, no He did not say that prior to adultery, a person is always a wonderful husband or wife. To my knowlege, He also did not say they were not. To my knowlege, it wasn't addressed in Scripture, but I'm open to correction on that if you can cite a Scripture pertaining to that.

MEDC, I am not persecuting not putting to death Muslims. However I would be a very poor Christian, if I was unwilling to share with them what I believe to be the truth.

As Christians, it is our commission to go out and teach all men about Christ. I hope and pray that I will always have the courage to fill that commission.

Good night again. It's been a long day. Thanks for the lively discussion!

Okay, KIR...this is going way off topic now. I agree with your last post. Sharing your beliefs is fine... expecting that everyone is subject to Christian laws is not imo.

Good night.

Interesting. MEDC, as a believer (which you are right?) what do you think about this scripture in Romans 14:11?


Do you think the Lord was excluding unbelievers, Muslims, whatever, that every knee shall bow... and every tongue confess...?

I think this comment from me answers your question.

I am also certain that my believing that the Lord will ultimately judge all has zero meaning to a Muslim. Since we live in a world where others have different religious beliefs and none of them are proven...but based on faith...that we should be respectful that people have different beliefs.

I think enough strife has been caused in this world by trying to shove our own religious doctrine down the throats of others...consider the Twin Towers in New York or the Crusades...while we do not need to agree on religion, we should respect those around us. It is for God to call people to Him and for others to live as an example of His love.

More people are turned off by religion because of the disrespect that certain members of that group show towards others.

Just my opinion.

MEDC...

I think why your views on this puzzle people (I think I'm right in thinking that it puzzles others -- it does me), is that you are so outspoken on so many things...You typically do not care to offend people at all...Political Correctness has certainly never seemed to be your bag...Until now...About Christianity of all things...Jesus said that his name would offend...Me? I don't care if it does, I will still stand up and proudly proclaim it...There is but one truth, and it doesn't matter if others believe that or not...It is TRUE, and does not depend on their belief to make it so...

I know you said that no religion has been "proven"...I think there are many books you should read if you feel that way about Christianity...A good one is The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel...I have friends that were raised as atheists, and they will tell you that they now believe for one reason and one reason only...Because it is TRUE...

Anyway, not trying to cause a rift, just wanted to let you know my thoughts...

Mrs. W

it's not political correctness that I am professing...it is respect. I respect those that deserve it and have no problem showing contempt for those that do not.

I've read the books Mrs. W...probably more than most. Every single one of them is full of assumptions that while I agree with the authors...are very easy to pick apart. It is not by science that we are called...but by faith.

It still comes down to faith and the Lord calling those to Him. I can stand for Christ without being rude to other people and their beliefs. Muslims also feel there is but one truth. God has afforded people free will to be subject to His laws here on Earth.

And while my views may puzzle some people...they are consistent with scripture and are a reflection of what I have learned in my walk. I believe there is one true God. Others feel differently. When He calls them, they will understand as I do...it will not be because of my chest thumping.

Mrs. W, this is a rare moment indeed. For once I agree with medc.

If you or I had been born into a devout Muslim community, our faith would have been in Allah and the teachings of Mohammed. We would consider 'goodness' to be our adherence to the religious principles we had been taught.

The fact that any of us follow the teachings of Christ is largely down to the culture and community we were born into, whether we like the idea or not.

There are likely to be many people on this forum who are Jewish; while they believe in the same Judaeo-Christian G*d as Christians, but do not believe in the divinity of Christ. Their faith in their own beliefs are just as 'true' to them as yours are to you.

Given that our religious faith is so heavily influenced by the culture we are born into and grow up in, having tolerance for the absolute conviction of others seems to me to be a necessary requirement for all of us.

As is tolerance for atheists and agnostics who have come to that conviction in a similar way to how we reach religious faith. It's the same process, with a different conclusion.

I'm not aware that even the most brilliant philosopher has ever managed to prove the existence of God, never mind the correctness of any particular religious position. Faith means exactly what is says.

Judging other people against the principles they claim to espouse is reasonable. Judging the actions of people who hold to quite different principles according to whether they fit OUR standards is not reasonable. Deciding that it's OK to do that in the name of our religion makes me think of....9/11.

Yes. This is VERY true.

Charlotte

Very good point, TA!! Thank you.

Charlotte

But that is not how "truth" works. Competing truth claims cannot possibly both be true. I can believe in the man in the moon, but that does not mean his existence is TRUE. When Jesus claims he is the "way, the truth, the light," that is either true or it is false. Faith is the not the practical equivalent of IMAGINATION and confusing PERSPECTIVE with TRUTH relegates truth to perspective. It is no such thing. WE are not talking about imaginary friends here.

My "faith" in Jesus Christ is not a blind faith that is based on things UNKNOWN, but on a master that is UNSEEN. I also believe in CUBA even though I have never been there. I don't believe in Christ for any other reason than its TRUE. I am sure as he11 not going to waste my time on some imaginary friend. My faith is not a blind faith in an imaginary god, but one that evolved from study of the evidence. It is a faith that is contingent upon facts and evidence that lead to that truth. By the same token, I do not not believe in the man in the moon or Big Foot or Santa, because I have no evidence.

I have no objection to anyone claiming that their god is true, but that does obligate me to state that mine is NOT. Tolerance of other beliefs does not mean that I DENY the truth of CHRIST or suspend all logic and claim that competing truth claims are true. That is impossible. If something is true, it is true to ALL or it is NOT TRUE. And a persons perspective has nothing to do with reality.

I am very tolerant of other beliefs, even opposing beliefs, but I will NOT deny the truth of mine in order accommodate theirs and I don't understand why Christians are expected to do so.

Several interesting things to comment upon. Not sure I feel "up to it" or even if it's worth the time. However, differences of opinion may well offer opportunity to explore differing beliefs and possibly cause people to THINK and evaluate their opinions that they use to govern their lives and their actions.




There are a few "operative words" in this thought that anyone might want to consider.

"Pushing." If stating one's belief (or opinion if you prefer) is wrong, then it makes no sense for MB to exist, let alone for all the threads of opinions to exist. It would be wrong to disagree with anyone, let's say a "foggy" Wayward Spouse, who comes to MB and states opinions in support of "Wayward" behavior, after all, "A Wayward doesn't give a hoot about our" opinions or beliefs concerning marriage that apply to all marriages regardless of individual variations of beliefs.

"Suggest." Suggesting something is not "requiring" that anyone else "embrace" your opinion. Neither does THEIR opposition to YOUR opinion, stated and/or suggested, require that YOU are "subject" their opinions.

"Our God." By "Our God" it seems as though one is "pushing" the "suggestion" that there IS more than ONE God, who is sovereign over ALL people, regardless of their beliefs or opinions.

" A Muslim doesn't give a hoot about our God. This may be an opinion, but it is NOT true fact as the Koran is very specific about ANYONE who does not accept Islam and THEIR belief as to who and what God is. Muslim DO care enormously about "our God," if you mean the "Christian" God, the "Jewish" God, the "Hindu" God, the "Any God" but the "Allah" of Islam. In fact, they "care" so much that they are killing people all over the world who disagree with them and issuing "fatwah's" against any "suggestion" by anyone that they are "wrong" in their beliefs and in their attempts to "force" Islam on the rest of the world. Shoot, within marriages and families, many Muslims BELIEVE that "honor killings" are justified AND "necessary" to impose their belief system on others.

Now, given that the topic began with "Waywards" and how they are often treated here on MB **********edit******* how is that any different than what the Muslims are trying to do with their "beliefs?" There is no difference. It is the imposition of one person's, or a combined group of people, OPINION of what is "right and applicable to everyone else."

The very same thing, of imposing opinions on others because of someone's own opinion, ************edit********** How is that ANY different from what Muslims are doing? How is that "imposition of opinion" rather than "published rules that are applicable to everyone" (sort of like the 10 Commandments) in any way similar to the "Christian" position of "suggesting but not requiring" that Christ IS the way and that SHOULD be obeyed?" Now if you want to argue that the 10 Commandments are only "applicable" to persons of the Jewish and/or Christian faiths, and not the "world at large," you CAN certainly argue that opinion. ***********edit**********

Whether or not you or I personally believe in God (for purposes of argument, the "Christian God" as revealed in the Holy Bible, the ONE God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is NOT the question. The question is one of TRUTH. Truth exists independently of "opinion," and even independently of "SINCERE belief." TRUTH IS. It is that fact that is the "object" of question and "opinion" about God, and about what God has established is TRUE for all people, regardless of their acceptance or denial of HIS truth.




Both of these statements, though appearing contradictory, are true statements in so far as they go.

The issue is one of "true truth," and not just human opinion.

To take medc's response a little further, "A Christian could say the same thing to someone else (a Muslim, or any other 'faith system')…..it doesn't make it true just to say it." TRUTH is NOT dependent upon a "Christian's" OPINION anymore than it is dependent upon anyone's opinion about anything.

The opposite of TRUTH is relativism, of denial that there IS a truth that operated independently of any person's opinion. The existence of that TRUTH is applicable to anyone, anywhere, no matter who "wants to believe it" or not.

So the issue really is the age long search that so many people embark upon; "What IS truth?" "How can we KNOW what is true rather than just opinion?" "Who HAS the true authority to ESTABLISH 'right and wrong' behavior for everyone."

In the "world at large," that answer (for Christians) is God.

**********edit**********

In the world at large, believers are SERVANTS of the Master (God) and His established rules that apply both to them and to the world at large (those who are not part of the "clique" of people who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior for all mankind).

******edit**********

That's why God has set His "rules" in place and established them as the "judgment standard" for all people.

*********edit***********

"Usurping" God's published rules (see: Holy Bible and Torah) is wrong, because God established and codified THE rules by which HE judges ALL of mankind. It is NOT open to "relativism," though humans often WILL try to use relativism as the argument to enable them to DO whatever they WANT to do.



And "morality" is in the same basket. If "morals" and "moral standards" are relative and not absolute, then ANYTHING anyone wants to do, for their OWN reasons, IS NOT WRONG and cannot be said to be wrong by anyone as being applicable to anyone OTHER THAN themselves. And that still does not "automatically" confer TRUTH to what any given person believes is "true for themselves." That's just the old "I may NOT agree with what you believe, but you can believe whatever you want to believe." That is true, but it also does not confer truth. It confers "relativism," that there are NO "absolute standards" by which anything can be judged. It simple "grants" everyone the ability to determine "truth" for themselves and the ability to MAKE truth be whatever they WANT it to be.

"Murder" also falls under that "relativistic" opinion, so that "honor killings," for example, are NOT murder even though it "imposes" one person's opinion (belief system) upon another, whether it's by way of abortion or by way of killing women and children "for the honor of the father and his faith." "Cultural morality" is just another way of saying all things are "relative" and there are NO "true" absolutes that apply to all people regardless of their own opinions.


The issue has also been raised that a Wayward Spouse is "always" a "wayward spouse," even if that moniker of "Former" is applied. The argument has been stated that they CANNOT be a "wonderful spouse" by virtue of the FACT of adultery. I would submit that no one is a "wonderful spouse" because that "absolute" term cannot be applied to anyone else other than an individual who might hold to the belief that anyone CAN be a "wonderful spouse." There are MANY things, including adultery, that are not "wonderful" in a spouse. That is the nature of being a "sinful" person. All that anyone could say is that there might be "degrees" of "wonderfulness" and "badness." To give just one analogy, it has been taught to a lot of children that "spanking" as a corrective punishment by parents is "Child Abuse." Certainly there IS a "line" at which corporal punishment CAN cross the line into abuse, but to "blanket" say that ANY spanking is, de facto, "abuse" is imposing someone else's "standard" or "belief" on someone else and goes way beyond merely "suggesting" that such behavior or belief in a parent's right to spank their child is wrong regardless of their opinion.




EXPECTING a non-Christian (for example an unbeliever in Christ, a Muslim, Atheist, etc.) to accept God's "opinions" and then submit their will to His will IS a "waste of time." Unless they were to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, all "things Christian" are "foolishness" to them and not applicable to them.

However, it does not follow from that "waste of time" issue that a Christian cannot suggest that other beliefs are wrong. If that were so, there would have been NO point in the Apostles, let alone Jesus Himself, telling anyone that "their beliefs," though perhaps even sincerely held beliefs, are wrong according to the One True God. This is where knowing WHAT a Christian believes and WHY they believe it are important, with the Word of God as the "measure" by which those things are "judged."

Additionally, Christians (if one accepts the premise of the first part of medc's responsive opinion, "We can use it for Christian's," are defined by, and "governed by" the "opinion of God" as He has revealed His "opinion" to us in His Word (the Bible, the Scriptures). That is the clear teaching of Jesus, and reiterated by Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16. It is God's standard (opinion) that is "superior" to any contrary belief by any individual who claims to be a "Christian." Any other "opinion," is just that, an opinion that is contrary to the revealed "word of God on the subject of God, God's standards (see the 1st and 2nd "Greatest Commandments," and salvation from sin" according to God who establishes TRUTH regardless of personal opinion.


So back to the suggestion that Wayward spouses are ALWAYS "Wayward Spouses."


I don't think anyone is suggesting that the FACT that an affair occurred is "erased" or that when a choice to engage in an affair is made there is a "character flaw" at work. That is WHAT sin is, a "character flaw" in all of mankind. We are all sinful and inclined TOWARD sin, according to God and by HIS definition of what sin IS.

By the same "measure" (God's revealed truth in the matter as He has revealed it to us in Scripture), the idea that ANY "unrepented of sin" KEEPS someone out of heaven would seem to go against, and be contrary to, what God has clearly said about salvation and HOW someone receives God's forgiveness for ALL sin. It is NOT any given sin, repented of or not repented of, that "keeps" someone out of heaven and an eternal relationship with God. It is solely their position with God THROUGH their acceptance or rejection of Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior that determines whether or not God DOES forgive them of their sins.

That is the idea that God places a believer's sins as "far as the East is from the West," and "I will remember your sins no more." Without Christ, no one receives forgiveness from God for any sin and will NOT be in heaven with God in an eternal relationship with Him.

All sins are NOT equal, but ALL sin anathema to God and God has provided just ONE way by which ALL sins, great sins and small sins, can be forgiven and a relationship with God reestablished.

With respect to FORMER Wayward Spouses, the issue of "character," of their status TODAY, the operative word is FORGIVENESS. The term, as used by God, is NOT to imply that the sin did not occur. The term is, to pick up on medc's previous analogy to the legal system and the retention of a "record" of wrongs, equivalent to having the "record" EXPUNGED, so that there is NO "record" any longer.

That is why the three promises that a Forgiver makes to one that they forgive are so important. It establishes a "new reality" and effectively "expunges" the past "bad behavior" from the "forgiven one" BY the Forgiver. That is what is meant by "forgive others as you have been forgiven your sins by God."

Whether we "fight" our "human nature" to want to retain some "one-upsmanship" position by keeping the "reality" of past "waywardness" current is irrelevant when it comes to "forgiving as God has forgiven me." I DID sin. I continue to commit some sins. I am not perfect. Neither is anyone else. But God has clearly revealed HOW we are to "confess our sins one to another" and to repent of them (means "turn toward God") and receive forgiveness. The FACT is that ALL of our sins; past, present, and future; ARE forgiven for all believers NOT because we DO "something" (like confess them) but because of what Jesus Christ did and that HE imparts His righteousness to all believers who have accepted Him as their personal Lord and Savior.

"Neither do I condemn you. Go and leave your life of sin." Leaving (repenting) a lifestyle that is sinful ENDS that "time of waywardness" and established TODAY, the only "state of being" that is relevant. TODAY is what shapes each "today" as what was a "future day" becomes TODAY, each and every day.

"Consequences" that result from prior sin may NOT be "expunged." We MAY still have to live the rest of our lives with some of those consequences. That is ONE of the principles of MB, to have NO CONTACT with the "affair partner" for the rest of the "former wayward spouse's" life.

But the sin itself, and the "title" that describes someone IN that state of sin, ARE to be "expunged." That is, IF they are truly to be forgiven.



Now it would appear that "I respect those that deserve it and have no problem showing contempt for those that do not." is inconsistant with:

"I can stand for Christ without being rude to other people and their beliefs."

It would seem that "showing CONTEMPT for those that "do not" IS offering an opinion that IS okay to be RUDE to someone who holds beliefs contrary to our own.

The "just have to agree to disagree" sort of response on something like this is, again, just another form of 'relativism.'

The STANDARD is God and His Standards, not our opinions.

God bless.

p.s. not that it matters much, but I was raised by atheists to be an atheist. THAT is the "culture" I was raised in. I do not have the kind of faith required to be an atheist, though.

Nor should you. I don't think anyone suggests you should deny that...just as I will not suggest that a Muslim deny theirs. God is sovereign and will call those to His table as He sees fit.


I agree 100%. That doesn't mean that others don't feel the same way regarding their "truths." Until there is irrefutable proof, it will all be a matter of faith and not fact.

Agreed. And what in your opinion constitutes "irrefutable proof?"

It would seem as though God provided such "irrefutable proof" in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Is there something that might be "refutable" in that? I am really unclear as to what you are arguing here.

against my better judgement, I will respond to you but one time FH.

I believe based on faith that Christ was risen from his mortal grave. I do not think that there is any evidence that scientifically supports that...it is based on faith. The records of this event would not stand up to scientific scrutiny. Many very learned people that are not called to Christ can make a good intellectual case against Christianity...they only see with their minds and not their heart. Nothing in faith is irrefutable until one is called to His house.

FH, I would appreciate that you discontinue directing questions towards me. I will not post to you again. You have not been disrespectful here in the least...but based soley on our history, I have no desire to communicate with you. Obviously, you are free to post as you please...and I think once you get past the issues you have with the mods...you can do a lot of good here. I just refuse to engage in debates with you moving forward.