Questioning morality

My point in posting this was to ascertain if you would find God to be of more importance to you in your life than your own blood.It was a simple question to gauge how I view my family and the importance of that in relation to you and your worldview.Thank you for your input.[This message has been edited by sidelined, 10-16-2003]

sidelined,I think that people who don't have children cannot EVER possibly understand your question.One person might find comfort in their religion when they lose a child, another will be destroyed by it, and another will find god.Most people can't know how they will react until they are faced with such a tragedy.

I would still have to say yes, now that you reworded it a bit more.
All Christians should put God first in their lives, if it is any other way, than they really out living but what the Bible is saying. Of course, being a 15 year old with nothing but 11 years of a public school education, I should really know what the Bible is saying, right?

hi You can make the Bible say anything you want it to say, that's how ambiguous it is.Brian.

Your doing fine. You stated the first commandment correct. To love God before anything.

This reply also goes along with REI's last post.
So many may believe that you have to believe in more than just that he exists, but since he is reveiled to people like me, I would have no excuse as to why I don't believe in such things on my Judgement day."Mainstream christianity teaches that salvation is through faith in Christ. Name a single native american tribe who worshiped anything like Jesus. As for whether they worship the same God, the religions are generally utterly different (and often animist/polytheist)."-REIWell, that doesn't mean they might not have . Anyways, with so many branches of Christian religion,how could anyone know if what is being taught if exactly right. I'm sure on my Judgement day, God isn't going to say, "Well, Katie... I think you'll go to hell just because you're not Catholic."
For the Native Americans, how could God expect them to know more than he ever reveiled to them? Of course, I don't know where I'm trying to go with this.

So, in short Barlow, you're saying that you believe that salvation is not through Christ (or not only through Christ)?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Not quite.
I already said it as simply as I could, and I knew I would get someone to twist it around a bit.
Once again, I think that since God has reveiled himself to me, and I do have the chance to grab hold of a Bible, that I should accept Christ as my Savior, throughfore, Salvation through Christ.
But for people that don't have the chance to know this, I think God would allow them in, just for the fact that despite that they didn't have anything to lead them into Salvation through Christ, they still believed in him.... hmm... I hardly understand that myself. This is just my humble opinion. I tried explaining it, if you didn't get it this second time, I'm sure a third time wouldn't help much more.

Taking the bible literally, they should be the direct descendants of Adam and Eve, as well as Noah. You would think that Pre-Flood oral histories and a belief in the Christian god would still be intact.This problem is something I have also mulled over many times. If the christian god is obviously the true god, according to many christians, why don't all cultures believe in him. Better yet, why only choose the Jews as the chosen people, at least in the Old Testament and the Old Covenant? It kind of complicates Pascal's Wager a bit.