Which commandments do you think are superior; Yahweh’s or Gnostic Christianity’s?


Yes it does as it shows that we never believed in anything of the supernatural.

Have more.

If you can’t or won’t believe a well known Gnostic, please do not bother with me. I will certainly not bother denouncing your foolishness.


if you are not bright enough to see the relevance it does not mean it is not there.

What did you see in that link?

Did you even listen to that scholar? What was the topic and what topic were you and I talking about.

Tell me please so that I can see if you have even that much intelligence going for you.


I refute them as they have no basis anymore than any other made up code in the absence of a superior moral law maker.

I already disproved that as morality goes beyond secular law which in my case is far below my set of morals which are rigid and lengthy. Governments are usually renown for their corruption and immorality. While my church is not and is better ran than any government and outdoes it in every test.

No, I think all denote our inhertant levels of moral awareness. As there is truth in many religions and philosophies, and the teachings of many different great religious leaders have raised the spiritual and moral awareness of humanity throughout history.

Therefore morality may split off in many streams but there is one source of the highest good until you reach pure religion. The story of mankind has been one of growing moral comprehension line upon line, precept upon precept until all is revealed.

The call of my creator.

We do not give him authority, it is his as the supreme intelligence. What is the purpose of moral principles? There is a purpose and if you understand that purpose then you will understand why God is obviously the best person to look to on that matter.

Ad Hom

See…“facts have no moral judgement. They merely state what is. Not what we think of them, not what we feel. They just are.”

Simple questions don’t have simple answers.

Letting all man perish would have been a greater evil but I’ve already answered this as it does not violate the rule. We are commanded to love and sacrifice is the greatest act of love. Therefore it does not violate the law…it fufills it.

13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. John 15

"5 And men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil. And the law is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is justified; or, by the law men are cut off. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever.

6 Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth.

7 Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered." - 2nd Nephi 2

The law exists for a purpose linked to everything.

Yes, even the flood was an act of mercy for all mankind. And I have a vastly different conception of hell then the mainstream misconception of christianity. The mainstream concept I reject, before you start mocking it, since i likely share some of your criticism of it’s flaws.

Proverbs 3

“12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth…”

In the context of the full letter from 200 years ago I assure you that is not what he was saying. As he used the same language in talking to women about men.

The Trinity does make far less sense than the Non-Trinity beliefs. Hence why I hold to the second.

Volenteered along with Satan. They both had very different concepts in mind for the future of mankind. The Father choose Christ along with 2/3rds of the hosts of heaven and then Satan and his 1/3rd rebelled and were cast down.

There is a world of difference between knowing the commandments and following them.

Yes the spirit world is here and all things were created spiritually before they were physically. Hence we are both spiritual and physical beings.


Now back to sacrifice. From a theological view.

From an intelligent philosphical secular view from Dr Jordan Petersons lectures.


How about none and every single one. No religion is better than the other, it’s all about perspective. All commandments have a sole purpose of guiding humans and so, their messages are basically the same and hence, none is better than the other if they preach about the same thing.


We have such. It is called secular law.

I must have missed it or you are lying.[quote=“Joshua_Heckathorn, post:23, topic:112799”]
The call of my creator.

So even without agreeing with his view, you will take it.

Get thee behind me Satan.

There may have been more for us to chat about but you are saying that your head is too far up your God’s ass for us to discus in an honest way.

You cannot hear what I say from there so I will ignore you unless you come out.


“You won’t agree with me so I’m just going to ignore you”

Absolutely fucking pathetic. Why the fuck are you here again?




yes yes and as a by-product we all are enslaved incels who adore genocide

impressive, you’ve got it all figured out.


We have been through this before. Armstrong is not a “scholar,” she has an honorary degree. As @Champion whose in the navy can probably tell you, honorary ranks mean jack shit when it comes to qualification or authority.

She talks about Hinduism, misdating it by thousands of years when modern Hinduism developed around the time of Christianity. It’s all irrelevant.[quote=“Greatest_I_am, post:22, topic:112799”]
Tell me please so that I can see if you have even that much intelligence going for you.

I have more intelligence than you considering I don’t obsess over this one point.


So you are unable to speak to any actual believers on the matter and rely on a strawman argument backed by the infinite strength of a pseudo-Moral and Intellectual God Complex?


"The societies in which many of us live have for more than a generation failed to foster moral discipline. They have taught that truth is relative and that everyone decides for himself or herself what is right. Concepts such as sin and wrong have been condemned as “value judgments.” As the Lord describes it, “Every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god” (D&C 1:16).
As a consequence, self-discipline has eroded and societies are left to try to maintain order and civility by compulsion. The lack of internal control by individuals breeds external control by governments. One columnist observed that “gentlemanly behavior [for example, once] protected women from coarse behavior. Today, we expect sexual harassment laws to restrain coarse behavior. …
“Policemen and laws can never replace customs, traditions and moral values as a means for regulating human behavior. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. Our increased reliance on laws to regulate behavior is a measure of how uncivilized we’ve become.”

(Elder) D. Todd Christofferson


Not really. Society still has quite a large number of social taboos. Murder is still wrong. Theft is still wrong. Rape is still very much wrong. Pedophilia is still wrong. Child abuse is still wrong. Animal abuse is still wrong. Racism is still wrong. Sexism is still wrong. Etc, etc, etc.

If anything, some of these have become even more taboo in the modern era.

Not really. It’s more that our perspective of reality is heavily influenced by a number of external factors that we simply cannot control. Therefore, it is important to take multiple viewpoints into account in order to gain a more holistic view of reality.

No, and no one will argue that this is true, because it is utter bullshit. People don’t decide what is right for his or herself, society tells them what is and is not right. Those who are outliers are then shunned from their group.

They are though. I don’t see how that’s condemning anything.

lmao wut?

If anything, government had a much stricter control over people’s lives when it was primarily theocracies and absolute monarchies.

“Gentlemanly” behavior didn’t restrain men from acting like shit, it just masked it up by acting like it was the social norm. The reason we see more sexual harassment cases now is because that shit doesn’t fly no more.

Why do you think that the people who describe themselves as “gentlemen” are often the most sexually frustrated and misogynistic?

And they never will. Because laws are a reflection of the customs and values of the times. Laws do not replace morality, laws reinforce morality.

Except we’ve always relied on laws and codes bestowed upon us from some higher power to regulate behavior. It’s the entire concept of man being born evil.


Do you see us as being born good or evil?

If evil, when do some of us turn into the good people that we see, and if born good, when do some of us turn into being evil?


The Gods like Allah and Yahweh are slave holding Gods. Allah says submit or end in hell and Yahweh says obey or end in hell.

Would you say that those Gods are uncivilized or civilized?


You seem to not get his central point of personal moral discipline and that without underlying moral values then the law will come to reflect that. Imagine if enough people became a moral nihilist after the death of god and therefore accepted others lives of being of no value or meaning.

All the virtue signaling taboos have mostly skyrocketed these days in areas that have fallen away from established moral values. (What is virtue?) The disintegration of even the family due to lacking values has caused intergenerational poverty. In the US entire demographics are worse off economically than they were when they were literally suppressed by government. [quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
Not really.

It seems that it either is or isn’t. No deeper meaning to that simple question.[quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
society tells them what is and is not right.

Society doesn’t really exist anymore due to multiculturalism, if it ever existed. Communities in conflict are what exist and we go with whatever group fits our individual moral awareness. Unless we take knee jerk moral positions without any thought on the underlying basis of the matter.

The largest community coalition then enforces or deforces their will upon the others in politics depending on how authoritarian their political worldview is.

See I’ve lived in four different areas of one country where people on average acted differently toward one another and seemed to simply reflect the individual values of the majority depending on how closely they adhered to them.

But even different neighborhoods have different moral values according to the individuals within the culture. In one your life is of no value and you will be robbed and murdered if you look wrong like in Baltimore, there’s little social mobility there or true community as there’s an obvious lack of values. In another place like Utah people will on average go out of their way to help out strangers as they view it as a moral duty. So much so that it has the highest social mobility in The United States and little crime or unemployment.

And no I’m not saying there is no such thing as pressure and that people conform in practice. But not in principle…

If something has no real moral value then to argue value is backtracking and logically inconsistent. Broken down by simply asking why.

Example of devils advocate: Murdering a 9 month old human the moment they come out of the womb is wrong. Why? Because they have value? Why? Because they have rights? Why? There’s no basis of human rights at all once you throw out the precepts of natural law in western civilization or any for that matter. [quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
lmao wut

If anything you failed to understand his statement because it has absolute nothing to do with history but a philosophical fact. Tell me does evil terrorism not cause governments to take away liberty in the name of security? When societies become immoral the government steps in but the government is not some sort of all good God, quite the opposite on average.

For example from an economic perspective the entire war on drugs has only served to protect the drug cartels.[quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
“Gentlemanly” behavior didn’t restrain men from acting like shit, it just masked it up by acting like it was the social norm.

Not in my faith. You seem to not understand what being an actual gentlemen is, which was denigrated by the frat social norm that grew in youth. No one even drinks at lds colleges. [quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
Why do you think that the people who describe themselves as “gentlemen” are often the most sexually frustrated and misogynistic?

I don’t see where you are pulling that from. You are making an unpacked assumption of hypocrisy. For one describing yourself as a gentlemen doesn’t make you one. Doesn’t change the point of the archetype.[quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
And they never will. Because laws are a reflection of the customs and values of the times. Laws do not replace morality, laws reinforce morality.

Exactly so you understand his and my point the secular law at the end of day only have meaning because of moral values. And I would put customs as being moreso cultural sometimes associated with religion but mainly historical tribalist rituals.[quote=“Chrome, post:32, topic:112799”]
Except we’ve always relied on laws and codes bestowed upon us from some higher power to regulate behavior

The Law is not the place to look for moral guidance or to regulate our behavior. We should be a good person no matter what the law is. Just following orders is not a valid moral response. The government can’t make people love each other, in fact quite the opposite occurs when there is forced artificial association.

Why do you assume I believe in such a concept? I believe we are born with a potential for evil not as evil. Did you know most with Down syndrome literally love just about everyone they meet, they can’t help it as it’s biologically. And by love I mean not in a sexual manner.

What it comes down to is I don’t look to society or the government to shape my moral values because both are not inherently moral. More so the morality of a mob and more often than not mobs don’t spontaneously form and march around helping everyone. As I mentioned my family came from Baltimore and still have connections there. Mobs formed and burned down an entire part of the city, even the bloods and crips gangs joined together to rampage. The mayor stood by and did nothing saying she was giving them room to destroy until the governor had had enough and sent in national guard that had to clear every street.

I think societies true colors are shown when the government isn’t enforcing behavior. If society is defined by herd behavior then if a majority of the individuals are immoral then even the good individuals can be swayed to commit immoral acts when pressured.

If the majority of the society is made up of good moral individuals then even the immoral individuals can be swayed to commit moral acts when pressured. The underlying point is defending and promote values in society is far more effective and efficient than attempting to enforce them upon people.


Define civilized and uncivilized. And then explain why that objectively matters.

Objective morality has been applied differently throughout the ages according to an increasingly revealed moral awareness. (Absolute morality is a dubious position.)

History has no moral judgment and applying modern morals to the distant past is irrational. Most of all on the matter of Justice.

(And hell is a state of being we are warned about. We are not sent there by anyone. Though there is a separation due to sin. I’ve written in depth answers to this on my Q and A so I won’t get into it here.)


Apply that foolish thinking to our roads.

Would you say that we should all ignore the road law?


That sounds like you are copping out.

I did not need to ask you to do so when you used those terms because they are well defined in the dictionary. I will go with your definition, so will you please answer my question?



Need I say more?

Child sacrifice.

Need I say more?


No car is better than another if they all drive in the same direction. But what about cars that have stopped or swerve out of control with no true direction?