But I did not say that now did I?
I thought you were insinuating that confusing was satan's realm. In fact, as the author of the Bible, God has done a great deal to confuse people. As much as we wish things were clearly, sometimes they are not.
I was asking what sins are we to consider harmless if fictionalized.
No
sin is acceptable. These acts in virtual worlds are not sin, that is what I am saying, yet they
can impact our character over time, so we need to assess
why we are playing these games. Depending on the reason
why we are indulging in that fiction, we can then determine if it's ok.
The thing Is that would you still play the game if the objectionable parts were removed?
It depends on what the content is that is removed and if it impacts other areas. For example replacing soldiers with zombies in BF2, would destroy the entire game for me, so no. Yet not having blood appear when shot, is fine. In fact one of the big discussion I had with a friend at work was that I would possibly play Diablo 2 if the extreme gore was removed.
Fellowship with the world is not necessarily a Good thing.
I think fellowship is generally a good thing, and if we can promote our message through it, then that's even better. Heck, if Jesus hung out with prostitutes and sinners, I think we can certainly say that good will come of it if we uphold our integrity.
I am certain there was plenty of fellowship watching Christians being fed to the lions in the coliseum,.
Were Christians enjoying that too? I think not.
This is also not an answer to my question of what other sins are acceptable.
No sins are acceptable, that's for sure. Yet these actions in games are not sins. Did you read my post earlier about how God created rules to protect us and how all sin has a consequence and so on?
Cheers,
Digit