Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (13482)	5/11/2001 3:37:19 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

I think you did pretty well with it, but: Augustine is pretty clear, and follows Paul: Paul says," We were slaves to sin", and Augustine asserts that the taint is so great that even babies are not free of sin. Calvin and Luther follow follow Augustine: we cannot not sin, which is why grace is required. Yes, some sins would be our own, but even the virtuous is only so relatively, and needs grace. I do not think it is possible for God to pronounce an unjust sentence. That is why I think that everyone has a chance to accept grace, and that even those in Hell do not suffer torment eternally, but simply do not receive infinite blessedness. As for the idea that the offense is against God, and therefore worthy of infinite punishment, I don't think the gradations of transgression can be shrugged off so easily. Even towards God there are greater and lesser degrees of disrespect. It seems to me that the parables indicate that He wills salvation for all. This is incompatible with election, but not with requiring acceptance of the gift. One need not be a universalist to think that everyone should have a real opportunity to accept or reject. Remember, that is what started the initial discussion, but whether those not evangelized, or otherwise closed off, were necessarily damned........