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 (28826)	9/21/2001 12:19:06 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I did mean to complement you, I am sorry it came off merely as an after thought. I agree with you that a Christian accepts what Paul said. It is because I am not convinced of it that I refuse to call myself a Christian, or participate in any denomination. When Episcopal bishops write books about their disbelief in the Resurrection, I shake my head and wonder where their sense of shame is. However, I tend to sympathize with the confused ordinary parishoner, who is doctrinally unsound but seeking a way to relate to God in existing institutions. (Unitarians, by the way, are not at all hypocrites). I do though, think that one can accept what Paul said and nevertheless believe that the matter is not settled until after death. I rather like Lewis's book "The Great Divorce", for example, which conceives of a chance after death, while admitting that there must sometime be a settlement.....

To: Greg or e who wrote (28826)	9/21/2001 12:20:35 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Classic liberalism rejects every aspect of this, and therefore, believes what it believes "in vain" Would you be able to put "imo" after that? OR are you sure? Because just as St. Bill is not privy to God's plan, if there is a God, neither are you. God is mysterious, beyond our comprehension (so you have told me)- many things COULD be possible, and we can't know for sure, because God is mysterious. What if the Bible is part of that mystery. What if God intentionally made it confusing (he does things like that, according to some people). As a test of some sort. To see who would use it for divisive and "evil" purposes, and who would use it for love, and charity, and furthering humanity. In that case the liberal Christians would be way ahead (imo).