[CS-FSLUG] Glorifying having a baby out of wedlock

[Stephen J. McCracken]

Aaron Patrick Lehmann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 02:16:46PM -0500, Stephen J. McCracken wrote:
> 
>>This is the typical HUMAN viewpoint.  To God, sin is sin.  A little lie, 
>>a little disobediance, a murderer, an adulteror.  It is all sin in the 
>>eyes of God.  If you are a Christian, ALL sin is covered by the blood of 
>>Jesus (but read Romans 6 here).  If you are not a Christian, does it 
>>really matter?  Even the little sins will keep you out of heaven (not 
>>mentioning the inherated original sin).  "Compounding sin"... don't 
>>think it matters here (maybe "compounding consequences", but would have 
>>to think about that one).
[snip]
> single in evil, from the eyes of those wrronged.  In a situation like this, God
> is not the only injured party, just the only divine injured party.  In one of
> the hypotheticals, the baby is dead, and in the other it is not.
> 
I agree with what you say, but when we are talking about "sin" I think 
we are referring to God rathen than people for the most part.  That's 
why I added "compounding consequences" at the end for the results of the 
sin.  You will see that I also tried to avert your accusation below by 
putting in "**but** read Romans 6 here" in the middle.  What does Romans 
6 say?

> What you are saying seems to be a twisted version of "Let me sin more, so that
> grace may abound."  "Let me sin more, since I'm hellbound anyway."
> 
> As an afterthought, is there any way for us to know that Hell is equally bad for
> all sufferers?

Some think so, some think not.  We will only know when it's too late to 
do anything with the knowledge.

sjm