Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: I AM DISGUSTED! Message-ID: Date: 14 May 91 07:28:00 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 30 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article tom@salzo.cary.nc.us (Tom Salzmann) writes: + +It's not even worth quoting your article, but the fact is simple and +clear. Homosexuality, fornication, etc, is SIN. Read it again. It is There have a been a couple of postings during which I have though the following: "if civil laws reflected the Biblical moral laws, would any more people receive salvation?" It would seem from a number of postings, that some people beleive that if certain 'temptations' were not available, the less people would 'fall'. This seems to be in contrast to the statements that everyone is in need of the 'saving Grace' independent of what type of sin is involved. In civil law the idea is to coerce at least a major portion of the population into a certain behavior pattern. The result is a more 'peaceful' society(very simplistic model). In Biblical moral law the principle is 'to some higher goal, ie. change human nature' (I don't believe this but some may subscribe to it). Or in another way, if one removes 'alcohol' from the available drinks, clearly there will be less alcoholics but will there correspondingly be more 'saved' individuals? (in this model, say, no one can produce alcohol, yeast no longer works the same way). -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu