[z3n]

Thank you stfassisi. Really.
But I still feel very fuzzy on the difference.
In fact, I feel like it just got fuzzier.

The statement that the devil is the indirect cause of all our sins seems quite clear by itself. ALL our sins? Not much wavering there.
All of human nature is infected with the first sin. Okay.
That is the part where we are prone to sin resulting from the fall.

But the article's statement seem as if there was a dual probability of sin, and the other aspect was just the (inherant?) "weakness of human nature"... and when you went into the desire for food and sexual pleasures, to me these would seem to be the later, as they are some what mundane and perhaps not so diabolical.

[stfassisi]

“”But the article’s statement seem as if there was a dual probability of sin””

Another thing to keep in mind is that with free will there was always going to be potential sin by our own free decisions

When speaking of sex ,food etc.. what is meant that in excess they can become more important than Man’s love of God and fellow man,thus man can fall into sin of gluttony

Sorry for not being more clear in my last post ,dear friend.