Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
14,716
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1,260:
Line 1,260: + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Rob Smith, still waiting for you to summarize 3 or 4 essential beliefs of the Gospel in one para: reply
:"All these things have I considered in my heart, that I might carefully understand them: there are just men and wise men, and their works are in the hand of God: and yet man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love, or hatred:..."
:"All these things have I considered in my heart, that I might carefully understand them: there are just men and wise men, and their works are in the hand of God: and yet man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love, or hatred:..."
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 12:08, 13 July 2020 (EDT)
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 12:08, 13 July 2020 (EDT)
So what do you mean? All good Catholics are assured of salvation, an ASSURANCE by means of faith in Christ and His Divinity, in His Lordship and Death, in His Resurrection from the dead.
OR
All good Catholics are assured of salvation, a SALVATION by means of faith in Christ and His Divinity, in His Lordship and Death, in His Resurrection from the dead.
I think the chief Catholic doctrinal source of philosophy, Aristotle, calls that an AMPHIBOLY, a rhetorical device used to perpetrate fallacies.
I have a second question. Do you think expressing a doctrine about PROPITIATION with an AMPHIBOLY is a PROPITIOUS way to set the ground rules of what is conveyed to be a collegial discussion? Or is it more like you placing something slippery in front of a colleague who's walking with you and sincerely seeking understanding to add to his faith?
[[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) Monday, 14:27, 13 July 2020 (EDT)