Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: jo kus

No.

I don’t believe I’m infallible.

Just not as fallible as the traditions of men edifice of the RC . . . structure etc. . . .

but it’s just an old version of many such structures of men . . . and thereby MORE vulnerable to traditions of men errors.

Vocabulary time . . .

MORE than is DIFFERENT from LESS than.

MORE is different from 0.00.

“A” as MORE fallible than “B” does not mean that “B” is 100% INFALLIBLE.


15,321 posted on 05/27/2007 9:48:40 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15318 | View Replies ]


To: Quix
“A” as MORE fallible than “B” does not mean that “B” is 100% INFALLIBLE.

You must be joking. Now, you are less fallible than the 2000 year mind of the Church...

Is that a vast improvement on your last claim? You still are saying you are right and the entire 2000 year Church is wrong. Based on your "less fallible" nature, no doubt...

15,327 posted on 05/27/2007 10:18:00 PM PDT by jo kus (Humility is present when one debases oneself without being obliged to do so- St.Chrysostom; Phil 2:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15321 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson