Replies

To: OLD REGGIE; narses

Is the “smart conclusion” that your church has only fallible declarations or that it has no declarations?

Or...?

482 posted on 08/29/2010 3:24:53 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)

To: D-fendr; OLD REGGIE

Maybe his church has only fallible declarations or has no declarations? Wait, what is that echo?

493 posted on 08/29/2010 4:12:17 PM PDT by narses ( 'Prefer nothing to the love of Christ.')

To: D-fendr; narses

(#481) Is the “smart conclusion” that your church has only fallible declarations or that it has no declarations? Or...?

Nope! Please pay attention and brush up on reading comprehension.

The following post provoked my "stupid conclusion" reply.

(#479 narses) Really? You have no Church and yet you want mine to have Dogmas that fit neatly into your understanding? Why?

A very stupid conclusion. What more can I say?

Let me explain in elemental language the proper interpretation of "NONE" in my reply.

(#473) Really? Well then, what are the “official” list of “Infallible” declarations of your Church?

There are NONE!.

Simple isn't it? One question was asked and one answer was given.

My Church has NO self declared "Infallible" declarations nor does it even claim Infallibility for the writings of any of it's leaders. (Sorry - we have no Pope.)

Is that clear?

590 posted on 08/30/2010 10:59:20 AM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am a Biblical Unitarian?)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794