Replies

To: D-fendr

You’d have to prove that premise first.

And why would that one need to be proved first and not the other premises?

the EO accept the logic of this syllogism, but consider the Immaculate Conception false or not proven.

Where's the oneness?

6,602 posted on 08/04/2010 2:27:18 PM PDT by the_conscience (We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))

To: the_conscience

And why would that one need to be proved first and not the other premises?

All premises have to be necessary and, either: self-evident (axomatic) or proven (true).

Your premise has been shown to be unnecessary, irrelevant to the syllogism.

Which of the other premises to see as neither self-evident nor true or proven.

6,613 posted on 08/04/2010 2:40:54 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)

To: the_conscience

Sorry, should be:

Which of the other premises do you see as neither self-evident nor true or proven.

6,614 posted on 08/04/2010 2:41:56 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)

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