Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: NoCmpromiz
Several very vocal posters seem to think it is OK to set aside the role of civil discourse in interpersonal communications as long as they are 'contending for the faith'.

Several RCs come to mind. Which ones did you mean?

Meaning, your post can be construed to be anti-Catholic.
302 posted on 03/24/2015 4:40:58 PM PDT by Resettozero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies ]


To: Resettozero
Several RCs come to mind. Which ones did you mean?
Meaning, your post can be construed to be anti-Catholic.

Only by a very fractured exegesis of verbiage. Your interpretation of my language certainly does have a strange bent.. I reviewed my post and saw nothing of an anti Catholic OR anti-Protestant slant. Maybe you would like to enlighten me as to the anti-Catholic phraseology?

I did see a portion that could have punctured the epidermis of certain thin skinned people who presume more than they should. I can see how this would elicit a response from such an one.

Perchance are your shoes fitting properly?

305 posted on 03/24/2015 4:53:38 PM PDT by NoCmpromiz (John 14:6 is a non-pluralistic comment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | 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