Ignorance?

  • Thread starter Thread starter UnityofTrinity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sig said:
Despite your repeated denials, your statements are straw men.
Click to expand...
I’ve demonstrated that they aren’t, let the people who are viewing this thread decide whether they are or not, there is no point in arguing it further
 
Sig said:
You are ignorant and are not responsible for your heresy
Click to expand...
Like a typical Protestant, you take one sentence and quote it completely out of context…IN context this is one of two options, the other, being that you are a malicious heretic
 
It doesn’t matter whether I am fallible because I do not appeal to my own authority, I appeal to divine authority, you however appeal to your own authority, which is fallible
 
Yes I do “capiche.” The underlying notion of invincible ignorance is flawed. God is the savior, capable of saving anyone He desires to save.
Click to expand...
Capiche?
Click to expand...
Let me help you further: God causes one to be born again 1 Pet 1:3.
Click to expand...
Capiche that?
Click to expand...
I agree completely that God is capable of saving anyone He desires to save.

I also agree 100% that God causes one to be born again.

Where you seem to lose the argument is the entire concept of free will. That’s where ignorance comes in. God does not ‘force’ one to be saved. He gives us the choice. If someone is unable to make the choice, that doesn’t condemn them to hell. That’s where ‘ignorance’ comes in.
 
frankpetrucci83 said:
I’ve demonstrated that they aren’t, let the people who are viewing this thread decide whether they are or not, there is no point in arguing it further
Click to expand...
OK, and let them look at your statements here:

**Catholic Doctrine is infallible
A Protestant is in error because he disagrees with Catholic Doctrine
Catholic Doctrine infallibly defines “ignorance”
If the Catholic Doctrine is indeed infallible then there are only two possible options for you
  1. You are ignorant and are not responsible for your heresy
  2. Your heresy is done out of maliciousness**How do you know your assertions about the CC doctrines, and the reasons I disagree with you are true unless you, yourself, are infallible? Are you infallible?
Let the reader note that Mr. Petrucci refuses to answer that question. Hmmmm, I wonder why? :hmmm:
 
frankpetrucci83 said:
Like a typical Protestant, you take one sentence and quote it completely out of context…IN context this is one of two options, the other, being that you are a malicious heretic
Click to expand...
Look to the post immediately above. I quoted your all of your points.

Are you infallible, Mr. Petrucci?
 
frankpetrucci83 said:
It doesn’t matter whether I am fallible because I do not appeal to my own authority, I appeal to divine authority, you however appeal to your own authority, which is fallible
Click to expand...
How do you know the authority to which you appeal is infallible unless you, yourself, are infallible?

Are you infallible, Mr. Petrucci?
 
bmullins said:
Where you seem to lose the argument is the entire concept of free will. That’s where ignorance comes in. God does not ‘force’ one to be saved. He gives us the choice. If someone is unable to make the choice, that doesn’t condemn them to hell. That’s where ‘ignorance’ comes in.
Click to expand...
Your statement is a straw man.

Where have I stated that man is not volitional, and that God forces man to be saved?

Please list the post #s in which I’ve stated that. :hmmm:
 
Your statement is a straw man.
Click to expand...
To quote one of my favorite movies, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
 
You know, I typed a great deal to post in response but I’m going to instead simply say ‘peace be with you.’ You can’t take a verse here or there out of context, you must take the Scripture as a whole in order to even get a glimpse at the Word of God. The only thing I’m going to quote is the very scripture you quoted to us in order to prove there is no such thing as ignorance of God.

Romans 1:19

Because that which IS known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them.

This verse does nothing to affirm your stance. It only affirms that what a man knows about God is what God shows him, it does not say that God will show everyone about Him or fully about Him. It clearly does not say that every person has a complete understanding of God, nor does it affirm that they can be ignorant of God.
 
bmullins said:
You know, I typed a great deal to post in response but I’m going to instead simply say ‘peace be with you.’ You can’t take a verse here or there out of context, you must take the Scripture as a whole in order to even get a glimpse at the Word of God. The only thing I’m going to quote is the very scripture you quoted to us in order to prove there is no such thing as ignorance of God.

Romans 1:19

Because that which IS known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them.

This verse does nothing to affirm your stance. It only affirms that what a man knows about God is what God shows him, it does not say that God will show everyone about Him or fully about Him. It clearly does not say that every person has a complete understanding of God, nor does it affirm that they can be ignorant of God.
Click to expand...
I take it then that you are unable to produce the #s of the posts in which I said what you assert I said, is that right?

If you can’t produce them, just say you can’t, and we can move on.
 
fallibility means the possibility of being wrong, therefore fallibility does not equal being incorrect
 
by your definiton though, i’d have to say yes I am infallible, just to shut you up

if i say 2+2=4 does that make me infallible

if i am infallible am i incorrect if i say 2+2=4

you are fallible, therefore you fail by your own argument
 
maybe you should be agnostic, because according to your fallible reasoning, there is no way you can know for sure that CHrist is your saviour, since you are fallible
 
second tiring example, if HItler says 2+2=4 is he wrong…no

a person can’t be infallible but a statement can

and the statements I am saying that regard the CHurch, are indeed infallible
 
frankpetrucci83 said:
by your definiton though, i’d have to say yes I am infallible, just to shut you up

if i say 2+2=4 does that make me infallible

if i am infallible am i incorrect if i say 2+2=4

you are fallible, therefore you fail by your own argument
Click to expand...
Sir you’ve admitted that you’re fallible, and therefore, everything you believe could be wrong.
 
Sig said:
But what it does mean is that your certainty regarding what you think is infallible is a fallible certainty.
Click to expand...
then, like i said, become agnostic…because as soon as you apply this to YOURSELF, that’s what you are stuck with
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top