Christology and Trinity

[1Cor15.54 (Massimiliano)]

@Miekhie

I am not adding anything else. this just what I got from your previous post to prove that I don’t make things up

Another proof that you completely misunderstood what I was saying What is the meaning of life? - #141 by 1Cor15.54

In that post I wrote

@1Cor15.54

Look, there are some gray areas where the Church didn’t weigh in, such as the controversia de auxiliis. I’ve studied it for years and I can tell you that I absolutely, viscerally, thoroughly, comprehensively LOATHE Banez’ interpretation. I find it offensive both morally and philosophically.

But let me tell you this: if the Church finally established that Banez was right (which would also mean that Molina or even modern excellent theologians such as Fr.Most would be wrong) I would accept it and I would also accept (in that case) that I AM WRONG AND THAT I WAS WRONG ALL ALONG (even if, currently, I absolutely don’t think I am).

Because I don’t consider myself the final arbiter of the truth, I don’t give myself such authority and I’d rather die ten times, but even 100 times, before being personally responsible (not that I would have such power, bytheway) of a division and a schism within the Church.

Do you understand now that you were very much wrong when you claimed that I loathed Craig (which bytheway would have been wrong even if those words actually referred to him, because loathing someone’s doctrine doesn’t mean loathing him as a person)?

And there is one thing I could have phrased better, and I’m sorry for it, because I don’t think you have actual reading comprension problems, I think you just read very superficially which unavoidably leads to these errors (everyone would make those errors if they read superficially).