King Solomon
-
to be respected or despised?
-
Actually what evil did Solomon committed?
-
1000 wivesOriginally posted by Icemoon:Actually what evil did Solomon committed? -
HiOriginally posted by Pyoro:1000 wives
you need to retake your math, he where got so little ... -
REspected for his wisdom and to build the Temple of God.Originally posted by Pyoro:to be respected or despised?
To be despised when he didn't have the heart like his father's.
Than again, the illustration is - Man is fallible. Grace and Covenant is ever-standing. -
Man is not impeccable.
His powers of King is undisputed due to God's promise. -
deleted
-
biangz ... you quoted too fast liao ... correction already made.Originally posted by M©+square:Man is infallible?????????
Ok. I opt out. -
As Vince correctly pointed out...its a typo which was immediately rectified.Originally posted by M©+square:Man is infallible?????????
Ok. I opt out.
Well technically man can be infallible at times like when a school teacher teaches her students school work etc etc. -
why do you ask?Originally posted by Pyoro:to be respected or despised? -
In Protestant's POV.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:As Vince correctly pointed out...its a typo which was immediately rectified.
Well technically man can be infallible at times like when a school teacher teaches her students school work etc etc.
Men is all falliable, regardless of time.
And only by Christ that christians obtain saving grace.
Which explains the whole weight of Protestant's belief is onto The Cross and Salvation by Faith. -
Do you have any idea what infallible means?Originally posted by M©+square:In Protestant's POV.
Men is all falliable, regardless of time.
And only by Christ that christians obtain saving grace.
Which explains the whole weight of Protestant's belief is onto The Cross and Salvation by Faith.
It means to teach without error.
For example, my teachings of Pri 4 Maths is infallible.
U are being confused with impeccability (without sins) and infallible (teaching without error). -
Hai, here i am explaining to you...nevermind lah....Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Do you have any idea what infallible means?
It means to teach without error.
For example, my teachings of Pri 4 Maths is infallible.
U are being confused with impeccability (without sins) and infallible (teaching without error).
fal·li·ble
adj.
Capable of making an error: Humans are only fallible.
Tending or likely to be erroneous: fallible hypotheses.
If you choose to stick to your views. You can go ahead. -
Humans can be incapable at errors at times. Im not arguing in the Christian sense at all.Originally posted by M©+square:Hai, here i am explaining to you...nevermind lah....
fal·li·ble
adj.
Capable of making an error: Humans are only fallible.
Tending or likely to be erroneous: fallible hypotheses.
If you choose to stick to your views. You can go ahead.
I am merely saying at times we can be infallible.
For example, when I teach primary 1 Maths, am i 'likely to be erroneous' ???
Its virtually impossible as I am too learned.
Hence in that capacity, I am infallible and all my solutions to pri 1 Maths problems will be correct.
So Man can be infallible at times. A rarity though.... -
Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Humans can be incapable at errors at times. Im not arguing in the Christian sense at all.
I am merely saying at times we can be infallible. For example, when I teach primary 1 Maths, am i 'likely to be erroneous' ??? Its virtually impossible as I am too learned. Hence in that capacity, I am infallible and all my solutions to pri 1 Maths problems will be correct.
So Man can be infallible at times. A rarity though....
OK.
VINCE, now i Opt out. -
We clashed on the definition of Fallible.Originally posted by M©+square: OK.
VINCE, now i Opt out.
U then Provided an official definition for it.
I then made used of the official definition word for word : "likely to be errorneous'.
And you give up......and run to Vince69(a good choice as he sticks to his arguments and a good partner for discussions) -
of cuz can. its also called careless mistakes.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Humans can be incapable at errors at times. Im not arguing in the Christian sense at all.
I am merely saying at times we can be infallible.
For example, when I teach primary 1 Maths, am i 'likely to be erroneous' ???
Its virtually impossible as I am too learned.
Hence in that capacity, I am infallible and all my solutions to pri 1 Maths problems will be correct.
So Man can be infallible at times. A rarity though.... -
-
Definition he quoted: Tending or likely to be erroneous: fallible hypotheses.Originally posted by Ito_^:of cuz can. its also called careless mistakes.
I wont consider careless mistakes in Pri 1 Maths to be a factor so great so as to cause me to be 'likely to be erroneous'. -
wah leow eh .. Mr Pope spoils the discussion again.
-
MC2 started it by hyping on a typo which i had recitifed almost immediately.Originally posted by Icemoon:wah leow eh .. Mr Pope spoils the discussion again.
Nothing christian has been discussed. -
not really, even school teacher can teach wrongly, problem is some student failed to spot it. thats why we have school text books to do 'check and balance'.Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Do you have any idea what infallible means?
It means to teach without error.
For example, my teachings of Pri 4 Maths is infallible.
U are being confused with impeccability (without sins) and infallible (teaching without error). -
Haha. I understand your position fully vince. I agreed with you in the PM.Originally posted by vince69:not really, even school teacher can teach wrongly, problem is some student failed to spot it. thats why we have school text books to do 'check and balance'.
But if 2 different students have 2 different intepretation of the textbook, who do they turn to as the final source of authority (besides the author LOL)??? -
Nothing Christian????Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:MC2 started it by hyping on a typo which i had recitifed almost immediately.
Nothing christian has been discussed.
Let me show you why i choose to opt out.
Then you replied with nothing christian....Originally posted by M©+square:In Protestant's POV.
Men is all falliable, regardless of time.
And only by Christ that christians obtain saving grace.
Which explains the whole weight of Protestant's belief is onto The Cross and Salvation by Faith.
Conclusion - Frequency NO same same....Originally posted by Pope Nicholas:Humans can be incapable at errors at times. Im not arguing in the Christian sense at all.
I am merely saying at times we can be infallible.
For example, when I teach primary 1 Maths, am i 'likely to be erroneous' ???
Its virtually impossible as I am too learned.
Hence in that capacity, I am infallible and all my solutions to pri 1 Maths problems will be correct.
So Man can be infallible at times. A rarity though.... -
btw .... hoh ... before unker Eng comes in and start scolding all of us hoh ... please be reminded ... we had all gone super OOT liao