On May 16, 2012, at 1:17 PM, 123hop at comcast.net wrote:
> No. I know that one. I was thinking of a more extended discussion.
>
> J.
>
Isn't that one of those proven to be spurious?
> ----- Original Message -----
> On Wed, 16 May 2012 07:27:23 +0000 (UTC)
> 123hop at comcast.net wrote:
>
>> All you classicists....philosophers....catholics..... help.
>>
>> I have a fuzzy dim recollection about some discussion about the
>> purity of sin ....about the pure being unable to sin....
>
> Are you thinking of the Epistle to Titus?
> πάντα μὲν καθαρὰ τοῖς καθαροῖς -- to
> the pure, all
> things are pure?
>
>
> --
> --
>
> Michael J. Smith
> mjs at smithbowen.net
>
> http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org
> http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com
> http://cars-suck.org
>
> Some fine cliches there. Should be encouraged. Too many damn people
> trying to be different. Coining phrases when a good platitude would
> do and save anxiety.
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk