56.  That by sinning man lost free will, et non.

69.  That the Son of God was predestinated, et contra.

79.  That Christ was a deceiver, et non.

85.  That the hour of the Lord’s resurrection is uncertain, et contra.

116.  That the sins of the fathers are visited upon the children, et
     contra.

122.  That everybody should be allowed to marry, et contra.

141.  That works of sanctity do not justify a man, et contra.

144.  That at times we all sin against our will, et contra.

150.  That sins are not remitted without confession, et contra.

153.  That a lie is never permissible, et contra.

154.  That a man may destroy himself for some reasons, et contra.

155.  That Christians may not for any reason kill a man, et contra.

156.  That it is lawful to kill a man, et non.

How he brought out the conflict of opinions is shown by the following example: 

     THAT IT IS LAWFUL TO KILL A MAN, AND THE OPPOSITE THESIS.

     Jerome on Isaiah, Bk.  V. He who cuts the throat of a man of
     blood, is not a man of blood.

     Idem, On the Epistle to the Galatians: He who smites the
     wicked because they are wicked and whose reason for the murder is
     that he may slay the base, is a servant of the Lord.

     Idem, on Jeremiah: For the punishment of homicides, impious
     persons and poisoners is not bloodshed, but serving the law.

Cyprian, in the Ninth Kind of Abuse: The King ought to restrain theft, punish deeds of adultery, cause the wicked to perish from off the face of the earth, refuse to allow parricides and perjurers to live.

Augustine: Although it is manslaughter to slaughter a man, a person may sometimes be slain without sin.  For both a soldier in the case of an enemy and a judge or his official in the case of a criminal, and the man from whose hand, perhaps without his will or knowledge, a weapon has flown, do not seem to me to sin, but merely to kill a man.

Likewise: The soldier is ordered by law to kill the enemy, and if he shall prove to have refrained from such slaughter, he pays the penalty at the hands of his commander.  Shall we not go so far as to call these laws unjust or rather no laws at all?  For that which was not just does not seem to me to be a law.

Idem, on Exodus ch. xxvii: The Israelites committed no theft in spoiling the Egyptians, but rendered a service to God at his bidding, just as when the servant of a judge kills a man whom the law hath ordered to be killed; certainly if he does it of his own volition he is a homicide, even though he knows that the man whom he executes ought to be executed by the judge.

     Idem, on Leviticus ch. lxxv: When a man is justly put to death,
     the law puts him to death, not thou.