Yakuda

I'll be sitting quietly with a great big smile on my face listening for the sound of leftists heads exploding all across America.

Those are your words so if anyone is playing word games its you. I merely asked a clarifying question. I've noticed that everytime people like you get challenged you get all whiney.

Why should it be less complicated? Why should you be allowed to vote from home? It's BS

You realize that poster is a bit off his nut right?

For 500 years now non catholic Christians have preached the "sola" doctrines. Faith and Scripture alone are the basis of salvation but is true. Sola fide was discussed in another thread and has shown to be untrue. This thread will address the truth of sola scriptura. Protestants will often refer to 2 Timothy 3:16 as proof that sola scriptura is true. But what does the passage actually say? Here: "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful (some translations use, profitable) for teaching, for refutation, for correction and for training in uprightness." Notice it says useful but never mentions only. The whole idea of sola scriptura is to combat "tradition" which Protestants see as contrary to what they call the Christian faith. In fairness Scripture does speak poorly of tradition but it always qualifies a type of tradition. They refer to "human" traditions and traditions of our "elders" or traditions of "man". But Scripture references what must be a different type of tradition. 1 Corinthians 11:2 "I praise you because you remember me in everything and you maintain the traditions just as I handed them down to you." 2 Thessalonians 2:15 "Therefore stand firm brethren and hold fast to the traditions that you have been taught whether by word of mouth or by letter of ours." 2 Thessalonians 3:6 "...we command you to keep your distance from any brethren who are living an idle existence and who disregard the traditions you received from us." Protestant belief in sola scriptura is not only wrong it actually contradicts scripture.

It is tangible. I have, you reject him. But I must remember you're proud of calling yourself crack ho barbie. I should expect nothing less. Because you say so. I'm not impressed Have you ever read an article in a "professional" journal?

As I've stated already as well thats irrelevant Yes you can but you havent offered anything but an asinine comment. You haven't shown why the 5 proofs are bad you've just spouted your opinion. Actually the unicorn thing is more impressive than your opinion. Yes, just about everything that I haven't actually personally experienced. The same is true for you but you think you only believe things based on evidence. BS

That's your problem not mine. I do care about what I think not what you think unless why you think makes sense which it doesnt. AGAIN I'm not asking you to disprove my belief in God. I have told you the proofs I use to conclude there is a God. All you have done thus far is say you don't like the proofs. That's not a counter argument.

Oh I see you think I care what you believe. Let me unburden you, I never have. So you will run away. Smart boy I'll give you that Only in your own head.

So thinking Jesus is "a" savior is unjust and immoral? Is that right?

They are evidence. You dont like it. That's not the same I would reject everything offered to me to if I was you. In have give you the chance to empirically prove me wrong but you don't want to do. As I said before youre disingenuous at best but it's more like you're just straight kut duplicitous. You aren't to be taken seriously. I've noticed this site is full of blowhards.

It is different Yes tedious to those who lack the ability to creat an argument. I've given you the proofs of Gods existence which you rejected without out any explanation why it's bad but now you're you're whining. Ill give you credit though you know when to quit.

Exactly how do they treat them badly?

No I dont want them to disprove my God. That's incorrect. I've challenged them to do something that would in turn require me to abandon my belief. The challenge is to show that others could what I believe only God can do. If you could do it then my belief would be irrational.

Jesus said lots of things that lots of people didn't like.

You posted my words out of context. At best Id say you're being disingenuous but my inclination is to say you're just duplicitous.

I'm sorry to hear about the medical issues you're facing. The bible also says, "Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my heavenly father". Matthew 7:21. It is good enough for you but his it good enough for him?

According to you its bad but I'm sure someone else somewhere might care what you think of the evidence but I don't. Yes but you've declared it bad and as already stated someone else might care about that but i don't. What I have done though is given you people the chance to convince me I'm wrong but not one of you enlightened geniuses has yet been able to pull it off. And as I've mentioned I remember decades ago when the arguments from you people were better. The quality has really trailed off

If I'm a "radical papist" then I guess you're a rabid heretic. See how easy that is? Your lack of respect speaks volumes about how far you have strayed. You're not a simple believer in Jesus Christ and his word. What you believe is only 500 years old. Scripture says nothing near what you claim it says. You've been trained to use rote repetition of Scripture without actual knowledge and sadly that tactic is effective with too many Catholics. I'm not one of the too many Catholics. This happens every time you protestants can't bully your way through the discussion, you bail. I dont blame you. You should bail because facing the truth will be VERY difficult for you. YOU go around in circles because that's the result of repetition. I'll be here if you ever want to hear more of the truth. But work on this, where does Scripture say which books should be in the bible?

No I'm not YOU are, yet here you are claiming I can research them in other sources. You protestants read other sources all the time! Do you actually know what the cathecism is or do you only know what others tell you it is? It's most like.thr latter and not the former. Explain to me what the cathecism is.

Profitable for doctrine not the sole authority. Repeating it doesnt make it mean what you want it to mean. They did not have the scripture we have now. And John the apostle taught it atius if Antioch who speaks.of bishops and if you work outside the bishops you are outside the church . Where does Scripture say which books should be in Scripture

Whoa hang on there....I can research this subject in various sources and articles?????? You're kidding me right? I gave that to you Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18. Acts 15:1-10

You've stopped thinking and are spewing again. You keep saying Scripture is the final authority but haven't shown where Scripture says that. Jesus gave power to bind and loose to Peter and the apostles.

You haven't shown that anything I've said isn't in Scripture. All you've don't is try to convince me that your fallible interpretation of Scripture is more worthy of belief that what Jesus said, the apostle John said what John's disciple Ignatius said. Useful for teaching NOT the final authority. That's what you believe NOT what it says. Jesus gave authority to Peter and the apostles their word is worthy of belief yours isn't You can examine it all you like but you will need to convince me why i should believe you over the teachings of a church created by Jesus himself. BTW while you're doing your "examination" give me the chapter and verse in Scripture it says what books should be in Scripture. Thank you in advance.

That says nothing about you must find everything in Scripture Yes you will and you will deny every word. Your heart and mind are not open. It would be monumentally difficult for you to admit you're wrong but you are.