Difference between revisions of "User talk:IndependentSkeptic"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(proposed revision of text and layout of Debate page Have the gates of hell prevailed)
Line 253: Line 253:
 
*No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user. }}
 
*No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user. }}
 
[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 19:47, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
 
[[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 19:47, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Suggestion for additional rule:{{quotation|
 +
*Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.}} <br> --[[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic]] ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk]]) 10:00, 1 September 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
I cite in particular these, as relevant to a revision of the mainspace Debate page to remove spam, and disruptive insertions into original postings, as vandalism:{{quotebox|'''Rules'''
 +
*Off topic subjects, without providing an explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question, can be removed by a Sysop/Moderator.
 +
 +
*[...]
 +
 +
*[...]
 +
 +
*[...] Spamming is not allowed in either the Protagonist, Antagonist, or Open discussion sections. Such designated spam postings may be removed by a Debate Sysop/Moderator. Editors may freely inquire of any Debate Sysop/Moderator, along with a brief explanation of cause, for removing such spam postings.
 +
 +
*[...]
 +
 +
*No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user. }}
 +
 +
In support of these I propose this additional relevant rule:{{quotation|
 +
*Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.}}In accordance with these rules proposed by RobSmith and myself I have revised a copy of the Debate mainspace page as follows. <br>(This is not spam. RobSmith said he had unlocked the page. It's still locked. All double-brackets enclosing identifying signatures of users posting comments have been removed from the copy below to preemptively defeat a potential accusation of "forging electronic signatures" on a page the user "never posted to"—meaning this IndependentSkeptic talk page.) <br> --[[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic]] ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk]]) 10:00, 1 September 2020 (EDT)
 +
----
 +
<center>''This is a non-denominational exchange of ideas intended to bring about a greater understanding of the Bible.''<br>''All views are welcome.''</center>
 +
 +
'''10 Texts:'''
 +
*'''Matthew 16:13-19''' <br> 13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? <br> 14 And they said, Some say ''that thou art'' John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias or one of the prophets.<br> 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? <br> 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. <br> 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed ''it'' unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. <br> 18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter ["a rock"]. and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. <br> 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
 +
*'''John 14:16-17''' <br> 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; <br> 17 ''Even'' the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
 +
*'''John 16:12-15''' <br> 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. <br> 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, ''that'' shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. <br> 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew ''it'' unto you. <br> 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew ''it'' unto you.
 +
*'''Ephesians 2:18-22''' <br> 18 For through him [Jesus] we both [the Uncircumcision and the Circumcision] have access by one Spirit unto the Father. <br> 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; <br> 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner ''stone''. <br> 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: <br> 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
 +
*'''1 Timothy 3:14-15''' <br> 14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: <br> 15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
 +
*'''1 Timothy 4:1-2''' <br> 1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; <br> 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
 +
*'''Hebrews 13:7''' <br> 7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of ''their'' conversation.
 +
*'''Hebrews 13:17''' <br> 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that ''is'' unprofitable for you.
 +
*'''2 Peter 3:17''' <br> 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know ''these things'' before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
 +
*'''1 John 2:18-19''' <br> 18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. <br> 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would ''no doubt'' have continued with us: but ''they went out'', that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
 +
 +
'''Rules'''
 +
*Off topic subjects, without providing an explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question, can be removed by a Sysop/Moderator.
 +
 +
*In Open discussion, debaters are strongly discourage from cutting and pasting extensive text from their already stated Protagonist or  Antagonist position. The Open discussion is for a free-flowing examination of those ideas, not redundant spam.
 +
 +
*An editor may return to correct typos, sloppy grammar, or add a link in support of a statement in the Open discussion. Adding additional sentences, extensive phrasing, thoughts, comments, etc. to a posting one previously made that another editor has already responded to is not acceptable conduct in Open discussion.
 +
 +
*Spamming, defined for purposes of this Debate, means providing multiple citations to scripture without providing the actual scriptures and/or its relevant context to this Debate, or providing scriptures in full with no relevant context or explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question. Spamming is not allowed in either the Protagonist, Antagonist, or Open discussion sections. Such designated spam postings may be removed by a Debate Sysop/Moderator. Editors may freely inquire of any Debate Sysop/Moderator, along with a brief explanation of cause, for removing such spam postings. 
 +
 +
*Users are encouraged to cite specifically a limited number of scriptures to make any point, preferably counting on one hand, as a courtesy to other readers and participants.
 +
 +
*Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged. <br>—Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.}}
 +
 +
*No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user. 
 +
 +
'''Note:''' The original stated titles of the "Yes" and "No" sides of the debate have been revised.<ref>[https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Debate:_Have_the_gates_of_hell_prevailed_against_the_church_Jesus_founded_on_a_rock,_when_He_Himself_said_it_could_never_happen%3F_Did_Christ_who_cannot_lie_fail_to_fulfill_his_promise%3F&oldid=1678913 click here to see the original wording of the two sides of the debate - scroll to bottom of the page].</ref>
 +
----
 +
==Protagonist: The church headed by the bishop of Rome is an apostate church==
 +
*'''Isaiah 28:16''' - ''Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.''
 +
*'''Matthew 16:18''' - ''That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church''
 +
*'''1 Corinthians 14:33''' - ''God is not the author of confusion''<ref>https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-33.htm</ref>
 +
Christ is the foundation stone or rock that the Christian church is built upon, not Peter. This confusion, authored by the author of confusion and father of lies,<ref>https://biblehub.com/john/8-44.htm</ref> is the source of all the confusion regarding the claims to "authority" by Roman Catholic doctrine.
 +
 +
===One mediator===
 +
The [[Catechism of the Catholic Church]] in sum essentially reads,
 +
*''We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for '''we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves'''
 +
*'''2 Corinthians 13:1''' - ''This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.''
 +
*'''1 Timothy 2:5''' - ''there is one God and '''one mediator between God and mankind,''' the man Christ Jesus''
 +
:Official Roman Catholic teaching supplants the bible in authority (Catholic teaching believes :God's word is "evolving"), says
 +
*'''CCC 1456''' - "When Christ's faithful strive to confess all the sins that they can remember, they undoubtedly place all of them before the divine mercy for pardon. But those who fail to do so and knowingly withhold some, place nothing before the divine goodness '''for remission through the <u>mediation of the priest</u>'''".<ref>https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c2a4.htm#1456</ref>
 +
:Jesus says in the resurrection we are sexless:
 +
*'''Matthew 22:30''' - ''For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.''
 +
:Yet the Roman Catholic church teaches
 +
*'''CCC 969''' - "the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and '''Mediatrix'''."<ref>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm#969</ref>
 +
 +
===Salvation by grace===
 +
God says,
 +
*'''Ephesians 2:8''' - ''by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God''
 +
*'''Acts 19:2''' - ''“Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”''
 +
However Roman Catholic catechism teaches that grace and salvation is earned, and that the Holy spirit is given through water baptism.
 +
*'''CCC 2010''' - “Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, '''we can then merit for ourselves''' and for others '''the graces needed''' for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and '''for the attainment of eternal life.'''<ref>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm#2010</ref>
 +
To restate, '''"we can then merit for ourselves'''...'''the graces needed'''...'''for the attainment of eternal life."'''  This is a denial of salvation by grace (''grace is not grace'') and a doctrine, or another gospel of salvation by works.<ref>
 +
*'''Galatians 1:8''' - ''if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.''
 +
*'''2 Corinthians 11:3-4''' - ''But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.  For if he that cometh '''preacheth another Jesus''', whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, '''or another gospel''', which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him'' (''ye might well bear with him'' is explained in verse 19, ''For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.'')<br>The Roman church preaches that the foundation stone laid in Zion is Peter, not Jesus and another gospel of salvation by works. </ref>
 +
The Roman Catholic catechism teaches that the Holy Spirit is given through water baptism.
 +
*'''CCC 1999''' - “infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism.”
 +
 +
===The Christian is not under law===
 +
God says,
 +
*'''Romans 6:14''' - ''ye are not under law but under grace''
 +
*'''Galatians 3:10''' - ''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''
 +
The [[Apostle Peter]] rebukes the Roman Church's claim to "authority":
 +
*'''1 Peter 5:2-3''' - ''Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, '''not by constraint, but willingly'''; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; '''Neither as being lords''' over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%205:2-3</ref>
 +
 +
===The sacraments cannot save===
 +
The sacraments of the Roman Catholic church are works of the law.  God says,
 +
*'''Galatians 3:10''' - ''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''<ref>https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm</ref>
 +
*'''Ephesians 2:8-9a''' - ''by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works''
 +
The Roman Catholic church teaches of a false gospel of [[salvation]] by works.  Paul says,
 +
*'''Galatians 1:6-9''' - ''I marvel that ye are so soon '''removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.''' But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1%3A6-9&version=KJV</ref>
 +
*'''Galatians 2:16''' - ''by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.''
 +
 +
Whereas the Roman Catholic church teaches, among other strange and non-biblical doctrines,
 +
:*'''CCC 1471''' - "The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the '''sacrament of Penance'''. What is an indulgence? 'An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.' 'An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.' The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead." [<small>''boldface emphasis added''</small>]
 +
:*'''CCC 1478''' - "An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity.
 +
:*'''CCC 1498''' - "Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory."
 +
:*'''CCC 1472''' - "...On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin..."
 +
 +
===The Roman Catholic Church teaches sacraments are works<ref>http://justforcatholics.org/a14.htm</ref>===
 +
God says,
 +
*'''Galatians 3:10''' - ''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''<ref>https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm</ref>
 +
*'''CCC 2068''' - "The [[Council of Trent]] teaches that '''the [[Ten Commandments]] are obligatory''' for Christians and that the justified man is still bound to keep them; the [[Second Vatican Council]] confirms: "The bishops, successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord . . . the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism '''and the observance of the Commandments."'''<ref>http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2068.htm</ref>
 +
:Hence, ''per'' the Bible, adherents and practitioners of the Roman Catholic faith are under a curse and not redeemed by the blood of Jesus.<ref>https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-13.htm</ref>  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:33, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
The parallels between apostate Israel and the apostate Roman church are unmistakable.
 +
*'''Matthew 15:8-9''' - ''This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, '''teaching as doctrines the commandments of men'''.
 +
*'''Mark 7:13''' - '''''making the word of God of no effect''' through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.''
 +
There is a straight line of continuity from Moses at Mt. Sinai to the Council of Trent as a doctrine of law, hence Isaiah 28:14 and the two scriptures cited above ''do'' apply. You have rejected grace, as Israel in the wilderness did. Ye are under a curse.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 14:08, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
:We've already proven at least 5 times your catechism is a [[fraud]]. You're just digging your hole deeper in rebellion against God and God's word. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:55, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
*'''Hebrews 3:19''' - ''So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.''<ref>https://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-19.htm</ref>
 +
:Unbelief in God's word.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:59, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Unbelief is a lack of faith.
 +
*'''Hebrews 4:2''' - ''but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.''
 +
:Unbelief, or a lack of faith, is disobedience.<ref>Heb. 3:18, 4:6.</ref>
 +
----
 +
 +
==Antagonist: No, the gates of hell have never prevailed against the church Jesus built on a rock so that it never committed [[apostasy]] from the faith, because Jesus remains with the church always to the end of the world, and the Spirit of truth is with the church for ever leading into all the truth as Jesus promised, and Jesus is God Who cannot lie.==
 +
===User: IndependentSkeptic===
 +
*According to the above argument, the gates of hell '''''have''''' prevailed against the church Jesus founded on a rock, and therefore it cannot be the pillar and ground of the truth as Paul testified it is. Your position is that Jesus failed to fulfill his promise. You make Jesus out to be a liar. That is antichrist.
 +
*'''Jesus''' said by his own divine authority that the gates of hell shall never prevail against the church he built.
 +
*''But you say it happened.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said by his own divine authority that he is with us (''addressed to the apostles'') always, to the end of the world.
 +
*''But you say he did not remain always with their appointed apostolic successors in the church he founded, the church that still exists to this day.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said another Counsellor, the Spirit of truth given by the Father would be with us '''for ever''', and that the Spirit of truth would guide us into '''all''' the truth.
 +
*''But you say he did not remain with the church for ever, and did not continuously guide the church into all the truth for ever, from the time of the apostles to this present day.''
 +
*'''Paul''' said the church is the household of God, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a '''holy''' temple in the Lord, in whom we also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
 +
*''But you say the church is no longer the pillar of the truth and a holy temple in the Lord and a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. And you say that the same church as identified by an unbroken  continuous line of [[apostolic succession]] is built on the lies and blasphemies of Satan, and not the truth.''
 +
*'''Paul''' said in the church '''God''' has appointed apostles, prophets, teachers, workers of miracles, healers, helpers, administrators, and speakers in various languages; and that in the church are bishops, ''presbyteroi'' (priests/elders), and deacons.
 +
*''But you say these are done away by the Bible as the sole rule of faith and authority.''
 +
*'''Paul''' said that all authority is established by God, and whoever resists authority resists what God has established, and that those who resist what God has established will be condemned.
 +
*''But you say that true Christians are duty-bound to resist the established authority of the church when they personally judge that it is wrong, and not to listen.''
 +
*'''Peter''' said to submit to the elders and be clothed with humility, for God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble, and therefore to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God that in due time he may exalt you.
 +
*''But you say we are not obligated to submit to others' authority.''
 +
*'''The Letter to the Hebrews''' says to obey our leaders who spoke the word of God to us, in the historical context, those leaders of the existing church in the first century established since the time of the apostles.
 +
*''But you say we should disobey the leaders of the church who have preserved the Bible and draw doctrine directly from it as the word of God that they speak in every celebration of the Catholic [[Mass (liturgy)|Mass]].''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said that anyone who will not listen to the church is to be rejected as the Jews rejected tax collectors and pagans, and said that whoever has an ear is to listen to what the Spirit says to the '''churches'''.
 +
*''But you praise those who did not and do not listen to the church Jesus built on a rock and who did not and do not listen to the churches that have continually existed since the first century, both at the time John wrote the book of Revelation and since that time to the present day.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said that unless a man is regenerated by water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. '''Paul''' washed away his sins by being baptized, and '''Peter''' said that baptism saves now; and '''Paul''', again, that God saves us in virtue of his own mercy by the water-washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, and that God loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the '''washing of water with the word''', that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
 +
*''But you say that baptism does not save and does not regenerate and does not cleanse away sin or wash away sin by water and the word.''
 +
*'''James''' says that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
 +
*''But you say that faith alone justifies, not works.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' and '''Paul''' both say that all will be judged according to their '''works'''.
 +
*''But you say '''no''' believer saved by faith alone will be judged.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said to the apostles, "Whosesoever sins you forgive are forgiven, and whosesoever sins you retain are retained." The entire context of the New Testament warns that we can fall away and forfeit eternal life by mortal sins "unto death", but that we can be brought back by confession to those entrusted with the ministry of reconciliation and absolution as ambassadors of God, God speaking by them, for if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. It was not to them alone that it was said, but to us on whom the end of the ages has come.
 +
*''But you say that this is idolatry and a demonic doctrine, that no one has been given the power of God to forgive sins.''
 +
*'''Jesus''' said that his flesh and blood are '''real''' food and drink, and that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you do not have life in you, and that whoever eats his flesh and drinks his blood has eternal life. (<small>the word for "eat" ''trogŏn'' '''τρώώγων''' in John 6:27-58 is not figurative or metaphorical in the Greek text, but only literal and physical in meaning</small><ref>https://sermonwriter.com/bittpsblical-commentary/john-651-58/ John 6:51-58 Biblical Commentary (Bible study) John 6:51-58<br>http://shamelesspopery.com/what-if-the-protestant-interpretation-of-john-6-is-correct/ What if the Protestant Interpretation of John 6 is Correct?</ref>)
 +
*''But you say this is only a metaphor and does not and never did literally mean eating and drinking his flesh and blood, and that communion does not give eternal life.''
 +
:Catholics believe the word of Christ and what he promised forever.{{quotation|For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God. But it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has commissioned us; he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee. <br>—2 Corinthians 1:20-22}}
 +
 +
:From the first century to the present day there have been those who disobeyed their leaders who spoke the word of God, rejected the traditions of the apostles, and insisted on private interpretation of the scriptures, who went out and taught a different gospel than the one delivered to them by their teachers, and who by this visible pattern of behavior showed that they were antichrists. <br>According to history the Catholic Church dominated and led by its leaders as shepherds of the flock having established authority to make disciples of all nations, was not founded by those who disobeyed, went out, and taught a different gospel from the one they had been taught. The question of who has the true doctrine of Christ is settled by scripture, as outlined above. Ask this question about those who founded your church, and about those who do not profess any particular church but claim the authority of the Bible alone as interpreted by themselves: did they and do they disbelieve and disobey '''Hebrews 13:7,17; Galatians 1:6-9; 1&nbsp;John 2:18-19; John 14:16; 16:13 and 15:1-6'''. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:00, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
===User: NishantXavier===
 +
 +
No, the gates of hell have not prevailed against the Church built on the earthly Rock of St. Peter, with the heavenly Rock remaining Jesus Christ Our Lord. 2000 years of Church History bear witness to the Truth of Our Lord's Promise. God's Word attests it, history confirms it, and it's the Truth. The Church of Christ is the Catholic Church. God desires all Christians to be One in Full Communion with the Church and with each other. That's why He appointed St. Peter as the Head Bishop or First Pope of the Church, named him the visible Rock of the Church (Himself being the invisible Rock), and desired that all Christians look to the Pope as to the Chief Shepherd of Christ's Flock on Earth. If we all did that, all Christians would be One. User:NishantXavier|NishantXavier<sup>User talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King</sup> 11:14, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
==Unresolved==
 +
 +
::Both sides of the Debate on this page and the Talk page have made abundantly clear the irreconcilable differences in the doctrines of grace, and in the doctrines of the authority of the church.
 +
 +
==Open discussion==
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|God says,
 +
*'''Ephesians 2:8''' - ''by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God''
 +
*'''Acts 19:2''' - ''“Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”''
 +
However Roman Catholic catechism teaches that grace and salvation is earned, and that the Holy spirit is given through water baptism.}}
 +
[[Falsehood|False]]. CCC 2010: "''no one can merit the initial grace'' of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion." (CCC 1996-2011)<br>Your "water baptism" comment is a [[misrepresentation]], by carefully omitting an important teaching of the Bible. In '''Acts 19:1-6''' Paul explained why John's water baptism was insufficient (vv.4-5). John's baptism, though it required repentance, yet looked '''''forward''''' to the coming of the One for whom John was a forerunner (Jesus). '''Jesus had not yet died''' when John baptized people. His was a baptism of '''''preparation''''' looking forward to Jesus' death. "Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard ''this'', they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." This shows that John's water baptism unto repentance cannot be the water baptism which Jesus commanded people to receive under the gospel (Matthew 28:19). Christians are baptized into his death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12) "by the washing of water by the word" (Ephesians 5:26). John's disciples were not. So then they were baptized by Paul.<ref>See https://www.gospelway.com/topics/salvation/baptism-john.php The Baptism of John the Baptist, David E. Pratte. <br> See also ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' CCC 1213-1228.</ref> --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 06:36, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|We've been over this a  dozen times. The gospel was preached to Israel in the wilderness. King David had the Holy Spirit. [[Job]] was "perfect and upright." Zacharias and Elisabeth were both "righteous before God", as was [[Abel]]. Simeon (Luke 2:25) was "just and devout".  In all these cases '''Jesus had not yet died''' either. There is only one way a sinner can be declared righteous before God.<ref>Question:
 +
*'''Romans 4:1''' - ''What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?''<br>
 +
Answer:<br>
 +
*'''Romans 4:21''' - ''being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform,'' i.e., the [[resurrection]].<br>All these Old Testament figures, Abraham, Job, David, Zacharias and Elizabeth, Simeon, Anna, Abel and others had faith in God and the resurrection, (or new life in Christ), knowing that ''whatsoever He had promised he was able to deliver''. Faith is ''the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen''.  They didn't have to wait for Jesus to be born, crucified, and resurrected to be 'born again' and receive the Holy Spirit. They were all declared righteous by simply believing what God promised, or ''faith''.  Faith is obedience.</ref>  The Law cannot make righteous.<ref>https://biblehub.com/library/augustine/anti-pelagian_writings/chapter_16_x_how_the_law.htm</ref> You apparently do not understand what the gospel is.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 08:43, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Independent Skeptic says, '''"This shows that John's water baptism unto repentance cannot be the water baptism which Jesus commanded people to receive"''' Bingo!  Now reconcile what you just posted with Roman Catholic doctrine and all the drivel in the [[Infant baptism]] page. Hint: Jesus didn't command "water baptism".  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:07, 30 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
''Oh yes He did!'' John 3:5 "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born [''regenerated''] of '''water and ''of'' the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God'''."<br>"Regenerate" in John 3:3-5 is the Greek '''γεννηθή''' ''gennethe''.<br>The words '''γεννηθή''' ''gennethe'' and '''γεννηθήναι''' ''gennethenai'' in the Greek New Testament text of John 3:3-5 mean to ''procreate, regenerate, bear, beget, be born, conceive'', a variation of '''γένος''' ''genos'', meaning ''born, offspring, generation, stock''.<ref>See Strong's numbers [http://biblehub.com/greek/1078.htm 1078], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1079.htm 1079], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1080.htm 1080], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1081.htm 1081], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1083.htm 1083], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1084.htm 1084], [http://biblehub.com/greek/1085.htm 1085].</ref> This "born" (as being literally "generated/regenerated") is the ordinary word for "born".
 +
 +
"Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word."<br>See also [http://biblehub.com/interlinear/titus/3-5.htm interlinear text of Titus 3:5] [http://biblehub.com/titus/3-5.htm multiple versions of Titus 3:5] and [http://biblehub.com/commentaries/titus/3-5.htm multiple commentaries on Titus 3:5]. <br> "he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the '''''washing'' of regeneration''' and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior". The Greek word for "washing" in this text means "water-washing"—"he saved us...by the water-washing of regeneration". <br> The word of God is the word spoken simultaneously with the action of pouring, immersing or sprinkling of water in the [[sacrament]] of [[baptism]] to wash away all sins,<ref>See [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+22%3A16&version=RSVCE Acts 22:16]; [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5%3A26&version=RSVCE Ephesians 5:26].</ref> "I baptize you in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen." (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16.) This is "baptismal regeneration". It is Jesus Himself Who baptizes through the ministry of the members of His Own Body the Church in which He dwells always together with the Holy Spirit of truth with us foe ever.<br>Not one of those who claim to have been baptized in the Spirit by faith alone has ever been told at the decisive moment they accepted Christ as their personal Lord and Savior, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" before they were plunged into water as their testimony of salvation (''especially at the moment when they accepted Him sitting in the pew or decided to accept him by faith when they were alone''—''they certainly did not hear the words, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", at that moment of decision''). <br>So from the whole context of the scriptures we can '''know''' that Jesus commanded water baptism. The Catholic doctrine of water baptism is biblical. It's the doctrine of the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, led into all the truth for ever by the Spirit of truth with us for ever. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:07, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|On a side point, you appear to be misreading Acts 19:2 with this statement, "Christians are baptized into his death, burial, and resurrection...John's disciples were not."  No, John's baptism is with water, Jesus' baptism is with the Holy Spirit. John says, "I baptize with water, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit." All of this runs contrary to Roman Catholic doctrine on water baptism, salvation, and receiving the Holy Spirit.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:16, 30 August 2020 (EDT)<br><br><s>You are trolling again.</s> Below you state salvation is earned or merited, which is exactly what catechism teaches. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:42, 29 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|The [[Apostle Peter]] rebukes the Roman Church's claim to "authority":
 +
*'''1 Peter 5:2-3''' - ''Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, '''not by constraint, but willingly'''; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; '''Neither as being lords''' over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%205:2-3</ref>}}
 +
 +
The Apostle Peter also commanded the flock of Christ to honor the [[Paganism|pagan emperor]] ('''[[Nero]]''' at the time of writing).
 +
*'''1 Peter 2:17''' - ''Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. '''Honor the emperor'''.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%202:17</ref>
 +
1 Peter 5:2-3 (quoted above) is pastoral counsel to '''those who have the oversight of the flock of God'''. He did not contradict the fact that '''they do have the oversight as elders and leaders and shepherds that we are bound to obey.'''
 +
*'''Hebrews 13:17''' - '''''Obey''' your leaders and '''submit''' to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2013:17</ref>
 +
There is no denying that elders and leaders and shepherds of the flock of God (but not all) have abused their office just as Nero abused the office of emperor, and they will all be called to account for it. We are still commanded to honor all men, to love the brotherhood of the church, and to honor even wicked leaders like Nero, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way, and we too will be called to account for our behavior. "''For he will render to every man according to his works''" (Romans 2:6; Revelation 22:12)
 +
*'''1 Timothy 2:1-3''' - ''First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires '''all''' men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:1-4</ref>
 +
This is the ultimate fulfillment of God's commandment to honor our fathers and mothers, even if they are wicked, and to obey the judges of the people, even if they are wicked. "You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people." (Exodus 20:12; 22:28; Deuteronomy 17:9-13; Matthew 23:2-3; John 19:10-11)
 +
*'''1 Peter 2:18''' - Servants, ''be'' subject to ''your'' masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward ["''but also to the overbearing''" RSVCE]
 +
--[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Yes, for the carnally minded and those walking in the flesh that's good advice, too. You just can't seem to wrap your head around the word "obey". To the spiritual believer, to "obey" means to trust and believe God. To the natural man and carnal mind, "obey" means to follow orders to avoid a spanking. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 09:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)<br>And throughout all your spam postings, your point comes through clearly - you claim the Roman Church is God. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 09:24, 28 August 2020 (EDT)<br>God is not a tyrant who rules by threats and intimidation. But you make him out to be such and claim the Roman Church is here to enforce his ''[[diktat]]s.''  This is the opposite of grace. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:27, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
I cited the scriptures (''I had help''.) "'''The law'''" in all of Paul's letters refers to "the law of Moses".<ref>https://biblehub.com/topical/l/law.htm The Topical Bible: "Law"</ref> The Bible commands obedience to authority—especially to the higher authorities. Even the congregation of the people of the Lord under the authority of the elders and leaders and shepherds of the flock of the Lord charged as guardians to feed them. Both Old Testament and New Testament, so that it is the will of God to obey those in authority, especially the higher authorities and leaders in the church, even if they are sinful men. This doctrine in the Bible is not the will of sinful men speaking according to their own corrupt and prideful fleshly carnal opinion, but the infallible word and will of God Himself. And the wrath of God is against the disobedient. On those who obey, grace is poured. On those who do not obey, who are factious and do not obey the truth but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury (Romans 2:8). This finally convinced me that the Reformers who disobeyed their leaders and went out from the church and taught a different doctrine were wrong, "not having the Spirit". Jude 19 "''It is these who set up divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit''." And as proof that it's talking about them and all like them, to this very day Reformation principles embraced by many independent-minded Christians have generated divisions for five hundred years on the ground that leaders '''''can''''' be disrespected and disobeyed and rebelled against, like in the example of Korah's rebellion against the priests of God who had the rule over them as Moses and Aaron. And the same thing was done by Jeroboam in 1 Kings 12:25-33 (''esp. verse 31''), and in 2 Chronicles 13:6-12, when he appointed priests of his own making who were not according to the will of the Lord, but apart from and in disobedient defiance of the scripture regarding the established authority of the priesthood of Aaron valid up to the time of the apostles whom Jesus Himself ordained ("I have chosen you and ordained you" Luke 22:29-30). <br>You, and all others of a mind like you, who reject the authority of the church to bind and to loose and to forgive or retain anyone's sins as they judge to be right according to the will of God as seen in the Bible, it is you who willfully set aside the word of God to set yourself above and apart as not obligated to obey Him, and as not obligated to obey the authority He has appointed, in what the Bible commands '''all''' men everywhere to do to fulfill His sovereign will, by submitting to the leaders who watch over your souls. You misapply the scriptures to justify yourselves, and it is they that speak against doing that. "Therefore, let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall." 1&nbsp;Corinthians 10:12. St. Peter said that it is the ignorant and unstable who twist the scriptures to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:16-17. Those who <big>'''will'''</big> to '''not do''' the Father's will as not obligated in any way to obey it are deprived of grace, and lose what they thought they had. "Be careful how you hear. To him who has will more be given and he shall have abundance. But to him who has not, even what he thinks he has will be taken away." (Luke 8:18; Matthew 25:29)—unless you repent and confess that you have been determined according to your own opinion of private interpretation of the scriptures to justify yourselves as free to not obey the word of the Lord and as not being condemned for your self-willed rejection of what he has ordained and established so you can pick and choose what you like from the word of God and discard the rest you don't like, as Martin Luther did in judging the scriptures and rejecting four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) because they condemned disobedience and said that faith without works is dead and brings condemnation for being unfruitful. We can't earn salvation, but of those who are saved good works are required according to each one's ability, or they are worthless servants producing no fruit and they forfeit what they have through Christ alone, and are taken away and burned (John 15:1-8). --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:01, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|
 +
God says,
 +
*'''Galatians 3:10''' - ''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''<ref>https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm</ref>}}
 +
Yes. The works of the law of Moses. Not the works of righteous obedience in holiness, including respect for authority, as the Bible says, and the work that Christ Jesus Himself does in the sacraments ordained by Christ in the church as fountains of his grace flowing from his righteous sacrifice of his blood in the Holy Spirit on the cross, works He Himself does through the ministry of the church He built, led into all the truth forever by the Spirit of truth.<br>'''''Antagonist:'''''{{quotation|'''CCC 1076''' In this age of the Church '''Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church''', in a new way appropriate to this new age. '''<big>He</big> acts through the sacraments''' in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls "the sacramental economy"; this is '''the communication (or "dispensation") of the fruits of Christ's Paschal mystery''' in the celebration of the Church's "sacramental" liturgy. <br> — http://scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s1.htm (''<small>boldface added</small>'') }} --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:20, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|
 +
*'''Isaiah 28:14''' - '' '''we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves'''}}
 +
Isaiah is speaking of the disobedient Israelites who refused to respect and reverently obey the Covenant of the Lord. His word cannot be applied to the church Jesus built, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail and in which Jesus Himself and the Holy Spirit dwell together leading into all the truth.
 +
:'''CCC 1088''' "To accomplish so great a work" ... "Christ is always present in his Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the Sacrifice of the Mass not only in the person of his minister, 'the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,' but especially in the Eucharistic species. By his power he is present in the sacraments so that when anybody baptizes, it is really Christ himself who baptizes. He is present in his word since it is he himself who speaks when the holy Scriptures are read in the Church. Lastly, he is present when the Church prays and sings, for he has promised 'where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them."'
 +
 +
:'''CCC 1089''' "Christ, indeed, always associates the Church with himself in this great work in which God is perfectly glorified and men are sanctified. The Church is his beloved Bride who calls to her Lord and through him offers worship to the eternal Father."
 +
'''''Antagonist:'''''{{quotation|'''CCC 1076''' In this age of the Church '''Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church''', in a new way appropriate to this new age. '''<big>He</big> acts through the sacraments''' in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls "the sacramental economy"; this is '''the communication (or "dispensation") of the fruits of Christ's Paschal mystery''' in the celebration of the Church's "sacramental" liturgy. <br> — http://scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s1.htm (''<small>boldface added</small>'') }}
 +
 +
"''for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.''" [https://biblehub.com/philippians/2-13.htm '''Philippians 2:13'''].
 +
 +
"''in hope of eternal life which God, who never lies, promised ages ago, and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior.''" [https://www.biblehub.com/titus/1-2.htm '''Titus 1:2-3''']
 +
 +
--User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:45, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|The parallels between apostate Israel and the apostate Roman church are unmistakable.
 +
*'''Matthew 15:8-9''' - ''This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, '''teaching as doctrines the commandments of men'''.
 +
*'''Mark 7:13''' - '''''making the word of God of no effect''' through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.''}}
 +
''Context'': Jesus is speaking of the Jews, and in particular of the Pharisees. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|There is a straight line of continuity from Moses at Mt. Sinai to the Council of Trent as a doctrine of law, hence Isaiah 28:14 and the two scriptures cited above ''do'' apply. You have rejected grace, as Israel in the wilderness did. Ye are under a curse.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 14:08, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
The law of Moses is one particular expression of the revealed will of God: ''justice and mercy and faith—keeping faith with God by eagerly doing what the Lord requires in being just, merciful, and humbly reverent in worship of Him''. Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42.<br> Micah 6:8 "He hath shewed thee, O man, what ''is'' good; and what doth the L<small>ORD</small> require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"<br>Matthew 23:37-40 "37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandmensts hang all the law and the prophets."<br>The [[Council of Trent]] and the ''Roman Catechism'' (the ''Catechism of the Council of Trent''), the ''Baltimore Catechism'', and the [[Second Vatican Council]] and the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'', all say the same, explaining the meaning of the will of God in practical detail, just as the New Testament does. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|We've already proven at least 5 times your catechism is a [[fraud]]. You're just digging your hole deeper in rebellion against God and God's word. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:55, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|
 +
*'''Hebrews 3:19''' - ''So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.''<ref>https://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-19.htm</ref>
 +
:Unbelief in God's word.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:59, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Unbelief is a lack of faith.
 +
*'''Hebrews 4:2''' - ''but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.''
 +
:Unbelief, or a lack of faith, is disobedience.<ref>Heb. 3:18, 4:6.</ref>}}
 +
Fine. "''Working together with him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.''" 2&nbsp;Corinthians 6:1. Believe what God has said, and with confidence full of hope in him obey the authority of the church He built on a rock as His Own Body and Temple, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, led into all truth for ever by the Spirit of truth. Jesus cannot lie. And the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, in this world or the next. The weeds will grow together until the time of harvest, and then they will be gathered and burned in the fire. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:05, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|
 +
:"obey" means have faith. Why would anyone have faith in lies?  And the Christian believer is not under law anyway. Does God command us to bow the knee to Satan? Satan is the god of this world.<ref>https://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/4-4.htm</ref>  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 13:06, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
It only seems like lies to you. The Christian believer is not under the authority of the law of Moses, but under the authority of Christ in the church rightly interpreting and rightly dividing the word (2&nbsp;Timothy 2:15) and applying it according to the law of righteousness in the Holy Spirit. God does not command us to bow the knee to Satan, but to bow to the will of Christ the Lord who established his church which He built on a rock so that it cannot fall, for "''Every knee shall bow and every tongue proclaim to the glory of God the Father: Jesus Christ is Lord''" That is the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, in which He dwells as Lord and Savior, and the Holy Spirit leading into all the truth forever, just as Jesus promised. And God cannot lie. Jesus did not fail to keep his promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church he built on a rock. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:25, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
"''To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure: their very minds and consciences are corrupted. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds; they are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good deed''" Titus 1:15-16. The ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' is pure and rich in holy scripture supporting her authority and the truth of her doctrine. You say it is Satanic (the scribes and Pharisees said the same about Jesus). You seem unable to see its purity and holiness (Ephesians 5:25-27). You have been deceived and blinded by the God of this world. And the promise of Christ is fulfilled in her, as the promise of Him Who Cannot Lie. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:29, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|You either can't read or are just playing stupid now. I just cited above CCC 2068 "'''the [[Ten Commandments]] are obligatory'''".  Get thee behind me, Satan. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 13:44, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
In saying '''''that''''', you are asserting that we are freed from the law forbidding worship of other gods, that we don't have to worship God at all, that we are free to make idols of [[Other gods|other (pagan) gods]], free to blaspheme the name of God, free to work every single day so as not to attend to worship of God at any time or regard any day as holy to the Lord and not rest or allow anyone else to rest from crushing compulsive labor, free to dishonor our fathers and mothers and do nothing good to them or for them or help them in any way, free to kill as we please and maim and murder anyone, free to commit adultery and sexual perversions of any kind, free to steal anything from anyone at any time anywhere, free to commit perjury in court when summoned to testify in order to destroy the innocent by supporting a false conviction leading to a sentence of wrongful imprisonment or execution, free to covet what others have by hating their benefits and advantages that belong only to them as their rightful possession and dignity and to no one else, free to try to deprive them of their spouse, their employees and servants, their livestock, and anything that is theirs. <br> You are saying no Christian is under any obligation to avoid these sins because the Christian is not under the law of condemnation for sins committed and therefore is free to do as he pleases. That's the evil counsel of [[Antinomianism]] and immorally corrupt [[Licentiousness]]. I've already shown that Paul himself condemns this whole idea. We are not to yield ourselves to wickedness. He made this clear in Romans 8: "''To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace.''" (verse 6). John says the same thing: {{quotation|"''Little children, let no one deceive you. He who does right is righteous, as he is righteous. He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning.''"}} To rebel against the law of God is Satanic. Peter also says about all disobedient and licentious [[Libertinism|libertines]] who obey no law and acknowledge no authority outside themselves, {{quotation|"the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and '''despise authority'''. Bold and wilful, they are not afraid to revile the glorious ones [saints and angels], whereas angels, though greater in might and power [than they], do not pronounce a reviling judgment upon them before the Lord. But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and killed, reviling in matters of which they are ignorant, will be destroyed in the same destruction with them, suffering wrong for their wrongdoing. They count it pleasure to revel in the daytime. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their dissipation, carousing with you. They have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls. They have hearts trained in greed. Accursed children! Forsaking the right way they have gone astray; they have followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved gain from wrongdoing, but was rebuked for his own transgression; a dumb ass spoke with human voice and restrained the prophet's madness. These are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm; for them the nether gloom of darkness has been reserved. For, uttering loud boasts of folly, they entice with licentious passions of the flesh men who have barely escaped from those who live in error. '''They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved. For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them.''' It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is '''washed''' only to wallow in the mire (sewage).}}You condemn the Ten Commandments as a curse. '''''That's wrong.''''' We are not free to sin. We must obey righteousness, as expressed in the law of God about righteousness and the doctrine of the church—''justice, mercy, and humility before God''. Your "gospel of grace" as you define it gives liberty to sin without fear of judgment or condemnation. But the "yoke" of Christ sets free from the bondage of sin, and purifies us from all unrighteousness by the power of the grace of his sacraments administered by Him through his body the church, the pillar and foundation of the truth, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 14:51, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|I never said or implied anything of the sort. God is not a slave driver. God want's the Christian believer to serve him out of a clean and willing heart, not under compunction and fear. That's all the gospel of grace is about. God is not trying to coerce anyone with threats of damnation.  God desires sincerity.
 +
*'''Psalm 51:6''' - ''Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.''
 +
If licentiousness is the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear ''ye are not under law but under grace,'' you probably don't have that ''truth in the inward parts''. Salvation and grace cannot be merited or earned.  You need to repent, accept God's grace, and begin living life in the spirit. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 15:15, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
:The Roman church's rejection of grace and reversion back under law is not just serious error, it is a rejection of the [[New Covenant]] entirely.  Hence, you are under a curse, as God says.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 13:59, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
Yes! Salvation and grace and justification cannot be earned by us by ourselves alone! Jesus saves, and gives us the power to become sons of God (John 1:12-13). That is the doctrine of the [[Magisterium]] in the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' (CCC '''1965–2029'''). --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Both sides of the Debate on this page and the Talk page have made abundantly clear the irreconcilable differences in the doctrines of grace, and in the doctrines of the authority of the church. <br> I have said all that is necessary to help expose the nature of both. <br>Christians are not under the law of Moses, but are under what Paul calls the law of Christ as realized in the authority of the Catholic Church to preach and teach the law of righteousness in the doing of '''[[Corporal and spiritual works of mercy|good works]]''' as the law of God, and the dire consequences of '''refusal''' to act righteously, justly, mercifully and godly in all humility of heart, '''in opposition to the love of God'''. (Micah 6:8). <br>At the heart of the debate is the issue of [[Free will]]. The real threat of actual judgment is in reality a mercy from God who is not willing that any should perish. (A '''godly''' fear and terror of judgment, by the grace of God.) It can actually help bring the non-Christian sinner to repentance and salvation through Christ Jesus alone, and bring back the Christian sinner from the error of his way and save him from death (James 5:19-20). <br>We can obey for the love of God, joyfully and wholeheartedly because it is right and just to do so, and knowing the Lord is truly worthy of all our love; <br>or we can obey because it is right to do so, out of fear of the righteous judgment of God, maybe reluctantly, or even compulsorily for the sake of survival, feeling that there really is no alternative or acceptable choice, because we do fear the loss of heaven and the everlasting pains of hell, knowing that God who is merciful and just and righteous and holy commands doing what is right, so we firmly resolve not to do anything evil or sinful as far as possible; <br>or we can refuse to obey the will of God, and "''break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us''" (Psalm 2:3), because "now there is no condemnation", and suffer the consequences for our boldness in the face of God's sovereign Lordship as if rebelling against a tyrant. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 15:20, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Well, that's interesting, cause that now puts you at odds with the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 15:31, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
Not at all. The law of Christ as I have relatively expressed it is a brief summary of the official doctrine of the ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'', beginning with  [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a1.htm Part Three, Section One, Chapter Three, Article 1: '''The Moral Law'''] <br> I have nothing else to add to this Debate. Peace be with you. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 16:05, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Go ahead, be in denial. For the third time in this section CCC 2068  "the Ten Commandments are obligatory".  The law was only our schoolmaster.
 +
*'''Galatians 3:24-25''' - ''the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A24-25&version=KJV</ref> 
 +
If you choose to continue under a schoolmaster and a curse, good luck.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 16:17, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
See the article [[Great Apostasy]]. The Protestant Reformers disobeyed, went out, and preached another gospel than the one they had received in the church, perverting the gospel of Christ. They proclaimed that the gates of hell had long prevailed against the Church and that the Holy Spirit had utterly departed from the Church, and that the [[Beasts of Revelation|Beast]] [[Antichrist]] and [[Satan]] together ruled as the spirit of the Church turning the Church into the [[Whore of Babylon]]. The very desire to live a good life by humbly receiving the sacraments of grace in worship and doing good works pleasing to God—''justice, mercy''—was condemned as [[Blasphemy|blasphemous]] [[Piety|impiety]] and bondage to the law, meriting only the curse of God, and more dangerous than sin. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 17:49, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Martin Luther wrote this about a good life manifested by good works:{{quotation|There is no more dangerous, more pernicious scandal than a good life exteriorly manifested by good works. Those pious souls who do good to gain the Kingdom of Heaven not only will never succeed, but they must even be reckoned among the impious; and it is more important to guard them against good works than against sin. <br>—Works of Luther, Wittenberg, Vol. VI, 160 <ref>[http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2012/07/luther-said-doing-good-is-more.html Luther Said: Doing Good Is More Dangerous Than Sinning - Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com)]</ref>}}{{quotation|'''No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.''' - Martin Luther ''Letter to Melancthon'', 13.<ref>Dr. Martin Luther's Saemmtliche Schriften, Letter No. 99 http://www.earlychurchofjesus.org/martin_luther.htm</ref>}}--User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 18:00, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|What does that have to do with receiving the sacraments? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 18:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}It has to do with the biblical and Catholic doctrine of the necessity of good works to bear fruit to eternal life by those who have already first been saved and justified by unmerited grace (CCC 1996-2011), dismissed by Martin Luther as an evil doctrine worse than sin. And by you as being under "the curse of the law". --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 23:26, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Bull. It's a [[whataboutism]] that has nothing to do with the alleged "authority" of the Roman Catholic church and/or the fact salvation through sacraments is unbiblical. Please stick to the topic. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 23:42, 28 August 2020 (EDT)<br>If you want to debate Martin Luther, create a page, [[Debate: Are the teachings of Martin Luther biblical]], or some such.  He doesn't bolster any of your arguments in the least. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 23:49, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
I have no intention of debating Martin Luther, only defending the promise of Christ that the gates of hell never will prevail against the doctrine of the church he built and have never prevailed in spite of the scandal of those whose lives have clearly violated the doctrine and holiness of the Church. I've done that here. I don't need to add to it, you would only try to provoke more debate, and it's not necessary. You've presented your case. I'm not convinced that Jesus failed to fulfill his promise. Jesus didn't lie. He cannot lie. And that's where it sits. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|The problem you have is in claiming the validity of your interpretation of Matthew 16:18, on which the entire monstrosity of Roman Catholic doctrine is built. All the other scriptural evidence, that the foundation stone laid in Zion is Christ, not Peter, weighs against your claims that the catechism, encyclicals, traditions, etc have nullified biblical teaching. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:59, 29 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
You've insisted over and over again that the Catholic Church is an institution of sinful men led by sinful men. OK, Peter says to "obey every human institution' RSV "submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake" KJV - part of the whole passage in the Bible of 1 Peter 2:13-17. ''So where do you get off saying it's right to not submit and not obey sinful men leading the Catholic Church?'' As Dataclarifier pointed out, the Catholic Church wasn't founded by anybody disobeying and refusing to submit to the leaders of their church and went out and taught a different doctrine than what they'd been taught and established a different church. It's the Church, so obey. You say it's a human institution, so obey. You're stuck in the fact you disobey even the Bible here. It doesn't matter if there are weeds among the wheat. They both are to grow together until the harvest. Obey the Bible and obey the Church. Not those who left. It's had authority for a long time. And every authority is established by God, and whoever resists the authority resists God. Romans 13. Those who left are antichrist. 1 John 2:18-19. So whichever way you turn, the Bible says to obey, but you don't want to. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 09:43, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Your whole argument appears to [[Putting words in someone's mouth|put words in one's mouth]]. Another deceptive lie. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 09:57, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
::Let's isolate this question I/S asks:
 +
::*'''So where do you get off saying it's right to not submit and not obey sinful men leading the Catholic Church? '''
 +
::I'm sure we'll have more to say about it later. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 10:42, 27 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
You use the Bible to contradict the Church and condemn it and its teaching which is from the Bible. Well, I've known a lot people who cited the Bible so that it even contradicts itself and say, "''There! You see? It contradicts itself and even praises murderers and liars and adulterers. So the Bible can't be true! And you're an idiot if you think it is!''" They abuse the Bible so they don't have to accept it. You do the same thing. You use the Bible against the Church. Well, the Bible can be used against you. And it can be used to support the Catholic Church. And it has and it does. I read it. When I found out what the Catholic Church actually teaches I was convicted of error and could see for myself from the Bible itself that it is the one true Church. Jesus is no liar. Who are you to say He did not fulfill his promise? I have an idea who you are, and it ain't good. Why should we listen to you when you won't even listen to the Bible? I think what Gamaliel said to the Sanhedrin applies to you, "IF it is of God, you cannot defeat it. You may even find yourself fighting against God." Acts 5:33-39. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 10:12, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|You use the Bible to twist God's word into lies. The Roman Catholic church rejects the authority of the Bible in favor of sinful men, i.e. the [[Magisterium]].  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 10:26, 27 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
The Roman Catholic Church acknowledges entirely the authority of the Bible in support of the authority of the Catholic Church led by sinners redeemed and forgiven through Our Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed for the sins of the whole world just as the Magisterium teaches and has always taught. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 11:28, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|That's [[specious reasoning]]; The Roman Church claims God's word is evolving and is overridden by the Magisterium. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 11:32, 27 August 2020 (EDT) <br> You yourself claim God allows sinful men to dictate what is now considered to be the Word of God. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 11:35, 27 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
"There shall be one flock and one shepherd" John 10:16. And yet the Bible '''''also''''' says there are many elders as guardians whom God has appointed as shepherds to feed the flock, Peter himself being an elder among them, whom Jesus himself '''first''' appointed to feed his sheep and ewes and lambs. Acts 20:28 and 1 Peter 5:1-6 and John 21:15-17. The ''Letter to the Hebrews'' commands us to obey the leaders who spoke the word of God and watch over our souls. Hebrews 13:7,17. Paul insisted on being of "one mind" in the faith "striving side by side for the faith of the gospel". Philippians 1:27; 4:2. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 11:40, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:
 +
:::One flock and one shepherd = Jew + Gentile = Catholic. This isn't rocket science. ''ye are not under law but under grace'', but the Judaizers kept preaching law.<ref>https://www.biblehub.com/galatians/2-14.htm</ref> User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 11:51, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
"Ye are not under the law of Moses". Paul's every reference to the law is to the law of Moses. Christians are not under the law of Moses, but the law of Christ, which includes being subject to men in the church. Jesus and Paul and Peter preached obedience to the authority of God in the church he built on a rock, and against it the gates of hell shall not prevail. Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to correct and rebuke "with all authority" in guarding the faith. 1&nbsp;Timothy 4:11-12; 2&nbsp;Timothy 1:14; Titus 2:15. And he condemned those who would not accept his authority; as did John those who would not accept his authority. 2&nbsp;Corinthians 10:1-8; 11:12-15; 3&nbsp;John 9-11. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, not on lies. And it is led into all truth forever by the saving grace of God through Christ alone in the Church he built on a rock, and he is with us always to the end of the world [[Eon|''aeonos'']]. The authority of the church is not a lie but truth. And we are commanded to obey that authority, not the law of Moses, but the authority established by God, not to abolish the law and the prophets but to rightly fulfill them in Christ Jesus (Matthew 5:17). Jesus who cannot lie did not fail to fulfill his promise that Satan, the power behind the gates of hell, shall not prevail against the church he built. Jesus cannot lie. So it has never been ruled by Satan. And its doctrine of unmerited grace according to the ''Catechism'' ('''Grace and Justification''') is the truth of God straight from the Bible. For, "if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." Acts 5:38b-39. <br> The Reformation taught for centuries that Catholicism and the Catholic Church would come to naught and be destroyed by God. It has never happened, and history is witness. Ye are not under the law of Moses, but are commanded to submit to the authority of the elders and leaders of the Church and their teaching. Because it is the pillar and ground of the truth, and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it. Even when there are weeds among the wheat that will have to be gathered out of the kingdom at harvest time and burned. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:31, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:
 +
:::''ye are not under law but under grace.'' Right there, you just dispensed with grace once again. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 12:49, 27 August 2020 (EDT)<br>Law of Moses = law of God. The Christian is not under the law of God, which can only condemn and not save. The Christian believer is under the grace of God, which the Catechism of the Catholic Church denies.<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A23-25&version=KJV</ref> The grace of God, i.e. God ''not'' holding the sinner to account for his sins, '''''is''''' the Gospel. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 12:53, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
*''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse;''<ref>https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A10-14&version=ESV</ref><br>User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 13:38, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
You have [[Specious reasoning|speciously]] redefined the law of God as limited strictly to the law of Moses. The law of God is obedience to his will. That is what the Bible commands and teaches. If the Christian is not under even the law (authority) of God the Christian is not obligated to obey even the will of God. '''[[Antinomianism]]''' and '''[[Licentiousness]]'''. Paul denounced that monstrous lie. {{quotation|Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. Romans 3:31}}{{quotation|What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Romans 6:1-2}}{{quotation|Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. Do not yield your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but yield yourselves to God as men who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments of righteousness. Romans 6:12-13}}{{quotation|What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness. But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to '''the standard of teaching to which you were committed.''' Romans 6:15-18}}{{quotation|For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23}}So '''obedience''' leads to righteousness.{{quotation|For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not '''obey the truth''', but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Gentile, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Gentile. For God shows no partiality. Romans 2:6-11}}If as you say the Christian is not under even the law (authority) of God, then the Christian is not obligated to obey even God and is not obligated to obey the Bible the word of God, and we can freely do anything we please, even every kind of wickedness, because we are not under law and "there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus". But that is not the whole truth. For "in him is no sin". Paul said "every man" and that includes every Christian. Those who obey wickedness are not "in Christ"—"for those who are factious and do not '''obey the truth''', but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury." And those who disobey are severed from him and are not in Him. The Bible commands obedience for the sake of the Lord. 1&nbsp;Peter 2:13.<br>You reject the obedience of righteousness unto life, the obedience of righteousness in seeking for glory and honor and immortality by works of doing good. Rejecting the grace of God to do good works is death. For the wages of sin is death. Christians are God's workmanship, '''created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.''' Ephesians 2:10. Therefore, what you propose is death. Not even obeying God. Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments" John 14:15; 15:10. When one came to him and asked what must he do to have '''eternal life''', Jesus said, "If you would enter '''life''', keep the commandments." Matthew 19:17b. John said, "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome." 1&nbsp;John 5:3.<br>The ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'', with doctrine '''directly from the Bible''', explains the keeping of the commandments (Part Three: Life in Christ - CCC '''1691–2557''')—'''''love, mercy, humility, justice, respect for parents and those in authority, obedience to the will of God'''''. Jesus did not fail to keep his promise to lead us into all the truth for ever by the Holy Spirit of truth, and remain always to the end of the world. And the Bible tells us to obey the leaders of the church. <br>You say to disobey the Catholic Church. You say that obedience is against the gospel of grace. The doctrine of disobedience and rebellion against the authority of the church Jesus built on a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, is a doctrine not of God. You reject the grace bestowed on the Church, reject the grace of salvation through the Church, reject the grace of the sacraments He ordained to bestow grace unto salvation and for the upbuilding of the church, reject the grace of the established authority of the most senior-ranking leading elders and shepherds of the Church led into all the truth by the Spirit of truth, and reject the grace of being united to the Body and Blood of Christ in the Church he built on the rock of Peter and continued with, always, to the end of the world. Your "gospel of grace" is a false gospel of [[libertinism]] and [[licentiousness]] and [[antinomianism]], opposed to the word of Christ Jesus in his promise regarding the church he built, a false gospel rooted in disobedience and contempt for authority established by God. Your "gospel of grace" is the rebellion of Korah, [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+16&version=kjv Numbers 16] (see [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jude+1%3A8-11&version=RSVCE Jude 8-11]), and is the rebellion rooted in the first rebel who would not obey the authority of God, and fell, being cast out (Revelation 12:7-10). <br> I will have nothing more to do with you (Titus 3:10-11) --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 14:29, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|You can [[spam]] all you want. The bottomline is we have already proved both the Magisterium and Catechism contradict the Bible. The only question is, ''Why?'' Answer: [[Pride]].  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 14:34, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Obedience = faith. Disobedience = lack of faith, not believing God, doubting what God says is true or calling God a liar, leaning on your own understanding.
 +
:''by grace are ye saved, through faith...not of works''
 +
:''if it be by works, grace is no longer grace''
 +
:''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''
 +
:Disobedience - rejecting what God says here, and you reject the Gospel. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 15:00, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
:Adam and Eve, for example, their real disobedience was in not believing what God said, moreso than in the act of partaking of the forbidden fruit. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 18:10, 27 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
''You keep [[spam]]ming the same lie!'' '''Practical''' (actual) '''Spiritual Disobedience, [[Rebellion against God|Rebellion]], [[Licentiousness]], [[Libertinism]], [[Antinomianism]], [[Anarchism]], [[Amoral]]ity, [[Individualism]].''' ''Your real disobedience is in not believing Jesus, in not believing what God Himself said, in not believing the Bible!'' --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 19:57, 27 August 2020 (EDT)<br>The spiritual definition of '''obedience''' is actively choosing and '''''doing what is right''''', not solely believing alone, but actually doing what God commands, the will of the Father. <br>The spiritual definition of '''disobedience''' is '''''not''''' choosing to '''''do what is right''''' in deeds of wickedness and unrighteousness, by relying solely on believing alone, and not striving with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength to do what God commands, and not acting according to the will of the Father.<br>See '''[https://biblehub.com/luke/6-46.htm Luke 6:46]; [https://biblehub.com/matthew/7-21.htm Matthew 7:21]; [https://biblehub.com/james/1-22.htm James 1:22]''' and '''[https://biblehub.com/james/4-17.htm James 4:17]; [https://biblehub.com/1_john/3-18.htm 1&nbsp;John 3:18]'''<br>Faith that bears fruit in deeds of love and mercy fulfills the law of God, "the doers of the law". [https://biblehub.com/romans/2-13.htm Romans 2:13] and [https://biblehub.com/james/2-24.htm James 2:24] and [https://biblehub.com/john/15-2.htm John 15:2]. See ''[[Corporal and spiritual works of mercy]]''.<br>If you don't do good works as he commands and bear fruit in righteousness, you reject the Gospel; and the Son of man on his glorious throne, and all the angels with him, will say to you, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" [https://biblehub.com/matthew/25-41.htm '''Matthew 25:41'''] ([https://www.bible.com/bible/111/MAT.25.31-46.niv context Matthew 25:31-46]); [https://biblehub.com/romans/2-9.htm '''Romans 2:9''']. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 01:49, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Maybe we're making progress here. The spiritual definition of disobedience is not believing God. It appears you just acknowledged that. Disobedience is not necessarily breaking a line item of the 613 commandments or decalogue.  Praise God! We may have a spiritual breakthrough!    User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 22:49, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Why do Christians ''not'' use their liberty as a cloak for unrighteousness? Because of law? No. Because they believe (i.e. have faith in) God.  They believe unhesitatingly what God says is true.  And by this faith (belief in God's word) they obtain grace and are freed from the curse of the law.  If any man sin, we an Advocate with the Father.  Next time your mediator other than Christ sentences you to three Hail Mary's and two Our Fathers, remember before you do your penance, ''all who rely on works of the law are under a curse''.  User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 23:21, 27 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
''all who rely on works of the law of Moses are under a curse.'' All who act and do works according to the law of righteousness are justified. "The doers of the law are justified." Romans 2:13. "Do we nullify the law by faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Romans 3:31. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Revelation 2–3. Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls. Hebrews 13:7,17. There is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore anyone who resists the authority resists what God has appointed, and those that resist will incur judgment. Romans 13:1-2. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matthew 16:18-19. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them. Whose sins you retain and do not remove are retained and not removed. John 20:23. God has entrusted to them the ministry of reconciliation as the ambassadors of God who speak for God. 2&nbsp;Corinthians 5:18-20. If anyone will not listen to the church, let him be to you as a sinful publican and an unbelieving pagan. Matthew 18:17. Why do you call Me Lord, and not do what I say? Luke 6:46-49; Matthew 7:21-27. "He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." '''[https://biblehub.com/john/8-47.htm John 8:47]'''. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 03:21, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
Protagonist:{{quotation|Nice try, but you can't around ''ye are under grace and not under law''. I guess you're just not among the ''ye''. User:RobSmith|RobS<sup>User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q</sup> 03:32, 28 August 2020 (EDT)}}
 +
 +
==Angry observer==
 +
===Un-ask the debate question/category error===
 +
This doesn't belong to either side of the debate, but it has to go somewhere.
 +
 +
You don't even understand the expression "gates of hell".  Jesus said what he meant in an unusual way, probably to make it lively to the imagination.
 +
 +
He meant he had the devil on the run and in stronghold after stronghold (of the devil's) and in city after city (of the devil's), he and his disciples were ''breaking through, besieging'' the gates of hell ''to rescue the sinners inside'', so "the gates of hell" were taking a beating, being broken, knocked over, bent and dented all over the place, passed through and its city's inhabitants rescued!
 +
 +
You're not in a position to know; you could mount an attack against a devil's stronghold anytime you want, but you try to abuse Conservapedia instead, and then because your attitude is so passive, you don't see that knowledge of ''anyone'' being rescued from Satan counts as his gates not prevailing and instead feel the need for ''us!'' to tell you what amounts to, in your ignorance, asking if it's even still happening or not! Newsflash!: ''Wherever'' those gates are being smashed into by groups of Christians of every stripe, the gates of hell are ''already'' failing to prevail!
 +
 +
The "Church" is not an "institution"; look what happens to people like you who think it is! Once again, you are completely wrong!
 +
 +
User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan (User talk:VargasMilan|talk) Wednesday, 22:16, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
 +
 +
==See also==
 +
*[[Debate:Does the Catholic Church have the biblical authority of Christ Himself to preach and to teach the truth forever?]]
 +
*[[Debate: Is the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace biblical?]]
 +
*[[Debate: Is the Magisterium infallible?]]
 +
*[[Debate: Is Roman Catholic teaching on the Holy Spirit biblical?]]
 +
*[[Debate: Infant baptism]]
 +
*[[Debate: Is there a Purgatory before Judgment Day]]
 +
*[[Debate:Is Holy Communion the True Body and Precious Blood of Jesus Christ]]
 +
*[[Salvation: declarational salvation and ontological salvation]]
 +
*[[Ex opere operato and ex opere operantis]]
 +
*[[Eternal security (salvation)]]
 +
*[[Antinomianism]]
 +
 +
==References==
 +
{{reflist}}
 +
----
 +
Having removed the spam and disruptive insertions, this is the way the page should be, according to the counsel of User:Conservative regarding orderly and organized Debate pages. Having posted this, I have nothing more to say. I'm done with this project. --[[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic]] ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk]]) 14:52, 1 September 2020 (EDT)

Revision as of 18:52, September 1, 2020

This page is left intentionally blank.

Debate page

You are spamming; read the rule posted on the Debate page: "providing citations to scripture without providing the actual scripture and/or its relevant context to this Debate". We are obviously talking about two different baptisms, water baptism and spirit baptism. You cannot expect readers to go through the dozens of scripture citations you provided to inspect each one to see if you are referring to water baptism or spirit baptism. Please remove the spam or a Sysop/Moderator will do it. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:19, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

The moment I got your alert I tried to relegate it to a ref note, but you blocked me before I could. So we're left with a hanging tag note. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:33, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Fine, Rewrite it and/or carrying your debating points over to Debate: Is Roman Catholic teaching on the Holy Spirit biblical? Remember, that Debate (a) has the same rules, and (b) more importantly is on Roman Catholic teaching on the Holy Spirit, not baptism. So you can't just cut n' paste your stuff on water baptism or spirit baptism without focusing on the Debate question. RobSTrump 2Q2Q
Please do not disregard Sysop/Mediator's warnings by edit warring. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:31, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I didn't. But you made it impossible. You are inventing the pretext of edit warring. You are stlll trying to remove evidence against your distorted misrepresentations. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:35, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
(ec x3) No, you made it impossible by violating Debate rules and warnings not to. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:44, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Oh yeah...I'm just sure! Your trademark is eternal Last wordism. Not to mention Confirmation bias. And violations of the 90/10 Rule. You're insulting too. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:56, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I see you're hesitating on posting one example of the 12 you allegedly found. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:58, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things. Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? (2 Cor 11:6-7) I speak here as a debate participant and not as Moderator. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 14:07, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Idea! How 'bout I go through the whole page and remove all of your repetitive spam? Just give me the chance! But I think you're too much of a sniveling coward to allow it, no way! --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:37, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Something to consider. Give me one example. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:44, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I found more than 12 of 'em! Let me loose and I'll do it! If you don't see the repetitions I remove as repetitive spam then revert the edit.! --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:48, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Ah ha! Hesitation. Could be fatal. Don't think you'd recover from it. You'd just bury it as if it never existed. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Post one example here. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:54, 30 August 2020 (EDT)


How 'bout several (indents retained): [note: see my recommendation at the bottom}

Christ is the foundation stone or rock that the Christian church is built upon, not Peter. This confusion, authored by the author of confusion and father of lies, is the source of all the confusion regarding the claims to "authority" by Roman Catholic doctrine.

One mediator The Catechism of the Catholic Church in sum essentially reads,

  • We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves
  • Isaiah 28:14 - we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves

Salvation by grace This is a denial of salvation by grace (grace is not grace) and a doctrine, or another gospel of salvation by works.

We've been over this a dozen times. The gospel was preached to Israel in the wilderness.
Independent Skeptic says, "This shows that John's water baptism unto repentance cannot be the water baptism which Jesus commanded people to receive" Bingo! Now reconcile what you just posted with Roman Catholic doctrine and all the drivel in the Infant baptism page. Hint: Jesus didn't command "water baptism".
Yes He did! ...
You are spamming; read the rule posted above: "providing citations to scripture without providing the actual scripture and/or its relevant context to this Debate". We are obviously talking about two different baptisms, water baptism and spirit baptism. You cannot expect readers to go through the dozens of scripture citations you provided to inspect each one to see if you are referring to water baptism or spirit baptism. Please remove the spam or a Sysop/Moderator will do it. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 13:15, 30 August 2020 (EDT)


All of this runs contrary to Roman Catholic doctrine on water baptism, salvation, and receiving the Holy Spirit. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 09:16, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
You are trolling again. Below you state salvation is earned or merited, which is exactly what catechism teaches.
  • Isaiah 28:14 - we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves

The Christian is not under law God says,

  • Romans 6:14 - ye are not under law but under grace
  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse
You just can't seem to wrap your head around the word "obey". To the spiritual believer, to "obey" means to trust and believe God. To the natural man and carnal mind, "obey" means to follow orders to avoid a spanking.
And throughout all your spam postings, your point comes through clearly - you claim the Roman Church is God.
God is not a tyrant who rules by threats and intimidation. But you make him out to be such and claim the Roman Church is here to enforce his diktats. This is the opposite of grace.
ye are not under law but under grace. Go ahead, keep making the case that the Roman Catholic Church denies the Bible.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches sacraments are works God says,

  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse
Hence, per the Bible, adherents and practitioners of the Roman Catholic faith are under a curse and not redeemed by the blood of Jesus.
  • Isaiah 28:14 - we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves
The parallels between apostate Israel and the apostate Roman church are unmistakable.
  • Matthew 15:8-9 - This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.
  • Mark 7:13 - making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.
Context: Jesus is speaking of the Jews, and in particular of the Pharisees. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)
You have rejected grace, as Israel in the wilderness did. Ye are under a curse.
We've already proven at least 5 times your catechism is a fraud. You're just digging your hole deeper in rebellion against God and God's word.
Unbelief in God's word.
Unbelief is a lack of faith.
  • Hebrews 4:2 - but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
Unbelief, or a lack of faith, is disobedience.
"obey" means have faith. Why would anyone have faith in lies? And the Christian believer is not under law anyway. Does God command us to bow the knee to Satan? Satan is the god of this world.
You either can't read or are just playing stupid now. I just cited above CCC 2068 "the Ten Commandments are obligatory". Get thee behind me, Satan.

Salvation and grace cannot be merited or earned. You need to repent, accept God's grace, and begin living life in the spirit.

The Roman church's rejection of grace and reversion back under law is not just serious error, it is a rejection of the New Covenant entirely. Hence, you are under a curse, as God says.
Go ahead, be in denial. For the third time in this section CCC 2068 "the Ten Commandments are obligatory". The law was only our schoolmaster.
  • Galatians 3:24-25 - the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
If you choose to continue under a schoolmaster and a curse, good luck. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 16:17, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

The sacraments cannot save The sacraments of the Roman Catholic church are works of the law.

The Roman Catholic church teaches of a false gospel of salvation by works.

What does that have to do with receiving the sacraments?
Bull. It's a whataboutism that has nothing to do with the alleged "authority" of the Roman Catholic church and/or the fact salvation through sacraments is unbiblical. Please stick to the topic.
The problem you have is in claiming the validity of your interpretation of Matthew 16:18, on which the entire monstrosity of Roman Catholic doctrine is built.
Your whole argument appears to put words in one's mouth. Another deceptive lie. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 09:57, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
You use the Bible to twist God's word into lies. The Roman Catholic church rejects the authority of the Bible in favor of sinful men, i.e. the Magisterium.
That's specious reasoning; The Roman Church claims God's word is evolving and is overridden by the Magisterium. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 11:32, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
One flock and one shepherd = Jew + Gentile = Catholic. This isn't rocket science. ye are not under law but under grace, but the Judaizers kept preaching law.
ye are not under law but under grace. Right there, you just dispensed with grace once again.
Law of Moses = law of God. The Christian is not under the law of God, which can only condemn and not save.
  • all who rely on works of the law are under a curse;
  • all who rely on works of the law are under a curse;
  • Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law
Obedience = faith. Disobedience = lack of faith, not believing God, doubting what God says is true or calling God a liar, leaning on your own understanding.
The spiritual definition of disobedience is not believing God. It appears you just acknowledged that.
Nice try, but you can't around ye are under grace and not under law. I guess you're just not among the ye.

--IndependentSkeptic (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Recommendation - I go through the whole Debate main page and remove all of my inserted responses to the "Protagonist" arguments, and remove all your (and others) inserted responses to the "Antagonist" arguments, and let both sides stand alone. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Ah ha! Longer hesitation! more than 13 minutes! Hands sweaty and trembling yet? You really don't like the idea, do you?

TLDR; look, I asked for one example and you give spam. The page is unlocked. Let's see if you can abide by the rules this time. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 14:58, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Oh, you've spammed TLDR before. I didn't expect you to read every one of them, just select one. You have a multiple choice. Choose one. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:01, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
If you don't choose one, and answer it here within 24 hours, I'll do what I recommended. Let's see how you like that! You can block me all you like. But you can't avoid what a block response by you really means. Even Andy reverted your most recent long series of edits on the Debate main page. Dataclarifier was too patient and polite with you. You need a "smack-down" by your own argument exposed for what it is by a reply that you don't want to hear. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:16, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I told you the page is unlocked. I'm not going over that garbage again. You are free to edit without spamming or creating any more intentional disruption to the free exchange of ideas. RobSTrump 2Q2Q

The problem

(ec)The problem originated when you began posting responses in my discussion points that were not below any signature. That created confusion and disruption. If you have a response to another editor, formulate your ideas coherently, without massive blocks of spam, and answer point by point below where another editor leaves off with their signature. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:03, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Hah! You have a long history of initiating that same kind of harassment long before Dataclarifier and I used your example in kind. Boo-hoo, that "problem" precedent was set by you, not him and not me, and you can't take your own medicine. Too bad. You earlier stated about Dataclarifier that you "shoved his face in his own garbage". You can dish it out, buddy, but you sure can't take it when it's your turn in the game that you yourself set up! So either put up, or shut up. I'll see you, and raise. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:16, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I can't deny I may have done that once or twice, particularly in the midst of one of DC's massive spam postings. That's why we have an anti-spam rule now, RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:18, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Bzzzt! Wrong! Once or twice! Hah! I counted over 89 + times you've done it. You've done that kind of vandalism to several other users. Some of them quit because of you and your gang of supporters.
You have 96 hours before I blank this page. I don't want to preserve your crap. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:26, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
(ec) I wear two hats, one as a regular editor and one as a Sysop; I'll try to make known in edit summaries or on pages when I intervene as a Sysop.
96 hours for what? The more you talk, the less sense you make. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:30, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
"For what?" Read. Repeat. "You have 96 hours before I blank this page. I don't want to preserve your crap." Do you remember now? Or is that too much to expect? --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:34, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I still have no idea what you're talking about. If you want to blank this page, go ahead. If you want vandalize the Debate mainspace, I'd advise against it. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:39, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
When you're loosing an argument, you can't quash it or hide your embarrassment with 50,000 bytes of spam. PERIOD. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:20, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
You can't even spell "losing"! "Lose" "Loose" You're the one who's loose. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:26, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I have a keyboard that notoriously sticks. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:37, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Don't you know how to edit-correct spelling? You just let it slide without reading what you've posted? Not very intelligent. Blame the equipment. You're totally innocent. It was the keyboard. Well override the keyboard and redo the edit as a minor. Or is that beyond your capacity. (You said it, not I.) --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:06, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Here's my keyboard; as you can see, it's not flat. Don't ever buy one. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 17:17, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
The Problem. It's spelled R O B S M I T H. Deal with it. I will get rid of your disruptive insertions. Or block me. Your call. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:31, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I haven't a clue what you're talking about. All I know is you disrupted my talking points in the mainspace before they were completed. In several sections they never were completed (particularly The Christian is not under law section). Unlike yourself, I didn't cut n paste my Protagonist position, but I did take the bait with the loaded Debate question. It appears you're not happy with the Protagonist position. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:37, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE. Right. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
I just now heard Dataclarifier (Michael) laugh behind me. He read what I posted here.
"Disrupted my talking points"!!! Poor baby! I've seen what you did to Dataclarifier's own talking points in disrupting his talking points argument so much that to make it without disruption and make sense he had to copy it to an Essay page. Talk page Infant baptism. You couldn't stand to let him make his point. And you yourself disrupted it without posting below his signature line. You hypocrite! Well, when it turned out to be your turn in accordance with the precedent you set, you hated it. Conservative even had to tell you not to do that. You did it any way. Why does Andy put up with you? You constantly violate Conservapedia rules and ethics and commandments. The fallacy of special pleading. Double standard!! You're no Christian. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
(tsk tsk, judge not lest ye be judged...)
You know, everyone said this was a foolish Debate to get involved with. I did it anyway, with no regrets. Obviously we never even got into all the spam Debate texts in the Debate question. But I did just now read over all your objections above. It appears you got your butt handed to you on a popsicle stick.
Let's call this Debate over, and move onto either Holy Spirit baptism or Martin Luther (sorry, I can't participate as an editor in a Luther debate cause I just don't really know much about it). No sense going over Catholic doctrine on baptism, cause that's been covered on several pages. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 16:08, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
So. You concede defeat. Good! You couldn't take it any more. So you want to flee the scene. OK. You lose the debate. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Dataclarifier laughed out loud. We're falling down laughing!!! Wow. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
He almost fell off his chair laughing. (We thought of the line from a Warner Bros. Bugs Bunny cartoon applied to RobSmith, "Hahahaha! What a maroon!") --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:39, 30 August 2020 (EDT)


I'm blanking this page 2 PM Thursday. Unless you want to preserve it for the purpose of gloating by blocking me so I can't. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Do whatever you like. We need a good coherent Protagonist position at Debate: Is Roman Catholic teaching on the Holy Spirit biblical? RobSTrump 2Q2Q 16:21, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Yes, it is biblical. The Bible citations and quotations in the Catechism of the Catholic Church prove it! CCC 683–747. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Not it doesn't. You have no clue who authored that catechism anymore than who authors Wikipedia. And it was not God-breathed nor holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. RobSTrump 2Q2Q
Incidentally, being that Solomon authored Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticle of Canticles, despite his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God in his old age, he still qualifies as one of the holy men of God, which would tend to argue in favor of eternal security. Not so? RobSTrump 2Q2Q 17:24, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
So, you'll even reject the scriptures cited as clear proofs that anybody can read for themselves that anonymous preachers of the church cite as infallible proofs of support for Catholic doctrines. The doctrines are rooted firmly in the inspired word of God. You just refuse to accept it. You are not even as honest as the Beroeans who checked these things for themselves to see if they are true, what Paul said in his preaching. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Oh, so you claim in the 2,000 year history of the church, there was never one single sleezebag in any position, from pope to scribe, who inserted subversive disinformation into the catechism? RobSTrump 2Q2Q
Oh, people tried. "Sleazebags" of loud-mouthed discontent and ambition introduced subversive disinformation causing dissension and division. They were judged by the senior-ranking elders, leaders and shepherds of the whole church in council together to be heretics. The actual doctrine of the church Jesus founded, and people defied and went out and taught a different doctrine than this one Church they left, its actual doctrine is a matter of record as consistent with the scriptures, with apostolic tradition, and clarified by the magisterium as the Christian faith.
Yes, over the 2000 year history of Christianity, the doctrine of the Ante-Nicene Fathers and the Post-Nicene Fathers of the Church both east and west has been a consistent, harmonious unfolding of the depths of meaning in the scriptures, bringing out of the whole life of the Church all that is already implicitly present in the revelation of God through Christ our God and Savior as reflected in the Bible and discerned according to the promise of Jesus Christ Our Lord to be the doctrine of the Holy Spirit with us for ever, guaranteeing that the Church from which others departed and separated from is in fact the pillar and ground/foundation/bulwark of the truth. Paul said we have this treasure in fragile clay vessels, but the treasure is pure and true, revealed by God. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
Your faith is in Magisterium, not in God. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 19:30, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
So God's word is evolving....RobSTrump 2Q2Q 19:31, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
So let's compare momentarily a passage of scripture with catechism:
  • James 1:18 - Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
Now let's look at the variableness and shadow of turning in the Catechism:
  • CCC1 1471 - "remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.' 'An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.' The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead."
That looks more like the language of a shyster lawyer than the God-breathed inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For my money, I'll stick with God's word, and I'm not really interested in an interpretation or trying to understand what that gobbledygook supposedly means. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 19:41, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
That's how it seems to you, insults included.
Tell us, what is your guarantee that your own repetitive "gobbledygook" interpretations of God's word is the truth and not a deception of the devil instead leading you astray by the word of God? The Bible warns that people have deviated from the truth through believing in their own opinion about the scriptures. Some to their own destruction being convinced they were right, but they weren't. All of them quoting the Bible. Simon bet his money on what he supposed was perfectly all right and he was condemned Acts 8:9-24.
I stand firmly trusting in the promises of Christ my Lord and Savior.
I'm now referencing the word of God about properly interpreting the word of God according to the word of God:
1 John 2:18b-19a "many antichrists have come...They went out from us, but they were not of us"
2 Peter 3:15-18 "Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him...in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability."
2 Peter 1:20–2:1 "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies"
Hebrews 13:8-9a "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever. Do not be led away by divers and strange doctrines"
Hebrews 13:17 "Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account"
1 Timothy 1:6-7 "Certain persons by swerving from these have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions."
2 Corinthians 11:13 "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ."
2 Corinthians 4:2 "We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."
2 Corinthians 2:17 "For we are not like so many, peddlers of God's word; but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ."
1 Corinthians 10:12 "Therefore let any one who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall."
1 Corinthians 6:12 "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful. 'All things are lawful for me,' but I will not be enslaved by anything."
1 Corinthians 3:18 "Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise."
Acts 20:30 "And from among your own selves will arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them"
Mark 12:24 "Jesus said to them, 'Is not this why you are wrong, that you know neither the scriptures nor the power of God?' "
Proverbs 14:12 "There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death."
Proverbs 3:5b "do not lean on your own understanding."
"For my money" I'll stick to God's word in the infallible promises of Christ himself about the church he built on a rock, himself with us always to the end of the world, the Spirit of truth with us for ever leading us into all the truth, commanding us to obey our leaders who speak the word of God in the household of God, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, having given himself up for her that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, as a temple and dwelling place of God in the Spirit, built of living stones to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God in the Spirit, and its warning about those who go out from us and teach a different gospel than what they had received by twisting the scriptures.
--IndependentSkeptic (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2020 (EDT)
(ec) What a bunch of nonsense. In one breathe you say the catechism is the word of God. In the next breathe you say the church is not built upon the Rock of Christ. Sheesh, talk about divers and strange doctrines, that's exactly what that catechism is. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 00:18, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Standing on the promises of Christ my King
Through eternal ages let His praises ring
"Glory in the Highest!" I will shout and sing
Standing on the promises of God
Stand-ing - Stand-ing
Standing on the promises of Christ my Savior
Stand-ing - Stand-ing
I'm standing on the promises of God.
--IndependentSkeptic (talk) 00:28, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Isaiah 22:16 - What hast thou here? and whom hast thou here, that thou hast hewed thee out a sepulchre here, as he that heweth him out a sepulchre on high, and that graveth an habitation for himself in a rock?
RobSTrump 2Q2Q 00:57, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Out of context, misapplied, abuse of scripture! My name is not Shebna, I have never counted the houses of Jerusalem, I am not over the household of a king, I am not the steward of a palace, I have no chariots, I have no appointed office to be thrust from, no robe of office, no girdle of rank, no station to be cast down from, no governmental authority, another man has not been clothed with my uniform. You read the Bible, but you neither know it nor understand it. That is quite clear from the way you ignore fundamental passages of doctrinal importance which proclaim the authority of the church over the private interpretation of individuals leaning on their own understanding. You have no understanding of the word of God, only your own misguided interpretation and rejection of scripture based on blind, prejudicial confirmation bias against authority. "Leave them alone. They are blind guides of the blind; and if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a ditch." --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 01:19, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I/S says, "you ignore fundamental passages of doctrinal importance which proclaim the authority of the church over the private interpretation of individuals".
You can say that til you're blue in the face. The problem you have is proving any relationship between the Roman church today and the church Christ built upon a rock. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 09:56, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
  • Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light
The evidence for your claims weighs in that direction. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:02, 31 August 2020 (EDT)

Interesting suggestion

Hi IndependentSkeptic, if you and/or Dataclarifier ever feel that debating with other editors here gets nowhere, do you want to consider creating an account on this site created by Toby Chester? It seems to be a more Catholic-oriented alternative to Conservapedia, and it's a site I may register an account on sometime soon. —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Monday, 01:32, 31 August 2020 (EDT)

Don't! It looks heretical, unless you want to associate yourself with anti-Roman Catholic heresy. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:14, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Sure looks like it, and no, I don't. On this point RobSmith and I totally agree. As soon as I logged on 12:45 my time (CDT) and saw there were messages I came here and saw your warning. Very much appreciated! Thank you for that much respect. I followed up and took a good look at it. It not only looks heretical, I read enough to know that it is. I've read the Bible through several times (not as much as Dataclarifier, whoo-boy he knows his stuff!) and the Catechism 3 times through. I utterly reject Sedevacantism as a heresy as much as the Protestant Reformation and the separated Old Catholic Church, precisely because of the promises of Christ and the command of scripture to obey our leaders and according to the Bible that all authority that exists is established by God, and whoever resists the authority resists what God has established. Of course, you already know that's the biblical position I have been defending.
Liberaltears, the site recommended by you as one that "seems [to you] a more Catholic-oriented alternative to Conservapedia" opposes Catholic doctrine regarding the Pope, the Magisterium, and the authority of the Ecumenical Councils of Trent through Vatican II. (I'll post this paragraph on Liberaltears' talk page.) As for feeling that "debating other editors here" gets "nowhere", you totally miss the fact that a firm defense of the truth of the doctrine of the Church on Conservapedia is not for the purpose "winning" a debate or getting people ignorant of the actual doctrine to admit they were in error (perhaps misinformed by others who did not really know what they were talking about, or perhaps reaching erroneous conclusions on their own based on a badly uninformed reading of the Bible without knowledge of what the original language texts really say by not knowing that some words are not metaphors but only literal in meaning—like trogon in John 6 "eat, chew, gnaw, crunch my flesh"). Conservapedia "welcomes all points of view" officially, but too often some of the Sysops/administrators are hostile even to the point of violating Conservapedia standards in order to ridicule, insult, and drive the Catholic contributors away by a vigorous vendetta against Catholicism, by using insults and outrageous misrepresentations based on Confirmation bias, making Conservapedia more and more Protestant than it was ten years ago (according to Dataclarifier—he says it was more friendly then). Occasionally postings and contributions have been utterly deleted as being intolerable spamming with "irrelevant Catholic garbage". But most of the time not, just being treated with bullying contempt and hostility instead. "Catholics not wanted" is the hidden message. And it's pervasive. Much of what Dataclarifier has contributed has survived almost intact. My own brief contribution to some of the articles on the popes, and what I did adapting the Harmony of the Gospel conservative version to audio read aloud, has apparently been left untouched. So, if what I've edited or contributed to Conservapedia does in fact convince anyone that the actual Catholic doctrine of the Catechism is from the guidance of the Holy Spirit working through them leading into all the truth, that is the work of the Holy Spirit. Dataclarifier says he was too zealous for the Church when he first entered, and that Father Nelo Leto asked him, "Were you talking with anyone when you decided to become Catholic?" and he said, "No." And Father Leto said, "Then why don't you let the Spirit do his work? I don't really think He needs your help."
So, whether or not it "gets nowhere" is moot, because after I finish up with the Debate on whether the gates of hell prevailed against the church Jesus founded or not, both Dataclarifier and me will retire from Conservapedia for the most part. He didn't want to "butt heads" with anti-Catholics on that Debate page but just wanted to see what would happen. When I looked at it I couldn't stand the fact that no one was defending the Church and the "No, it hasn't happened" section was empty. As I said, he didn't want to participate, but I sure did! And so it's reached a point where there's no point to it. Conservative wanted Debate pages to be organized with straightforward "Yes" and "No" sections, each one presenting a particular side of the the Debate and leaving it at that. But it got bogged down and obscured by constant interruptions of inserted opposing comments and insults and scriptures cited again and again and contradictions with scriptures cited in opposition to other scriptures again and again and each side denounced by the other as posting "irrelevant spam intended to obscure the purpose of the debate and deflect it into other issues not relevant to the stated topic of the debate in violation of the rules of the debate" (whew, that's a mouthful).
OK that brings us to today. I will go ahead this afternoon with what I recommended ("24 hours after making the Recommendation) and revise the layout of the Debate page,
  • getting rid of unnecessary repetitious "spam" and disruptive insertions into contributing users' arguments that chopped them up by cutting and interrupting their text at multiple places above the contributing user's signature line and essentially obscuring the point being made,
  • and moving comments "yay" to the now named "Protagonist" section, and comments "nay" to the now-named "Antagonist" section of the Debate. That should streamline the whole page.
If it's promptly reverted afterward I won't be at all surprised, even if the revised layout is according to the form Conservative insisted should be maintained for a debate page. If it is, I won't stick around to contest it. A reversion would only prove that revision of the page into the form of a fair debate clearly stated without obscuring the topic is unacceptable to someone.
Nuff said! (too much!) --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:11, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
That presents a problem, not against you personally, but setting a new precedent by allowing editors to rearrange other editors contributions in a Debate format. Context can often be lost. The problem may be with debate rules and formats, which I would encourage developing uniform standards and guidelines (here is an excellant example where the 90/10 rule discourages cooperation between editors).
As to the specific debate page in question, I'd encourage you to engage on the talk page there with suggestions before making any substantial revisions to the mainspace. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:25, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I happen to totally agree with Conservative. Take it up with Conservative. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Ok then. Don't make any substantial changes moving other editor's comments. It can be viewed on sight as vandalism.
Also, adding more content to a posting, which another editor has already responded to, is in my view, unethical. And you have developed a habit of doing that which entirely changes the meaning of whatever the subsequent poster responded to. That can be considered a form of trolling and vandalism. You need to post your comments contiguously in a real time debate. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:39, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
No one objects to correcting typos, adding a link in support of a statement, and even sloppy grammar. But adding additional whole sentences, phrases, thoughts, comments, etc. to a posting that another editor has already responded to is at a minimum, unfair. You would think common sense would guide you to refrain from such actions, but if restrictions on such highly irregular and unethical conduct have to be set down in black and white, that can be done also. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 15:49, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Then I "suggest" you stop your practice of disrupting others' texts with your own inserted disruptive comments. I'm not the only one who's complained about your form of vandalizing. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
See, that's what I mean. A moment ago I suggested developing rules and guidelines for debate. You essentially told me to go to hell. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 16:25, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
You hypocrite! Every single point you listed in the comment above is exactly what you've been doing yourself. Double standard! --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 16:28, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Well duh, if you're not interested in collaborative editing to develop Debate rules and guidelines for Conservapedia just say so. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 16:56, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I would suggest developing a format that allows for an Introductory Debate Question or Resolution, Two sections reserved for Protagonists and Antagonists to outline their respective positions (and possibly allow neutral or other alternative positions), and a Third section for a free-flowing interactive discussion. A rule should be imposed that debaters cannot simply cut and paste redundant spam from their stated reserved positions into the free-flowing debate section, but must expand on or articulate answers to specific points and questions. Additional subheads can be created as the free flowing debate takes various twists and turns. Sound reasonable? RobSTrump 2Q2Q 17:06, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
That's what Conservative said to do in the first place, bozo. Ah—I see!—you just don't want your irrelevant off-topic spam removed! Only the relevant comments relating to the debate question will be left intact. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 17:16, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Bingo. But he didn't lay out the rules in black and white. I've had to do it on the fly. I'd appreciate some input or criticism of the language I've had to develop on these rules. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 17:19, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Pity poor me! I've had to balance the role of being a neutral Moderator/Sysop and debate participant all the while developing debate rules at the same time over three debates; whereas you have been able to use the same time to concentrate the full weigh of your hatred and venom against me while filling in the gaps of your lame arguments with redundant spam. It's not fair. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 17:36, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
"Hatred and venom!" You don't even recognize yourself! Your own comments on the debate page have been quite vicious! No prizes for diplomacy there. "Neutral!!" Comments like "garbage spam", "Satanic", "gobbledygook", "antichrist". They're all there, and more! "Incivililty"—a blocking offence! And your vindictive deletion of abundant evidence from the Bible against statements you have made that were lies! And when an attempt was made to correct you on what might charitably be called "falsehoods" rather than going so far as saying they are deliberate lies you retaliated. I know what you are. Anyone with a modicum of good sense can see it. You're a proven bigot. The evident hatred mentioned as characteristic of a Double standard is clearly evident in your inveighing against the Catechism of the Catholic Church—which you don't seem to have actually read in its entirety. (TLDR?) You've closed your mind and heart to the truth—only stubbornly maintaining your own Prejudice in answer to clear explanations from the Bible and your refusal to acknowledge responses explaining that you are not truthful regarding actual Catholic doctrine, by continuing the same attack of misrepresentation using the Straw man fallacy in a classic example of the Fallacy of invincible ignorance when the evidence disproving your assertions is not acknowledged by you, as if no evidence was presented. You don't belong on a Christian site. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 18:27, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I get what you mean about RobSmith sometimes using rather harsh words, etc., though he technically is CP's largest contributor currently. —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Monday, 18:30, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
And speaking of bigotry and hatred, look no further than to VargasMilan's attacks. —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Monday, 18:31, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
"Largest contributor currently". Andy Schlafly gives him a free hand to violate Conservapedia. I can only conclude that Andy fully approves of his incivility and grants him complete immunity to express his bigotry. Why does he put up with it? Again, obvious Double standard. It's unconscionable. It's neither Catholic nor Christian nor ethical. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 18:56, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
User: Conservative has also refused to discipline or restrain either of them [RobSmith and VargasMilan]. Same thing. Several Debate pages about controversies over Catholic doctrines are proof. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 19:04, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
While I do agree that RobSmith has been uncivil at times (especially with his smear one point accusing me somehow defending pedophilia), he's been the biggest contributor to topics regarding the Deep state, 2020 presidential election, quid pro joe, etc. And regarding Andy, I can see why he avoids getting involved in the debate wars; all I'd really wish regarding him is maybe a promotion to rollback, Block and/or Upload abilities, especially with the general elections coming up in almost 2 months. About Conservative, my biggest suspicion is his deletions of revisions, something Shobson20 acts as an apologist for, insisting that it's merely "moderation". Conservative recently deleted Dataclarifier's user talk page, removing the >300,000 views for it. And VargasMilan is about the worst, contributing almost nothing substantial to the mainspace and rabble-rousing here and there. VM recently suggested that I was a sock of Dataclarifier simply because I strongly defend DC. All I can really conclude about the more anti-Catholic editors here on CP is that their behavior makes me more inclined to be a Catholic Christian. (note: I'm technically not a Catholic, as I only sympathize with Catholicism currently) —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Monday, 19:17, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Come on in, the Church is fine. "And you will find rest for your soul." The Bible is precious to the Catholic Church, her most precious treasure along with the sacraments and her precious souls. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 19:23, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I'll see if I get a chance to go to a local Roman Catholic church once some moronic lockdowns imposed by my state's governor are all over. For now, I may try to find time to read the Conservative Bible Project. —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Monday, 19:27, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
I posted a response to Liberaltears immediately and saved page, before the following postings, but it has vanished! Anyway, I'll post it here again, as best I can reconstruct it. I said:
Oh, better than the CBP, go to the Harmony of the Gospel (Conservative Version) longer form, which has marginal notes, and includes the Gospel/New Testament texts of the CBP. Read online the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Go online to EWTN.com for Catholic programming and live daily broadcasts of the Mass. The Catholic Bible is also available to read online. Also contact the nearest Catholic Church to you and ask about remote inquiry classes without any obligation.
I will have to quit for now. This afternoon's messages and postings have taken too much time for me to get to the revision of the layout of the Debate page. Tomorrow.
God bless. Dataclarifier says Pax vobiscum, which he says is Latin for "peace be with you". His mother says, "Get off the computer and come watch a movie." Any way, good night. God Bless. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 20:17, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Forget revising it. It'll have to be preserved for posterity as is. We've moved on to writing agreeable debate rules and the Roman Catholic position on the Holy Ghost. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:22, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Again, see what I mean. I lay a choice between grace and wrath, salvation and condemnation, being a collaborative editor and spewing hatred and venom, and you choose the path of wrath, condemnation, hatred and venom. Get with the program and lay your pride aside. Look up, the fields are white ready to harvest. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 19:35, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
You absolutely ignore everything Catholicism says about the path of forgiveness, mercy and compassion, and the fact that God himself has revealed in the Bible that rejection of righteousness and justice and love and mercy merits hell. You claim to have been raised Catholic. Then you know better (unless you lied about being Catholic). What you say in your comment above is a lie. You are spamming lies. There is no truth in what you said. Get with the program of salvation and holiness and start by telling the truth instead of telling lies. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2020 (EDT)
Ok, I guess we're not discussing hammering out rules anymore.
From my perspective, you (a) do not cite any or not enough CCC for other debaters and readers to view and criticize; leading to (b) a gross misuse and misrepresentation of the Bible for readers and debaters to compare and criticize.
You need to cite more CCC and less scripture; others, that is readers and debaters, have to take your word for your claim that the Bible supports catechism, yet you provide no evidence. This makes for a non-logical debate.
IOWs, your complaint is without merit. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:03, 31 August 2020 (EDT)

Anyways....

I'm hammering out Debate Rules. Any suggestions for alternative wording or additional Rules?

Rules

  • Off topic subjects, without providing an explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question, can be removed by a Sysop/Moderator.
  • In Open discussion, debaters are strongly discourage from cutting and pasting extensive text from their already stated Protagonist or Antagonist position. The Open discussion is for a free-flowing examination of those ideas, not redundant spam.
  • An editor may return to correct typos, sloppy grammar, or add a link in support of a statement in the Open discussion. Adding additional sentences, extensive phrasing, thoughts, comments, etc. to a posting one previously made that another editor has already responded to is not acceptable conduct in Open discussion.
  • Spamming, defined for purposes of this Debate, means providing multiple citations to scripture without providing the actual scriptures and/or its relevant context to this Debate, or providing scriptures in full with no relevant context or explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question. Spamming is not allowed in either the Protagonist, Antagonist, or Open discussion sections. Such designated spam postings may be removed by a Debate Sysop/Moderator. Editors may freely inquire of any Debate Sysop/Moderator, along with a brief explanation of cause, for removing such spam postings.
  • Users are encouraged to cite specifically a limited number of scriptures to make any point, preferably counting on one hand, as a courtesy to other readers and participants.
  • No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user.

RobSTrump 2Q2Q 19:47, 31 August 2020 (EDT)

Suggestion for additional rule:

  • Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.


--IndependentSkeptic (talk) 10:00, 1 September 2020 (EDT) I cite in particular these, as relevant to a revision of the mainspace Debate page to remove spam, and disruptive insertions into original postings, as vandalism:

Rules

  • Off topic subjects, without providing an explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question, can be removed by a Sysop/Moderator.
  • [...]
  • [...]
  • [...] Spamming is not allowed in either the Protagonist, Antagonist, or Open discussion sections. Such designated spam postings may be removed by a Debate Sysop/Moderator. Editors may freely inquire of any Debate Sysop/Moderator, along with a brief explanation of cause, for removing such spam postings.
  • [...]
  • No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user.

In support of these I propose this additional relevant rule:

  • Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.

In accordance with these rules proposed by RobSmith and myself I have revised a copy of the Debate mainspace page as follows.
(This is not spam. RobSmith said he had unlocked the page. It's still locked. All double-brackets enclosing identifying signatures of users posting comments have been removed from the copy below to preemptively defeat a potential accusation of "forging electronic signatures" on a page the user "never posted to"—meaning this IndependentSkeptic talk page.)
--IndependentSkeptic (talk) 10:00, 1 September 2020 (EDT)

This is a non-denominational exchange of ideas intended to bring about a greater understanding of the Bible.
All views are welcome.

10 Texts:

  • Matthew 16:13-19
    13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
    14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias or one of the prophets.
    15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
    16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
    17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
    18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter ["a rock"]. and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
    19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
  • John 14:16-17
    16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
    17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
  • John 16:12-15
    12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
    13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
    14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
    15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
  • Ephesians 2:18-22
    18 For through him [Jesus] we both [the Uncircumcision and the Circumcision] have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
    19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
    20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.
    21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
    22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
  • 1 Timothy 3:14-15
    14 These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly:
    15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
  • 1 Timothy 4:1-2
    1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
    2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
  • Hebrews 13:7
    7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.
  • Hebrews 13:17
    17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
  • 2 Peter 3:17
    17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
  • 1 John 2:18-19
    18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
    19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

Rules

  • Off topic subjects, without providing an explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question, can be removed by a Sysop/Moderator.
  • In Open discussion, debaters are strongly discourage from cutting and pasting extensive text from their already stated Protagonist or Antagonist position. The Open discussion is for a free-flowing examination of those ideas, not redundant spam.
  • An editor may return to correct typos, sloppy grammar, or add a link in support of a statement in the Open discussion. Adding additional sentences, extensive phrasing, thoughts, comments, etc. to a posting one previously made that another editor has already responded to is not acceptable conduct in Open discussion.
  • Spamming, defined for purposes of this Debate, means providing multiple citations to scripture without providing the actual scriptures and/or its relevant context to this Debate, or providing scriptures in full with no relevant context or explanation of its relevancy to the Debate question. Spamming is not allowed in either the Protagonist, Antagonist, or Open discussion sections. Such designated spam postings may be removed by a Debate Sysop/Moderator. Editors may freely inquire of any Debate Sysop/Moderator, along with a brief explanation of cause, for removing such spam postings.
  • Users are encouraged to cite specifically a limited number of scriptures to make any point, preferably counting on one hand, as a courtesy to other readers and participants.
  • Original postings are to be left intact. No inserting of commentary or challenge into an original posting made by another user, and thereby disrupting, interrupting or breaking up the flow of the thought or argument of the posting. Any editor can remove it, especially the original posting editor, as an attempt at spamming or vandalism, obscuring the point of the posting.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Protagonist section must be made in the Antagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Protagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.
    —Opposing comments or challenges to particular points in the Antagonist section must be made in the Protagonist section or Open discussion section, citing the Antagonist point being challenged by the opposing or objecting user. A quote box of the point being challenged by an opposing editor is encouraged.}}
  • No personal attacks, such as impugning another editor as a Nazi or anti-Christ are allowed, and the offending posting can be removed in its entirety by any user.

Note: The original stated titles of the "Yes" and "No" sides of the debate have been revised.[1]

Protagonist: The church headed by the bishop of Rome is an apostate church

  • Isaiah 28:16 - Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
  • Matthew 16:18 - That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church
  • 1 Corinthians 14:33 - God is not the author of confusion[2]

Christ is the foundation stone or rock that the Christian church is built upon, not Peter. This confusion, authored by the author of confusion and father of lies,[3] is the source of all the confusion regarding the claims to "authority" by Roman Catholic doctrine.

One mediator

The Catechism of the Catholic Church in sum essentially reads,

  • We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves
  • 2 Corinthians 13:1 - This is the third time I am coming to you. Every charge must be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
  • 1 Timothy 2:5 - there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus
Official Roman Catholic teaching supplants the bible in authority (Catholic teaching believes :God's word is "evolving"), says
  • CCC 1456 - "When Christ's faithful strive to confess all the sins that they can remember, they undoubtedly place all of them before the divine mercy for pardon. But those who fail to do so and knowingly withhold some, place nothing before the divine goodness for remission through the mediation of the priest".[4]
Jesus says in the resurrection we are sexless:
  • Matthew 22:30 - For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.
Yet the Roman Catholic church teaches
  • CCC 969 - "the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix."[5]

Salvation by grace

God says,

  • Ephesians 2:8 - by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God
  • Acts 19:2 - “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

However Roman Catholic catechism teaches that grace and salvation is earned, and that the Holy spirit is given through water baptism.

  • CCC 2010 - “Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life.[6]

To restate, "we can then merit for ourselves...the graces needed...for the attainment of eternal life." This is a denial of salvation by grace (grace is not grace) and a doctrine, or another gospel of salvation by works.[7] The Roman Catholic catechism teaches that the Holy Spirit is given through water baptism.

  • CCC 1999 - “infused by the Holy Spirit into our soul to heal it of sin and to sanctify it. It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism.”

The Christian is not under law

God says,

  • Romans 6:14 - ye are not under law but under grace
  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse

The Apostle Peter rebukes the Roman Church's claim to "authority":

  • 1 Peter 5:2-3 - Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.[8]

The sacraments cannot save

The sacraments of the Roman Catholic church are works of the law. God says,

  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse[9]
  • Ephesians 2:8-9a - by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works

The Roman Catholic church teaches of a false gospel of salvation by works. Paul says,

  • Galatians 1:6-9 - I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.[10]
  • Galatians 2:16 - by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.

Whereas the Roman Catholic church teaches, among other strange and non-biblical doctrines,

  • CCC 1471 - "The doctrine and practice of indulgences in the Church are closely linked to the effects of the sacrament of Penance. What is an indulgence? 'An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain prescribed conditions through the action of the Church which, as the minister of redemption, dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions of Christ and the saints.' 'An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it removes either part or all of the temporal punishment due to sin.' The faithful can gain indulgences for themselves or apply them to the dead." [boldface emphasis added]
  • CCC 1478 - "An indulgence is obtained through the Church who, by virtue of the power of binding and loosing granted her by Christ Jesus, intervenes in favor of individual Christians and opens for them the treasury of the merits of Christ and the saints to obtain from the Father of mercies the remission of the temporal punishments due for their sins. Thus the Church does not want simply to come to the aid of these Christians, but also to spur them to works of devotion, penance, and charity.
  • CCC 1498 - "Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in Purgatory."
  • CCC 1472 - "...On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called Purgatory. This purification frees one from what is called the "temporal punishment" of sin..."

The Roman Catholic Church teaches sacraments are works[11]

God says,

  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse[12]
  • CCC 2068 - "The Council of Trent teaches that the Ten Commandments are obligatory for Christians and that the justified man is still bound to keep them; the Second Vatican Council confirms: "The bishops, successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord . . . the mission of teaching all peoples, and of preaching the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain salvation through faith, Baptism and the observance of the Commandments."[13]
Hence, per the Bible, adherents and practitioners of the Roman Catholic faith are under a curse and not redeemed by the blood of Jesus.[14] User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 12:33, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

The parallels between apostate Israel and the apostate Roman church are unmistakable.

  • Matthew 15:8-9 - This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.
  • Mark 7:13 - making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.

There is a straight line of continuity from Moses at Mt. Sinai to the Council of Trent as a doctrine of law, hence Isaiah 28:14 and the two scriptures cited above do apply. You have rejected grace, as Israel in the wilderness did. Ye are under a curse. User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 14:08, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

We've already proven at least 5 times your catechism is a fraud. You're just digging your hole deeper in rebellion against God and God's word. User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 12:55, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
  • Hebrews 3:19 - So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.[15]
Unbelief in God's word. User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 12:59, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
Unbelief is a lack of faith.
  • Hebrews 4:2 - but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
Unbelief, or a lack of faith, is disobedience.[16]

Antagonist: No, the gates of hell have never prevailed against the church Jesus built on a rock so that it never committed apostasy from the faith, because Jesus remains with the church always to the end of the world, and the Spirit of truth is with the church for ever leading into all the truth as Jesus promised, and Jesus is God Who cannot lie.

User: IndependentSkeptic

  • According to the above argument, the gates of hell have prevailed against the church Jesus founded on a rock, and therefore it cannot be the pillar and ground of the truth as Paul testified it is. Your position is that Jesus failed to fulfill his promise. You make Jesus out to be a liar. That is antichrist.
  • Jesus said by his own divine authority that the gates of hell shall never prevail against the church he built.
  • But you say it happened.
  • Jesus said by his own divine authority that he is with us (addressed to the apostles) always, to the end of the world.
  • But you say he did not remain always with their appointed apostolic successors in the church he founded, the church that still exists to this day.
  • Jesus said another Counsellor, the Spirit of truth given by the Father would be with us for ever, and that the Spirit of truth would guide us into all the truth.
  • But you say he did not remain with the church for ever, and did not continuously guide the church into all the truth for ever, from the time of the apostles to this present day.
  • Paul said the church is the household of God, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom we also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
  • But you say the church is no longer the pillar of the truth and a holy temple in the Lord and a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. And you say that the same church as identified by an unbroken continuous line of apostolic succession is built on the lies and blasphemies of Satan, and not the truth.
  • Paul said in the church God has appointed apostles, prophets, teachers, workers of miracles, healers, helpers, administrators, and speakers in various languages; and that in the church are bishops, presbyteroi (priests/elders), and deacons.
  • But you say these are done away by the Bible as the sole rule of faith and authority.
  • Paul said that all authority is established by God, and whoever resists authority resists what God has established, and that those who resist what God has established will be condemned.
  • But you say that true Christians are duty-bound to resist the established authority of the church when they personally judge that it is wrong, and not to listen.
  • Peter said to submit to the elders and be clothed with humility, for God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble, and therefore to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God that in due time he may exalt you.
  • But you say we are not obligated to submit to others' authority.
  • The Letter to the Hebrews says to obey our leaders who spoke the word of God to us, in the historical context, those leaders of the existing church in the first century established since the time of the apostles.
  • But you say we should disobey the leaders of the church who have preserved the Bible and draw doctrine directly from it as the word of God that they speak in every celebration of the Catholic Mass.
  • Jesus said that anyone who will not listen to the church is to be rejected as the Jews rejected tax collectors and pagans, and said that whoever has an ear is to listen to what the Spirit says to the churches.
  • But you praise those who did not and do not listen to the church Jesus built on a rock and who did not and do not listen to the churches that have continually existed since the first century, both at the time John wrote the book of Revelation and since that time to the present day.
  • Jesus said that unless a man is regenerated by water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Paul washed away his sins by being baptized, and Peter said that baptism saves now; and Paul, again, that God saves us in virtue of his own mercy by the water-washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, and that God loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.
  • But you say that baptism does not save and does not regenerate and does not cleanse away sin or wash away sin by water and the word.
  • James says that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
  • But you say that faith alone justifies, not works.
  • Jesus and Paul both say that all will be judged according to their works.
  • But you say no believer saved by faith alone will be judged.
  • Jesus said to the apostles, "Whosesoever sins you forgive are forgiven, and whosesoever sins you retain are retained." The entire context of the New Testament warns that we can fall away and forfeit eternal life by mortal sins "unto death", but that we can be brought back by confession to those entrusted with the ministry of reconciliation and absolution as ambassadors of God, God speaking by them, for if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. It was not to them alone that it was said, but to us on whom the end of the ages has come.
  • But you say that this is idolatry and a demonic doctrine, that no one has been given the power of God to forgive sins.
  • Jesus said that his flesh and blood are real food and drink, and that unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood you do not have life in you, and that whoever eats his flesh and drinks his blood has eternal life. (the word for "eat" trogŏn τρώώγων in John 6:27-58 is not figurative or metaphorical in the Greek text, but only literal and physical in meaning[17])
  • But you say this is only a metaphor and does not and never did literally mean eating and drinking his flesh and blood, and that communion does not give eternal life.
Catholics believe the word of Christ and what he promised forever.

For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God. But it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has commissioned us; he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.
—2 Corinthians 1:20-22

From the first century to the present day there have been those who disobeyed their leaders who spoke the word of God, rejected the traditions of the apostles, and insisted on private interpretation of the scriptures, who went out and taught a different gospel than the one delivered to them by their teachers, and who by this visible pattern of behavior showed that they were antichrists.
According to history the Catholic Church dominated and led by its leaders as shepherds of the flock having established authority to make disciples of all nations, was not founded by those who disobeyed, went out, and taught a different gospel from the one they had been taught. The question of who has the true doctrine of Christ is settled by scripture, as outlined above. Ask this question about those who founded your church, and about those who do not profess any particular church but claim the authority of the Bible alone as interpreted by themselves: did they and do they disbelieve and disobey Hebrews 13:7,17; Galatians 1:6-9; 1 John 2:18-19; John 14:16; 16:13 and 15:1-6. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:00, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

User: NishantXavier

No, the gates of hell have not prevailed against the Church built on the earthly Rock of St. Peter, with the heavenly Rock remaining Jesus Christ Our Lord. 2000 years of Church History bear witness to the Truth of Our Lord's Promise. God's Word attests it, history confirms it, and it's the Truth. The Church of Christ is the Catholic Church. God desires all Christians to be One in Full Communion with the Church and with each other. That's why He appointed St. Peter as the Head Bishop or First Pope of the Church, named him the visible Rock of the Church (Himself being the invisible Rock), and desired that all Christians look to the Pope as to the Chief Shepherd of Christ's Flock on Earth. If we all did that, all Christians would be One. User:NishantXavier|NishantXavierUser talk:NishantXavier|For Christ the King 11:14, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Unresolved

Both sides of the Debate on this page and the Talk page have made abundantly clear the irreconcilable differences in the doctrines of grace, and in the doctrines of the authority of the church.

Open discussion

Protagonist:

God says,

  • Ephesians 2:8 - by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God
  • Acts 19:2 - “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

However Roman Catholic catechism teaches that grace and salvation is earned, and that the Holy spirit is given through water baptism.

False. CCC 2010: "no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion." (CCC 1996-2011)
Your "water baptism" comment is a misrepresentation, by carefully omitting an important teaching of the Bible. In Acts 19:1-6 Paul explained why John's water baptism was insufficient (vv.4-5). John's baptism, though it required repentance, yet looked forward to the coming of the One for whom John was a forerunner (Jesus). Jesus had not yet died when John baptized people. His was a baptism of preparation looking forward to Jesus' death. "Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." This shows that John's water baptism unto repentance cannot be the water baptism which Jesus commanded people to receive under the gospel (Matthew 28:19). Christians are baptized into his death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12) "by the washing of water by the word" (Ephesians 5:26). John's disciples were not. So then they were baptized by Paul.[18] --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 06:36, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

We've been over this a dozen times. The gospel was preached to Israel in the wilderness. King David had the Holy Spirit. Job was "perfect and upright." Zacharias and Elisabeth were both "righteous before God", as was Abel. Simeon (Luke 2:25) was "just and devout". In all these cases Jesus had not yet died either. There is only one way a sinner can be declared righteous before God.[19] The Law cannot make righteous.[20] You apparently do not understand what the gospel is. User:RobSmith

Oh yes He did! John 3:5 "Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born [regenerated] of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
"Regenerate" in John 3:3-5 is the Greek γεννηθή gennethe.
The words γεννηθή gennethe and γεννηθήναι gennethenai in the Greek New Testament text of John 3:3-5 mean to procreate, regenerate, bear, beget, be born, conceive, a variation of γένος genos, meaning born, offspring, generation, stock.[21] This "born" (as being literally "generated/regenerated") is the ordinary word for "born".

"Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word."
See also interlinear text of Titus 3:5 multiple versions of Titus 3:5 and multiple commentaries on Titus 3:5.
"he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior". The Greek word for "washing" in this text means "water-washing"—"he saved us...by the water-washing of regeneration".
The word of God is the word spoken simultaneously with the action of pouring, immersing or sprinkling of water in the sacrament of baptism to wash away all sins,[22] "I baptize you in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen." (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16.) This is "baptismal regeneration". It is Jesus Himself Who baptizes through the ministry of the members of His Own Body the Church in which He dwells always together with the Holy Spirit of truth with us foe ever.
Not one of those who claim to have been baptized in the Spirit by faith alone has ever been told at the decisive moment they accepted Christ as their personal Lord and Savior, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" before they were plunged into water as their testimony of salvation (especially at the moment when they accepted Him sitting in the pew or decided to accept him by faith when they were alone—they certainly did not hear the words, "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", at that moment of decision).
So from the whole context of the scriptures we can know that Jesus commanded water baptism. The Catholic doctrine of water baptism is biblical. It's the doctrine of the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, led into all the truth for ever by the Spirit of truth with us for ever. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:07, 30 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

On a side point, you appear to be misreading Acts 19:2 with this statement, "Christians are baptized into his death, burial, and resurrection...John's disciples were not." No, John's baptism is with water, Jesus' baptism is with the Holy Spirit. John says, "I baptize with water, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit." All of this runs contrary to Roman Catholic doctrine on water baptism, salvation, and receiving the Holy Spirit. User:RobSmith

Protagonist:

The Apostle Peter rebukes the Roman Church's claim to "authority":

  • 1 Peter 5:2-3 - Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being examples to the flock.[23]

The Apostle Peter also commanded the flock of Christ to honor the pagan emperor (Nero at the time of writing).

  • 1 Peter 2:17 - Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.[24]

1 Peter 5:2-3 (quoted above) is pastoral counsel to those who have the oversight of the flock of God. He did not contradict the fact that they do have the oversight as elders and leaders and shepherds that we are bound to obey.

  • Hebrews 13:17 - Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.[25]

There is no denying that elders and leaders and shepherds of the flock of God (but not all) have abused their office just as Nero abused the office of emperor, and they will all be called to account for it. We are still commanded to honor all men, to love the brotherhood of the church, and to honor even wicked leaders like Nero, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way, and we too will be called to account for our behavior. "For he will render to every man according to his works" (Romans 2:6; Revelation 22:12)

  • 1 Timothy 2:1-3 - First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.[26]

This is the ultimate fulfillment of God's commandment to honor our fathers and mothers, even if they are wicked, and to obey the judges of the people, even if they are wicked. "You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people." (Exodus 20:12; 22:28; Deuteronomy 17:9-13; Matthew 23:2-3; John 19:10-11)

  • 1 Peter 2:18 - Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward ["but also to the overbearing" RSVCE]

--[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Yes, for the carnally minded and those walking in the flesh that's good advice, too. You just can't seem to wrap your head around the word "obey". To the spiritual believer, to "obey" means to trust and believe God. To the natural man and carnal mind, "obey" means to follow orders to avoid a spanking. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 09:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
And throughout all your spam postings, your point comes through clearly - you claim the Roman Church is God. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 09:24, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
God is not a tyrant who rules by threats and intimidation. But you make him out to be such and claim the Roman Church is here to enforce his diktats. This is the opposite of grace. User:RobSmith

I cited the scriptures (I had help.) "The law" in all of Paul's letters refers to "the law of Moses".[27] The Bible commands obedience to authority—especially to the higher authorities. Even the congregation of the people of the Lord under the authority of the elders and leaders and shepherds of the flock of the Lord charged as guardians to feed them. Both Old Testament and New Testament, so that it is the will of God to obey those in authority, especially the higher authorities and leaders in the church, even if they are sinful men. This doctrine in the Bible is not the will of sinful men speaking according to their own corrupt and prideful fleshly carnal opinion, but the infallible word and will of God Himself. And the wrath of God is against the disobedient. On those who obey, grace is poured. On those who do not obey, who are factious and do not obey the truth but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury (Romans 2:8). This finally convinced me that the Reformers who disobeyed their leaders and went out from the church and taught a different doctrine were wrong, "not having the Spirit". Jude 19 "It is these who set up divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit." And as proof that it's talking about them and all like them, to this very day Reformation principles embraced by many independent-minded Christians have generated divisions for five hundred years on the ground that leaders can be disrespected and disobeyed and rebelled against, like in the example of Korah's rebellion against the priests of God who had the rule over them as Moses and Aaron. And the same thing was done by Jeroboam in 1 Kings 12:25-33 (esp. verse 31), and in 2 Chronicles 13:6-12, when he appointed priests of his own making who were not according to the will of the Lord, but apart from and in disobedient defiance of the scripture regarding the established authority of the priesthood of Aaron valid up to the time of the apostles whom Jesus Himself ordained ("I have chosen you and ordained you" Luke 22:29-30).
You, and all others of a mind like you, who reject the authority of the church to bind and to loose and to forgive or retain anyone's sins as they judge to be right according to the will of God as seen in the Bible, it is you who willfully set aside the word of God to set yourself above and apart as not obligated to obey Him, and as not obligated to obey the authority He has appointed, in what the Bible commands all men everywhere to do to fulfill His sovereign will, by submitting to the leaders who watch over your souls. You misapply the scriptures to justify yourselves, and it is they that speak against doing that. "Therefore, let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall." 1 Corinthians 10:12. St. Peter said that it is the ignorant and unstable who twist the scriptures to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:16-17. Those who will to not do the Father's will as not obligated in any way to obey it are deprived of grace, and lose what they thought they had. "Be careful how you hear. To him who has will more be given and he shall have abundance. But to him who has not, even what he thinks he has will be taken away." (Luke 8:18; Matthew 25:29)—unless you repent and confess that you have been determined according to your own opinion of private interpretation of the scriptures to justify yourselves as free to not obey the word of the Lord and as not being condemned for your self-willed rejection of what he has ordained and established so you can pick and choose what you like from the word of God and discard the rest you don't like, as Martin Luther did in judging the scriptures and rejecting four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) because they condemned disobedience and said that faith without works is dead and brings condemnation for being unfruitful. We can't earn salvation, but of those who are saved good works are required according to each one's ability, or they are worthless servants producing no fruit and they forfeit what they have through Christ alone, and are taken away and burned (John 15:1-8). --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:01, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

God says,

  • Galatians 3:10 - all who rely on works of the law are under a curse[28]

Yes. The works of the law of Moses. Not the works of righteous obedience in holiness, including respect for authority, as the Bible says, and the work that Christ Jesus Himself does in the sacraments ordained by Christ in the church as fountains of his grace flowing from his righteous sacrifice of his blood in the Holy Spirit on the cross, works He Himself does through the ministry of the church He built, led into all the truth forever by the Spirit of truth.
Antagonist:

CCC 1076 In this age of the Church Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls "the sacramental economy"; this is the communication (or "dispensation") of the fruits of Christ's Paschal mystery in the celebration of the Church's "sacramental" liturgy.
— http://scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s1.htm (boldface added)

--User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:20, 28 August 2020 (EDT) Protagonist:

  • Isaiah 28:14 - we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves

Isaiah is speaking of the disobedient Israelites who refused to respect and reverently obey the Covenant of the Lord. His word cannot be applied to the church Jesus built, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail and in which Jesus Himself and the Holy Spirit dwell together leading into all the truth.

CCC 1088 "To accomplish so great a work" ... "Christ is always present in his Church, especially in her liturgical celebrations. He is present in the Sacrifice of the Mass not only in the person of his minister, 'the same now offering, through the ministry of priests, who formerly offered himself on the cross,' but especially in the Eucharistic species. By his power he is present in the sacraments so that when anybody baptizes, it is really Christ himself who baptizes. He is present in his word since it is he himself who speaks when the holy Scriptures are read in the Church. Lastly, he is present when the Church prays and sings, for he has promised 'where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst of them."'
CCC 1089 "Christ, indeed, always associates the Church with himself in this great work in which God is perfectly glorified and men are sanctified. The Church is his beloved Bride who calls to her Lord and through him offers worship to the eternal Father."

Antagonist:

CCC 1076 In this age of the Church Christ now lives and acts in and with his Church, in a new way appropriate to this new age. He acts through the sacraments in what the common Tradition of the East and the West calls "the sacramental economy"; this is the communication (or "dispensation") of the fruits of Christ's Paschal mystery in the celebration of the Church's "sacramental" liturgy.
— http://scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s1.htm (boldface added)

"for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." Philippians 2:13.

"in hope of eternal life which God, who never lies, promised ages ago, and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior." Titus 1:2-3

--User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:45, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

The parallels between apostate Israel and the apostate Roman church are unmistakable.

  • Matthew 15:8-9 - This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.
  • Mark 7:13 - making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.

Context: Jesus is speaking of the Jews, and in particular of the Pharisees. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

There is a straight line of continuity from Moses at Mt. Sinai to the Council of Trent as a doctrine of law, hence Isaiah 28:14 and the two scriptures cited above do apply. You have rejected grace, as Israel in the wilderness did. Ye are under a curse. User:RobSmith

The law of Moses is one particular expression of the revealed will of God: justice and mercy and faith—keeping faith with God by eagerly doing what the Lord requires in being just, merciful, and humbly reverent in worship of Him. Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42.
Micah 6:8 "He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"
Matthew 23:37-40 "37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandmensts hang all the law and the prophets."
The Council of Trent and the Roman Catechism (the Catechism of the Council of Trent), the Baltimore Catechism, and the Second Vatican Council and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, all say the same, explaining the meaning of the will of God in practical detail, just as the New Testament does. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

We've already proven at least 5 times your catechism is a fraud. You're just digging your hole deeper in rebellion against God and God's word. User:RobSmith

Protagonist:

  • Hebrews 3:19 - So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.[29]
Unbelief in God's word. User:RobSmith

Fine. "Working together with him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain." 2 Corinthians 6:1. Believe what God has said, and with confidence full of hope in him obey the authority of the church He built on a rock as His Own Body and Temple, the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth, led into all truth for ever by the Spirit of truth. Jesus cannot lie. And the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, in this world or the next. The weeds will grow together until the time of harvest, and then they will be gathered and burned in the fire. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:05, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

"obey" means have faith. Why would anyone have faith in lies? And the Christian believer is not under law anyway. Does God command us to bow the knee to Satan? Satan is the god of this world.[30] User:RobSmith

It only seems like lies to you. The Christian believer is not under the authority of the law of Moses, but under the authority of Christ in the church rightly interpreting and rightly dividing the word (2 Timothy 2:15) and applying it according to the law of righteousness in the Holy Spirit. God does not command us to bow the knee to Satan, but to bow to the will of Christ the Lord who established his church which He built on a rock so that it cannot fall, for "Every knee shall bow and every tongue proclaim to the glory of God the Father: Jesus Christ is Lord" That is the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, in which He dwells as Lord and Savior, and the Holy Spirit leading into all the truth forever, just as Jesus promised. And God cannot lie. Jesus did not fail to keep his promise that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church he built on a rock. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:25, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

"To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure: their very minds and consciences are corrupted. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds; they are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good deed" Titus 1:15-16. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is pure and rich in holy scripture supporting her authority and the truth of her doctrine. You say it is Satanic (the scribes and Pharisees said the same about Jesus). You seem unable to see its purity and holiness (Ephesians 5:25-27). You have been deceived and blinded by the God of this world. And the promise of Christ is fulfilled in her, as the promise of Him Who Cannot Lie. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 13:29, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

You either can't read or are just playing stupid now. I just cited above CCC 2068 "the Ten Commandments are obligatory". Get thee behind me, Satan. User:RobSmith

In saying that, you are asserting that we are freed from the law forbidding worship of other gods, that we don't have to worship God at all, that we are free to make idols of other (pagan) gods, free to blaspheme the name of God, free to work every single day so as not to attend to worship of God at any time or regard any day as holy to the Lord and not rest or allow anyone else to rest from crushing compulsive labor, free to dishonor our fathers and mothers and do nothing good to them or for them or help them in any way, free to kill as we please and maim and murder anyone, free to commit adultery and sexual perversions of any kind, free to steal anything from anyone at any time anywhere, free to commit perjury in court when summoned to testify in order to destroy the innocent by supporting a false conviction leading to a sentence of wrongful imprisonment or execution, free to covet what others have by hating their benefits and advantages that belong only to them as their rightful possession and dignity and to no one else, free to try to deprive them of their spouse, their employees and servants, their livestock, and anything that is theirs.
You are saying no Christian is under any obligation to avoid these sins because the Christian is not under the law of condemnation for sins committed and therefore is free to do as he pleases. That's the evil counsel of Antinomianism and immorally corrupt Licentiousness. I've already shown that Paul himself condemns this whole idea. We are not to yield ourselves to wickedness. He made this clear in Romans 8: "To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace." (verse 6). John says the same thing:

"Little children, let no one deceive you. He who does right is righteous, as he is righteous. He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning."

To rebel against the law of God is Satanic. Peter also says about all disobedient and licentious libertines who obey no law and acknowledge no authority outside themselves,

"the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority. Bold and wilful, they are not afraid to revile the glorious ones [saints and angels], whereas angels, though greater in might and power [than they], do not pronounce a reviling judgment upon them before the Lord. But these, like irrational animals, creatures of instinct, born to be caught and killed, reviling in matters of which they are ignorant, will be destroyed in the same destruction with them, suffering wrong for their wrongdoing. They count it pleasure to revel in the daytime. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their dissipation, carousing with you. They have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls. They have hearts trained in greed. Accursed children! Forsaking the right way they have gone astray; they have followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved gain from wrongdoing, but was rebuked for his own transgression; a dumb ass spoke with human voice and restrained the prophet's madness. These are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm; for them the nether gloom of darkness has been reserved. For, uttering loud boasts of folly, they entice with licentious passions of the flesh men who have barely escaped from those who live in error. They promise them freedom, but they themselves are slaves of corruption; for whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved. For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire (sewage).

You condemn the Ten Commandments as a curse. That's wrong. We are not free to sin. We must obey righteousness, as expressed in the law of God about righteousness and the doctrine of the church—justice, mercy, and humility before God. Your "gospel of grace" as you define it gives liberty to sin without fear of judgment or condemnation. But the "yoke" of Christ sets free from the bondage of sin, and purifies us from all unrighteousness by the power of the grace of his sacraments administered by Him through his body the church, the pillar and foundation of the truth, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 14:51, 28 August 2020 (EDT) Protagonist:

I never said or implied anything of the sort. God is not a slave driver. God want's the Christian believer to serve him out of a clean and willing heart, not under compunction and fear. That's all the gospel of grace is about. God is not trying to coerce anyone with threats of damnation. God desires sincerity.

  • Psalm 51:6 - Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.

If licentiousness is the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear ye are not under law but under grace, you probably don't have that truth in the inward parts. Salvation and grace cannot be merited or earned. You need to repent, accept God's grace, and begin living life in the spirit. User:RobSmith

Yes! Salvation and grace and justification cannot be earned by us by ourselves alone! Jesus saves, and gives us the power to become sons of God (John 1:12-13). That is the doctrine of the Magisterium in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1965–2029). --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

Both sides of the Debate on this page and the Talk page have made abundantly clear the irreconcilable differences in the doctrines of grace, and in the doctrines of the authority of the church.
I have said all that is necessary to help expose the nature of both.
Christians are not under the law of Moses, but are under what Paul calls the law of Christ as realized in the authority of the Catholic Church to preach and teach the law of righteousness in the doing of good works as the law of God, and the dire consequences of refusal to act righteously, justly, mercifully and godly in all humility of heart, in opposition to the love of God. (Micah 6:8).
At the heart of the debate is the issue of Free will. The real threat of actual judgment is in reality a mercy from God who is not willing that any should perish. (A godly fear and terror of judgment, by the grace of God.) It can actually help bring the non-Christian sinner to repentance and salvation through Christ Jesus alone, and bring back the Christian sinner from the error of his way and save him from death (James 5:19-20).
We can obey for the love of God, joyfully and wholeheartedly because it is right and just to do so, and knowing the Lord is truly worthy of all our love;
or we can obey because it is right to do so, out of fear of the righteous judgment of God, maybe reluctantly, or even compulsorily for the sake of survival, feeling that there really is no alternative or acceptable choice, because we do fear the loss of heaven and the everlasting pains of hell, knowing that God who is merciful and just and righteous and holy commands doing what is right, so we firmly resolve not to do anything evil or sinful as far as possible;
or we can refuse to obey the will of God, and "break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us" (Psalm 2:3), because "now there is no condemnation", and suffer the consequences for our boldness in the face of God's sovereign Lordship as if rebelling against a tyrant. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 15:20, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Well, that's interesting, cause that now puts you at odds with the official doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. User:RobSmith

Not at all. The law of Christ as I have relatively expressed it is a brief summary of the official doctrine of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, beginning with Part Three, Section One, Chapter Three, Article 1: The Moral Law
I have nothing else to add to this Debate. Peace be with you. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 16:05, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Go ahead, be in denial. For the third time in this section CCC 2068 "the Ten Commandments are obligatory". The law was only our schoolmaster.

  • Galatians 3:24-25 - the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.[31]

If you choose to continue under a schoolmaster and a curse, good luck. User:RobSmith

See the article Great Apostasy. The Protestant Reformers disobeyed, went out, and preached another gospel than the one they had received in the church, perverting the gospel of Christ. They proclaimed that the gates of hell had long prevailed against the Church and that the Holy Spirit had utterly departed from the Church, and that the Beast Antichrist and Satan together ruled as the spirit of the Church turning the Church into the Whore of Babylon. The very desire to live a good life by humbly receiving the sacraments of grace in worship and doing good works pleasing to God—justice, mercy—was condemned as blasphemous impiety and bondage to the law, meriting only the curse of God, and more dangerous than sin. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 17:49, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Martin Luther wrote this about a good life manifested by good works:

There is no more dangerous, more pernicious scandal than a good life exteriorly manifested by good works. Those pious souls who do good to gain the Kingdom of Heaven not only will never succeed, but they must even be reckoned among the impious; and it is more important to guard them against good works than against sin.
—Works of Luther, Wittenberg, Vol. VI, 160 [32]

No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. - Martin Luther Letter to Melancthon, 13.[33]

--User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 18:00, 28 August 2020 (EDT) Protagonist:

What does that have to do with receiving the sacraments? RobSTrump 2Q2Q 18:16, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

It has to do with the biblical and Catholic doctrine of the necessity of good works to bear fruit to eternal life by those who have already first been saved and justified by unmerited grace (CCC 1996-2011), dismissed by Martin Luther as an evil doctrine worse than sin. And by you as being under "the curse of the law". --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 23:26, 28 August 2020 (EDT) Protagonist:

Bull. It's a whataboutism that has nothing to do with the alleged "authority" of the Roman Catholic church and/or the fact salvation through sacraments is unbiblical. Please stick to the topic. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 23:42, 28 August 2020 (EDT)
If you want to debate Martin Luther, create a page, Debate: Are the teachings of Martin Luther biblical, or some such. He doesn't bolster any of your arguments in the least. User:RobSmith

I have no intention of debating Martin Luther, only defending the promise of Christ that the gates of hell never will prevail against the doctrine of the church he built and have never prevailed in spite of the scandal of those whose lives have clearly violated the doctrine and holiness of the Church. I've done that here. I don't need to add to it, you would only try to provoke more debate, and it's not necessary. You've presented your case. I'm not convinced that Jesus failed to fulfill his promise. Jesus didn't lie. He cannot lie. And that's where it sits. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

The problem you have is in claiming the validity of your interpretation of Matthew 16:18, on which the entire monstrosity of Roman Catholic doctrine is built. All the other scriptural evidence, that the foundation stone laid in Zion is Christ, not Peter, weighs against your claims that the catechism, encyclicals, traditions, etc have nullified biblical teaching. User:RobSmith

You've insisted over and over again that the Catholic Church is an institution of sinful men led by sinful men. OK, Peter says to "obey every human institution' RSV "submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake" KJV - part of the whole passage in the Bible of 1 Peter 2:13-17. So where do you get off saying it's right to not submit and not obey sinful men leading the Catholic Church? As Dataclarifier pointed out, the Catholic Church wasn't founded by anybody disobeying and refusing to submit to the leaders of their church and went out and taught a different doctrine than what they'd been taught and established a different church. It's the Church, so obey. You say it's a human institution, so obey. You're stuck in the fact you disobey even the Bible here. It doesn't matter if there are weeds among the wheat. They both are to grow together until the harvest. Obey the Bible and obey the Church. Not those who left. It's had authority for a long time. And every authority is established by God, and whoever resists the authority resists God. Romans 13. Those who left are antichrist. 1 John 2:18-19. So whichever way you turn, the Bible says to obey, but you don't want to. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 09:43, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Your whole argument appears to put words in one's mouth. Another deceptive lie. User:RobSmith

You use the Bible to contradict the Church and condemn it and its teaching which is from the Bible. Well, I've known a lot people who cited the Bible so that it even contradicts itself and say, "There! You see? It contradicts itself and even praises murderers and liars and adulterers. So the Bible can't be true! And you're an idiot if you think it is!" They abuse the Bible so they don't have to accept it. You do the same thing. You use the Bible against the Church. Well, the Bible can be used against you. And it can be used to support the Catholic Church. And it has and it does. I read it. When I found out what the Catholic Church actually teaches I was convicted of error and could see for myself from the Bible itself that it is the one true Church. Jesus is no liar. Who are you to say He did not fulfill his promise? I have an idea who you are, and it ain't good. Why should we listen to you when you won't even listen to the Bible? I think what Gamaliel said to the Sanhedrin applies to you, "IF it is of God, you cannot defeat it. You may even find yourself fighting against God." Acts 5:33-39. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 10:12, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

You use the Bible to twist God's word into lies. The Roman Catholic church rejects the authority of the Bible in favor of sinful men, i.e. the Magisterium. User:RobSmith

The Roman Catholic Church acknowledges entirely the authority of the Bible in support of the authority of the Catholic Church led by sinners redeemed and forgiven through Our Lord Jesus Christ and his blood shed for the sins of the whole world just as the Magisterium teaches and has always taught. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 11:28, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

That's specious reasoning; The Roman Church claims God's word is evolving and is overridden by the Magisterium. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 11:32, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
You yourself claim God allows sinful men to dictate what is now considered to be the Word of God. User:RobSmith

"There shall be one flock and one shepherd" John 10:16. And yet the Bible also says there are many elders as guardians whom God has appointed as shepherds to feed the flock, Peter himself being an elder among them, whom Jesus himself first appointed to feed his sheep and ewes and lambs. Acts 20:28 and 1 Peter 5:1-6 and John 21:15-17. The Letter to the Hebrews commands us to obey the leaders who spoke the word of God and watch over our souls. Hebrews 13:7,17. Paul insisted on being of "one mind" in the faith "striving side by side for the faith of the gospel". Philippians 1:27; 4:2. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 11:40, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

One flock and one shepherd = Jew + Gentile = Catholic. This isn't rocket science. ye are not under law but under grace, but the Judaizers kept preaching law.[34] User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 11:51, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

"Ye are not under the law of Moses". Paul's every reference to the law is to the law of Moses. Christians are not under the law of Moses, but the law of Christ, which includes being subject to men in the church. Jesus and Paul and Peter preached obedience to the authority of God in the church he built on a rock, and against it the gates of hell shall not prevail. Paul commanded Timothy and Titus to correct and rebuke "with all authority" in guarding the faith. 1 Timothy 4:11-12; 2 Timothy 1:14; Titus 2:15. And he condemned those who would not accept his authority; as did John those who would not accept his authority. 2 Corinthians 10:1-8; 11:12-15; 3 John 9-11. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, not on lies. And it is led into all truth forever by the saving grace of God through Christ alone in the Church he built on a rock, and he is with us always to the end of the world aeonos. The authority of the church is not a lie but truth. And we are commanded to obey that authority, not the law of Moses, but the authority established by God, not to abolish the law and the prophets but to rightly fulfill them in Christ Jesus (Matthew 5:17). Jesus who cannot lie did not fail to fulfill his promise that Satan, the power behind the gates of hell, shall not prevail against the church he built. Jesus cannot lie. So it has never been ruled by Satan. And its doctrine of unmerited grace according to the Catechism (Grace and Justification) is the truth of God straight from the Bible. For, "if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to naught: But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God." Acts 5:38b-39.
The Reformation taught for centuries that Catholicism and the Catholic Church would come to naught and be destroyed by God. It has never happened, and history is witness. Ye are not under the law of Moses, but are commanded to submit to the authority of the elders and leaders of the Church and their teaching. Because it is the pillar and ground of the truth, and the gates of hell shall never prevail against it. Even when there are weeds among the wheat that will have to be gathered out of the kingdom at harvest time and burned. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 12:31, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

ye are not under law but under grace. Right there, you just dispensed with grace once again. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 12:49, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
Law of Moses = law of God. The Christian is not under the law of God, which can only condemn and not save. The Christian believer is under the grace of God, which the Catechism of the Catholic Church denies.[35] The grace of God, i.e. God not holding the sinner to account for his sins, is the Gospel. User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 12:53, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
  • all who rely on works of the law are under a curse;[36]
    User:RobSmith|RobSUser talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q 13:38, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

You have speciously redefined the law of God as limited strictly to the law of Moses. The law of God is obedience to his will. That is what the Bible commands and teaches. If the Christian is not under even the law (authority) of God the Christian is not obligated to obey even the will of God. Antinomianism and Licentiousness. Paul denounced that monstrous lie.

Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law. Romans 3:31

What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Romans 6:1-2

Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. Do not yield your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but yield yourselves to God as men who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments of righteousness. Romans 6:12-13

What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness. But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed. Romans 6:15-18

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23

So obedience leads to righteousness.

For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Gentile, but glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Gentile. For God shows no partiality. Romans 2:6-11

If as you say the Christian is not under even the law (authority) of God, then the Christian is not obligated to obey even God and is not obligated to obey the Bible the word of God, and we can freely do anything we please, even every kind of wickedness, because we are not under law and "there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus". But that is not the whole truth. For "in him is no sin". Paul said "every man" and that includes every Christian. Those who obey wickedness are not "in Christ"—"for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury." And those who disobey are severed from him and are not in Him. The Bible commands obedience for the sake of the Lord. 1 Peter 2:13.
You reject the obedience of righteousness unto life, the obedience of righteousness in seeking for glory and honor and immortality by works of doing good. Rejecting the grace of God to do good works is death. For the wages of sin is death. Christians are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:10. Therefore, what you propose is death. Not even obeying God. Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments" John 14:15; 15:10. When one came to him and asked what must he do to have eternal life, Jesus said, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments." Matthew 19:17b. John said, "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome." 1 John 5:3.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, with doctrine directly from the Bible, explains the keeping of the commandments (Part Three: Life in Christ - CCC 1691–2557)—love, mercy, humility, justice, respect for parents and those in authority, obedience to the will of God. Jesus did not fail to keep his promise to lead us into all the truth for ever by the Holy Spirit of truth, and remain always to the end of the world. And the Bible tells us to obey the leaders of the church.
You say to disobey the Catholic Church. You say that obedience is against the gospel of grace. The doctrine of disobedience and rebellion against the authority of the church Jesus built on a rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, is a doctrine not of God. You reject the grace bestowed on the Church, reject the grace of salvation through the Church, reject the grace of the sacraments He ordained to bestow grace unto salvation and for the upbuilding of the church, reject the grace of the established authority of the most senior-ranking leading elders and shepherds of the Church led into all the truth by the Spirit of truth, and reject the grace of being united to the Body and Blood of Christ in the Church he built on the rock of Peter and continued with, always, to the end of the world. Your "gospel of grace" is a false gospel of libertinism and licentiousness and antinomianism, opposed to the word of Christ Jesus in his promise regarding the church he built, a false gospel rooted in disobedience and contempt for authority established by God. Your "gospel of grace" is the rebellion of Korah, Numbers 16 (see Jude 8-11), and is the rebellion rooted in the first rebel who would not obey the authority of God, and fell, being cast out (Revelation 12:7-10).
I will have nothing more to do with you (Titus 3:10-11) --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 14:29, 27 August 2020 (EDT) Protagonist:

You can spam all you want. The bottomline is we have already proved both the Magisterium and Catechism contradict the Bible. The only question is, Why? Answer: Pride. User:RobSmith

You keep spamming the same lie! Practical (actual) Spiritual Disobedience, Rebellion, Licentiousness, Libertinism, Antinomianism, Anarchism, Amorality, Individualism. Your real disobedience is in not believing Jesus, in not believing what God Himself said, in not believing the Bible! --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 19:57, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
The spiritual definition of obedience is actively choosing and doing what is right, not solely believing alone, but actually doing what God commands, the will of the Father.
The spiritual definition of disobedience is not choosing to do what is right in deeds of wickedness and unrighteousness, by relying solely on believing alone, and not striving with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength to do what God commands, and not acting according to the will of the Father.
See Luke 6:46; Matthew 7:21; James 1:22 and James 4:17; 1 John 3:18
Faith that bears fruit in deeds of love and mercy fulfills the law of God, "the doers of the law". Romans 2:13 and James 2:24 and John 15:2. See Corporal and spiritual works of mercy.
If you don't do good works as he commands and bear fruit in righteousness, you reject the Gospel; and the Son of man on his glorious throne, and all the angels with him, will say to you, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels" Matthew 25:41 (context Matthew 25:31-46); Romans 2:9. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 01:49, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Maybe we're making progress here. The spiritual definition of disobedience is not believing God. It appears you just acknowledged that. Disobedience is not necessarily breaking a line item of the 613 commandments or decalogue. Praise God! We may have a spiritual breakthrough! User:RobSmith

all who rely on works of the law of Moses are under a curse. All who act and do works according to the law of righteousness are justified. "The doers of the law are justified." Romans 2:13. "Do we nullify the law by faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Romans 3:31. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Revelation 2–3. Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls. Hebrews 13:7,17. There is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore anyone who resists the authority resists what God has appointed, and those that resist will incur judgment. Romans 13:1-2. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matthew 16:18-19. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them. Whose sins you retain and do not remove are retained and not removed. John 20:23. God has entrusted to them the ministry of reconciliation as the ambassadors of God who speak for God. 2 Corinthians 5:18-20. If anyone will not listen to the church, let him be to you as a sinful publican and an unbelieving pagan. Matthew 18:17. Why do you call Me Lord, and not do what I say? Luke 6:46-49; Matthew 7:21-27. "He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." John 8:47. --User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic (User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk) 03:21, 28 August 2020 (EDT)

Protagonist:

Nice try, but you can't around ye are under grace and not under law. I guess you're just not among the ye. User:RobSmith

Angry observer

Un-ask the debate question/category error

This doesn't belong to either side of the debate, but it has to go somewhere.

You don't even understand the expression "gates of hell". Jesus said what he meant in an unusual way, probably to make it lively to the imagination.

He meant he had the devil on the run and in stronghold after stronghold (of the devil's) and in city after city (of the devil's), he and his disciples were breaking through, besieging the gates of hell to rescue the sinners inside, so "the gates of hell" were taking a beating, being broken, knocked over, bent and dented all over the place, passed through and its city's inhabitants rescued!

You're not in a position to know; you could mount an attack against a devil's stronghold anytime you want, but you try to abuse Conservapedia instead, and then because your attitude is so passive, you don't see that knowledge of anyone being rescued from Satan counts as his gates not prevailing and instead feel the need for us! to tell you what amounts to, in your ignorance, asking if it's even still happening or not! Newsflash!: Wherever those gates are being smashed into by groups of Christians of every stripe, the gates of hell are already failing to prevail!

The "Church" is not an "institution"; look what happens to people like you who think it is! Once again, you are completely wrong!

User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan (User talk:VargasMilan|talk) Wednesday, 22:16, 26 August 2020 (EDT)

See also

References

  1. ↑ click here to see the original wording of the two sides of the debate - scroll to bottom of the page.
  2. ↑ https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-33.htm
  3. ↑ https://biblehub.com/john/8-44.htm
  4. ↑ https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c2a4.htm#1456
  5. ↑ http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm#969
  6. ↑ http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm#2010
  7. ↑
    • Galatians 1:8 - if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
    • 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 - But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him (ye might well bear with him is explained in verse 19, For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise.)
      The Roman church preaches that the foundation stone laid in Zion is Peter, not Jesus and another gospel of salvation by works.
  8. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%205:2-3
  9. ↑ https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm
  10. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+1%3A6-9&version=KJV
  11. ↑ http://justforcatholics.org/a14.htm
  12. ↑ https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm
  13. ↑ http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2068.htm
  14. ↑ https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-13.htm
  15. ↑ https://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-19.htm
  16. ↑ Heb. 3:18, 4:6.
  17. ↑ https://sermonwriter.com/bittpsblical-commentary/john-651-58/ John 6:51-58 Biblical Commentary (Bible study) John 6:51-58
    http://shamelesspopery.com/what-if-the-protestant-interpretation-of-john-6-is-correct/ What if the Protestant Interpretation of John 6 is Correct?
  18. ↑ See https://www.gospelway.com/topics/salvation/baptism-john.php The Baptism of John the Baptist, David E. Pratte.
    See also Catechism of the Catholic Church CCC 1213-1228.
  19. ↑ Question:
    • Romans 4:1 - What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
    Answer:
    • Romans 4:21 - being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform, i.e., the resurrection.
      All these Old Testament figures, Abraham, Job, David, Zacharias and Elizabeth, Simeon, Anna, Abel and others had faith in God and the resurrection, (or new life in Christ), knowing that whatsoever He had promised he was able to deliver. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen. They didn't have to wait for Jesus to be born, crucified, and resurrected to be 'born again' and receive the Holy Spirit. They were all declared righteous by simply believing what God promised, or faith. Faith is obedience.
  20. ↑ https://biblehub.com/library/augustine/anti-pelagian_writings/chapter_16_x_how_the_law.htm
  21. ↑ See Strong's numbers 1078, 1079, 1080, 1081, 1083, 1084, 1085.
  22. ↑ See Acts 22:16; Ephesians 5:26.
  23. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%205:2-3
  24. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%202:17
  25. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2013:17
  26. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202:1-4
  27. ↑ https://biblehub.com/topical/l/law.htm The Topical Bible: "Law"
  28. ↑ https://biblehub.com/galatians/3-10.htm
  29. ↑ https://biblehub.com/hebrews/3-19.htm
  30. ↑ https://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/4-4.htm
  31. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A24-25&version=KJV
  32. ↑ Luther Said: Doing Good Is More Dangerous Than Sinning - Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com)
  33. ↑ Dr. Martin Luther's Saemmtliche Schriften, Letter No. 99 http://www.earlychurchofjesus.org/martin_luther.htm
  34. ↑ https://www.biblehub.com/galatians/2-14.htm
  35. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A23-25&version=KJV
  36. ↑ https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A10-14&version=ESV

Having removed the spam and disruptive insertions, this is the way the page should be, according to the counsel of User:Conservative regarding orderly and organized Debate pages. Having posted this, I have nothing more to say. I'm done with this project. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 14:52, 1 September 2020 (EDT)

Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:IndependentSkeptic&oldid=1681479"