Difference between revisions of "Talk:Debate: Have the gates of hell prevailed against the church Jesus founded on a rock, when He Himself said it could never happen? Did Christ who cannot lie fail to fulfill his promise?"
m (→IndependentSkeptic: linked John 9:39-41 to five versions - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+9%3A39-41&version=DRA;KJV;ESV;NIV;NABRE) |
|||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
:::Oh, the [[Truth (logic|logic]] is inescapable! Only someone like yourself blinded by [[confirmation bias]] can't see it. <br>Look at [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+9%3A39-41&version=DRA;KJV;ESV;NIV;NABRE '''John 9:39-41''']. --[[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic]] ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk]]) 10:56, 27 August 2020 (EDT) | :::Oh, the [[Truth (logic|logic]] is inescapable! Only someone like yourself blinded by [[confirmation bias]] can't see it. <br>Look at [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+9%3A39-41&version=DRA;KJV;ESV;NIV;NABRE '''John 9:39-41''']. --[[User:IndependentSkeptic|IndependentSkeptic]] ([[User talk:IndependentSkeptic|talk]]) 10:56, 27 August 2020 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Catechism teaches grace is merited. It's already cited in mainspace. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 11:03, 27 August 2020 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:03, August 27, 2020
I set up the debate page with a "Yes" and "No" format, but I will not participate. I have made my view known on other debate pages listed on this debate page under the See also section. May God bless you all. Pax vobiscum. --Dataclarifier (talk) 21:19, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- Good. Be a slacker. My response will serve as the response of the community, and if you try this stunt again, I'll pursue getting it deleted with the assistance of RobS. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 22:22, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
The title of this debate is unacceptable
Neither I nor RobSmith will accept a Debate whose title is based on such a loaded premise. We reject the very notion that the Roman Catholic Church as it exists today is the same church that "Jesus founded on the a rock" and that "the gates of Hell will not prevail against." Shobson20 (talk) 22:05, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- The question, as stated, makes little sense, needs to be shortened, and re-phrased.
- My guess is DC wants to use it as another spamfest. Fine. But once the spam is posted here, it should not be allowed to be cut and pasted unto other good faith Debate pages, IMO. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 23:06, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- Look at the top of this page. He already told us he wouldn't be participating, even though he's the one who set it up. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 23:16, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- He's making a statement. If nobody signs up in a few days, a speedy tag could be hung. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 23:20, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- So a debate page can be deleted for the sheer reason that no one participates, if such is the case? —LiberaltearsMay Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot! Thursday, 23:23, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
- Good question. I don't know. But if the creator of the page states it was created in bad faith and nobody participates, that certainly would be cause to hang a speedy tag, IMO. It could be defined as nonsense spam. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 23:26, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
This is practically the definition of bad faith
Please end it. --LawfulLibertarian (talk) 23:34, 26 August 2020 (EDT)
IndependentSkeptic
Dataclarifier may not be willing to participate. I am. At least once.
First the creator ot the page did not state it was created in bad faith.
Second (and I hope finally) I posted on the Debate Page what I consider the most devastating response I ever found to the blasphemous garbage-mouth objections posted by VargasMilan and RobSmith against the promises of Jesus Christ and against his Church. I joined because of the Bible, and like Dataclarifier (Michael), I too have found the Catholic Church to be the most biblical Church. It's a Full Gospel Church. Nuff said! Oh Yeah! --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 08:17, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- This debate will not add anything new that has not already been said on other pages. But if it becomes helpful to save a few more souls in what promises to be another spamfest, so be it. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:31, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- Just remember, by grace are ye saved, not spam, distortions, and lies. You're only making the chain heavier of the lost with all your spam postings and convoluted logic. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:34, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- As Solomon said, much study is a weariness of the flesh. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:35, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- "By grace are ye saved". Exactly! The Catechism says the same thing!
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part Three, Section 1, Chapter 3, article 2: Grace and Justification
You really ought to read it. The Bible backs it up completely. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 10:43, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- "By grace are ye saved". Exactly! The Catechism says the same thing!
- No it doesn't. The Catechism says grace is not grace. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 10:46, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- You lie! No such text in the Catechism. I've read it. You can't quote box any such passage anywhere in the Catechism.
- Oh, the logic is inescapable! Only someone like yourself blinded by confirmation bias can't see it.
Look at John 9:39-41. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 10:56, 27 August 2020 (EDT)
- Oh, the logic is inescapable! Only someone like yourself blinded by confirmation bias can't see it.
- Catechism teaches grace is merited. It's already cited in mainspace. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 11:03, 27 August 2020 (EDT)