Changes

In support of these I proposed on my talk page an additional rule:{{quotation|

In support of these I proposed on my talk page an 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.}}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)

*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 Debate 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>

<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>

'''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>

'''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==

==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.''

*'''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.''