Difference between revisions of "User talk:Dataclarifier"
From Conservapedia
(→Debate: Is the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace biblical) |
(→Debate: Is the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace biblical) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
::::Than address that specific Antagonist point in debate. Carpet bombing the page with spam is not an acceptable or meaningful response. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 20:36, 24 August 2020 (EDT) | ::::Than address that specific Antagonist point in debate. Carpet bombing the page with spam is not an acceptable or meaningful response. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Trump 2Q2Q]]</sup> 20:36, 24 August 2020 (EDT) | ||
| + | :::::In the forum of the debate this is introductory as presenting the affirmative position. "Here you are ladies and gentlemen. This is the position that Catholic doctrine is biblical. The debate will offer opinions for and against this scriptural material."--[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 20:39, 24 August 2020 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 00:39, August 25, 2020
This page intentionally left blank.
Debate: Is the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace biblical
You are not debating. You are just spamming. Please stop. Please remove your spam. If you wish to cite scripture and provide external links, it must be relevant to the Debate topic, Is the Roman Catholic doctrine of grace biblical? in a narrative context. This is not an unreasonable request and is a simple courtesy to other debaters and readers of the page. Spamming is disruptive of the Debate format. If you have any questions, please contact me here, on my User page, or on the Debate talk page. Thank you. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:19, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- I provided the links demanded at the top of the Debate page to already existing citations of scripture. They are directly relevant to the claim that Catholic doctrine is biblical. --Dataclarifier (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- Meaningless. If you wish to cite a scripture, and provide an external link to a scripture, it must in the context of debate. Carpet bombing the page with external links not relevant to a specific point under debate in unacceptable conduct. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:30, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- Your position in the debate is that the Catholic doctrine is not biblical. They are directly relevant. Visible evidence that Catholic doctrine is overwhelmingly biblical, a claim you stoutly reject in the face of such overwhelming evidence. --Dataclarifier (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- Than address that specific Antagonist point in debate. Carpet bombing the page with spam is not an acceptable or meaningful response. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:36, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- In the forum of the debate this is introductory as presenting the affirmative position. "Here you are ladies and gentlemen. This is the position that Catholic doctrine is biblical. The debate will offer opinions for and against this scriptural material."--Dataclarifier (talk) 20:39, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
- Than address that specific Antagonist point in debate. Carpet bombing the page with spam is not an acceptable or meaningful response. RobSTrump 2Q2Q 20:36, 24 August 2020 (EDT)
