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?

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. RobS^{Trump 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. RobS^{Trump 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? —Liberaltears^{May 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. RobS^{Trump 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)

Yes. It's redundant of at least two earlier debates. They think by their many words they shall be heard. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 13:29, 27 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. RobS^{Trump 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. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 10:34, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

As Solomon said, much study is a weariness of the flesh. RobS^{Trump 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)

No it doesn't. The Catechism says grace is not grace. RobS^{Trump 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)

Catechism teaches grace is merited. It's already cited in mainspace. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 11:03, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Not the initial grace of salvation. No one can merit that. You just won't admit it. That's the teaching of the Catholic Church. That's the teaching of the Catechism. Apart from Christ there is no meriting salvation. Only He saves. Only through Christ can we do anything. Only united to Him can we bear fruit. "For apart from me you can do nothing". We can't do it! Again, look at Grace and Justification.

You lie about what the Catechism says. But you keep repeating the same lie. You are spamming Falsehood.

I will waste no more time with you. --IndependentSkeptic (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

If grace is merited, grace is not grace. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 12:03, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

The grace of God is essentially the "good news", which is what the term "gospel" is translated into. Catholic catechism denies the good news, i.e. the gospel, and reverts back into law and Judaism. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 12:09, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

Ye are like unto whited sepulchers....… RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 12:25, 27 August 2020 (EDT)

This page should be locked if the disruptive trolling continues

RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 09:44, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

This page has turned into an incoherent mess

Replete with Dataclarifier's signature redundant spamming, which IndependentSceptic has now adopted. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 09:52, 29 August 2020 (EDT)

Mistaken reversion

My reversion this morning was a mistake by my super-sensitive touch screen. This error has been corrected.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:26, 30 August 2020 (EDT)