From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Talk:Salvation as edited by RobSmith (Talk | contribs) at 17:26, June 12, 2020. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Just so everyone knows, I did the major change on this entery today for these reasons:

- it seemed to filled with jargon. It made sense to me, someone who was raised in conservative protestant Christianity, but would a Hindu in New Delhi have understood what was written? I don't think so. I tried to use language that would be familiar to any English speaker with a reasonable education.

- the article I changed only explained one view of salvation. I tried to show that there are different views of salvation arising out of the NT and to give a brief description of a very popular protestant understanding of salvation, the Calvinist view.

I think several more things are necessary for the article on salvation:

1. an expansion/fleshing out of Calvinist thought, including a discussion of arius and the calvinist response. (because this is one of two major theories in American protestantism) 2. a subsection on Wessleyan soteriology (because this is the other major thoery in American Protestantism) 3. a subsection on original sin that discusses the impact of St. Augustine's innovation of A.D. 395 4. a subsection on St.Alselm of Canterbury's theory and the development of western soteriology since then. 5. a section dealing with various theories of salvation with subsections dealing with the ransom theory, the satisfaction theory, the mercantiist theory, the Christos Victor theory, etc. 6. a section dealing with soteriology of Roman Catholicism (because it is the largest church)(this might fit in under thediscussions of St. Augustine and St. Anselm) 7. a section dealing with the soteriology of the Orthodox Church (because it is the second largest church)

Article changed for the actual Biblical account[edit]

Too many, differing accounts for salvation tended to water-down the article and confuse the reader; further, and more serious, God only had ONE way for salvation and eternal life, and that is through Jesus Christ as specified in the Bible. There is no other way. Differing accounts that were here previously, such as the Calvinist, can be put into separate articles with entries as to why they differ from the straight, Biblical account. Karajou 01:10, 2 June 2007 (EDT)

I think you underestimate the inter-denominational bickering. Every denomination seems to say there is one way to salvation, true - but they all claim its a different way.
  • Catholic doctrine says there is no salvation outside the Catholic church. Period. For church members, its just a matter of dieing without unconfessed sin.
  • Most Evangalical churches go for the personal approach - where one need only accept Christ. Church membership is encouraged, but not required.
  • A very large number of more casual christians believe that God acts as a judge of who is 'good' and 'bad' - not even careing if someone is a Christian or not. If they are kind, generous and polite they go to heaven, while the violent and selfish go to hell.
  • The Jehova's Witnesses, very much on the fringes of Christianity, believe salvation is earned by works in life. Specificly, knocking on doors.
  • Then you have the little semi-cults and their strange selection of beliefs.

- Suricou

So what are you claiming? Interdenominational bickering nullifies God's Word? Let's draw the line first off, in Western Christianity, between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.
  • Roman Catholicism stresses God's Word and teaching is kept alive and passed on via a priesthood, or curia, i.e. in persons, and Church tradition, with the head of the Roman Church being the final arbiter or interpreter of Scripture.
  • Protestantism relies on Scritpture itself as God's Word and teaching, unfiltered by mortal men.
  • Various subdenominations which have sprung from Protestant traditions, such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormonism, et al can be reviewed within the Canon of Scriprture.
Where is the controversy? RobS 13:39, 2 June 2007 (EDT)

I think the article as written as (e.g. Biblical Account) is a really good statement of the modern Evangelical Protestant development of St. Anselm of Canterbury's 11th century Satisfaction theory. (See his work Cur Deus Homo?) I think it might be good to retitle this from the Biblical Account to Modern Evangeilcal Satisfaction Theory. Also, I'd like to include (1) something on the much older Christus Victor theory of salvation, and (2) something on the role of the Sacraments in salvation. Does anyone see any problems with doing this?--Mattk 13:36, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

There will be NO changes to this article. It is the Biblical account of salvation; it's not some modern theory; it's not some older Christus Victor theory; it's not anyone else's theory for that matter. Karajou 13:45, 29 August 2007 (EDT)
Well, I don't quite know what to say about that. I don't want to get into a fruitless debate with an Admin (especiallly one who served us in the Naval profesion) but I would like to make the following observations:

1 Many people who love the Scriptures and the Lord who is revealed in them have a different understanding of them than does Karajou. 2 The history of theology does show the development of the Protestant version of the Satisfaction Theory from Anselm, through Zwingli, through the Puritans and into modern American-style Protestantism. The impetus behind the development of the theory is laudible, but there is no denying that it is a comparitively recent interpretation of Scripture. 3 Many prominent American conservatives such as the Justice Salcia, Paul Weyrich, and Bill Buckley hold different views of Salvation from the one to which Karajou is limiting the article. 4 I want conservapedia to be a success. I would like for it to be a place where serious scholars can find information on every topic under Heaven, not a ghetto for echo-chamber seekers afraid of history, tradition, and reason.

Now having said that, I have a few questions: Would it be acceptable to Karajou to have links in the Salvation article that lead to articles dealing with the other soteriological theories? Would Karajou mind changing the "the" to an "a" because all of the major theories of how Salvation works are Biblical, they just rely on different passages of Scripture? Since the conservative movement is so broad, is it right for this encyclepedia to limit the definition of Salvation to one not held by most conservative Christians?--Mattk 16:24, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

This is the Biblical promise of salvation, not just some "belief". The fact that it stands apart from other versions of salvation is good enough to have the whole article on it. ScorpionVote for Pedro 22:41, 30 November 2007 (EST)
And I would just like to thank the writer of this article from the bottom of my heart...I was tormented by fear of hell, fear of eternal damnation before I came and read this. Now, after having recieved Jesus as my Lord and Savior, I feel as if I've already "entered the gates of Paradise" (quoted from [[Martin Luther")! What a wonderful Savior! I would encourage those who believe they can get eternal life by works to reconsider. Jesus died for you, and when He died He took our sins upon Himself, and He freed us from the power of sin and from the punishment of hell! There is nothing else that needs to be done. Praise the Lord! ScorpionVote for Pedro 22:54, 30 November 2007 (EST)
The article is cited as needing more citations, but it is locked. More material here:
Wonderful testimony Pedro! Thank God for "so great a salvation" (Heb. 2:3) by the "great God and our Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13) at so great a cost (who "spared not His own dear Son" (Rm. 8:32) to meet so great a need for so great a multitude of sinners, for so great an eternity! But i hope i can render more unto the Lord "according to the benefit thereof" (cf. 2Chrn. 32:35) as i feel i have done so little.Daniel1212 22:47, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

This article is a mess. It needs substantial revision[edit]

It basically says baptism is salvation, without telling us being saved from what. It totally ignores the problem of sin. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:31, 5 November 2019 (EST)

This verse for example:
Luke 18:17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.
While I suspect it is being used here to argue for Infant baptism, it is being used out of context. As Wikignome pointed out, the thief on the cross certainly was neither a child or baptized. Misuse of this scripture makes Jesus a liar. Jesus is saying one must have the faith of child.
I will bring to nothing the understanding of the wise - you can't get into the kingdom be reasoned argument or scholarship. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:44, 5 November 2019 (EST)
I agree. Would you please revise it? --1990'sguy (talk) 19:39, 5 November 2019 (EST)
I'm going to need some help in structuring it. Right now it says little or nothing of atonement, redemption, expiation, substitution, propitiation, reconciliation, justification, regeneration, repentance, faith, adoption, or assurance. I'm not particularly enamored to the idea of creating two major separate Protestant and Catholic sections. I'd rather like to make a simple scriptural presentation of salvation, then with various interpretations (such as an emphasis on baptism being equivalent or the key to salvation). But I'm not entirely certain how to do that. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:23, 5 November 2019 (EST)

Old Testament[edit]

1 Samuel 2:1-10

And Hannah prayed and said,

My heart rejoiceth in the Lord:—mine horn is exalted in the Lord:
My mouth is enlarged over mine enemies;—because I rejoice in thy salvation.
There is none holy as the Lord:—for there is none beside thee:
Neither is there any rock like our God.
Talk no more so exceeding proudly;
Let not arrogancy come out of your mouth:
For the Lord is a God of knowledge,—and by him actions are weighed.
The bows of the mighty men are broken,
And they that stumbled are girded with strength.
They that were full have hired out themselves for bread;
And they that were hungry ceased:—so that the barren hath borne seven;
And she that hath many children is waxed feeble.
The Lord killeth, and maketh alive:
He bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up.
The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich:—he bringeth low, and lifteth up.
He raiseth up the poor out of the dust,
And lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill.
To set them among princes,—and to make them inherit the throne of glory:
For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's,
And he hath set the world upon them.
He will keep the feet of his saints,
And the wicked shall be silent in darkness;
For by strength shall no man prevail.
The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken to pieces;
Out of heaven shall he thunder upon them:
The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth;
And he shall give strength unto his king,—and exalt the horn of his anointed.

Isaiah 53

Who hath believed our report?
And to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of a dry ground;
He hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him,
There is no beauty that we should desire him.
He is despised and rejected of men;
A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief:
And we hid as it were our faces from him;
He was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Surely he hath borne our griefs,—and carried our sorrows;
Yet we did esteem him stricken,—smitten of God, and afflicted.
But he was wounded for our transgressions,—he was bruised for our iniquities:
The chastisement of our peace was upon him;—and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned every one to his own way;
And the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,—yet he opened not his mouth:
He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before her shearers is dumb,—so he openeth not his mouth.
He was taken from prison and from judgment:
And who shall declare his generation?
For he was cut off out of the land of the living:
For the transgression of my people was he stricken.
And he made his grave with the wicked,—and with the rich in his death;
Because he had done no violence,—neither was any deceit in his mouth:
Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him;—he hath put him to grief.
When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,
He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,
And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.
He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:
By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many;
For he shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great,
And he shall divide the spoil with the strong;
Because he hath poured out his soul unto death;
And he was numbered with the transgressors;—and he bare the sin of many.
And made intercession for the transgressors.

Synoptic Gospels[edit]

Matthew 9:2-8

And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. And he arose, and departed to his house. But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

Matthew 16:24-27

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall iind it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily, I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Mark 2:1-12

AND again he entered into Capernaum after some days. And it was noised that he was in the house; and straightway many were gathered together, insomuch that there was no room to receive them, no, not so much as about the door; and he preached the word unto them.

And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy. Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy.) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.

Luke 1:67-79

And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,

Blessed be the Lord God of Israel:
For he hath visited and redeemed his people,
And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us—in the house of his servant David:
(As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets,
Which have been since the world began:)
That we should be saved from our enemies,—and from the hand of all that hate us;
To perform the mercy promised to our fathers,
And to remember his holy covenant;
The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,
That he would grant unto us,
That we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies
Might serve him without fear,
In holiness and righteousness before him,—all the days of our life.
And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest:
For thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
To give knowledge of salvation unto his people—by the remission of their sins,
Through the tender mercy of our God;
Whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,
To guide our feet into the way of peace.

Luke 5:17-26

And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them. And, behold, men brought in a bed a man which was taken with a palsy: and they sought means to bring him in, and to lay him before him. And when they could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus. And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee. And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, he answering said unto them, What reason ye in your hearts? Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee: or to say, Rise up and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee. Arise, and take up thy couch, and go unto thine house. And immediately he rose up before them, and took up that whereon he lay, and departed to his own house, glorifying God.

And they were all amazed, and they glorified God, and were filled with fear, saying, We have seen strange things to-day.

Luke 9:23-26, 56

And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it. For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast away? For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he shall come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the holy angels. But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God...

But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

Luke 15

THEN drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.

And he spake this parable unto them, saying, What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep "which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth her friends and her neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece which I had lost. Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

And he said, A certain man had two sons. And the younger of them said to his father. Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he divided unto them his living. And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.

And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants. And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son. But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet; and bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it; and let us eat, and be merry: for this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Now his elder son was in the field. And as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard music and dancing; and he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant. And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound. And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out, and intreated him. And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends; but as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf. And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

Luke 19:1-10

AND Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich. And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature. And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to-day I must abide at thy house. And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully.

And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner. And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham. For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

What does this phrase mean?[edit]

Explain this phrase, without the necessity of it being factually and historically true.

Does this mean (A) the gospel is not "factually and historically true", or (B) the Bible is not "factually and historically true"?

Without a response in 24 hours, the entire subsection will be reverted. It appears more of an attack on Protestantism and not an explanation of Salvation. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:44, 17 February 2020 (EST)


Look at this:

Relativist interpreters emphasize that "the true value of the Gospel" lies primarily in its profound psychological and emotional impact, in the telling of the story, without the necessity of it being factually and historically true, as a powerful means of causing spiritual transformation through personal identification with "the struggle and triumph of the mythical Jesus invented by Paul and the Gospel writers...

Just what the beejeezuz does

...the struggle and triumph of the mythical Jesus invented by Paul and the Gospel writers...


Seriously, I'm about to recommend to an Sysop with Oversight powers to nuke all your contributions since day one if you don't engage on Talk pages properly. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:54, 17 February 2020 (EST)

The meaning of the above quoted parts is explained in the linked articles included in the contributed material. The authors of those articles made those assertions, I did not.
From my talk page
I have just received the alert to your note and am immediately responding with an apologia to explain. I sincerely regret that the documented historical fact of gnostic influences in some (not all) of North American Protestantism as detailed in Philip Lee's book, favorably reviewed, fully verified and competently sourced was perceived as a rant, regretting especially that it is perceived as anti-Protestant. That was not my intention. I have not gone and checked where the material I contributed on the subject researched by Phillip Lee and reviewed and summarized by a respected Protestant pastor, Christian apologist and author was deleted or retained. I am not responsible for the research of others, only for my desire for balanced articles offering a spectrum of views. As long as the summarized material re Philip Lee's book containing historical fact established by his research is retained in some or at least one or two of the most relevant articles, I have no objection. I really do not doubt that you can exercise reasonable judgment as to which articles it is most appropriate. I was only attempting to be as thorough as possible in relating the documentation to as many articles as seemed to me to be relevant, especially those on the recent resurgence of Neo-Gnostic influences, for the sake of informing our readers, who may not read all articles on heresies, Christianity, Protestantism and apostasy, so that at least at those particular relevant articles that they do access they can be more informed. Again, I feel no need to "check" what articles the particular "Gnostic Protestant" sections were removed from. I do not believe you attempted any "historical revisionist cover-up" in removing some, or even most of the postings of the material regarding the warning of Gnostic influences in modern liberalist Protestant doctrine in North America. I hope this makes sense. Best regards. --Dataclarifier (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Dataclarifier says, I am not responsible for the research of others, only for my desire for balanced articles offering a spectrum of views.
If you post it on CP, you are responsible for the "research of others"; for example, posting excerpts of Mein Kampf to offer "a spectrum of views" to support of your blatantly anti-scriptural ideology wouldn't be acceptable. RobSLive Free or Die 19:07, 4 May 2020 (EDT)

Philip Lee is one man's opinion (regardless of haw many letters he has after his name). Philip Lee is not the Word of God. When discussing biblical subjects, we should cite the Word of God. Your contribution seems to question whether God spoke through the Apostle Paul. That sort of speculation probably should be confined to Essay space. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:34, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Actually, Lee is not alone, he is representative of many who perceive neo-gnostic influences in Protestantism, opposing authority of Church and State, opposing Catholicism, rejection of the good of material creation and marital relations as being a snare to the soul, lack of preaching on the bodily resurrection, the idea that moral behavior is optional. These are not part of biblical Christianity, only of those elements tending toward heresy. Do an online search on "Gnostic influences in the Protestant Reformers". That should explain why I included the material. I didn't really think that more than one representative source reflecting a summary of many others who also found the same influences was necessary. --Dataclarifier (talk) 19:51, 17 February 2020 (EST)
See the following link, and you should be able to see what I mean: Gnostic Influences in the Protestant Reformers
I hope this explains what I meant by "representative" of many researchers. --Dataclarifier (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Fine. God-haters are a dime-a-dozen. His smut doesn't belong in a scriptural article with the Template:Christianity in it. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:58, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Take a look at 2 Corinthians 2:11 and 1 Peter 2:15. I want Christians prepared and aware of exactly what are some of the arguments of Satan, so they can be ready and able to engage in spiritual combat. The danger of neo-Gnosticism is real. Bible believers need to know this! I don't want them ignorant and helpless when confronted by specious arguments that mask as Christianity by not knowing how to recognize the enemy and be caught unaware and not knowing how to answer. I sent no one into combat untrained and unprepared. Think about that! --Dataclarifier (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Your external scriptural links do not support the context of what you posted in mainspace, Explain this:
  • the mythical Jesus invented by Paul and the Gospel writers
and WHY you posted it in a mainspace article with the Template:Christianity in it? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:42, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Here's your problem, Dataclarifier: Below you deny the authority of scripture. Above you use (more properly, misuse) the words of Paul to deny the authority of God's word spoken through Paul and attack biblical Christianity. Many editors are getting fed up with your nonsense. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:16, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Simple question: Does the Roman Catholic Church regard the Apostle Paul as an authoritative source of the Word of God? Yes or No? (no speeches or spamming). If yes, stop posting attacks on the Word of God. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:24, 17 February 2020 (EST)
IMO, the unanswered question above from 10 weeks ago reveals the locus of the dispute: While Dataclarifier's knowledge of Roman Church history is impressive, his own understanding of Roman Catholic doctrine sometimes conflicts with what Roman Catholic doctrine actually is. Here he cannot answer if the Epistles of Paul are the divinely inspired word of God. RobSLive Free or Die 20:57, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

Another example of spamming and trolling[edit]

Dataclarifier says,

  • "I sincerely regret that the documented historical fact....verified and competently sourced..."
  • "I have not gone and checked where the material I contributed ...was deleted or retained."
  • "I am not responsible for the research of others..."

Anyone care to try and decipher what Dataclarifier said or means? RobSLive Free or Die 13:00, 12 June 2020 (EDT)

Dataclarifier: You don't have to answer here. Just remember the word of Jesus and the biblical truth:

  • But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. - Matthew 12:36
RobSLive Free or Die 13:18, 12 June 2020 (EDT)
And if you cannot give account for the words you have posted, the grace of God is your only hope to save you from judgement. RobSLive Free or Die 13:26, 12 June 2020 (EDT)

Illustration of a circular argument[edit]

Here Dataclarifer adds to mainspace,

the mythical Jesus invented by Paul and the Gospel writers

When asked to justify this insertion, Dataclarifer posts links to the writings of Paul, 2 Corinthians 2:11 and 1 Peter 2:15.

I am going to lock this page until Dataclarifier answers this simple question, Does the Roman Catholic Church regard the Apostle Paul as an authoritative source of the Word of God? RobSLive Free or Die 07:45, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

Qualifying the source[edit]

  • "biblical Christianity."
(A) You've proven by multitudinous mainspace and talk page postings that you don't know what "biblical Christianity," is; (B) by your own words, you've denied what "biblical Christianity" is,
from Essay:_Water_baptism_cannot_save,_the_Church_cannot_save,_Born_again_by_faith_alone):
::"You say,
The argument seems to be:
  • The Bible, or Word of God, is not authoritative;
  • Salvation is dependent upon church membership;
  • While baptism qualifies a person for adoption into God's family, it is no guarantee; salvation still must be earned by good works, or at least the sacrificial death of Jesus is insufficient to cleanse one of certain sins.
Dataclarifier's response
"Your analysis of the argument is a fairly accurate summary,"
RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:11, 17 February 2020 (EST)