[daniel1212]

amazing, you read and study a book handed to you by the Catholic church 2,000 years after they wrote it and insist that you can interpret it better than could the learned people who studied and kept it alive for 20 centuries. You are an amazing person, even I couldn't do that.

Amazing. So your argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth, and that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium?

[terycarl]

Amazing. So your argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth, and that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that Rome is that assuredly infallible magisterium

that pretty much sums it up, unless I hear otherwise, I will stick with Catholic 2,014 year old teachings from the book that they wrote.