You wrote: "I will not provide you with another platform for preening."
What preening? How does your failure become my preening?
"You entered the thread as a provocateur; your choice of words made that clear."
How is pointing out the obvious provocative?
"The fact of the matter, that you are loath to admit, is that Roman Catholics church shop with the best of them."
1) AS I PROVED the person who wrote to me was looking for a parish to go to on a vacation. How exactly is that "church shopping"?
2) It's ONE Church. There are many parishes, but ONE Church. If you want to call it "parish shopping" be my guest, but don't call it what it isn't.
"Their only constraint is that it has to be in the franchise."
Oh, so now you are tacitly admitting it is ONE Church. Thanks.
"Your response indicates a Pharisaical proclivity for gotcha."
So when you make an error, and someone proves that you OBJECTIVELY made an error, that means the person who was right is a pharisee? That is a seriously twisted piece of logic. Also, you went through my old posts looking for something to bring up. Who here then has a proclivity for "gotcha"? Are you the kettle or the pot?
"I notice that although you quote certain things, you only comment on segments ignoring those that do not support your position."
No, you didn't notice that because no such thing happened. Somethings written are simply extraneous. I usually comment on everything or almost everything someone writes to me. In fact I usually quote what a person wrote and write a comment right underneath it. You, however, have dodged a number of comments and questions directed at you. I wrote, IN JUST ONE POST, the following which you completely ignored:
1) "Really? So how do you explain, using sola scriptura, the Bible alone, that Matthew is inspired or that the gospel of Matthew was in fact written by Matthew?"
(you offered no response whatsoever)
2) "What explanation is tortured about the Avignon Papacy? The popes moved to Avignon. So what? That's the Avignon Papacy. Do you really know what you're talking about? Apparently not."
(you offered no response whatsoever)
3) "Unbiblical? Like sola scriptura? Or condemned like sola fide (James 2:24)?"
(you offered no response whatsoever)
4) "Absurd? I know of unions that were definitely not properly made marriages. How is that fact absurd?"
(you offered no response whatsoever)
5) "When you say something intelligent let me know. I should point out that in my posts I actually focused on the article and sola scriptura. You are all over the place throwing darts hoping something will stick. Where's the kitchen sink?"
(you offered no response whatsoever)
6) "No? So the Church has no responsibility to truth? Did Christ not send the Church out into the world to teach and baptize? Wouldn't that duty to teach people automatically include a responsibility to teach truthfully?"
(you offered no response whatsoever)
I asked a number of questions. You made no response, offered no reply, whatsoever. I made a number of points. You dodged them all. You said exactly nothing in response to much of what was posted.
Again, are you the kettle or the pot?