It's better if you answer my question rather than claiming that I am making a statement which I certainly did not write! I ASKED you if you were infallible, I didn't say YOU said you were infallible, nor did I say you were infallible. I was asking for clarification.
Yeah, 1600 years of some traditions of men are less right than my convictions about some Spiritual things.
Based on your say-so? Based on what evidence? That you are less fallible??? You have not said anything essentially different from what I have previously stated on my theory - that Protestants have this uncanny "knowledge" that they are right and those who disagree are wrong. Not only are they so sure of this conviction, they are INFALLIBLY so. Without possibility of being wrong. Only someone who thought that way could make such statements as "1600 years of some traditions of men are less right than my convictions about some Spiritual things".
So . . .
your question about whether I was infallible or not
was REALLY a question that you had no set-in-concrete-opinions about? You really wanted to know something you didn’t know?
LOL.
I’m not THAT stupid!
In terms of the evidence . . . at 15,329 posts . . . I seriously doubt that MORE evidence would help you much at all.
Cheers.