[Manfred the Wonder Dawg]

You bring up a different point entirely, which is another reason I dislike answering you.

I never said to anything was relevant of not. Teaching that is Biblical is right; that which is not is wrong.

Then you bring in the un-Biblical dogma of the Lord supposedly founding the error-laden RCC. Sorry, I will not argue with you.

[Petronski]

I never said to anything was relevant of not.

You said important, I said relevant....synonymous for this purpose.

Sorry, I will not argue with you.

You are wise not to make an argument on a point you cannot win. The facts are not with you on that point whether you argue with me or anyone else.

[pgyanke]

How is it possible to have a dialogue with these ground rules...?

Teaching that is Biblical is right; that which is not is wrong.

And who do you say is the final arbiter of what is Biblical? We have provided many quotes and supports for the Catholic position and yet you tell us the Church is wrong and unbiblical. Why don't you stick to discussing the issues instead of saying we are wrong because we are members of the universal (Catholic) Church.

Then you bring in the un-Biblical dogma of the Lord supposedly founding the error-laden RCC.

Isn't this entirely the issue? If the RCC is the Church founded by Our Lord then She is the One appointed by Christ as the "bulwark and pillar of truth" (1 Tim 3:15) Who is to "teach the principalities". If She is not, then we would have to look outside of Her to another... but who? Whose interpretation of Scripture or whose congregation can be relied upon to teach the principalities as the bulwark and pillar of truth? Since there is no agreement among those who take private revelation from the Holy Spirit and each insist in their accuracy, what are we to do and what are we to teach?