lol. Yep. We're told in order to be saved a person must believe in the Roman Catholic church and its teachings.
Therefore it's reasonable to wonder why Judith Ann would believe that the apostle Paul was "likely mentally unbalanced."
Perhaps Rome now teaches that Paul was "likely mentally unbalanced." (This would certainly be indicative of how little the Scriptures are esteemed in Rome.)
Or has Rome changed so much that it now permits its members to believe...anything?
“(This would certainly be indicative of how little the Scriptures are esteemed in Rome.)”
In post #575, you wrote: “No wonder Roman Catholics don’t have faith in the word of God. They believe it was written by knuckleheads with emotional problems.”
These claims lack credibility, yet are repeated many times.
Again, I say that the opinion of one Catholic re: St. Paul and his epistles is just that—one opinion. It is NOT the teaching of the Catholic Church. Again I mention that the epistles of St. Paul are used very extensively, in the 3-year cycle of Sunday Mass readings and the 2-year cycles of daily Mass readings. These readings are matched in content with the Gospel readings and provide the material for the homilies (sermons).
However you may couch these claims with “reasonable to wonder”, and “perhaps Rome now teaches...” and “this certainly would be indicative”, the fundamental idea presented is that Rome doesn’t have faith in the word of God, and/or that the opinion of one Catholic about St. Paul should/could be translated as the teaching of the Catholic Church.
It’s just not a credible position and doesn’t serve the truth about Catholicism.