The difference is that if I am committing idolatry or in danger of dong so I do want to be corrected for it. The fool hears not reproof, not unlike the supposedly infallible but truly indefensible positions being promoted in the name of Mary and the Church.
“as preached and taught by those who who pretend the anti-Christ, anti-Chistian, Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture is the complete Bible and by doing so assert that while the Holy Spirit cannot and did not protect the Word of God”
Catholics don’t generally use the Bible to defend Catholic doctrine, as I have found repeatedly here. Occasionally they use it as a springboard but never build their arguments around its authority because they always come back to the Catholic church being a higher authority than the Bible. The Bible itself declares there are people who add to and take away from scripture. If the Catholic church was the means of preserving God’s written word, then the church would not have maintained two sets of books so to speak.
By protecting God’s word, do you mean burning people at the stake like William Tyndale because the Catholic church was protecting people from learning the scriptures in their own language? Did the Catholic church try to stop that simply because it was the wrong time? And is now it okay that the Catholic church has an English version of the Bible which had nothing to do with Tyndale and other heretics seeing the need for the common man to be able to learn God’s word in their own language? Please tell me. I am trying to comprehend.
Tyndale was a pharisee so the Catholic church had to burn him a the stake just like Jesus taught and showed in the way He treated Pharisees, right? Just like Jesus did to Nicodemus and Paul, who were Pharisees, right?
And I should not be offended that the Catholic church burned Tyndale and many other heretics at the stake and never acknowledged and repented of this as sin, right?
How many hail Mary’s does it take to atone for burning people at the stake anyway?
By “Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture is the complete Bible” do you mean Textus Receptus (the received text) as opposed to the single non-contradictory text preserved by the Catholic church? Which ONE would that be? The Latin Vulgate? Codex Vaticanus? Codex Sinaiticus? Codex Alexandrinus?
So I am an idolater BECAUSE I will not bow to Rome or Mary?
I thought I had heard all the arguments before, but that is new.
“Catholics don’t generally use the Bible to defend Catholic doctrine, as I have found repeatedly here. Occasionally they use it as a springboard but never build their arguments around its authority because they always come back to the Catholic”
That’s because the Catholic Church came before the gospels and Catholics compiled what you read in the Bible. Not much easier put than that.