“Rather, she challenged the statement, mistaking it for mine, despite the contest and my careful formatting distinctions, which mistake itself would (to be consistent) be called incompetence if done by a Prot.”
No. I see no incompetence whatsoever in her question. I see plenty of it in your posts.
“Meanwhile, it remains that despite your intense effort trying to find technical faults, which avoided the real issue, Catholic sources affirm the NAB is the Bible that was approved the the Bishops for liturgical use in the United States, and even with its revised edition and readings the fact is that Rome sanctioned and sanctions liberal scholarship via the NAB and its notes. Thus the protest against it by some of your own.”
You were still wrong. You were wrong repeatedly and will continue to be so.
Which simply testifies to your Roman programming.
You were still wrong. You were wrong repeatedly and will continue to be so.
“Meanwhile, it remains that despite your intense effort trying to find technical faults, which avoided the real issue, Catholic sources affirm the NAB is the Bible that was approved the the Bishops for liturgical use in the United States, and even with its revised edition and readings the fact is that Rome sanctioned and sanctions liberal scholarship via the NAB and its notes. Thus the protest against it by some of your own.”
I was and am not, as per Catholic documentation, while your recourse is that if anyone and their documentation disagrees with with vladimir’s assertions, then they must be incompetent.”
Enough said.
There are none so blind as those who will not see (the point daniel was making, which is constantly being evaded.)