[CynicalBear]

>>I already did that. And it went well<<

No, it really didn’t. Your definition of “church” is no where found in scripture. Your definition of “Lord” is not found in scripture. Lord is the same as master and is used that way in scripture. When Catholics repeat the same polemic over and over and use scripture in ways it doesn’t mean it simply is an indication that Catholics have been so indoctrinated by the RCC that the truth of scripture is lost to them. As we post scripture we understand that the Catholics here are not the ones we reach. It’s the lurkers who God is reaching who understand that Catholics completely miss the Spirit of scripture.

So you see. We really don’t care what you believe. We simply need to present the scripture and believe that God reaches those who He is calling.

[vladimir998]

“Your definition of “Lord” is not found in scripture.”

Sure it is: the body of Christ, the bride of Christ. No Protestants are in it by their own choice.

[aruanan]

It’s the lurkers who God is reaching who understand that Catholics completely miss the Spirit of scripture.

"Spirit of scripture." Sounds like you're doing to scripture what Henry Blackmun did with emanations and penumbras of the Constitution, ignoring or redefining what was there in order to get what he wanted to be there.

And certainly, for your polemical purposes, you could come up with something a little more persuasive than talking about a solitary meaning of "Lord." You made an assertion. So come up with a table showing actual examples of "Your definition of "Lord" is not found in scripture" and demonstrate, not just assert, that there are no supporting examples found in scripture.