[Jvette]

****If the “chapter and verse please” Reformation had not occurred then who knows who Rome would not have been restrained from doing, seeing as she makes humbly holy Mary into a demigoddess, though she is rather marginally written of even in the gospels.****

And once again,my original point is proven that my time answering the question is a wasteful and futile endeavor for there are some here more interested in furthering lies about what the Church holds as true and teaches.

No amount of Scripture is acceptable in such a debate for when it is given, the understanding of it is rejected.

“Chapter and verse please” is no more than a game of Whack a Mole. First Scripture is demanded and then, when given, it is struck down with the claim that the Church has twisted it or misinterpreted it or has a faulty translation.

I refuse to be your mole. I have made my point and you have proven it. Game over

Jesus knew that not everyone would be open to hearing the Church. He warned them and told them what to do in that circumstance. It seems good to me that now is the time to heed His instructions.

[Elsie]

I have made my point and you have proven it. Game over

SURE you have.

[Elsie]

Jesus knew that not everyone would be open to hearing the Church.

Jesus knew that false teaching would abound; that's why He left us the unchanging SCRIPTURES.

No synods, councils or magisteriums needed.

[Elsie]

And once again,my original point is proven that my time answering the question is a wasteful and futile endeavor for there are some here more interested in furthering lies about what the Church holds as true and teaches.

Some?

WHO; exactly?

If you are going to ACCUSE someone; be brave enough to directly challenge them, instead of hiding behind a big tar brush.

[Elsie]

I have made my point and you have proven it. Game over

(See "E")

---

A. If you say something along the lines of “the moderators might ban me for saying this, but…” then you lost.

B. Anyone who says “well, ban me if you want to, but…” is actually saying; “in the name of a loving God, please ban me because I am losing this argument so badly that my only hope of escaping it with a shred of dignity is if I can make myself out to be some sort of martyr to free speech.”

C. If you claim to have supporting evidence available online, but instead of linking to it you say “Look it up yourself,” you lose. Similarly to the banning thing, “look it up yourself” clearly means “please please please don’t look it up yourself.” It’s an admission of failure.

D. If you invoke the name of a logical fallacy without explaining its relevance, you lose. Logical fallacies are not Harry Potter spells. You don’t just get to shout them out and wiggle your wand to make magic happen. Plus, there’s a logical meta-fallacy: Just because someone’s making an error in reasoning doesn’t mean they’re wrong.

E. If you claim to be winning, you lose. This should be self-evident: If you’re so desperate that you have to tell someone you’re winning, you’re obviously not. http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/12/alt-text-internet-arguments