[HossB86]

Try re-reading MY posts. I agreed that you posted from the KJV. My issue was the Catholic interpretation put to it.

I quoted back to you from the ESV. Then I proceeded to answer your accusation that I rejected the KJV. Show me where I used the word rejected.

Then, I attempted to explain that I like the KJV as well as the ESV and why I use the ESV.

I'd appreciate a little accuracy here.

Now. Can you, instead of deflecting, answer my question to you as to why the Roman Catholic Church refutes God in CCC 969 my claiming Mary as "medatrix" when God's inspired word in 1 Timothy 2:5 states there is ONE mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ?

How do untangle that? If you can, we'll continue. Otherwise, see ya.

Hoss

[af_vet_1981]

Try re-reading MY posts. I agreed that you posted from the KJV. My issue was the Catholic interpretation put to it.

You only agreed that I posted from the KJV after I corrected you.
1. My post 553, where you apparently stumbled over King James when you first read the word Catholic:
   Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
   Acts, Catholic chapter seventeen, Protestant verses twenty two to twenty nine, as authorized, but not authored, by King James
2. Your first uninspiring post was 555 where you incorrectly equated Allah with your transliteration of the name God gave to Moses. "So... Allah is Yahweh." You further argued that the Athenians were different from Moslems because they worshipped many gods while the Moslems worship Allah, still showing your ignorance of Arabic and the name(s) of God, which I corrected in my post 567.
3. In your post 574, you agreed that the text of Acts was inspired by the Holy Spirit, but
   rather than accepting the King James Version, you then quoted a long passage from an anonymous version, no where sourced in your post 574, boldly changing the KJV translation to try to make a point as an "Internet Theologian", as you term yourself. You stated " It doesn't mean the Athenians were worshiping God ingorantly ," clearly rejecting and repudiating the KJV text.
4. In post 584, I correct you and repeat the KJV text.
5. In post 587, you again gainsay, writing "Try a better translation -- it would help you -- instead of what the Catholic Cult "writes" --- "Acts, Catholic chapter seventeen," clearly showing you still did not realize I had quoted the KJV, sourced and attributed, to you twice. You confirmed this again in your post 590 with "No.. I rejected the misinterpretation foisted upon by the Catholic Cult."
6. In post 602 I corrected you again with "Read my post carefully. I posted the King James Version."
7. In post 604 you finally acknowledged I had used the KJV, and not a Catholic translation, but still grasped at the straw that I had posted a misinterpretation of that clear text which you had tried to modify, not me, with a different translation. "Yes, you did. But you used the Roman misinterpretation of it."
8. In post 607 I concluded that you had rejected the King James Version. "False; you rejected the King James Version and used some unattributed version. Being a baseball fan does not make one an impartial referee nor a workman who rightly divides the word of truth. What Protestant derived farm team do you root for that you have cast away the King James Authorized Version ? "
9. In post 608 I hammered the point home, so to speak.

I quoted back to you from the ESV. Then I proceeded to answer your accusation that I rejected the KJV. Show me where I used the word rejected.

Covered above

Then, I attempted to explain that I like the KJV as well as the ESV and why I use the ESV.

Rather pathetic

I'd appreciate a little accuracy here.

That is rich.

Now. Can you, instead of deflecting, answer my question to you as to why the Roman Catholic Church refutes God in CCC 969 my claiming Mary as "medatrix" when God's inspired word in 1 Timothy 2:5 states there is ONE mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ?

I did not deflect. I presented scripture from Acts which shows that people can worship God in ignorance, which you gainsaid, and now you are trying to deflect and change the subject to some other antiCatholic polemic.