Havoc duilds himself up as a master, so it is easy to destroy him by pointing out a single flaw. It is much like the enemies of the Church recognize.
(I probably couldn't handle Havoc either. He posts so much stuff it would be necessary to spend hours doing research in order to refute him. Dave has chosen to resort to taunts and dirt.
No dirt. Just truth. Did Havoc yesterday, or did he not rant about baptism and how John's baptism could not be efficaious and that Catholics were stupid for believing so? Well, I told him that he was wrong. That Catholics do not teach that John's baptism was efficacious. Why does our exper on Catholics miss such a simple thing?
Why do you trust him to tell you the truth when on simple matters he fails?
Is this being "dirty" on my part? Is my tongue nasty?
SD
Why do you trust him to tell you the truth when on simple matters he fails?
You tell your people that NC's believe that Eternal Salvation means we don't have to do good works. should that disqualify everything else you say?
Is this being "dirty" on my part? Is my tongue nasty?
Your only doing what comes naturally Dave, donworryaboutdt. :-)
JH
The RCC has been caught in many blatant lies. Why do you trust them? (Oh, I know. faith and morals.)
Is this being "dirty" on my part? Is my tongue nasty?
You have probably the nastiest tongue of any long timer on the Neverending.
I don't "duild" myself up as anything but an average joe who bothers to read rather than take somebody's word for anything and expects the same from others. I'm just effective against your propaganda because I do bother to read. Being effective and being a master are not one in the same. Your problem is that you've tried everything in the book to shut me up or discredit me and every reference I've ever presented - even Catholic references I'd note with a bit of divine irony, and you still can't overcome facts and scripture with rhetoric. That should be a lesson but it hasn't been learnt yet by appearances.
No dirt. Just truth. Did Havoc yesterday, or did he not rant about baptism and how John's baptism could not be efficaious and that Catholics were stupid for believing so? Well, I told him that he was wrong. That Catholics do not teach that John's baptism was efficacious. Why does our exper on Catholics miss such a simple thing?
Well, let's see, Havoc did not say that John's baptism wasn't efficacious. Havoc said that John's baptism was efficacious for repentance and that Christ's baptism was not that of John. And Havoc did so using the very testimony of John. Alas, Dave doesn't like the testimony of John because it makes a stark point that dunking people in water doesn't save them. Why must you pervert everything I say? If you're a christian, why is it necessary for you to engage in such tactics as are worthy of the devil?
Is this being "dirty" on my part? Is my tongue nasty?
Only when you mistate the record; so, yes.