So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
My position has been consistent in all my arguments. I have been arguing one thing. That thing has been relevant in all cases.
Maybe try reading what I type instead of arguing to "win" and "be right". You're not going to get to bulldoze your way through this discussion, so you can pretend you came out "victorious". Respond to my point, or don't respond.
To make it clearer, if your only argument is that something is unbiblical, then you don't have an argument, because as you refuse to admit you agree, you know that plenty of things that aren't in the Bible aren't inherently bad because the Bible isn't exhaustive.
So you don't want to misrepresent him but want to misrepresent me... got it.
I guess you can't see the primary issue stems from an unbiblical structure of the Catholic Church, specifically the office of the Pope, which gives one man the ability to create the issue at hand.
Why are you so adversarial? how did I misrepresent you? I stated what I thought jumper's actual comment was saying. I made no statement or assertion about yours.
I DID make a comment about your general attitude and behavior, which personally I see as belligerent, and you, by all means, appear to self-justify this belligerence with references to [your] view of scripture, while denigrating the views of those who appear to disagree or focus on different things.
Why do I say belligerent? Because you are behaving as if YOUR focus (in this case, the issues and problems of the Roman Catholic Church) is the only one that anyone else must also focus on.
You don't present yourself as being here here for sharing and learning and discussion, but for argument. In my view, that's belligerent, and it comes across very poorly from someone who professes himself/herself to be Christian. In my opinion.
That's all I have to say on the matter.
I'm sure you agree the Bible is not exhaustive, yes?
Well, grilled cheese is also unbiblical… it's just not in there!
But we wouldn't say that makes it inherently bad or wrong, would we?
I'll admit, the analogy isn't perfect, as I'm comparing important matters of the faith to a grilled cheese, but I think it makes my point well enough.
Category error. I was using stepping into your assertion and showing you how it didn't hold up. You are now making an analogy that is another position and argument all together.
We are talking about standards of faith, theology and church structure.
The Bible lays out very specific standards for Pastors, Deacons, and church leadership. None of which the Pope meets.
Do you know what those standards are directly from scripture?
My position has been consistent in all my arguments. I have been arguing one thing. That thing has been relevant in all cases.
Maybe try reading what I type instead of arguing to "win" and "be right". You're not going to get to bulldoze your way through this discussion, so you can pretend you came out "victorious". Respond to my point, or don't respond.
To make it clearer, if your only argument is that something is unbiblical, then you don't have an argument, because as you refuse to admit you agree, you know that plenty of things that aren't in the Bible aren't inherently bad because the Bible isn't exhaustive.