Ben Franklin said, "Beer is proof God loves us and wants us to be happy."

He also said, "Three people can keep a secret only if two of them are dead."

You need some serious work on reading comprehension.

Let me clarify. I HAVE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS about the canons of the Roman Catholic church,
I specified exactly what concerns me most, and they are by no means DISPARATE, in fact they are intimately related.

I have not yet asked the questions, and will not ask until I hear from you whether or not you will respond honestly,
like a man with some integrity and a sense of honor.

If you agree to respond in this manner, I will pose the questions,
if you refuse to respond, as you so often do when hit with a challenging question, you will once again reveal your pathological inability to communicate with others, much less have a reasonable discussion or debate on the subjects you yourself bring up, and you will prove that your theologically driven social justice campaign on this forum is going nowhere.

Ball's in your court.

Really? That's a first.
Are you prepared to answer an important question about the RCC canons?
I am concerned specifically with what came from the Council of Trent,
the Roman Missal from the Second Vatican Council,
and something astonishing from Faith Of Millions: The Credentials of the Catholic Religion by Father John O'Brien.

Think you can handle this, or are you going to snivel your way out of an honest response as you do continuously?

That fool isn't going to stop lying, it's in his DNA.

OK, my ADVICE to knightlady was friendly.
Maybe we should ask her how she feels about it.
It is ADVICE that you should also pay attention to.

Now, show me, professor, how is the following the "OPPOSITE of FRIENDLY?
After all, what I said is the T***H.

We are, in fact, engaged in a religious war worldwide, and it is most definitely Biblical.
Christians and Jews are being persecuted all over the world, and this is a war that must be fought both in words and deeds, it is not simply something to b***h about.

Friendly advise is not h**eful.

I have a serious, even critical, question for you, TJ, I'll get to it soon.
It is in regards to the RCC canons on the celebration of the Mass and t***substantiation of Christ.
I do hope you are man enough to answer honestly, without prejudice or malice.
Stand by.

We are, in fact, engaged in a religious war worldwide, and it is most definitely Biblical.
Christians and Jews are being persecuted all over the world, and this is a war that must be fought both in words and deeds, it is not simply something to b***h about.

You heard that, didja? You weren't there, were ya?

Trump rally, Wildwood, NJ. Where are the people leaving in large numbers?

85% of the people on earth are religious, it is foolish to think that religion plays no part in human affairs.
If discussions of religion and the Bible offend you, change the channel.

President Trump consoles the mother of a slain NYPD officer.

And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Matthew 22:36-40

When Jesus commanded we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves,
He wasn't referring to just our next door neighbor,
and in loving ourselves, He wasn't alluding to self-righteous conceits, selfishness. arrogance or narcissism.

In the five months you've been here, you haven't expressed love for anyone or anything.

God's Love for His creation is absolute and unconditional.

Tis a shame you have disobeyed Him.

Good Lord, Peter, where in the world did you get the notion that the "God-of-the-gap" fallacy explains the creation of the universe, and that this fallacy is the basis of my own beliefs. You're not keeping up with the latest from physicists, cosmologists, and astro-biologists, and your logic is flawed.

If the universe and we humans didn't exist 15 billion years ago, where did "they" and the "someones" unable to worship "them" come from? You are implying "they" and "someone" preexisted the creation of the universe. Who created "they" and "someone" before the origin of the universe?
That doesn't make any sense.

Physicist and Philosopher of Science Stephen Meyer writes in his book, Return of the God Hypothesis:
In assessing explanations for the origin of the universe, I have, of course, critiqued many materialistic theories, including the steady-state and oscillating-universe theories. I also showed that quantum cosmology---advanced by scientific materialists (such as Neil DeGrasse Tyson) as an alternative to the God hypothesis---failed to provide a causally adequate materialistic explanation for the origin of the universe (and even that it has unintended theistic implications).

In addition, I argued that all materialistic theories of the origin of the material universe face a fundamental problem given the evidence we have of a cosmic beginning. Before matter and energy exist, they cannot cause, or be invoked to explain, the origin of the material universe. Instead, positing a materialistic process to explain the origin of matter and energy assumes the existence of the very entities---matter and energy---the origin of which materialists need to explain. No truly materialistic explanation can close this particular causal discontinuity or gap---the gap between nothing or a preexisting immaterial or mathematical reality, one the one hand, and a material universe, on the other.

Nor do appeals to the laws of nature solve this problem. Stephen Hawking's claim that the "laws of science" or "the law of gravity" can explain "why there is something rather than nothing" betrayed a deep philosophical confusion about what the laws of physics can do. Laws of nature describe how nature operates and how different parts of nature interact with one another; they don't cause the natural world to come into existence in the first place. This suggests the futility of waiting for the discovery of some new law of nature or a "theory of everything." No law of nature can close the causal discontinuity between nothing and the origin of nature itself.