Cool, so you don't know what sola scriptura (which I explicitly didn't defend) actually means, you don't know what the KJV Only position (which I clarified I don't hold to) is either.
You may as well just be punching yourself in the face.
Discussion
THEN YOU PUDDAT SHEEIT IN DUH MUTHAFUCKIH HOT PLATE NIGGA YOU FRY AWW DAT SHEEIT UP MMMMHMMMM DEN WHILE DAT BE COOKIN YOU THROW ON DAT TABASCO SAUCE N FRANKS RED HOT CUH YOU NEED TO USE AWW FIVE BOTTLES YOU GOT ON YOU NIGGA N IF YOU AIN'T GOT DAT SHEEIT DEN YOU A DUMBASS CRACKA LMAO AIN'TCHOO NEVER COOK BEFO NIGGA SHEEIT WE BE TEACHIN YAW ERRUTHANG :fwmclove:
I sincerely don't understand why you people do this.
Roman Catholicism has a decent reputation in the current year among normies. But people like you, who have never put any effort into examining a primary source, come out as say the most retarded things imaginable.
You make all Roman Catholics look bad. Lurk more. Read a book. Or just don't talk about it and save yourself the embarrassment.
> You people ... You make all Roman Catholics look bad
Your attacks on character fail. I left Protestantism because of the lack of historical basis, the rejection of Christ's clear teaching on the Real Presence (John 6 and the Last Supper narratives are very clear), and the complete lack of authority.
You claim to not defend Sola Scriptura, but you have given no other basis upon which KJV Onlyism can be founded. How is it not downstream of Sola Scriptura? Where else might the ultimate authority in the Faith lay which would allow a KJV Onlyism?
Jesus gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom, and the rest of His Twelve the authority to forgive sins. It is upon them and their successors that the Church has authority, and that competes against KJV Onlyism. It does not stand against it in any way.
The only way KJV Onlyism may have a chance is to reject the authority of the Magisterium of Christ's One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. Show how anything else may support it.