I use the Bible to prove my point so what's wrong with that? Have you no respect for Scripture?
Well... I do! :) Only Catholicism is not based on the Bible solely, but on the thoughts of Fathers of Church. They somehow knew that the Book is only an eclectic, huge hint at the Truth of Faith, and tried to suck the essence out of it.
And, between us, it all boils down to that when you stand before the Judge, then you are solely responsible for your deeds and negligence. So it's Church and priest for the simpler folk, but if you are capable of independent thought, then the personal responsibility grows accordingly. Thus as a good Catholic you complain stubbornly about a greedy priest to his bishop, but you do not make a tabloid news out of it. And such. Catholicism is not so simplistic, as it appears to outsiders.
It is not off-topic, no,
How come? it's just an exchange of private opinions of two particular people, on a particular topic. No society involved, actually, and Poland only loosely related.
I stress the danger of affixing a sticker. I can see some merits in Catholicism (good deeds, for example). However, I just believe that they are artificial constructs and I could also quote many provisions relating to God's Grace which prove that.
You always end up with an artificial product, God's wisdom is not available to you.
You want to see an eminent Catholic get defeated in argumentation time after time? Watch this It's one of many topics that they discuss. Dr Walter Martin, helped by Ankerberg admittedly, defeats Rev Mitchell Pacwa. It's really detailed stuff which explores imputation Vs infusion. Deep but they keep it accessible and watchable :)
Deep? this is some talmudic hocus-pocus, Seanus, who cares about it? :) Do they really want to find the answer to Faith, Life, and Everything? Through logical argumentation on TV? It's a show, PR, propaganda.