Uh, excuse me, Matt.

On June 17th above you catagorically stated that:

"Catholicism, Hinduism and Islam clearly can't be true if the Christianity of the NT is. . ."

I'm sure you wouldn't mind explaining to an old former Catholic Christian exactly how and why Catholicism can't be true if the NT is. You can't be unaware that Catholic Christianity predates any other Christian religion by several hundred years -- Protestanism by 1,500 years, for example. What were Christians prior to the reformation, Buddhists?

I think Christianity of all flavors is flakey, pernicious, and harmful. But the residual effects of the likes of Luther and Calvin, for example, are even worse theologically than what preceeded them.

I'd posit that given the historical and tracable apostolic succession, beginning with Simon Peter, Roman Catholicism comes closer to having an exclusive claim to "real" Christianity than any other so-called denomination. I think it's demonstrable that all protestant denominations and cults constitute little more than heretical derivitives of true Christianity -- Catholicism, the mother Church.

Give me some VERIFIABLE evidence that Catholicism can't be true if the Christianity of the NT is, okay?