I'm not going to reply to everything because this conversation is not going anywhere and this will be my final post. There is no point in continuing when you ha

I'm not going to reply to everything because this conversation is not going anywhere and this will be my final post. There is no point in continuing when you have clearly taken so much out of context. First, what is this Latin barrier? The New Testament was written in Greek and continued to be available in Greek. I assume you think that the Catholic church was the sole church back then. It wasn't. The Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, and the Eastern Orthodox churches all existed. They all agree with what I am saying. They had scrupture in a variety of languages not just Latin. This was a universal view. Your are misreading the letter from Ignatius. He did not say they were married he said "and the rest of the apostles, that were married men." That were married would mean not all were in fact married. Not mandating celibacy is not the same as mandating men were married. How are you making an argument like this? The Bible says what it says, but the Bible also makes it clear you shouldn't interpret the Bible on your own (Acts 8). This is what you and Protestants did to come to this conclusion. Unless you are willing to submit to what all the Churches that have actual claims of succession from the Apostles, there is no point in continuing. If you are a Christian you aren't following Acts 8. If you aren't a Christian then you are just pushing your secular views onto Bible to push your own narrative.