Deletion of Catholic Bible Contradictions

Comment: OK, some things to be going on with when working on this article: Wikipedia:Weasel_words|avoid weasel words such as ''"It is a widespread (but not universal) belief..."''.  This tells a researcher and a casual reader precisely nothing about the scope and depth of the topic under discussion and, more importantly, attempt to cover a Point of View.  Articles shouldn't be partisan and  is a guide to avoiding this stance.  The article tells me nothing about the dispute between the two authors but instead prompts in my mind the question "What line is the author trying to push in the debate?".   Secondly, presenting illustrative quotes to raise awareness of a debate is not the same as contributing an encyclopædic article about said debate.  Wikipedia:How_to_write_a_great_article|How to write a great article is a good guide towards constructing something for inclusion in WP.  Please read it whilst thinking of further improvements.  Why not precis the debate?  What is the context?  What are the points of view of the contending authors?  A NPOV guide to the debate is worth far more than a series of quotations which are really quite boring to read.  Sources and citations for researchers?  Is this debate continued in journals of religious studies?  References to these would be really worth having for any researcher interested in the debate. In summary, NPOV; introduction with topic & scope; analysis of POV of subjects' work; one or two illustrative quotes so as not to disrupt the flow of the article; summary if appropriate; citations, references and further reading.  I hope that my comments are useful.  I would like to read about the debate but I can gain nothing from reading this article as it stands
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: as  violation that cannot possibly be remedied as long as the article remains in its current form. I could very easily dig up entire scholarly articles debating the "true meaning" of almost every single Bible passage listed, so to simply dump the quotes onto the page without any attempt to provide context renders the article useless. In addition, the article is also a rather nasty - some might say outright bigoted -  violation ("Catholic views" vs "''Biblical'' views"? That's not just opinion, it's Catholic bashing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR||WP:NPOV)

Comment: WP:NOR, . This is one person's original research being presented uneqivocally by another. Similar criticisms could be levied against many other sects and religions in their interpretation of scriptures. Similarly this is just ''evidence'', not fact and not analysis, for criticisms of the Catholic Church, and as such is just a list. This could be filtered and entered into an appropriate article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: this violation of  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:NOR)