Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
I regret to say that you, like so many others I had higher hopes for, have failed my test. Tests I designed with the intent of proving myself wrong by the way. If you were a being with my own perspective, you'd get how I so dearly wish people would, for once, fail to live down to my most pessimistic of expectations. I am not a certified Theologian but I'd bet you've never confronted a real example of one. Ply your BS with the likes of Cardinal Sarah or the sadly departed Sheen. They converted rabid commies and other ardent Christ-hating heathens to the truth of the Gospel. Could you convert them to your blasphemy if you assumed the spirit of absolute humility and respect for the unbeliever they did? How'd you go about convincing those folks who may have damn good arguments for their beliefs without recourse to "authority" or violence? I do eagerly await an answer that doesn't involve said violence or some form of brainwashing.

As I've said before, I tried in earnest to deny the existence of a divinity. I failed. Thus, I tried to ascertain the nature of this divinity. The only one that stood up to the rigor of a man who sought to deny divinity was the Christian/Catholic conception. Thus, I'm a practicing Catholic. If you can tell me an argument I've failed to hear before that, in your eyes, makes me look like a misguided fool I'll give ya a cookie as I dismantle it .
Theologians are experts in Nothing.

Three members of my immediate family did degrees in theology, and two were preachers. However, I learnt nothing from them.

You are accusing me of blasphemy simply for beliefs I honestly hold. If an ideology damns people for thought crimes, then it must be a very sorry ideology indeed. And you don't even say what I said that qualifies as blasphemy.

Does Jesus have a Y chromosome? If yes, what hablogroup is it? This could easily be tested and matched with the flesh and blood of the Eucharist.

If you make a claim, shouldn't you be the one to make an argument for it, rather than me making an argument against it? I don't need to debunk a claim there is no evidence for.