I’d like to point out, for the record, the next time someone goes on about how left-leaning and atheistic the dope is, that this was a thread in which the OP attacked religion, and EVERY SINGLE POSTER DISAGREED WITH HIM. Bar none. (Including me.)
To further respond to the OP (just making the same points others have, in a slightly different way): Find me a story about a sect of Catholicism where the children frequently have anemia because they don’t get enough iron, and the doctors say “make your kids eat more meat”, and the parents respond by feeding the kids more communion wafers; and THEN I might take your OP seriously.
I will tell you what I once wrote on a student’s paper, when I was still teaching classics and religious studies classes at a lovely Canadian university…
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
Heed Mark Twain on this one. You’re coming across as a total tool.
Yeah, the gross taste is the vegetable protein. Nasty shit, but it keeps the vegetarians happy. The vegans still gripe, though, since it would still oppress Jesus to try to make the host taste like him even if there was no Jesus in it at all.
Look Catholics claim the waifer actually changes into the Body of God.
They do this through claims about accidents and substances.
This makes many claims about reality:
There is a God
He became flesh
The waifer has a substance beyond it physical accidents
This type of substance actually exists
This substance actually to the flesh of the Body of God
These are all claims about the actual world. There is no justification to believe any of these things.
You really are stupid, aren’t you? Hell, where do you get off lecturing Catholics about science, when you don’t even understand why fast food places can’t cook their burgers rare?
Hell, you can’t even spell wafer correctly, dumbass.
[QUOTE=MaxTheVool]
I’d like to point out, for the record, the next time someone goes on about how left-leaning and atheistic the dope is, that this was a thread in which the OP attacked religion, and EVERY SINGLE POSTER DISAGREED WITH HIM. Bar none. (Including me.)
Yeah, too bad the Mormons didn’t get the same consideration here.. (I do know that some people called the OP out in the Mormon thread, but there does seem to be a double standard.
I mostly chalk this up to the board atheists and the like not wanted to be associated with the original poster in any way. Even they usually don’t like to associate with antagonistic idiots.
Well… he’s a head, I suppose. Possibly syphilitic. I hear that sometimes warps the thinking processes. I betcha he wears tighty whities that are cutting off the circulation to his brainstem.
AFAIR even officially the church admitted that for bread and wine the appearances open to the senses or to scientific investigation are still those of common bread and wine after consecration, IOW they already admit that in the actual world the items will still be bread and wine for both the unbelievers and Catholics (!). (When I was a devout catholic the items still tasted normal, it is only by faith that I assumed it was the body and blood of Christ anyhow)
Get this through your thick skull: It is a matter of faith. As a lapsed Catholic I can tell you that even if I don’t believe in that anymore it does not mean I should make a fool of myself demanding that an article of faith be demonstrated in the real world when they tell you already it is not apparent anyhow.
*“I might have joined the Catholic Church if it was just a little different. If at Communion the Host was fudge, I’d be there for that. “Body of Christ, with or without nuts?””
I do not believe that in this case there is a double standard being applied. In the “bash Mormons” thread, he opened up the thread to the whole panoply of historic claims that any number of other people delight in using to bash the LDS. In this thread, he focused very narrowly on one specific doctrine which he clearly fails to understand. He also has a couple of other threads wandering around in which he has gotten a bit more support for his anti-Catholic prejudices (although, again, not when he attacks the one teaching that he thoroughly misrepresents).
(He also set the tone in this thread by using abusive language in the OP, set in Great Debates, marking him out as a loon, whereas in his earlier threads he was hostile, but not so obviously inappropriate in his behavior, thus giving the thread some time to pick up steam on his thesis before it was derailed by his personality.)
