Quote from jem:
1. How do you know if anything governs God if he exists.
Well now jem, it seems you already know that....
"God does not have to be governed by your newtonian views of what is possible."
So you tell me, (which was the purpose of my bringing this to your attention in the first place), how you know God does not have to be governed by 'my newtonian' views, instead of trying to dodge and switch the question back at me..
Once you answer that, it might be a little more rather obvious to see how any state or condition anything has, governs that thing.
Quote from jem:
2. I currently "know" what happens on the subatomic level during the Mass by faith and educated intuition. I do no declare it to be science. You would think you would understand that by now. You seem to have trouble believing someone could love God and still understand the traditional concepts f what faith and science are. You are very prejudiced. Apparently you have never befriended a believer who is also and academic or a scientist.
You completely missed the point. There was no subatomic you could have been aware of in the first place for you to introduce to your Mess by faith without science.
Your "educated intuition" has to be science based to even refer to subatomic, as your Church had no idea about subatomic (along with most everything else) until it realized that science had discovered something.
It is a fact that your assumption is also very wrong.
Quote from jem:
3. Finally I see you have learned the difference between literal and figurative cause you dropped that argument and proceeded to rather hatefully belittle my faith.
This time you have portrayed an eaxteme degree of intellectual cowardice. Your obvious incapacity to realize you were "Literally being Figurative" as I pointed out to you a few pages back, has resulted in you now trying to blame me for your own failure.
The faith you talk of teaches a depraved imoral act to be thought of Literally which fortunately you can in fact only achieve Figuratively. That is not my belittling your faith and neither is it my fault your Church teaches you to cherish those obnoxious thoughts and practices.
And when called to account for it, you try excuse and blame me for not knowing a difference between Literal and Figurative. You have now stooped to a ridiculous childish playground nonsense as your argument , along with its disgusting ideas and inhuman notions which you think are defensible simply because they are religious. And you play the persecution card at the same time. Those are the typical actions of a moral coward.
Quote from jem:
All I can say to you STU is seek out God and communion without the chruch then. Because clearly you have been wounded by someone who claimed to have faith. By the way, the teaching is not "medievil" It is was confirmed in Corthians. Written about in the didiche (which goes back to 2nd century and Christians in the first few hundred years were persecuted for being Canibals. The teaching of transubstantiation goes back to the earliest days of the Chruch and it is not only Catholic. The other old (orthodox) chruches believe in virtually the exact same thing, only the words are different.
If that's all you can say to me then you have nothing to say.
Why would I seek out something as abhorrant as the God you describe, unless I was scared, superstitious or a coward?
More religious excuses for what is by any measure of human decency, a totaly disgusting and depraved idea. And you are apparently too much of a coward to even recognize the fact and enough of a unprincipled scoundrel to try and childishly shift blame and accuse me of the offense you commited which I first brought to your notice. Not forgetting your performce being like that of an idiot, as the record clearly shows what was said!
