View Single Post
Old 10-29-07, 12:00 AM   #24 (permalink)
niftydrifty
thrifty

 
niftydrifty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Last Online: Today 11:04 AM
Posts: 3,398
Thanks: 461
Thanked 755 Times in 483 Posts

Awards:
True Debate Winner:  Winner of True Debate #5 True Debate Winner:  True Debate Winner 

Thread Starter Re: niftydrifty vs. Felicity: The Eucharist, real or symbolic?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
This is quite typical of your so-called "debate" style. Please take your own advice.

I did give specific evidence as to the "particular" word for "eat" that was used. It is not simply "eat" like the word we use in English--it is gnaw, chew, eat as in masticating specifically and can only be used to mean something literal. I'm sorry that you choose "to walk away" from the truth--just as those doubting disciples did in John 6. I hope you eventually come to recognize it, however.
there is only one truth. but there are many facts:
  • more than one word for "eat" are used interchangeably throughout John's gospel.
  • you parrot a gazillion catholic apologist websites and somehow it makes you "well versed in the subject."
  • Augustine of Hippo once wrote "believe, and you have eaten."
  • "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing." - John 6:63
  • You have no evidence that transubstantiation is real, other than your own misunderstanding.
  • lots of stuff in the bible sounds literal, and lots of deluded people take it that way.
  • etc.

post #19 was a doozy alright. I didn't think it was possible, but you've surpassed it here. just after I state (sincerely) that I hope you will find humility ... you go on to liken yourself, and your opinions, to Christ's message.

seek professional help immediately.
__________________
"I admit it. The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures." - Bill Kristol
niftydrifty is online now   Reply With Quote