you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 months ago* (4 children)

An important note: I literally never said that it was literal cannibalism.

I claimed that catholics literally believe that it happens, and that they believe that the transsubtantiation literally happens, which is what you said in your original comment. The entire thesis of my comment is that it doesn't matter at all that it doesn't literally happen. All that is required for the point is that the original statement was addressed to people who believe in the literal nature. The statement is made to "you", where "you" applies to the reader if and only if the reader "regularly consumes the blood and flesh of a demigod with elders standing around chanting". I think we can both agree on at least that much.

I am pointing out that, people not being perfectly objective, we must interpret whether statements apply to us based on our worldview. If a true believer in transsubstatiation read the comment, then the fact that they believe that they regularly consume the flesh and blood of Christ is sufficient to make that statement apply to them. Thus, it is utterly immaterial whether they "literally" eat a demigod. It is sufficient that they believe that they do, and thus should believe the statement to apply to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Reading comprehension is dead lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    Ironic, then, that I can't comprehend whether you are concurring or dissenting from my view. Whom are you suggesting isn't comprehending?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments