“You cite a source i provided, and then refer to so much disinformation, and that you think i get lot of my information from “The Da Vinci Code.” How then is this not a denial of my assertion that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery?”
Not that this would apply to any poster on FR, of course, but I find it unpleasant to try and converse with someone who is both malicious and stupid, and is blissfully unaware of either condition. Not, of course, that anyone on FR is both malicious and stupid. That could never happen, and if it did, we wouldn’t be permitted to comment on it.
To those of moderate or higher intelligence, my comment speaks to the dishonesty of bringing up a long-dead, ancient kerfluffle in an attempt to sling mud at the One True Church.
DSC, resorting to such bombast only digs your hole deeper, as if any postings evidence maliciousness by deliberate distortion of the truth and or lacking intelligence it is yours, as you charge me with lying due to your apparent inability to makes yourself clear - or admit guilt - which is the second time you did this in a 3 days.
First you carelessly make the fallacious statement that "As a matter of fact, if you go to Mass every day for three years, you will hear the entire Bible read aloud," which is rather a dumb thing to do in an age and forum in whichsuch assertions can be checked out and error exposed.
And yet after this was exposed, your only response to my assertion that this was as "another parroted dubious claim" was that "The Internet is a wonderful resource. It also provides fallacious information for the malicious to use in spreading error."
Meaning either you were the malicious one using the Internet in spreading error, or fellow RCs, which can hardly be your charge, or it infers that my exposé of your prevaricating propaganda is what is spreading error.
Finally when cornered you blamed your old age and infirmity, admitting you "misspoke," but followed that with distinguishing it from the professional liars one encounters.
And which is consistent with your well-know theme of anti-Catholic bias, and asserting there never has been or is a scintilla of anti-Protestant bias on FR, and thus i replied "Be careful throwing rocks at known or anonymous liars, Rome herself made use of the works of such done in the interest of supplying what Scripture does not," citing the Donation of Constantine besides the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals.
But true to form, you retort , "I have been wondering how you came to be in possession of so much disinformation. I’ve been reading a book called “The Da Vinci Hoax,” and now I think you got a lot of your information from “The Da Vinci Code.”
And which i dare say "anyone of moderate or higher intelligence" would normally see as a denial that the Donation was a forgery - or an example of an inability of a FR to be coherent - or unwillingness to be honest - and invite anyone on FR to express their judgment.
And yet when i conclusively substantiated that this is held to be a forgery even by Cath. scholarship, you have the audacity to charge me with lying, saying you did not affirm or deny anything about the Donation of Constantine, the very thing you cited as disinformation akin to The Da Vinci Code! And if not then the only item remaining as "disinformation" would be the Pseudo-IsidorianDecretals. No wonder you threatened to ignore me!
Yet when i went over this with you, rather than admitting the obvious, you example more inability to be coherent, or honest, explaining that you find it "unpleasant to try and converse with someone who is both malicious and stupid, and is blissfully unaware of either condition," but that this does not apply to any poster on FR or that it could.
A poor attempt at tongue-in-cheek at best, while then you come close to exampling malice by deliberate distortion of the truth and or lacking intelligence (even in damage control) by explaining your "disinformation" "Da Vinci Code" dismissal of my reference to the fallacious Donation really refers to "the dishonesty of bringing up a long-dead, ancient kerfluffle in an attempt to sling mud at the One True Church,"
which not only presumes what remains to be proven, and attempts to blithely dismiss such evidence as the Donation (and infers more recent examples of dishonestly are non-existent) against Rome being the OTC , but in-credibly charges me with dishonesty when it is you who have exampled this by your fake claims and damage-control denials!
Yes indeed, it would be best for you to ignore me, as the more you attemptted to be an escape artist the more your insolence has been displayed on FR for all to see, and as a negative example of what devotion to Rome can foster and excuse. Like mother like son, while charging bias in your glass house.
I hardly think it needs any more than what it has on it's plate right now.