[Quix]

You have no evidence from either Church Fathers or Scripture that the Assumption of Mary is not true.

Ahhhhhhh, so those on the side of the historical record and Biblical accuracy are now tasked by the magicsterical with proving the negative? LOL. ROTFLOL! GTTM!

The evidence from the Church Fathers and from Scripture also fails to show that Mary's toenails weren't painted in neon colors by angelic mice at 02:00 every morning while she slept.

SO . . . WHEN can we expect the new dogma of THE HOLY MICE PAINTED RAINBOW TOENAILS OF MARY to be published? Will it be first published on the net or by gold illuminated vellum missives from the hollowed Humpty Dumpty halls of the ensconsed magicsterical bodily in Rome? Will the Pope read it from an open window after releasing a dozen doves or after releasing a dozen holy white mice?

Enquiring snickerers would like to know.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

NYer: You have no evidence from either Church Fathers or Scripture that the Assumption of Mary is not true.

Ahhhhhhh, so those on the side of the historical record and Biblical accuracy are now tasked by the magicsterical with proving the negative? LOL.

IIRC, he loses who invokes the "you have no evidence it's not true" rebuttal. 8~)