So your Christian belief is now just an opinion, without any objective evidence for it.
No: ‘opinion’ does not imply ‘without objective evidence’. Until you can see that, you’re going to come up with all kinds of invalid conclusions!
OK, you accept that Christianity is merely an opinion
It is a conclusion, reached through rationality, to which I subscribe. The fact that you
don’t, doesn’t imply that there’s a “lack of evidence” – it merely means that you reject that evidence.
it was not intellectually satisfying (once I reached the level of discerning intellectualism) due to the rationally unacceptable teachings. And eventually… I lost my faith - which was NOT a volitional decision either.
You’re contradicting yourself, again.
You rejected it – on the basis of your rational decision – and therefore, you chose not to believe in it. That was volitional, based on the operation of your intellect.
If you think about this, you will understand that beliefs cannot be changed willy-nilly.
They proceed from not only faith but also reason. Which, if you recall, is precisely what the Church teaches.
You say that morality absolute and genocide is ALWAYS evil, but the flood killing every creature is just fine
I’m not saying that “the flood killed every creature”. I
would say that this is the way that the inspired writer chose to tell the story; but that doesn’t imply (again) that this is “the 7pm Evening News with Walter Cronkite”. For some reason, you want to make out Catholics to be Biblical Fundamentalists, and thereby, throw away the faith on that account. We’re not; and you cannot – unless you wish to tilt at windmills of your own creation.
Just get off your high horse.
My, my. Touchy, aren’t we, when our mistakes are corrected, eh?
But, allow me to engage you in your
continued irrational demands: “one of our senses”
cannot, by definition, “experience spiritual somethings.” Why do you continue to demand that we suggest that it be so?
No. You discard evidence as if it were not; that allows you to (mistakenly) claim “no evidence!” Really, what you’re doing is
rejecting it, which should lead you to the conclusion “I disagree with the evidence presented.” However, that would force
you off your “high horse”, which seems a unpleasant option for you.
That is another insult. Looks like that I am either a liar, or an imbecile - in your opinion, of course.
No – I just think you’re mistaken. Again, not an insult – unless you’re so enamored of your notion that you’re the only rational one around here that it’s insulting to you to consider that we are, too.