The reason the concept has become so convoluted and vague is because the Roman Catholic Church has repeatedly been forced to come up with creative solutions and after-the-fact modifying.
If your argument revolves around that, then:
a. its up to you to prove this accusation, since it is fundamental to your whole argument.
b. you should reasonably have started there, instead of attacking the simplistic notion.
Astonishingly, you do not actually buy the RCC's understanding of papal and church infallibility nor are you a Roman Catholic. Yet you have expended all this effort in defending it - a false doctrine - and potentially misleading others. Let that be accounted to you.
I'm not interested in defending the concept as true, but in defending it as being a reasonable position to hold, and in demonstrating that your attacks on it and the RCC in general don't hold water.
You need to humbly submit yourself to God as the Spirit of truth does not rest with you - lacking spiritual discernment and understanding.
Always the line the protestant fundamentalist pulls out when they are loosing an argument.
You have argued for the sake of arguing
Untrue.
and to undermine
to undermine lies and flawed logic. Christ needs neither used on his side.
and have wasted my time.
only you can do that.
Not only wasted my time but potentially misled people with foolishness - acting as the devil's mouthpiece. You will not get one more response from me.
We'll wait and see on that one.