• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

DOC's Proof of Christianity Through Irrelavent Fact Attrition

joobz

Tergiversator
joobz
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
17,998
DOC has started a number of threads which all raise a seemingly inconsequential point. (Was peter in rome, was Lief Erikkson christian, Communism better as christian,...). Whenever asked, "So what?", the question goes unanswered.

I wish to start this thread by presenting my believe as to what DOC's goal/view is here. I think it may provide interesting discussion and will hopefully shortcut further digressions down nonsensical paths.

I believe DOC is attempting to "prove" that christianity is great and wonderful and is the only thing that is worthwhile because

1.) Peter was in Rome
2.) Jefferson was a church going christian
3.) Communism would have succeeded if it was christian
4.) Athiesm can't rescue someone from drugs
5.) Secular humanism is a religion
6.) ACLU hates christianity
7.) Leif Errickson is a christian
8.) Christ and Paul are on some guys list of 100 most influential people.

The validity of any of these claims are not important to him. It is the quantity of arguments rather than the quality of the arguments that he is going for.

It is with the belief that by presenting enough small facts, these will add up to a large fact. This is obviously an example of either argumentum verbosium or fallacy of the consequent. But I would like for DOC to have a chance to prove me wrong.

Doc, why are these small "facts" relavent?
to what are they relavent?
and why I am wrong?
 
joobz said:
DOC has started a number of threads which all raise a seemingly inconsequential point. (Was peter in rome, was Lief Erikkson christian, Communism better as christian,...). Whenever asked, "So what?", the question goes unanswered.

I wish to start this thread by presenting my believe as to what DOC's goal/view is here. I think it may provide interesting discussion and will hopefully shortcut further digressions down nonsensical paths.

I believe DOC is attempting to "prove" that christianity is great and wonderful and is the only thing that is worthwhile because

1.) Peter was in Rome
2.) Jefferson was a church going christian
3.) Communism would have succeeded if it was christian
4.) Athiesm can't rescue someone from drugs
5.) Secular humanism is a religion
6.) ACLU hates christianity
7.) Leif Errickson is a christian
8.) Christ and Paul are on some guys list of 100 most influential people.

The validity of any of these claims are not important to him. It is the quantity of arguments rather than the quality of the arguments that he is going for.

It is with the belief that by presenting enough small facts, these will add up to a large fact. This is obviously an example of either argumentum verbosium or fallacy of the consequent. But I would like for DOC to have a chance to prove me wrong.

Doc, why are these small "facts" relavent?
to what are they relavent?
and why I am wrong?
Click to expand...
He has two more to go, of course, to match up with the Ten Commandments. Don't touch that dial!

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
He has two more to go, of course, to match up with the Ten Commandments. Don't touch that dial!

DR
Click to expand...

Some possibilities:

Christian chicks are hotter.
Christians drive better cars.
Stryper totally rocks.
Jesus could kick Buddha's ass.
Christians smell better than atheists.

The mind boggles.
 
i dont know if he will notice the thread, maybe you should put his name in the title or something.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Some possibilities:
(snip)...Christians smell better than atheists.
Click to expand...

Replace "atheists" with "hippies" and you'd be on to something. Then again, who doesn't smell better than hippies?

Oh that wretched patchouli stink...
 
nails3jesus0 said:
i dont know if he will notice the thread, maybe you should put his name in the title or something.
Click to expand...
changed, Thank you mods, whoever you are!

BTW, it looks Like my typing dislexia came to play again.
irrelavent. ugh!:o
 
Cello Man said:
Replace "atheists" with "hippies" and you'd be on to something. Then again, who doesn't smell better than hippies?

Oh that wretched patchouli stink...
Click to expand...

Knew a lot of hippies...even was one. Never knew anyone who used patchouli or didn't bathe.

Any other stereotypes you'd like to share? Some on black people, maybe? ;)
 
Mark said:
Knew a lot of hippies...even was one. Never knew anyone who used patchouli or didn't bathe.

Any other stereotypes you'd like to share? Some on black people, maybe? ;)
Click to expand...

Here's One: All black people are better at basketball than white people.;)
 
Mark, it must be just the hippies around Texas then. Occasionally some of them will wander out of Austin in a drug induced haze and drift into the DFW area. Anyone who's ever been to Scarborough Faire knows the type that I'm talking about. ETA: By the way, you're a former drummer for Spinal Tap...and you've lived to talk about it?!?!

Seriously though, back on topic. Wherefore art thou, DOC? This thread is a chance to unite all your conjectures into a grand unified theory and convert the heathens gathered here.
 
Last edited:
Cello Man said:
Seriously though, back on topic. Wherefore art thou, DOC? This thread is a chance to unite all your conjectures into a grand unified theory and convert the heathens gathered here.
Click to expand...
I think the only way we will get DOC to post here is if, whenever he posts an off topic point on another thread, people were to "gently" remind him that this thread exists.
 
Cello Man said:
Mark, it must be just the hippies around Texas then. Occasionally some of them will wander out of Austin in a drug induced haze and drift into the DFW area. Anyone who's ever been to Scarborough Faire knows the type that I'm talking about. ETA: By the way, you're a former drummer for Spinal Tap...and you've lived to talk about it?!?!
Click to expand...

Ah, now I get it because ALL Texans are (fill in blank)...

Kidding.

Btw, I am actually guitar player...I just love Spinal Tap (any similarity between that movie and my life is pure hogwash, if I could remember).
 
joobz said:
DOC has started a number of threads which all raise a seemingly inconsequential point. (Was peter in rome, was Lief Erikkson christian, Communism better as christian,...). Whenever asked, "So what?", the question goes unanswered.

I wish to start this thread by presenting my believe as to what DOC's goal/view is here. I think it may provide interesting discussion and will hopefully shortcut further digressions down nonsensical paths.

I believe DOC is attempting to "prove" that christianity is great and wonderful and is the only thing that is worthwhile because

1.) Peter was in Rome
2.) Jefferson was a church going christian
3.) Communism would have succeeded if it was christian
4.) Athiesm can't rescue someone from drugs
5.) Secular humanism is a religion
6.) ACLU hates christianity
7.) Leif Errickson is a christian
8.) Christ and Paul are on some guys list of 100 most influential people.

The validity of any of these claims are not important to him. It is the quantity of arguments rather than the quality of the arguments that he is going for.

It is with the belief that by presenting enough small facts, these will add up to a large fact. This is obviously an example of either argumentum verbosium or fallacy of the consequent. But I would like for DOC to have a chance to prove me wrong.

Doc, why are these small "facts" relavent?
to what are they relavent?
and why I am wrong?
Click to expand...

Where'd he claim that thing about Erikson? I thought i'd see all his innanity, but I missed that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom