There’s a thread in GD titled ARG220 And Mormonism. In it, ARG has posted the following:
He seems to think he’s pretty good at communicating ideas, and convincing people that he’s right.
I personally think that ARG’s debating skills are exactly zero. He writes opinion and conjecture as fact; his arguments contain many logical fallacies; when his points are refuted, he either simply repeats himself, or ignores the poster entirely. He also is very selective about the questions he answers, refusing to respond to anything that might catch him in a contradiction.
Am I wrong? Has ARG ever shown the ability to debate intelligently? Has he managed to sway even one person to his point of view?
(ARG, note that I am making no religious references of any kind. I am not bashing your beliefs, nor am I disparaging Christianity in general. This is a comment on what I see as laughable hubris, in your belief that you would easily out-debate your opponents. IMO, you couldn’t argue your way out of a wet paper bag.)
Of course I don’t fit in; I’m part of a better puzzle.