Christianity for Idiots and Atheists

It’s just common sense:

  1. The religious community would not accept Christianity unless it had conquered much territory. As a religion, Christianity (Jesus) is on par with Chanukah, and the Big Buddha. If the origins of man were not understood, religion would say so, just as it does concerning homosexual marriages, Satanic rap music, and eternity in Hell. Christianity is not scheming against Atheists.

  2. Christianity has no boring on the philosophy of Ayn Rand, because she could easily have created a philosophy complex enough to allow for fiction that is more than characters making speeches. The presence and manifestation of Rand in the literature are not nullified by Christianity.

  3. Almost everything is developing according to prophesy: from wars and rumors of wars, to the reestablishment of Israel, to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Is morality the only thing that atheism can’t accomodate-- requiring the continual “tinker toying” of Godless psychologists?

Christianity is a simple, elegant religion, supported by a third of the planet’s people, an extensive written record, classical logic, theology, realist art, canonical liturgy (catholic and protestant), and of course, common sense.

And before people come to kill you, Lib, a link.

::snicker::

No further comment here. :slight_smile: When I see some support for any of those statements (In particular the one where christianity is supported by common sense) <i>then</i> I’ll consider a proper response.

Ahh. Ok. Whoops. I’ve been wooshed it appears. :slight_smile:

I don’t know if that thread is worth a pitting Lib. I mean, we’re taking care of it pretty well over there. Why don’t you wait until things actually get out of hand before you start parodying them?

J

If evolution actually exists, why do we keep seeing the same damn thing over and over?

Can we burn him here?

I have the kindling all ready.

Darn it! I didn’t realize the OP was a parody until after I had checked the “Yes” box on the back page of all my Chick tracts! Am I allowed to change my mind?

No, you can’t be lovingly cast into a fiery hell now, not even if you ask nicely.

Lib you’re a pal and these parody threads are consistantly cuttingly brilliant, but can you please start including a link in the OP? I always read these posts of yours and we’re not always so lucky as to have someone as quick to post a link as MM was*. Since I’m not a GD resident, I don’t get a bunch of 'em until I get a link. Really: a link would make a great series of posts even better!

Please?

Thanks!

BTW: to Jarbaby: these are works of art, he needs no further reason! :slight_smile:

Fenris

*I’d promised myself that I’d bring this up the next time you posted one, and (of course) MM made this superfluous in this case. But the principle applies.

Awww!

Did you guys build the bonfire for me?

Shucks!

I don’t know what to say.

sniff, sniff.

Tris

OK, color me confused here. -Not about the parody, of course, but about the level of derision johndcal is receiving for his rather simply delivered homily. In fact, looking at his OP and his homepage, he’s saying essentially the same things I’ve seen other Christians on this board (hint: T------s, L-------n, others who have not engaged in this pile-on) argue for both passionately and eloquently. In addition, johndcal appears to be new to the SDMB, and while (s)he doesn’t seem to recognize the standards for argument in GD, (s)he has not exactly received, shall we say a Christian welcome here. Maybe there’s some history with this poster that some of you bring from other boards; I don’t know. But to my mind, this parody and the vitriol shown in the other thread are entirely out of place.

Rather than treating the poster as a troll, and treating that OP as simple-minded instead of simplistic, maybe we could, oh… say “hi” and encourage a more thoughtful explication of debate positions in the future.

Just a thought.

Well xen, before I started my first GD thread, I made sure that I read an participated in more than a few. Lurking - it’s a dying art.

A newbie may do as they wish, but if they want to do the MB equivalent of bursting into a crowded party of strangers and shouting their speech at the top of their voice, they’ve got to expect certain inevitable reactions.

And it’s not as if Lib is actually flaming, condemning or attacking the guy. After all 90%+ of the parody is using johndcal’s own words. If anyone is riduling johndcal, it is johndcal himself.

So please don’t discourage the Libertarian parody. For me it is definitely a SD highlight. And you know that a parody is good when it can and will be taken entirely at face value by anyone who has not seen the original.

So bravo to Lib.

pan

The only person Libertarian has successfully ridiculed in this instance is himself.

No - please do elaborate.

Well, not that I agree with hardcore, but it seems Libertarian was ‘itching’ to do a parody and jumped the gun. johndcal isn’t a crazy, hiryuu-ian troll, nor an idiot, nor being unreasonable, nor out of line or jerkish. He’s someone who posted in Great Debates, and rather than see if the debate got out of control…Lib decided to jump on it right away.

I don’t know that he looks “foolish”, but let’s save the ‘works of art’ for those who truly deserve it, eh? I mean, cripes, the poster JUST GOT HERE and we’re parodying him in the pit?

J

Wow, a cross-forum simulpost. I’m glad some of you like my parodies, but in this case, I think Hardcore is right. Upon the sum of the evidence, it is clear to me that Johndcal meant no harm, and intended no insult toward Christians (or anyone else). Jarbaby’s advice is probably good. I’ll try to be a bit more careful in the future.

Meanwhile, feel free to use this thread for test posts until a compassionate mod happens by and closes it. And don’t worry, Kabbes. I won’t be detered from writing pit parodies. I’ll simply be more discerning. Thanks for your comments. :slight_smile:

Sure, kudoes to Lib for good parody. This particular parody is kinda like swatting a gnat with a brick, but hey; let’s laff it up.

I’m just surprised at the dog-piling in this case. Having gone back (after I posted my earlier message :o ) and read johnd’s other posts, I can see that he looks like someone less interested in debate than in advertising his own website here. But he was promptly instructed about spamming by several posters, and subsequently attempted a GD thread without the spam; admittedly a weak thread, but possibly an honest attempt.

Geez, I guess I shoulda previewed!
Sorry, Lib!

“Think of it as evolution in action.” – L. Niven & J. Pournelle