Christians Unite

[Norman Humann]

You have to take context into account. You conveniently ignored the context because you read "no true Christian," a light bulb went off in your head and you said "AHA! GOTCHA!" without thinking it through.

My second point was directly related to the first point and the claim therein. If someone has the truth, they can never be contradicted by the source of that truth, that being the Bible in my case. Because I was able to contradict Professor, my claim that all organized religion is the harlot is valid until I myself can be contradicted with substance.

The context is irrelevant. You said the only true christians are outside of organised religion, meaning that christians in organise religions aren't true christians. That is a fallacy.

If Professor were to come back with "only true Christians believe in eternal torment" and not back up his claim, THEN the "No true Scotsman" fallacy would apply. If he backed up his claim with Scripture, then the argument could continue, each claiming he was right until irrefutably contradicted.

Say I WERE actually irrefutably contradicted, and then I said "You're wrong, because no true Christian would believe that," then the fallacy would apply.

You can't apply it when there isn't even opposition to the point, because it's not even an argument yet.

The fallacy does not necessarily need to be used within an argument. It can be a statement in itself. You do not need to present an argument in order to say that there aren't any real/true christians in organised religion and you do not need to present an argument along the statement for it to be fallacious.

In other words, you are deliberately trying to be an asshole. Good job, you are succeeding.

Yes. Thanks.