Yet Another Hysterical Anti-Christian Displays His Massive Stupidy for Us
While reading the reviews for a book called The Historical Jesus I came across a typical anti-Christian rant in need of a smack down. In quotes are sections of the rant by “A Customer” and I’ve replied to them:
The title of his review:
“Please! Faith and historical research don’t mix well.”
Bcuz! You Said! So! So is that your atheist science lesson for the day? Why then do so many evolutionists believe faith that evolution is true mixes with historical research? Do you even know what faith means? Hint: It doesn’t mean “belief without evidence” which you clearly think it means from reading your stupid rant.
“By A Customer”
What’s wrong, didn’t you have time enough to tell us who you were? Aren’t you proud of your scholarly scientific review?
“If this is the ‘factual’ basis for the historicity of Jesus, then Christianity is in trouble.”
Bcuz u said so, and whatever the atheist says is true is true. Not very scientific are you?
“What a joke.”
Bcuz u said so, and whatever the atheist says is true is true. Not very scientific are you? Hint: Evidence doesn’t mean, “Whatever you feel is true.” Use a dictionary and stop being lazy.
“The ‘evidence’ — ?”
That’s your “evidence” so far –? Atheists, always wasting time with their stupidity and pretension.
“Well, it isn’t there.”
Am I the only one who feels like there a fly buzzing in my ear, or is it just me?
“I was very excited to read this book;”
Because you had new material to find imaginary faults in.
“it was recommended to me by thoughtful, intelligent Christians who I greatly respect.”
I smell self-serving flattery.
“But the book was a real shock — “
Holy mother of mothers! Really! Shocking!
“the author contradicts himself all the time,”
Bcuz ye said so, and whatever ye say is true is true bcuz ye said it.
“the author uses the New Testament primarily to ‘prove’ the truth of the New Testament — Hm…”
Hmmmm, he’s trying to “prove”? So because it didn’t convince your illogical self it wasn’t proof to anyone else lol? Did you forget the meaning of proof too? Damn you’re an arrogant babbler aren’t ya?
Can you shut up already or come up with evidence? You’re wasting my time.
“That’s some fishy logic, no?”
No, whatever you say is not true bcuz u you posted a rhetorical question. Furthermore, questions do not equal evidence in and of themselves, sarcasm does not equal evidence in and of itself. You are really dying to end up in Hell aren’t you? Tell us all wise one where he says, “The NT is true bcuz it says it is true”. Show us. Oh, you can’t, bcuz you’re a careless liar.
“I strongly suggest that those who are earnestly interested in the history of Christianity and its beliefs concerning Jesus — “
And we saved Christians forgiven of our since care what an opinion-bashing ranter strongly suggests bcuz?
“who are not biased a priori by their ‘faith'”
Insane one why did you put “faith” in quotes? Are you stupid? So you don’t truly believe that they have faith, LOL? Well what do you think it is then, logical belief? Is that it Mr. Confused?
Mr. A Priori do you think you are smart because you said “a priori” rather than “because” like a non-vain person who truly cares about making sense and helping others (rather than being a show off) would have said? It makes you look stupid and vain to me and the millions of Christians on my side.
And what is your evidence that the author is biased? Do you wan’t us to just have, lol, “faith” that you’re right because you have “faith” that you’re right?
Contradictory one did you notice you are biased because you have faith that the Bible isn’t true? Blind much? Again, look up the meaning of the word faith before spitting all over everyone. Furthermore contradictory one, are you really that stupid as to think 100+ million Christians cannot think logically because they trust that God’s word is true based on the logical things it states? You’re seriously that stupid? Then you who have faith God and Jesus do not exist can never be logical either.
“which immediately necessitates certain conclusions –“
Trust “immediately” (the hell?) necessitates certain conclusions? Genius, did you mean, trusting in something means you conclude that something is true? Was that so hard to say Mr. Word Salad Master?
And why are you telling us that it’s immediate? Hey, I’ve got some useless information to waste your time with while I’m pretending to be smart too: If you say something you’ve immediately said something! Neato huh?
Now, your point that trust means you have concluded certain things, IS? So if an evolutionist trusts that evolution is true based on his reading of books endorsing evolution means he is biased? Huh? Can we say, “contradiction” or how about “I’m ranting and have made no point”?
“then check out the work by [blah, blah blah, blah blah], and [blah bleah].”
No thanks, clearly if they have as careless garbage research skills and moral logical as you aren’t worth reading.
“The bottom line: the authors of the New Testament simply used Old Testament, Pagan, and Greek sources to construct their jesus tales.”
Bottom line: saying “bottom line” with the feeling that you are oh so wise doesn’t cut it. Bottom line: Bcuz u said so does not equal evidence. Bottom line: Parroted tales like yours does not equal evidence. Bottom line: Fancy word salad does not equal evidence, let alone nonsensical word salad. Bottom line: You’ve wasted out time again. Bottom line: You are still sinning against God and pretending he doesn’t exist despite the clear evidence the universe has been designed and that Jesus was a good and truthful man. Bottom line: You need to learn the definitions of the words you use before acting like you know what you are talking about.
“It is all there — for anyone willing to look for the truth.”
It is all there — for anyone willing to look for the truth. Woah, I can say that to you too! That must make me right!