Incomprehensible Stupidity
I'm literally shocked by how stupid steve from Triablogue is. I mean, this has to set some kind of world record of stupidity.
On Thursday, I wrote this comment. Later on Friday, John added a section to it. He wanted to make sure that everyone knew that he was making this addition, not me. He wrote, "The following is added by John..."
Seriously, his addition was that big. Only a moron could have overlooked that (and two of them did).
On Thursday, I wrote this comment. Later on Friday, John added a section to it. He wanted to make sure that everyone knew that he was making this addition, not me. He wrote, "The following is added by John..."
Seriously, his addition was that big. Only a moron could have overlooked that (and two of them did).
In spite of the blazingly clear statement that John was adding to my post, steve (a village idiot):
1) attributes the comment to me--"posted by exbeliever"
2) writes some response to John's comments (that I didn't bother to read), and says, "So that, Exbeliever, is the proper exegesis of these verses." (emphasis mine)
GeneMBridges, universally noted for his inability to put together a coherent thought, once again displays his stupidity:
1) Commenting on steve's post, he writes, "The funny thing here is the Ex-believer has gone out of his way to say he is acting in a detached fashion, yet he keeps writing these jeremiads. " (emphasis mine)
2) Again, "He [i.e. exbeliever] would want us to believe he has no agenda, but to "refute" Evan, he picks up on a passage of Scripture dealing with 1st century Christians who were also being persecuted by the pagans around them and suffering for their faith." (emphasis mine) Gene says that "I" am picking up passages to refute Evan. Gene can't read the huge red letters either.
3) Still again, "One wonders, is Ex-believer now admitting he does have an agenda and that it includes causing suffering for the faith on the part of Christians? If we assume his use of v. 9, for example, is correct, then it would also mean that he has himself abused and done evil and believes that we at Tblogue are repaying him in kind."
4) He writes, "No, Ex-believer." and then writes some stupid drivel.
So, I read this and I think, "How ironic; here two idiots trying to correct someone's ability to read and understand someone's written expression, and they are making the most ridiculous reading errors imaginable."
I decided I would tell them about it. I wrote:
Look at how crap-for-brains responds:
Not wanting to leave any doubt about his stupidity, steve responds to my question, "So, am I going to get an admission of a mistake?!" by saying:
Is there anyone--Christian or non-Christian--who will agree with these idiots? Will anyone justify these blatant errors and steve's pride for refusing to admit when he is wrong? Does anyone blame me for writing off these idiots?
1) attributes the comment to me--"posted by exbeliever"
2) writes some response to John's comments (that I didn't bother to read), and says, "So that, Exbeliever, is the proper exegesis of these verses." (emphasis mine)
GeneMBridges, universally noted for his inability to put together a coherent thought, once again displays his stupidity:
1) Commenting on steve's post, he writes, "The funny thing here is the Ex-believer has gone out of his way to say he is acting in a detached fashion, yet he keeps writing these jeremiads. " (emphasis mine)
2) Again, "He [i.e. exbeliever] would want us to believe he has no agenda, but to "refute" Evan, he picks up on a passage of Scripture dealing with 1st century Christians who were also being persecuted by the pagans around them and suffering for their faith." (emphasis mine) Gene says that "I" am picking up passages to refute Evan. Gene can't read the huge red letters either.
3) Still again, "One wonders, is Ex-believer now admitting he does have an agenda and that it includes causing suffering for the faith on the part of Christians? If we assume his use of v. 9, for example, is correct, then it would also mean that he has himself abused and done evil and believes that we at Tblogue are repaying him in kind."
4) He writes, "No, Ex-believer." and then writes some stupid drivel.
So, I read this and I think, "How ironic; here two idiots trying to correct someone's ability to read and understand someone's written expression, and they are making the most ridiculous reading errors imaginable."
I decided I would tell them about it. I wrote:
So, I'm supposed to trust your exegesis of passages, when you miss the biggest freakin' red letters on the planet that say, "The following is added by John..." [That's John Loftus, not exbeliever] and then go on to attribute the whole thing to me? You address all of your comments to me when I didn't write anything that you quoted.Well, it's a good thing that I didn't hold my breath.
It's called reading, my friends. I'm afraid that this is typical of your intellectual abilities.
So, am I going to get an admission of a mistake?! Are you going to admit that you can't read for crap and that you missed those huge red letters that I saw at 3:00 pm this afternoon that explicitly state that I wrote NOTHING that you quoted.
I won't hold my breath.
Look at how crap-for-brains responds:
The "red-letter" words are attributed to Loftus, but the post is attributed to you. We can attribute it to either of you since that comes from the composite authorship of the post itself.Hmmm. . . Need I say anything about this? He can't admit any mistake! He says that it is perfectly justified to attribute something to me even though John, who actually wrote the statement, clearly distanced the statement from me. Moron!
So, yes, it's called reading, exbeliever. I'm afraid this is typical of your intellectual abilities.
Not wanting to leave any doubt about his stupidity, steve responds to my question, "So, am I going to get an admission of a mistake?!" by saying:
Well, ordinarily I don't admit other men's mistakes for them, but since you insist, yes, it was a mistake for you to let Loftus amend your original post.He simply refuses to state that he made a mistake!
Is there anyone--Christian or non-Christian--who will agree with these idiots? Will anyone justify these blatant errors and steve's pride for refusing to admit when he is wrong? Does anyone blame me for writing off these idiots?