Apologist Answer Ratings Chart

Dedicated to those who keep trying, even though they’re wrong.

Loosely interpreted scripture, tightly bound comments, and microfibrical folicular linguistic divisions (hairsplitting) has caused gastro-apologist scientists to develop a groundbreaking new ratings system to analize [sic] the words of apologetics budding superstars.

Macroscopic analysis of answered questions leads scientist to believe only comfort points are ever addressed, while the truly damming portions of obvious facts are left underserved or proctacally [sic] ignored, resembling answers given in diagram seven, where only bits and pieces of even philosophical arguments are allowed to enter the discussion.

While the acclaimed apologists feel like the image type 4, the disparity between feelings and fact are a unique christian problem, where truth rarely comes into play in their belief system, as this Box of bible facts illustrates.

Frequency and regularity have been consistent in the pastors blogging, allowing for continued observation of the stall tactics mentioned. And, as electronic data is easily tracked and difficult to wipe clean, the pastors words are readily available for examination.

Health department officials have recommended the above “full” facility be pumped and renovated into a two-seater to accompany fellow blogger and church spokesman Juan BrainYawn for prolonged verbal consultations.

How are they doing? Your feedback is important to us. Please rate apologists Mel and John using the Wong-Baker pain scale above, 10 being a bad job, and 0 being a good job, and include any helpful tips or comments.

Author: jim-

One minute info blogs breaking the faith trap.

31 thoughts on “Apologist Answer Ratings Chart”

  1. This post is absolutely, without a doubt, the best one I’ve read in a month of Sundays! Soooo fitting and appropriate to describe the subject individuals.

    And I absolutely love-love-love the part about Juan BrainYawn!!!

    Full of shit for sure.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. I can’t take credit for that one. That scale is from Allie at “Hyperbole and a Half”. If you’ve never been to her website I recommend it – but only when you’re ready for a good long session of helpless laughter!

        Liked by 1 person

        1. It’s a pretty big laundry list in the Bible. That’s why they have to have apologists literally defend every verse with rhetorical bs to try and make it make sense.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. An entertaining chart, to be sure! ๐Ÿ™‚ And not once did you mention that the aforementioned apologists suffer from the verbal daihorr diarher shits.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. I’ll bet you did not know I was once a judge for an olympic diving event?

    I’m holding up a score card with a 10 on it ๐Ÿ™‚

    I think we alll can agree they are both shitheads.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. After reading this damning evidence , yet in fairness to the pair of them, ( because as you know I am filled with compassion, understanding, light, and all that other good shit), I am, however, not convinced between you and those two who is more full of crap!

    Pee Ess. I now have to find a household cleaner compatible with laptop screens to wipe off all the splurted coffee.
    Thank you for nothing, Jim!

    Liked by 4 people

  5. I think the whole religious community needs either “GoLYTELY is a laxative solution that increases the amount of water in the intestinal tract to stimulate bowel movements” which will surely flush them out, or a sense of humility and humor. I think either one would achieve the proper goal. Hugs

    Liked by 3 people

      1. As to using the GoLYTELY I was trying to follow the instructions, when it came back on me and I threw up all over my cat and my laptop. The laptop went back to the manufacture and the cat did not come near me for weeks. To this day I think he wonders if I will puke on him again. ๐Ÿ˜‹ Hugs

        Liked by 2 people

  6. I want to rate them separately.

    Juan BrainYawn gets a 10.
    Why? Because he has no desire to get into any civil, mature discussions about religion, theism, or Christology. He is a waste of time and should be ignored as much as possible. That’s MY personal rated opinion. ๐Ÿ˜‰ ๐Ÿ˜›

    Mel gets an 8.
    Why? Because he’ll at least give you one, maybe two comments to engage on an intelligent, civil level. However, you’ll notice that you QUICKLY get to a dead-end — an “agree to disagree,” if you’re lucky. But watch out, he too has a nasty childish side, especially when BrainYawn is on/in the same playground. Furthermore, you’ll soon notice with Mel and his posts that all the supposed “critical analysis” of non-Christian subjects are merely a diversion for his single primary propaganda M.O. — Pentacostal Evangy-Fundamental Christology. For me, Mel gets an 8 because at LEAST he brings up some alternative world-views (though not adequately covered) to HIS OWN version of ICFG and PCCNA which he promotes implicitly and infrequently explicitly.

    To summarize, good luck in getting either of them into a very productive discussion of REAL LIFE. Hahaha. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Liked by 4 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s