Tuesday, January 01, 2013

Vintage Coyne

Coyne, after almost certainly lying about having finished the Old Testament, is now, he claims,  giving the New Testament a thorough reading.

His exegesis is laughable. It is no an exaggeration to say that I know of quite a few twelve-year-old Christians who would clean his clock on points in a debate.

Why, exactly, should I love my enemy? the Jerry-child asks, ergo Jesus is stupid and a jerk.

Can Christianity withstand such an assault such as this?

In a new post,  entitled Apparently I don't Understand Jesus,  (nothing "apparent" about it) Jerry writes:
I knew this would happen: amateur theologians come along after I give my reactions to the Bible and instruct me that I am interpreting it [w]rong.
The first miracle of 2013 is that he can make a snide comment about "amateur theologians" without his own head exploding.  Then again...

We are then treated to vintage Jerry. Referring to the antagonist of the post, a Christian commenter named Steve, Jerry writes:
He’s [Steve] somewhat of a troll, so I am not allowing him to comment further, but feel free to say what you want to him
That is vintage Coyne.  First, prevent someone from commenting. Then, without shame, he encourages his idiotic followers to pile-on the crap.

What a repulsive, bullying, cowardly slug.


  1. Coyne, after almost certainly lying about having finished the Old Testament

    Stated without a shred of evidence.

    What a repulsive, bullying, cowardly slug.

    Funny, I feel the same about you.

  2. Jeffrey,

    I am sure that you were just as morally outraged when Coyne argued that Obama is lying about being a Christian. We wouldn't want to think you're a hypocrite--it is not like, just for one example, you criticize people for using dictionary definitions-- except when it is convenient for you to use dictionary definitions. You'd never do that. Because you are, um, morally consistent.

    I'm looking for your comment on Coyne's post about how he could be so certain that the President is a liar--but so far I have not found it.

  3. This blog is a gold mine of logical fallacies. Tu quoque, for example.

  4. BeingItself,

    I don't think you know what a logical fallacy means. A logical fallacy applies when you attempt to win an argument. Insulting someone is not an ad hominem unless you think it wins you an argument. Calling someone a hypocrite is not a tu quoque unless you are attempting to use it to show that their argument is wrong. Just pointing out someone is a hypocrite just for the sake of pointing out they are a hypocrite, is not a logical fallacy.

    Are you in, like, 8th grade?

  5. You don't know what an argument is. It's a small man indeed who cannot admit his mistakes.

  6. BI, it's a stupid man who thinks he's won, and keeps coming back to prove he's lost.

    I'm talking about you, since you wouldn't know. I've seen you post a lot on Feser's blog, and I can't think of a single instance where you came out on top. No doubt you think you did.