Jesus’ IMMENSE Suffering: Identifying the false Christ of Muslims & Atheism

Published by firebrandnotes

Radical Preparation for the Return of Christ

56 thoughts on “Jesus’ IMMENSE Suffering: Identifying the false Christ of Muslims & Atheism

    1. What on Earth do you mean? I’m very tired of people like you jumping on to a public space/blog/video without so much as a name, let alone an intelligent comment that reflects even a modicum of careful thought.

      1. In that Christians can’t even agree amongst themselves about their supposed messiah, for you to claim that no one else gets it right is quite silly. christians claims many differnet christs, all who differ in what they want as morals etc and not one of you self-proclaimed christians can do waht your bible promises. There is no reason to be impressed by baseless claims.

        I am an atheist, a former Christian, and since there is no evidence for Jesus, man/god or delusional Jew, or prophet per Muslims, there seems to be no “true” christ at all. You can’t show your version to be the true one nor can you show that there is any “true” one, that isn’t simply a fictional character.

      2. Thanks for at least helping the conversation get going. I’m not fully disagreeing with you which I’m positive you weren’t expecting. The proliferation of false Christs (as evidenced by Muslims and compromised “Christians”) is absolutely the order of the day. As you may know, Jesus said exactly this would happen in the first few verses of Matthew 24. But, unless you know something that I don’t, you simply can not rationally claim that the New Testament is baseless or does not provide evidence of Jesus Christ. The historical evidence of His life and crucifixion is overwhelming. No historian or scholar would claim what you have. Are you aware of the exact MSS numbers and textual criticism of the New Testament that dwarf any other historical document of antiquity?

      3. Unsurpriingly, nothing new here, FB. You are just one mroe christian who thinks he has the only “right” version of Christianity, and has no evidence to support that at all.

        it’s also not a prediction that ignorant cults will be mocked, especially when they fail for 2000+years.

        I know quite a bit that you don’t. Your religion glorifies ignorance. There is no evidence for your magical jesus nor for any essential event in the bible. But do provide this “overwhelming” evidence, if you can.

        Plenty of historians and scholars agree with me, and they simply ignore your myths.

        That a book of lies is being criticized doesn’t make it true. And lots of copies of lies doesn’t make them true either.

      4. “Nothing new” and yet you are unable to actually refute the historical! Hot air and bluster! Again, for the purposes of genuine enquirers reading this dog’s dinner of a flow: to claim in the same breath the irrationality of orthodox biblical faith, while hoping to somehow disprove the disproportionate historical strength of the New Testament with no evidence, is irrational ignorance dot com. If one were to dispassionately research the NT MSS evidence (not to mention the staggering consistency of the entire Bible) you would be floored. How can you be so angry (at God or Christians) if He is a sky fairy?! For those interested in the historical foundations of this wearisome debate:

      5. and still nothing from the wannabee TrueChristian. No evidence that the essential events in the bible happened, nor that his god exists.

        Again, copies of lies don’t make them true. And funny how the bible isn’t consistent at all. If it were, then there would be no need for “harmonization”, and apologetics.

        If one only looks at the claims of what happened directly after the resurrection, one can see that your claim of consistency is a lie.

        And I can be quite angry at the harmful lies that people like you make up in the name of this imaginary god.

      6. Actually it does help quite a bit, since I’ve been able to see Christianity fail and wither thanks to people realizing just how ignorant and violent christianity is.

    2. Having looked at the culture of your own blog, I’m surprised that you’ve engaged like this. You know that it would only go in one direction at the speed of “shit at a wall” if the shoe was on the other foot. Perhaps you’d extend the same culture to other blogs you jump onto with little thought? What — are you going to publish my email address because I’ve stood up to the nonsense? Listen, you can swagger around in your atheistic bubble if you want to — that’s your choice of faith — but please don’t swoon around other people’s blogs in the way that you have while warning your clamouring fans against the very same standard. I’m the boss of this space, not you! That all said, I quite agree with you that these “religions” are failing. Hence having written a book about it.

      1. Alas, the only one throwing shit at the wall are theists who have no more evidence for their nonsense than the next.

        If you had actually looked at my blog, you’d see that I have no problem with theists commenting on it. I of course, will happily address their comments and show how they are wrong.

        You follow a religion, and it’s always great fun to see a Christian claim otherwise. I’ll posit that you are a familiar type of Christian, having invented your own version and bitter that no one finds you impressive.

      2. For other interested parties reading, see my above comment regarding the lunacy of claiming that the New Testament is baseless…or that, somehow, the plumb-line is in being impressive to others. The standard is exactly the opposite. As a “former Christian” I’m sorry that you are clearly so bitter yourself. Your problem is the Church not God (and I don’t mean to impress you by saying that!).

      3. and poor dear can’t show any evidence to support his claims. Tsk. Again, we have a Christian who has made up his own version, and still can’t show he’s the TrueChristian(tm) he wants everyone to believe he is.

      4. That’s what you took from that sentence? Ooooo, a raging hypocritical atheist has said that there aren’t any biblical manuscripts — gosh, I just have to admit that I “have nothing” Deary me…

      5. and I do enjoy watching a Christiaan intentionally lie. I’ve never said that there are no bible manuscripts. I have said that there are no autographs “an original manuscript or work of art” – merriam webster. There are plenty of bible manuscripts, just like there are plenty of manuscripts of the qu’ran, Dianetics, etc.

        Still waiting for any evidence. Or dear, do you want to admit that when the number of copies of the qu’ran outnumber the copies of the bible, it will magically become more true than your bible, per your very own argument.

      6. Sadly, tragically, laughable. There’s no point in educating you about today’s “religion” cf. religion per se given that your functional basis for thinking is at odds with historical credibility. The trope is very predictable and exceptionally lazy.

      7. This is a typical excuse by someone who has nothing to support their claims. It’s also typically incoherent. This: “religion per se given that your functional basis for thinking is at odds with historical credibility.” is meaningless.

      8. When historical evidence of autographs and manuscripts is considered “meaningless”, we all know there’s no rational debate and rather an emotional reflex kicking off from past trauma. As I said, your problem is not with God, it is with the church. I look forward to your article slandering me (or perhaps analysing historical facts).

      9. Ah, nice lies! There are no autographs for the bible books.

        happily, no past trauma, but of course that’s all you have are more lies. My problem is with liars like you, which make up the church and make up your imaginary god.

      10. I didn’t make the claim that autographs existed, dear. The burden of proof is on you for showing something does exist.

        And surprise, you can’t. If you google “do autographs of the bible exist” you will get christian website after christian website admitting that they don’t. we also have christan aguments that the bible is “inerrant”, but that claim only applies to the original autographs.

        “Remember, it is the autographs (original writings) that are inspired and inerrant, not the copies. The copies we have now are copies of inspired documents. The copies are not themselves “inspired;” that is, they have no guarantee of being 100% textually pure.” CARM

        Since there are no autographs no christian can be sure that their silly stories came from anything magical. That your god is so impotent to be unable to prevent changes, certain makes it seem imaginary, or at best, malicious since your christians have murdered each other over what you want to claim your bible “really” means.

        Oh dear, atheism is demented? Well, dear join the crowd since you are an atheist too. Atheism is only a conclusion that a god or gods don’t exist, and it seems you are quite sure that Odin, Zeus, Ra, Ameratsu, etc don’t exist.

      11. Where did I say that you did? You claim the manuscripts are either non-existent or false but then provide no evidence other than reaching to Google on your phone for another atheistic slamming of historical fact. Are you not extremely tired with this?

      12. ROFL.

        right here, dear “? Ooooo, a raging hypocritical atheist has said that there aren’t any biblical manuscripts — gosh, I just have to admit that I “have nothing” Deary me…”

        And again, I haven’t said what yuo claimed. Nice to see a Christian ignoring his god.

        Still waiting to see where these autographs exist dear.

      13. What was the excuse for the double-standard of your about section cf. how you approached my blog? You went oddly silent on that. There’s a word for that that…

      14. No double standard, and unsurprisingly you can’t show that I used one. This is just great fun to see yourself dig deeper, with yet more false claims. And funny how I didn’t go silent on anything. But again, do show where I have. I’ll be waiting.

      15. Lady, your “about section” is one of the most toxic sprees I’ve ever read, warning against the very same tone/conduct that you then engage with on other blogs that you hate. The hypocrisy is clear despite your circuitous responses. Rage away all you want. The point remains you are irrational in claiming that there are no autograph copies of the biblical/New Testament realities you hate. I will leave you to your quagmire and if you so wish to view that as your one-upmanship, the point at which you can sit back and consider a “job well done”, please be my guest.

      16. Happily, I’m not concerned about the worthless opinion of a known liar.

        Dear, you can ban me if you’d like. Alas, poor FB can’t show that autographs of the bible books exist nor show who has them. Where are they, FB?

      17. “Perhaps if you spent less time on FB (Facebook) or trolling on here, you’d easily be able to answer your own questions.”

        And here we go with the Christian unable to support his claims, and insist that I should be able to find his evidence for him.

        How fun. Unsurprisingly, FB here can’t give the location of these supposed autographs for the bible books.

        Later, dear!

      18. I don’t click on unknown links. Unsurprisingly, you can’t show what is here and why I should click on it.

        Surprise, still no location where the autographs of the bible books are. autograph “An autograph or holograph is a manuscript or document written in its author’s or composer’s hand. The meaning of autograph as a document penned entirely by the author of its content, as opposed to a typeset document or one written by a copyist or scribe other than the author, overlaps with that of holograph.” – “autograph” wikipedia

      19. ah, I found your link and it is valid. Alas, you seem to be trying to claim that the University of Muenster holds biblical autograph documents and they do not. They do have many manuscripts and again, lots of copies of lies doesn’t make those lies true.

      20. I can’t imagine what it must be like to be so utterly consumed by this obsession that Christians/copyists/manuscripts and God Himself are nothing but brazen liars and that all they hope to achieve is the deception of others. It’s an unimaginable reality to me. Your questions and all your comments betray your motivation but you can’t see your reflection despite gawping at a mirror. Neither am I sure what you’re hoping to achieve with these persistent ignorances.

        For the record, I’m more than happy and capable to dialogue online without reaching for Wikipedia or Google but I have much better things to do/people to be with than continue to feed your festering rage.


        P.s. Snow leopards ARE absolutely stunningly glorious.

        P.p.s. As is the historical validity of the Bible. 🐆

      21. I’m not saying that they are all brazen liars. Some are, and some are simply gullible cultists.

        Alas, you can’t even show your god merely exists, FB, and funny how you can’t do what your book promises to true believers in this character, so I have no reason to believe your nonsense at all.

        No one cares if you want to whine that it is an “unimaginable reality” to you. That’s nothing more than an argument from personal ignorance.

        I know you are willing to “dialogue online” without refering to evidence and facts. That’s wonderfully obvious. And gee, it’s such a lovely common excuse that you have other things to do, when you have failed. It’s rather like watching a failed politician say that they are only leaving their post to “spend time with their family”.

        and yet again, FB makes one more lie, that the bible is historically valid. Wonder why he can’t show evidence for that.

        Happily, snow leopards are real and quite lovely. FB’s lies aren’t, and he is stuck in a cult of ignorance and failure.

      22. and still no location where the autographs of the bible you claimed exist are at.

        I’ll debate you live with no problem. I’ll be happy to set up and record things so everyone can see. I’ve done so with a semi-famous christian apologist, Ray Comfort ( . You can see it on youtube. As a condition of debating him, I required a copy of the video. Unsurprisingly, he never put it up on his own channel, despite having hundreds of videos there. I do wonder why.

      23. I know you pride yourself in being the boss but there’s no need for you to set anything up. If someone invites you over for dinner you don’t accept the invitation by…inviting them over for dinner! I clearly said the debate will be live, hence it being impossible for the video not to be public. I’ll watch your conversation with Ray and come back to you with some suggested dates/times. Please confirm your timezone. In the meantime, as a basic human courtesy, I would appreciate you ceasing with the ongoing forked-tongue/accusations.

      24. Ah, and there we go with the christian running away from being held accountable.

        I’m on the east coast of the US.

        I do enjoy the pleas to stop showing you wrong and exposing your false claims. Funny how I’m still waiting for you to say where the autographs of the bible books are, dear. You claimed they exist, but where are they? These are your very own words “When historical evidence of autographs and manuscripts is considered “meaningless”, we all know there’s no rational debate and rather an emotional reflex kicking off from past trauma. As I said, your problem is not with God, it is with the church. I look forward to your article slandering me (or perhaps analysing historical facts).”

        “You can be as angry as you want; it won’t help. We’ll look forward to your proof that there are no autographs. Atheism is demented.”

        Why are you having so much trouble supporting your claims?

      25. Hi Andrea,

        Thank you for quoting me, even though you’ve misunderstood entirely. If you knew more about textual criticism you’d know that manuscripts are synonymous with autographs though doubtless you would take issue with the validity of the copying. But, you would also take issue with the autograph if it did exist. No-one in their right mind is claiming that papyri from AD50 still exist. Hence, I’m not having any difficulty at this end and, again, if you understood the Munster library, you’d know that perfectly well.

        But, listen, I don’t think you appreciate how laced with accusation and anger almost all of your sentences are. This messaging domain under a blog is the perfect breeding ground for this kind of spurious, trailing, circuitous, pointless debate. Hence offering to debate with you publicly.

        For my part in the inflammatory nature of these exchanges, I apologise.

        So, either we arrange that as amicable human beings, or we leave it here. The choice is yours. For what it’s worth I’d also be happy speaking with you privately, if you’d prefer to avoid the live dynamic.

        I watched your conversation with Ray and it was good to hear your voice and see your face. But I don’t see how you would view that on any day of the week as being some kind of victory.

        But in terms of the ongoing accusatory tone etc. I won’t be asking you again to kindly desist.

        Many thanks

        Nick Franks

      26. I did not misunderstand at all, FB. You have made the claim you did and now you cannot support it.

        I do love the lie that autographs are supposedly considered synonymous with copies in textural criticism. Alas, even your fellow christians say you are wrong “textual criticism strives to determine which copies of the Old Testament are the most faithful to the original autographs” To claim they were considered the same is belied here.

        Alas, for you, we have papyri from quite a lot longer ago than 50 CE, so your attempts to claim thath no one should expect to see autographs of the bible books fail.

        Nothing at the University of Muenster’s website has supported your claims. it is no surprise that you quoted nothing from it, just giving a entrance page, and hopeing that your throwing shit at the wall would make it stick.

        I have no problem in calling a liar out, and it’s quite quaint to see you try to invent a reason that you are the martyr here. I have no problem at all in debating you in public dear. it will give me a great place to yet again show that christianity is a set of cults that have no evidence to support them.

        It’s so cute to see someone who is known to have lied to me try to claim that he just doesn’t understand how Ray failed. Unsurprisingly, you can’t support *that* claim either.

        I have no problem accusing you of things I can support with evidence. I have no need to be “amicable” with someone who tries to lie to me and whose fantasy is that I deserve eternal torture for not agreeing with him.

  1. If you argue against the validity of the New Testament because you can’t read the autographs then you are not simply arguing about the Bible but all of ancient literature. If you can’t trust the Bible as an ancient work of literature then you can’t trust anything based on the same criticism.

    1. Precisely. Thank you for your sensible comment.

      The problem in the rest of this feed is this: 1) The immediate accusation of lying and deceiving people (even if I was entirely wrong myself about the Bible that wouldn’t necessarily make me a liar) 2) The claim of knowledge while being unable to follow a thread about MSS attestation and autographs and neither being able to demonstrate (or evidence) why historical MSS are in fact false 3) The irrational attempt to negate the overwhelming historical evidence of the NT by claiming that “a copy of a lie doesn’t make a truth”. It literally wouldn’t matter if an autograph was provided…or if Jesus physically appeared. I think the twisted thinking (and the fruit thereof) would intensify. The anti-Christ rage is plain to see in how the debate started and then unfolded. It’s this same anti-Christ rage that immediately makes anyone who exercises faith in the NT (evidently a foreign concept) into a “deceiving/hurtful liar”.

      That said, none of that should be a surprise to anyone if the person basically prefers animals to human beings.

      Thanks for being so succinct.

    2. Yep, you are quite right, “my heart notes”. There is no reason to beleive any ancient bit of literature on its own. They all need other evidence to support them.

      funny how the bible stories have none. Thanks for admitting the bible is nonsense and no more to be believed than the hindu holy books, the muslim one, the egyptian book of the dead, etc.

  2. “It isn’t that the Bible is true. It’s that The Bible is the precondition for the manifestation of truth.” Jordan Peterson

    For anyone who has read through the unpleasantness in this post, I’m sorry that I didn’t do better in remaining dispassionate with Andrea.

    But please don’t be deceived by her atheism and blasphemy.

    Listen to our podcast response:

    We will be producing a podcast to respond precisely and publicly to her next week. Andrea’s pre-condition for debating was a copy of a live video (no idea why) whereas mine was basic human courtesy. Sadly, public debating when vitriol and unceasing accusation is the native tongue is not only (in this case) anti-Christ, it is also profoundly anti-human.

    Therefore, having given her the ultimatum, Andrea has made her choice and persisted with the unpleasantness, opting instead for contacting me privately to accuse me further of cowardice.

    Once again, please don’t be deceived by her atheism and blasphemy.

    When Jesus returns, there will, even then, be people that refuse to repent of their sin. (See Revelation 9:20-21).

    “The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands nor give up worshiping demons wand idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk, nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts.”

Comments are closed.