The problem is that you make no attempt to establish common ground with the readers - points both can agree upon. Instead you assume that because you believe the bible is the word of god, etc., that automatically everyone else should... and then without any common ground you say all these things that - to those that do not share your beliefs - just come across as madness.
If I believed that 1 = 3... and then went on and on about how all mathematics was wrong, and that that all mathematicians were liars, and math teachers were out to corrupt our children with their lies... you'd probably would think I was nuts, and be just as inclined to mock my viewpoint as those have done to you. If on the other hand, I could come up with a compelling, logical argument as to why 1 = 3, starting with facts we could agree on, and build up a strong case as to why 1 = 3... only then might you entertain the idea that mathematicians may be aware of and hiding this information intentionally.
That is why there is so much discussion regarding who wrote the bible and is it scientific and historical accuracy - because all the higher points are moot until a foundation of agreement is established. Unfortunately there tends to be no way to reach agreement, as the bible is often at odds with historical, astronomical, and fossil evidence.
If you really want to really reach people and change their mind on a subject - you must first establish a foundation of agreement, and then logically build from there, one step at a time. If God is real, and he really expects you to convert people, then he would be fully aware that you can't change a person's entire world-view overnight. It is a grandual process that involves re-evaluating, re-thinking, and re-training the neural connections of the brain to perceive the world in a different way. If God is knowing this, then it would be irrational for him to ask or expect you to instantly convert people without due process. He would understand that changing people's minds takes time, solid information, and logical arguments that hold up under critism.
- Lime