Posts

Wes Huff, Paul Copan, Biblical Violence, and the Apologetics Spin Room

Image
3:09 - 3:27 I'm willing to assume that the project you reference really doesn't talk about the rare times when "the (primary) "God" (of Biblical lore) does something nice or sane.  I'm still landing on this conclusion: Your assessment of that project is not a fair assessment. Why not? Because you already admitted, earlier in this same video, that the purpose of that project was to identify every time the biblical "God" fails today's rational and ethical standards. It wouldn't make any sense for that project to list all the times when something is said about "God" that the project takes no objection to. It's not the job of the prosecution to list all the times when Ted Bundy took calls as an operator of a Crisis Helpline or helped a stranded motorists without exploiting those opportunities to do evil. It's not the job of a prosecutor of any domestically violent abuser ... to list and praise all the times when an abuser fed...
Post a Comment
Read more

James Reacts To Revo's Report of Reacting To Suffering; As Per The Will Of Revo's "God"

Image
[First draft]  [Please note: I've been unable to get Google Blogger's spacing to work correctly. I am still deciding about which other platform to transition over to for my blogs]    " ... because he suffered as well". The implication in saying that is "the Father and the Son are still unable to empathize" at all with our suffering. It would have to mean that a "GOD" (whatever that is) is limited to only understanding emotionally-charged and physical experiences that GOD has personally and independently experienced. Unlike the "God" of pandeism, the Christian God(s) cannot fully glean those understandings vicariously. Nor did any of its multiple person-alities really understand the suffering their group of person-alities were planning for mankind to go through, until very very long after humanity had been suffering. It would also mean they STILL don't understand most of it. Because Jesus' empathy is limited only to the specific ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rebuking A Substitute Apologist And Enabler for Gavin Ortlund's Christianity.

Image
 Today's refutation of utter bullshit begins here. In this short video, Dan McClellan sets a matter straight; in his usual eloquent, factually informed, logically rational, and ethical manner. From there, we move into the comments section. There, we find this sub-thread discussion: @magepunk2376 2 hours ago Gavin Ortlund is an apologist. Truth is not his motivation, dogma is. 44 Reply 13 replies @dechasrisen4783 2 hours ago No one's motivation is pure and no one is without bias. It's churlish to resort to an ad hominem attack, especially when it's so unnecessary. 6 Reply @magepunk2376 2 hours ago  @dechasrisen4783  What I said is true though. 11 Reply @sabrinaantonioverita3061 1 hour ago everyone is an apologist and everyone is a dogmatist. truth is everyone’s motivation. 3 Reply @dechasrisen4783 1 hour ago  @magepunk2376  it's petty. It misleading implies the same isn't true of everyone. It's arrogant. And given the tribalism it belies in you, it's ...
Post a Comment
Read more