Level314 @level_314

So Jones' apologetic defends not just the slaughter of ancient Canaanites but of contemporary Americans. Nice work, Clay! That's the moral incoherence of evangelical genocide apologetics. /5

with spears, sinking a sword into the forehead of a weeping 6 year old begging for his life. Craig's use of antiseptic language functions to mask the moral horror of what he is proposing from us. That is grossly immoral. /2

I have a few more comments about the @CosmicSkeptic's interview with William Lane Craig. First, when Craig talks about God "ending the life of these Canaanite children" what he's actually talking about is Israelite soldiers bludgeoning infants with rocks, impaling toddlers .../1

I just listened to this great interview from @CosmicSkeptic. Since they address some of my views, I decided to offer a reply in this 🧵. I will largely be quoting from my book "Jesus Loves Canaanites" in reply. /1

Alex O'Connor @CosmicSkeptic

a month ago

Today I speak with William Lane Craig about the Biblical slaughter of the Canaanites, something he thinks was ethically justifiable. This defence is the reason Richard Dawkins refuses to debate him. What do you think? youtu.be/WjsSHd23e0Q?si…

166 34 434 138K 142

Download Image

Christians who believe assent to the right doctrines is necessary for salvation face a serious objection in that Christians don't agree on what those doctrines are. If God is a perfect communicator, why would he allow such confusion regarding the nature of true doctrine?

Wendell @wendelltalks

a month ago

Do you believe that water baptism is necessary for salvation?

1K 26 773 112K 39

Michael thinks I'm "appealing to emotion" and "overreacting" because I'm offering a plain critique of his defense of the metaphor of God as a spouse killer.

InspiringPhilosophy - Michael Jones @InspiringPhilos

8 months ago

@smalexander88 @RandalRauser He just needs to stop appealing to emotion and overreacting.

6 0 28 4K 0

@InspiringPhilos Of course it's a metaphor. Nobody claimed it is "literal". The metaphor depicts Yahweh's rage in terms of a graphic instance of uroxicide. Yes, describing God's judgment as a man killing his spouse is "extreme" But extrajudicial spousal killing is also EVIL.

It is possible to raise a transcendental number to an irrational power and obtain a rational number.

@RandalRauser "evidence" here is diluted like in homeopathy. Its a kind of evidence like "beauty is an evidence for a god". Literally everything goes.

One of the nice YouTube comments! But how sad it is that my simple advice that you should watch the primary source to see if I've accurately represented it is seen as out of the norm for Christian apologists.

Calc 1 students after learning the power rule:

@RandalRauser Sounds spot on to me. He’s explaining the thinking behind statistical inference which we use for product testing, drug trials and everything else. When there’s no evidence for something, you live your life as though it doesn’t exist, regardless of the label you slapped onto it.

@level_314 @RandalRauser Haven't read the official "humsnist" positions that Matt and Randal referenced so I can't say. Does humanism have a stance on animals?

@RandalRauser I can only hope the topic is very very very clear to both and extensively discussed beforehand.

@RandalRauser Aye, rationality proceeds from presuppositions. You can rationally belief Elvis just gave you a blowjob, with the right presupposition, so yes it's a boring pointless conversation.

@RandalRauser That "Christian tradition has a diverse array of opinions on such matters" is a big part of the problem. One would think that an omnipotent deity of any ilk would be capable of clearly and unambiguously elucidating a matter as weighty as the path to eternal wellbeing.

@RandalRauser They would require a level of self-awareness and interest in reality that is mostly absent in their community. This obliviousness to how outsiders perceive their religion will strengthen their persecution complex and also further facilitate their downfall.

@level_314 @gmasonii @howie_hua It was arctan all along 😆

Me: I need to find the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter. 𝜋: I got you. Me: I also need to calculate 4(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + ...). 𝜋: You're not going to believe this.

@RandalRauser RR, don't fall into this trap. It depends on the topic, the venue, and other factors. Absolutely I agree he can be petulant at times, but to write off all interactions he's had as trolling or unproductive would be to forgo the very nuance you deride other people for lacking.