Numbered list only to separate them clearly. They're really in no particular order.
1. That stupid "Doesn't believe in god/hates him anyway" meme. It's perfectly reasonable to take issue with fictional characters, especially when the other party thinks they're real.
I made this analogy before, but I know Miss Havisham isn't real, but that doesn't preclude me from talking about her fictional actions and attitudes. Because she's a terrible fictional person, much like god.
2. How they conflate the claim (the bible) for being evidence of the claim. The bible is not evidence of itself, period.
3. How the bible is this great book, but it can only be properly understood by having supplemental information, which, not coincidentally, makes the really heinous shit in there slightly less heinous. Which is complete bullshit. A well written document, let alone a supposedly divinely inspired one, should be complete. It shouldn't rely on external information in order to explain what it's really trying to say.
4. How apologists repeat the same assertions-as-arguments over and over and over and over... as though repetition somehow bolsters what they're trying to push.
1. That stupid "Doesn't believe in god/hates him anyway" meme. It's perfectly reasonable to take issue with fictional characters, especially when the other party thinks they're real.
I made this analogy before, but I know Miss Havisham isn't real, but that doesn't preclude me from talking about her fictional actions and attitudes. Because she's a terrible fictional person, much like god.
2. How they conflate the claim (the bible) for being evidence of the claim. The bible is not evidence of itself, period.
3. How the bible is this great book, but it can only be properly understood by having supplemental information, which, not coincidentally, makes the really heinous shit in there slightly less heinous. Which is complete bullshit. A well written document, let alone a supposedly divinely inspired one, should be complete. It shouldn't rely on external information in order to explain what it's really trying to say.
4. How apologists repeat the same assertions-as-arguments over and over and over and over... as though repetition somehow bolsters what they're trying to push.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
