Debate on Fascist Facebook Censorship & Cancel Culture

Last updated on: February 11, 2021 at 12:25 pm By Dave Armstrong

Including an Examination of Godwin’s Law and Reductio ad Hitlerum (Unsavory Discussion Tactics) I posted two days ago, Mandatory COVID Vaccines & Facebook Fascist Censorship, which told my story of what Facebook deemed worthy to censor on my Facebook page. Yesterday, I received critical feedback on this article from Andre Menzies, whose words will be in blue. ***** But first, let me react to Facebook’s first attempted (and the only other) censorship of something I posted, which was equally ridiculous and groundless... Read more

Gospel of Matthew Bashing Refuted Point-by-Point

Last updated on: February 10, 2021 at 2:52 pm By Dave Armstrong

“The Gospel According to Saint Matthew” was written by atheist Vexen Crabtree in 2016. I will examine his “anti-biblical” arguments to see if they can withstand criticism. Vexen’s words will be in blue. ***** The Gospel of Matthew is a later copy of the Gospel of Mark, using 92% of its text. It’s grossly inaccurate to call Matthew simply a “copy” of Mark. Sure, it draws heavily from Mark, as almost all Christians would agree (though likely not it only), but it’s a... Read more

Why Do I Defend the Bible Against Atheist Attacks?

Last updated on: February 10, 2021 at 12:00 pm By Dave Armstrong

The Purposes and Goals of Contra-Atheist Christian Apologetics “Sporkfighter” is a friendly and fair-minded atheist who asked me some good questions underneath my article, Groundless Gospel of Mark Bashing Systematically Refuted (2-9-21). Here are my replies, with a short second round as well. It became an excellent opportunity to explain the wider goals and motivations of apologetics. His words will be in blue. ***** Question: Who are you writing for? 1) Christians: for their existing faith to be strengthened by seeing... Read more

Mandatory COVID Vaccines & Facebook Fascist Censorship

Last updated on: February 9, 2021 at 7:06 pm By Dave Armstrong

Apparently now it is liberal dogma that no one can possibly decide to not receive a particular vaccine. To not do so is to automatically be a wild-eyed conspiratorialist; perhaps even a “domestic terrorist”! Facebook Big Fascist Brother, in its infinite wisdom, deemed that a post of mine from five days ago, entitled, “Two Separate Thoughts About COVID Vaccines” didn’t “follow” their “community standards.” Presumably, my warning had to do their notice on the [leftist] “Standards” page: COVID-19: Community Standards Updates... Read more

Groundless Gospel of Mark Bashing Systematically Refuted

Last updated on: February 9, 2021 at 11:23 am By Dave Armstrong

I just finished yesterday an exhaustive (over 8,000-word) point-by-point refutation of a wholesale attack on the Gospel of Mark, written by atheist Steven Carr: Pearce’s Potshots #15: Gospel of Matthew vs. Gospel of Mark?. That piece was actually part of a longer diatribe, entitled The Gospel According to Saint Mark: written by another atheist: Vexen Crabtree in 2006. Now I will examine his piece, too, to see if it is any more worthy of belief than Carr’s relentlessly erroneous analysis. Vexen’s words will... Read more

Pearce’s Potshots #15: Gospel of Matthew vs. Gospel of Mark?

Last updated on: February 7, 2021 at 12:45 pm By Dave Armstrong

Atheist anti-theist Jonathan M. S. Pearce is the main writer on the blog, A Tippling Philosopher. His “About” page states: “Pearce is a philosopher, author, blogger, public speaker and teacher from Hampshire in the UK. He specialises in philosophy of religion, but likes to turn his hand to science, psychology, politics and anything involved in investigating reality.” . ***** I am replying to the post on Jonathan’s site: Gospel of Mark’s Poor Jewish Knowledge (3-3-21), written mostly by Steven Carr, and extracted from another page. Steven... Read more

Christian Apologetics Methodology: Similarities with Science

Last updated on: February 5, 2021 at 1:09 pm By Dave Armstrong

Christian apologetics is neither dishonest, a “stacked deck”, nor an “evidence-free” methodology, simply because the apologist assumes the truthfulness of Christian beliefs before he or she starts. The fact is that both philosophy and science (as well as mathematics) start from axioms or unproven premises and move on from there. Modern science (especially since Darwin) commences with unproven or incompletely proven hypotheses and then seeks to disprove them (philosopher of science Karl Popper is notable for having stressed this idea of falsifiability).... Read more

“Difficulty” in Understanding the Bible: Hebrew Cultural Factors

Last updated on: February 5, 2021 at 12:33 pm By Dave Armstrong

It’s a very common motif in anti-theist atheist polemics, to say that the Bible appears to be very complicated and inscrutable (and, they wrongly think, ubiquitously contradictory). This shouldn’t be the case — so they argue — if indeed it is a divinely inspired document from an omniscient God, meant to communicate to all human being at all times. One atheist, Eric [see our closely related dialogue immediately prior to this], stated it this way in an atheist combox, in... Read more

Pearce’s Potshots #14: Resurrection “Contradictions” #2

Last updated on: February 4, 2021 at 1:39 pm By Dave Armstrong

Atheist anti-theist Jonathan M. S. Pearce is the main writer on the blog, A Tippling Philosopher. His “About” page states: “Pearce is a philosopher, author, blogger, public speaker and teacher from Hampshire in the UK. He specialises in philosophy of religion, but likes to turn his hand to science, psychology, politics and anything involved in investigating reality.” . ***** I am replying to the post on Jonathan’s site, “Contradictions in the Resurrection of Jesus Accounts” (1-31-21): a guest-post written by one David Austin. This is my second... Read more

Atheists, Biblical “Contradictions” & the Plausibility Issue

Last updated on: February 5, 2021 at 12:45 pm By Dave Armstrong

This exchange with atheist Eric came about after he analyzed my recent post, Pearce’s Potshots #13: Resurrection “Contradictions” (?), in which I responded to a “laundry list of 18 alleged contradictions in the biblical accounts, in a neat little chart.” He responded in a combox on the web page of Jonathan M. S. Pearce, called A Tippling Philosopher. His words will be in blue. I will add further exchanges here if they take place in that venue. ***** Allow me to... Read more