Thank you.

That's the influence of Anabaptist thinking on American religion. When you define the church as that which opposes culture, you have to find the culture turning on you to feel validated.

Regarding A.: You are 1.) overstating the significance of the Inquisition (32,000 dead over four centuries, while noteworthy, is a drop in a bucket compared to the typical early modern war) and the Crusades, as well as unilaterally assigning blame to the European side when, in fact, blame is definitely bilateral…

A.) There are grounds for holding that Christianity is a comparatively non-violent influence on Europe in contrast to its pre-Christian past.

lol

"Internet atheism." Although I could add to that "atheism on the supposed basis of Darwinian abiogenesis or quantum cosmogony."

I do not believe I said it was.

That fucking dog is a better argument for the death of God than the average.

Ninth commandment, yo. (Following the traditional numbering of the Reformed churches.)

I say this to you as a full-on Christian (like, I believe the Bible and everything): "Christian films" are, regardless of your worldview, invariably terrible. There are many good films strongly marked by Christian concepts, some of which are even made by professing Christians. But the whole "evangelical movie"…

And, I might add, "rob, rape, and colonize" might as well have been the catchphrase of pre-Christian antiquity. The Assyrians, the Neo-Babylonians, the Greeks and Macedonians, the Romans, the Carthaginians… All pretty rapey, thieving, and colonial. Humans like to fuck over other humans. This is not a unique feature of…

"Protect your home" and "protect your people" were part of the rhetoric concerning the annexation of Poland by the Third Reich (Volksdeutsche and so forth). What I am saying is the rhetoric used to endorse an action is not the same as the motivation for the action. The fact that religious rhetoric is used in wartime…

That was a rhetorical "son." A bit of "hip-hop and you don't stop," if you will.

I'm saying the presence or absence of religious rhetoric in a given bad thing is irrelevant to the question of whether a particular religion is "good" or, more to the point, true. Soldiers have also always been exhorted to protect their homes and their families. Are "home" and "family" therefore blameworthy things?

Why do people cite the Columbian Exchange as "religious killing"? The fact that religion was involved in it? The Allies said a whole hell of a lot about God. Does that make WWII a religious war?

I'd say pietism is not lacking in representation. But I hate pietism. Serious-minded orthodox Christianity is a different question. Not that it's anyone's responsibility to represent me, of course.

It's easy to have modern American evangelical Christianity torn to pieces by internet atheism because neither of them think hard about what Christianity is. Christianity is not God making the world in seven twenty-four hour days six thousand years ago because the Bible itself makes that reading impossible. (Seriously,…

That's part of the problem, though. For a "religious" character to be okay, they have to be just "mildly religious." Being "too Christian" pushes you into the realm of saccharine bullshit, cold hypocrisy, or psychosis.

"You make an attempt to pass the crumpets. YOU FAIL."

…my best device for concealing my Hodor…