Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter

Welcome to the Twitter account of the DC chapter of Reasonable Faith! Our goal is to promote & defend the gospel in the DC-area (and here on Twitter)

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@TheoreticalBS @SpeedWatkins Last one :)

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@TheoreticalBS @CapturingChrist @SpeedWatkins I will note, I am not agreeing that Ben's tweet should be taken down.

In your video you indicated that you saw no meaningful differences between Ben's tweet and Cam's tween that you quoted, so I wanted to provide my understanding of how Cam may see the difference :)

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@TheoreticalBS @CapturingChrist @SpeedWatkins I think Cam is worried about how depressed people may interpret the call to *act* in Ben's tweet. Cam's tweet you quoted contains no such call. In fact, some apologists follow up that quote by saying it's GOOD atheists don't act in ways consistent w/ their worldview.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Matt_Dillahunty I wish you a speedy recovery!

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@ApologistMark @IamLeedy To be clear, I have no difficulty admitting that religion contributed to particular individuals being narcissistic.

But anything can do that.

My issue is simply with saying that religion does this uniquely, or to a worse degree than other belief systems (political, etc.).

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Atheist_Trooper No, as religion is about serving someone we believe to be greater than ourselves.

I'm not opposed to discussing instances where religion appears sociologically harmful. (In fact, I study this in my PhD program.)

However, I disagree that it promotes narcissism.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@SkepticShow Can confirm!

I called and and talked to Eric & Vi twice when they were at TH. Both conversations were fun and respectful: https://t.co/KYrQ0k6C5y

I hope to call in to your new show (congrats, btw) at some point for round three!

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

Keep in mind, the % of the population that identifies as "nothing in particulars" are twice the size of atheists and agnostics combined.

Replication code can be found here: https://t.co/KLi0L8lZdI

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

2010 - 2014

90% Caths and Prots remained so; most defectors went to "nothing in particular"

81% Atheists remained so; most defectors went to "NIP"

55% agnostics remained so; plurality of defectors became atheists

Of "NIP" defectors, more became Christian than atheist/agnostic

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

2010 - 2014

90% Caths and Prots remained so; most defectors went to "nothing in particular"

81% Atheists remained so; most defectors went to "NIP"

55% agnostics remained so; plurality of defectors became atheists

Of "NIP" defectors, more became Christian than atheist/agnostic

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@AndyBuzz72 Your last sentence is a bit confused.

Remember: I said that scholars agree there is good reason to think that Genesis 1-11 was *intended* as figurative.

If that is true, not believing in young earth is not "devaluating" anything; it is literally believing what was intended.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@AndyBuzz72 I’m not arguing believing in old earth makes Christianity true; I’m saying you can be Christian and believe in it.

Tons of non-Christian OT scholars agree that 1st-century Jews would *not* have interpreted Genesis 1-11 literally.

It’s not cherry picking; it’s proper exegesis.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Ateistene1 @AndyBuzz72 Of course parties say that to voters. I’m making a different point about candidates.

It a socialist wanted to run for US Senate as a Republican—however unlikely—the NRSC would *not* endorse them or give them money because of their belief.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Ateistene1 @AndyBuzz72 Again - the GOP isn’t saying “you HAVE to believe socialism is false.” Believe whatever you want.

They are saying “if you want to be affiliated with our party in an election, you must.”

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Ateistene1 @AndyBuzz72 So if you don’t “care” to engage with my original comment then I’ll be going.

It sounds like you’re really angry about something and brought that baggage here.

Have a nice day.

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Ateistene1 @AndyBuzz72 Posturing, not an argument

[Reasonable Faith - D.C. chapter @ReasonableDC]

@Ateistene1 @AndyBuzz72 This tweet does not even make sense.

You are free to believe in socialism, but if you are a GOP elected official, the party mandates that you don't.

Similarly, you are free to believe or not in God, but if you are a Christian you must believe in God.