So. Many. Hot. Takes.

All dumb.*

*This was not a hot take. This was a sampling of Twitter since Twitter's inception. Hot takes are all dumb.


My new podcast is out today. Learn or sharpen your apologetic in five minutes or less. New episode Thursday, Lord willing.


The response to the failure of some shepherds is not to eschew all shepherds and shepherding.

Solo Scriptura is not the answer.

In apologetics, your work is for the church. First and foremost, always.

Am I the only one who sees this and thinks, "yup, that's a Sanger move - get more hispanics in here, so we can kill them all."

Also, she'd want to get rid of you, too. But, you know, past racism is bad, y'all.

Unless it is actually our purpose here at PPFA, of course.

RT is proud to stand with immigrants & we are proud to continue to call on leadership to enact permanent protections for TPS and DED holders from all 13 countries & DACA recipients.


I'm sorry, were you under the impression that murder wasn't something to be policed and criminalized?


In a post-Roe era, it is women of color whose bodies would be increasingly surveilled, policed and criminalized and it is women of color who would experience an almost immediate loss of any access to safe, legal abortion care.


Theology drives apologetic, not the other way around.

Precisely right.

RT This is what happens when your theology is developed as a subset of your apologetics ministry.


Imma let you finish, but... William Lane Craig is the best apologist of all time. OF ALL TIME.


If you were kidnapped and were being forced to tweet so things appeared normal, what would you tweet to alert us you need help?


Now do unborn women.


The administration has unveiled a global women's empowerment initiative.

But you cannot economically empower women if you refuse to empower them to make decisions about their own bodies.


All this to say - theodicy is never bare. It is theological, and especially Biblical, or it is worthless. Pronouncements to either accuse or vindicate God's works are only as good as their source material.

Ignoring the primary source re: God is as reckless as it is useless.

He was not as harsh as he might have been - but there was a verbal recognition of their wrongdoing - and a rebuke of it.

He also took the opportunity presented to teach them about the God they claimed to served. They bowed to the sheaf, as he prophesied - their pride humbled.

It also has to be said that Joseph wept when reunited with his brothers. That he was (deservedly) harsh in their treatment, even though he did forgive them when they were all assembled together.

There is value and profit in the recognition of pain and loss in our suffering.

Why is evil permitted?

"He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory" - Rom 9:23

Far more than a mere consequentialism.

As a counter-argument, this seems to be exactly what Joseph tells his brothers, once they are in the center of his power, and confronted about their sins.

"You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, in order to bring about this present result."

It's classic theodicy.


This is the insanity known as "consequentialism." If someone molested Douglas' kids, he would be left to tell them "maybe there was good purpose in the suffering of a many great people in order to bring about God's glory and purposes." This actually is nuts. Unreal.


Just as a heads-up: I'm going to be using the Statement on Human Sexuality I authored for CH as an outline for a Sunday School series at my church over the next few months. I plan on polishing the resulting material up, and offering that as an additional resource on the site.

Show more
Mastodon Is this thing on? Hello?