Michael Klein ✝️🇺🇲🇺🇦

My book "Crossing Over At Remagen," is available in paperback, hardcover, Kindle, and Audible at Amazon. You can also find the audiobook by searching the title on Google Play books. It is a tribute to my father's service in WWII at the Battle of Remagen. amazon.com/Crossing-Over-…

@JeremyDBoreing @dailywireplus Is there a plan for a second season?

One more day until the Season Finale of The Pendragon Cycle: Rise of the Merlin @dailywireplus. Our season could have been called The Temptation of the Merlin instead. We spend much of season one exploring just how much power Myrddin Emrys has -- and why he is so reluctant to use it. In Episode Seven, that question is put to the test. But there are many kinds of power in this world...

@AtheistTakes You use advanced philosophy to argue FOR religion!?! Who wants to tell him? ...that he is an idiot.

I always find these posts funny because as soon as you start using advanced philosophy to argue for religion, they accuse you of word salad.

@GovBobFerguson It is a bad look to crow about violating the state constitution.

Washington state's tax system asks the most of those with the least. I signed the Millionaires' Tax to rebalance that unfair system.

@Atomixion2 @RobRohrs @Murray_2nd @AtheistTakes Richard Carrier is a crackpot and is not respected in academia. I have read him and seen him destroyed in debates on this subject. The fact that you think that he is a serious scholar on this tells me all I need to know about you.

Youve read nobody. Youre pulling shit out of your internet ass. That these scholars find it PLAUSIBLE (and many of agree jesus is a myth) means it is NOT flat earth tier, but a respectable position to take seriously. "Had Jesus not existed, people would’ve known" They did know. Thats why 2 peter was forged, to respond to the original celestial christians. Likewise the ignatian creed. its also why christians doctored josephus qnd tacitus because people did know there was no evidence. paul explicitly says we only know about jesus from scripture and revelation. all of your retarded, uninformed ideas are addressed in the studies.

Jesus is just a copy

@TheSkepticWiz This post is an insult to human intelligence. Since atheists redefined atheism as a lack of faith in God, they have lost the ability to think and debate. They brains have atrophied. So much that they post stupid things like this.

@McBrideLawNYC Isn't Easter linked to the Jewish Passover? So wasn't it the Jews, not the Catholic church, that determines when Easter is celebrated?

Sola Scriptura Geniuses are celebrating Easter this Sunday. Easter's date, however, isn’t in the Bible. The date was set by a Church at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Easter will be celebrated this Sunday because of Catholic Tradition. You’re welcome, Protestants.

@KingOfSalt4 You don't know how it evolved either.

"I can't conceive of how this could evolve, therefore it didn't" Stupid argument

@masonmennenga How will those who aren't in heaven "burn in hell forever" if they don't have a physical body?

conservative christians are like “i don’t hate gay people i just believe they’re going to burn in hell forever”

@AtheistTakes Maybe because they are the smart people and the antitheists are the dumb ones?

Why are so many smart people religious?

@kaizen000000000 Do you see suicide and suicidal ideation as sane? If not, then theist are objectively more sane than atheists, because both of those things are more common among atheists.

Theism disproves the existence of any deities. If any deity was proven to exist with verifiable evidence theism (belief or faith) would not be needed and would not exist. The existence of theism disproves the existence of deities.

@AtheistTakes Is the theory of evolution a theory that proves too much. It is weird that every biological discovery is used a evidence that evolution is correct, even when the theory predicted the opposite.

And what's the evidence for this view?

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 Your argument proves a "paradox" that requires specific metaphysical definitions (like Eternalism or Relational Change) to resolve, but whether it is a "proof of impossibility" remains a subject of intense debate.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 Time is simply the passing of moments. It does not necessarily have to be linear.

"Using arguments for God means you have no arguments for God" lmao Submitted by @doofgeek4011

@pray2pesci @TheSkepticWiz Such as?

@MathezarT @TheSkepticWiz Churches already have special carve outs that no other non-profits have.

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 How are you defining time? Are you referring to linear time?

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 If it doesn't reach the threshold then you should be able to pinpoint exactly which premise fails. You're trying to say that P2 fails but that would clearly be absurd since you'd be denying that there's any difference between a timeless TSoA and a temporal TSoA

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 To be honest, your premises don't seem to follow one another. The whole argument makes no sense.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 If you think that P2 is incorrect, then it seems like you think that a timeless TSoA is identical to a temporal TSoA. Do you actually think this?

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 You claim that this proof shows that God is logically impossible. It doesn't reach that threshold.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 So you think there's was a time before time? As opposed to timelessness before time?

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 I have told you. I don't think that P2 is valid. It assumes a level of knowledge that we don't have.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 So you think there's no difference at all between a TSoA with time and a TSoA without time? Idc what AI says. If you think my argument is fallacious then explain why, don't just say "AI says so"

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 My main objection is P2. There you use time vs timelessness. As if linear time exists and anything that could cause time to exist is not part of time in any way.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 That's incorrect. My argument doesn't assume that all time is linear. In fact it grants that timelessness is possible, so it clearly doesn't depend on the "time is only linear" assumption.

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 My main objection is the P2. But there are issues with other parts of the argument as well. AI seems to agree that it is possible that your argument may commit the semantic fallacy. Which was my initial concern with your argument.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 So do you reject any premise of my argument? Otherwise the conclusion is logically entailed

@Mesocortical @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 Your argument seems to be dependent on an linear timeline framework. My point is that we don't have enough information to know if that limitation would apply to the creation of the universe.

@MathezarT @AtheistTakes @doofgeek4011 I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here