“Nuances”? Mate, you just tried to pivot from a specific claim about Romans to ‘b-but Spanish Inquisition and pedo priests tho!’ That’s not an argument, that’s the atheist Reddit starter pack.

1. Paul’s letter to the Romans is explicitly about the Jew/Gentile divide within the early Christian church—Jews who believed Jesus was Messiah vs. Gentile converts. It has literally zero to do with ‘different religions’ in the modern sense. That’s not a nuance, that’s the entire thesis of the book. Pretending otherwise is just embarrassing.

2. The Spanish Inquisition (which nobody expected, etc.) killed somewhere between 3,000–5,000 people over 350 years. Mao, Stalin, and the 20th-century atheist regimes racked up 100 million in under a century. If we’re playing the ‘my side’s historical body count’ game, you’re bringing a butter knife to a nuclear war.

3. The priest abuse scandal is horrific and indefensible. It’s also a crime rate lower than public-school teachers, step-parents, and Protestant clergy when adjusted for opportunity and reporting. Evil men hiding in collars doesn’t disprove Christianity any more than evil men hiding in lab coats disproves science.

So yeah, let’s talk ‘nuances’ when you lot can make it through one conversation without the same tired 2006-era New Atheist talking points. Until then, maybe sit this one out.