>why does he allow bad translations like this?
Yet the fact we know it to be a bad translation shows he doesn't. The point is, one is entirely free to study the text or simply lampoon it for easy points.
>We can actually demonstrate the falsehood of many religious claims
Which is why half of those points have nothing to do with biblical claims, the rest twist the facts.
Take #2 for instance, the Galileo affair was entirely because he was trying to argue heliocentricity as fact without evidence. Catholics such as Bellarmine were actually teaching Coppernican heliocentricity and had no problem with it being treated as hypothetical, but argued it could not be taught as real physical phenomenon without evidence that met the scientific standard.
It also chooses to ignore the work of Nicholas Steno, the father of stratigraphy and George Lemaitre, the origin of the big bang theory, who were both driven by their faith to disprove the notions of an eternal Earth/Universe.
>I'd be glad to listen to your reasoning
Then I'd highly recommend the work of Christopher Marshall on Restorative Justice. He has a short primer on biblical justice as well as a more lengthy and detailed look at the universal theme of justice trending towards restoration in the bible.