Tagging the paradigm

 

An atheist(?) criticism of the Transcedental Argument for God (TAG) promoted by Eastern Orthodox apologist Jay Dyer. Not sure why, since presuppositionalism (in this form at least) is a conservative Calvinist thing. Indeed, the video mentions Bahnsen and Van Til.

TL/DR: the TAG is de facto used in a rhetorical fashion to confound the opposition, while never really demonstrating "the impossibility of the contrary". Which may explain why it attracts the more pugnacious kinds of interweb polemicists.

A relatively interesting contribution.  

Frat boy pseudo-science?

 

A Skeptic (and perhaps atheist) criticism of Jay Dyer, the bad boy of the Orthobro interwebs. "Frat boy brand of Christianity" is a keeper. 

TL/DR: Dyer is a young earth creationist and presuppositionalist. He actually references an essay by Traditionalist author Titus Burckhardt against evolution. (Our old friend Huston Smith had a similar argument about Platonic forms manifesting in the material world. Perhaps he got them from Burckhardt.) 

More unexpectedly, Dyer sounds agnostic on the existence of dinosaurs and even heliocentrism?! Which I suppose is inevitable if you interpret the Bible too literally. Not sure why Seraphim Rose´s name never comes up in the video. This content seems to be a kind of "parallel plot" to the recent drama between Dyer, Professor Dave et al.   

The demon defeater

 

If you believe in a revealed religion (and many religions are of that nature), how do you *know* you´re not being tricked by demons? We could call this "the demon defeater". For instance, many Christians would argue that the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith was duped by demons. But how do you know *your* religion isn´t the result of demonic trickery?

Apparently, some Jews (half-jokingly perhaps) consider the archangel Gabriel to be a herald of misfortune. After all, when he showed himself to Mary, the end result was Christianity, which persecutes the Jews. And when he appeared to Muhammed, the result was Islam, which also persecutes the Jews. Maybe Gabriel was a demon? 

"But Jesus fulfilled all the OT prophecies". First, he probably didn´t. Second, maybe that´s part of the deception. How would you know? I´m sure demons can stage a couple of miracles here and there, and even make a dead man rise. So what´s the objective criterion for knowing that one revealed religion is true and the others are phoney? It can´t be the miracle-claims, since they may be faked by demons. Nor can it be the revelation itself (obviously). 

The only criterion I can think of is that it makes people more moral and/or spiritual. But even assuming that everyone agrees on what these terms mean, the number of sinners and saints in each religion seem to be about equal. If saints predominate, I suppose all religions would be "true". That is, some form of religious pluralism would be the bottom line. If sinners predominate (which seems to be the case), all religions would be "false". Then, agnosticism - at least towards the really existing revealed religions - would be called for. 

And if really heinous sinners are everywhere dominant, maybe they are all demonic...

Drama

 

My man Titus 

For the record, I *am* following the recent YouTube drama between Jay Dyer, MythVision, Gnostic Informant and Professor Dave. 

2026 seems promising so far. I mean, who could have foreseen this? 

Chomsky...again

 

Overheard on X. A propos our previous discussion on Chomsky. From a xweet by "Chrome Barracuda". 

>>>It's ironic that tankies hate Noam Chomsky. Is it because he wasn't unequivocally pro-Stalin, pro-Mao and pro-Soviet Union?

>>>He criticised literally every American foreign policy decision for decades and was extremely pro-Assad, pro-Putin, pro-Serbia, parroting the exact same talking points that Jackson Hinkle and Pax Tube do. That's a harder position than the vast majority of American leftists.

>>>It's hypocritical to idolise the likes of Glenn Greenwald and Jimmy Dore but dismiss Chomsky as subversive. Only in his 90s did he "soften up" and endorse Biden. And even then, he made a huge fuss about how the West triggered the Ukraine war.

Hail Baal

 

Overheard on X. The joke (such as it is) is that the presumably anti-Semitic Dugin is a Christian and therefore must believe in Yahweh. Spencer is probably an atheist, but sometimes pretends to be a pagan.

Alexander Dugin:

At some point the Ba'al-elite has only one option: to k*ll all of us pretending that it was done by AI getting out of control. We have to start to fight now. Tomorrow will be too late.

Richard Spencer:

Baal is, by the way, Jupiter, more or less. He’s not the devil, Satan, or a Chthonic deity, like Yahweh. He’s a celestial god. One of the most notorious (and misunderstood) women in the Hebrew Bible, Jezebel, worshipped him. Hail Baal!

Monday

 

Ställ in valet?

 

Från Aftonbladets ledarsida. Så oppositionspartier är "objektivt sett" pro-ryska nu, även om de inte är pro-ryska? I en annan ledarartikel varnar AB för att Trump vill ställa in de amerikanska valen. Är de avundsjuka? 

>>>Partierna som Kreml stöttar är inte alltid Rysslandsvänliga. Det räcker med att de skapar splittring, både inrikes och i relation till andra länder. De skrämmer upp politiker från andra partier med näthat och hot. De försvagar demokrati, rättsstat och internationella samarbeten.

>>>Det spelar ingen roll att Sverigedemokraterna stöder Ukraina, som Kristersson stolt konstaterar i sin debattartikel. De som vill Sverige illa har en toppentillgång i Jimmie Åkesson och hans mobb. Det gäller både Ryssland och Trumps USA.

>>>Den tanken verkar inte ha slagit Ulf Kristersson, i alla fall märks det inte i hans malliga debattartikel. Det borde oroa svenska väljare.

Valkampanjen har börjat på allvar. 

Vi har en vinnare

 

Om t.o.m. Thomas Di Leva gillar din låt, så kommer du att vinna. Alltså: Brandsta City Släckers kommer att ta hem Melodifestivalen. Bastun brinner!  

Look who´s baaaack

 

Professor Dave is back with all the hot takes...