A shame EM Jones wasn't on the panel in leiu of the other guy.
EMJ is not a qualified theologian, Trent Horn would be a better option.A shame EM Jones wasn't on the panel in leiu of the other guy.
That's a very biased opinion to have. You might as well say the same about Jay Dyer by that statement.EMJ is not a qualified theologian, Trent Horn would be a better option.
EMJ is not a qualified theologian, Trent Horn would be a better option.
A Panel on Christian Theology:
Orthodox - Jay Dyer
Catholic - David Gordon
Protestant - Dr. Michael Easley
He’s cringe level when it comes to Orthodox Christian theology.Agreed. EMJ is good when it comes to the history of Western Europe, but not when it comes to theology per se.
Sure, but he's a Roman Catholic with a PhD in English literature. What would you expect?He’s cringe level when it comes to Orthodox Christian theology.
Exactly, i just tune out that bit and focus on all the good he does.Sure, but he's a Roman Catholic with a PhD in English literature. What would you expect?
Exactly, i just tune out that bit and focus on all the good he does.
It's like going to a world class steak house and ordering sushi.
Why would you go for that when there's do many other wonderful things on the menu.
Aslo EMJ doesn't pretend to really be all that well informed about Orthodoxy from what I've heard. He's says "they're apostolic so I don't really know how to criticize" or something to that effect.
I would expect him to say nothing in regards to what the Orthodox believe and teach, or if he does, then be willing to back up what he says when challenged.Sure, but he's a Roman Catholic with a PhD in English literature. What would you expect?
I would expect him to say nothing in regards to what the Orthodox believe and teach, or if he does, then be willing to back up what he says when challenged.
See, life is easier when you're like me and don't know what “Neoplatonic” means. Doesn't really mean anything to me so I can't be offended.Well, more than once he said that the theology of the Orthodox Church is Neoplatonic.
100 percent agree. Sometimes disregarding minutia solves a lot of quarrels that don't need to exist.See, life is easier when you're like me and don't know what “Neoplatonic” means. Doesn't really mean anything to me so I can't be offended.
100 percent agree. Sometimes disregarding minutia solves a lot of quarrels that don't need to exist.
I know I'm smarter than your average bear, but I try and not fall in love with my own intellectual capabilities and recognize that 50 percent of all academic pursuits are beyond substantive value in my life....
I just need to make sense of the 25 percent of chaos that's out there and make it fit into my m 25 percent of knowledge base habits and this will square itself away.
I think this is apropos for Jay, he is genuine and absolutely a quality person. No doubt very sincere in his faith. However If following him gets so minute youre at the point of arguing distinctions with out a differences...then I'd move on for a While.
That also applies to any/all intellectuals regardless of field or subject.
Easy killer ... But if you're gonna play that game...It's fine that you don't know these things and don't care, but the issue is by no means a mere matter of minutia.
Easy killer ... But if you're gonna play that game...
Don't confuse me, or others, trying to give a pass to an otherwise excellent source with a Neophyte good sir...
I do know and I don't pretend to be the one to right the wrongs of centuries disagreement ...
Merely saying there are better groups to pick fights with.
How dare I agree with a Catholic on general substance with out taking his dogma seriously?
None should be getting priestly or catechism advice from him...why mess that up?
I think it's more like a niche. Like in every sphere, there's a niche for everything, and Jay fills the niche of the vehement intellectual who fiercely pursues in depth intellectual understanding of theology, great reset, who the elite are, more ancient philosophical films, symbolism in movies and media etc. His debates with atheists have been the most useful for me, for his transcedental arguments really puts every atheist checkmate instantly. Useful also to realize how stupid I was beyond belief when I proudly declared that I ''believed in myself'' and of course not in ''a God''. I also learned quite a lot from his breakdowns of the Elite writings, a very useful playlist he has on Jewtube, for example his tragedy and hope breakdown but many more. The more philosophical/theological stuff goes a bit over my head and I don't really, for myself, see the need and utility to deep dive into that, but others may be conoisseurs of that more than I am.100 percent agree. Sometimes disregarding minutia solves a lot of quarrels that don't need to exist.
I know I'm smarter than your average bear, but I try and not fall in love with my own intellectual capabilities and recognize that 50 percent of all academic pursuits are beyond substantive value in my life....
I just need to make sense of the 25 percent of chaos that's out there and make it fit into my m 25 percent of knowledge base habits and this will square itself away.
I think this is apropos for Jay, he is genuine and absolutely a quality person. No doubt very sincere in his faith. However If following him gets so minute youre at the point of arguing distinctions with out a differences...then I'd move on for a While.
That also applies to any/all intellectuals regardless of field or subject.