What are your thoughts on Jay Dyer's books?
He is an expert on philosophy, theology, and conspiracies.
What are your thoughts on Jay Dyer's books? He is an expert on philosophy, theology, and conspiracies.
What are your thoughts on Jay Dyer's books?
Falling into your wing while paragliding is called 'gift wrapping' and turns you into a dirt torpedo pic.twitter.com/oQFKsVISkI— Mental Videos (@MentalVids) March 15, 2023
Who has the time to watch these long unscripted videos?
here is a short one
Sorry, if it's not a Youtube short I tend to lose the thread rather quickly.
There are people here who read him. I am not one of them.
>an expert on philosophy, theology, and conspiracies.
Ok I'll pass.
>reading anything at all written by a debatebro youtuber
Surely you can see there are better ways to spend your time.
Jay is highly intelligent and has a masters degree in philosophy and he specifically has permission from his priest to teach theology.
How do you have time to listen to his videos when you clearly also spend so much time sucking his dick?
>has a masters degree in philosophy and he specifically has permission from his priest
he does NOT have a degree in anything. he dropped out
oh no no no Jaysisters...
That's not true. He dropped out of his PhD program. He has a masters degree.
Why? Let me guess, genius student drops out because he had enough of le corrupt academia and not because he couldn't make it
>drops out because he had enough of le corrupt academia
Yes and also because he decided he could do better on his own.
He talked about one time he had some professor who was criticizing people who believe in "globalist conspiracy theories" and Jay happened to have a copy of Tragedy and Hope by Carol Quigley which explicitly lays out the plans from an actual globalist himself. The professor had no argument and simply told Jay to get out of his class.
>and then he owned the prof and everyone clapped
Probably sperged out like a schizo in class and his professor flunked him tbh
>just be a sycophantic cuck like me to get anywhere in life bro
Not a Dyer fag but cringe. I hope for your sake you're only 20 years old.
Are you aware that self-promotion is against the rules of LULZ(nel)? Buy a banner ad.
He's either a shill or a useful idiot but either way I wouldn't trust him for philosophy or theology let alone conspiracies.
Jay is the opposite of shill.
>spoke out against the covid "vaccine"
>against the NWO
>names the israelites
>against liberals, wokefags, marxists, atheists, progressives
>talks about mind control, propaganda, and so on so you can be aware of it and not let it work on you
Lol. Kill yrself retard
but he's right and it's not schizo
>he thinks there arent shills for all of those things
and you do not want to waste time with academic "theologians" when you can sit at the feet of living holy Elders and Saints. Jay is the epitome of the overly rational, western mindset.
having permission from your priest doesn't mean much when you keep in mind the prevalence of the cancer that is ecuminism in the Church for the last 100 years.
>cancer that is ecuminism
Jay is against ecumenism. He criticizes it all the time.
How come people who criticize Jay don't even know what his position is
>and you do not want to waste time with academic "theologians" when you can sit at the feet of living holy Elders and Saints.
There are no staretsis around, so nobody's going mystic. What is left is going to church service every Sunday, more often if you're zealous sort, and that's not what some are looking for. Those things tend to be just bourgeois social clubs. Not that I think the American ''orthobros'' skip on the Sunday church.
On top of that. Priests words don't mean much? Very protestant view of things.
there are plenty. visit any monastery started by Elder Ephraim of Arizona.
if you only go to liturgy on Sunday that is a very protestant mentality. you revolve for life around the Church services and do prayers at home on top of that. that's the only way you can keep that connection.
i also mean by being at their feet is read the lives of contemporary saints. not just visit the ones here. priests today are mostly academics from Seminary school with zero connection to monasticism. they are ecuminists and modernists. this is the problem in today's Church and a sign of the end times. to obey priests for the sake of obedience is a papist innovation. we do not follow priests that teach modernism and heresy. they can do the mysteries but you ignore their advice. this is what the Saints teach us to do.
You might like Fr. Peter Heers tbh anon.
I've been following him for over a year and went to the conference in Pennsylvania. i recommend you attend the next one. the vigil alone was very edifying.
SATANIC MALEFACTOR, DEMONIC THEOLOGICAL INNOVATOR, THE FIRST CHILD OF HELL
Just read the PHILOKALIA
Fuck off, Jay. If you weren’t such a douche you might have debated Sam Harris, but you never will.
Jay would demolish Sam in a debate easily. It would not even be a contest.
Guys, it's obviously bait.
Sam Harris is a joke. Jay would destroy him.
>Jay would destroy him.
Yes, retard. And that’s why it’s such a shame, because Jay would humiliate and expose him. But as it is no respectable person wants to touch Jay with a pole because he’s so toxic.
>he’s so toxic
I've... I've found my people
Jay dyer himself doesn't understand the cogito based on that clip. The cogito is NOT an appeal to sense data as a grounding or starting point for knowledge. The cogito is about the BEING that EXPERIENCES the sensual data stream. The nature OF the data stream CAN 100% be doubted, ie the SOURCE of the data stream can be doubted, ie is the source of the data stream an observer independent piece of meat which somehow beams a mental experience into an observer to interface with, or is the source of the data stream the god mind, ect. This CAN be doubted. The fact that there is a BEING/observer/mind/unit of consciousness which is EXPERIENCING the experience OF the data stream can NOT be doubted. This is ONE thing that the observer can be sure of. To doubt something requires an internal subjective conscious EXPERIENCER (an 'I am) to do the doubting. So the doubting of the fact that 'I am' is itself a confirmation OF the fact that 'I am'. This is self evidence and self proof at the same time. The ultimate grounding and surety and epistemic justification AND ontological justification. The being IS being. The mind is minding. Things which are NOT can NOT doubt that they ARE. This is not to deny the soundness of some transcendental arguments, this is just to say that jay is lacking depth of thought on this particular issue.
Put on the big boy pants and form an argument of your own. Pick out something I said that is faulty.
refutation of cogito
Form an argument of your own. I don't want a homework assignment to watch some video.
>The fact that there is a BEING/observer/mind/unit of consciousness which is EXPERIENCING the experience OF the data stream can NOT be doubted. This is ONE thing that the observer can be sure of. To doubt something requires an internal subjective conscious EXPERIENCER (an 'I am) to do the doubting. So the doubting of the fact that 'I am' is itself a confirmation OF the fact that 'I am'. This is self evidence and self proof at the same time. The ultimate grounding and surety and epistemic justification AND ontological justification.
Cogito already presupposes many things that it cannot account for on its own grounds, such as time over which experience is happening, the ability of words to describe this reality, the laws of logic, and so on.
>Cogito already presupposes many things that it cannot account for on its own grounds, such as time over which experience is happening
This is all irrelevant. Presuppositions require a pre-supposer (consciousness) to do the presupposing. To even presuppose would just be another confirmation of my own 'I am-ness'.
>such as time
Doubting temporality requires a consciousness to do the doubting. This is more confirmation of the self evidence and proof of the fundamental nature of consciousness.
>the ability of words to describe this reality
Completely irrelevant. The experiencer knew he was experiencing before there even were such things as natural language. I myself knew I was experiencing before I knew the natural language to elaborate it.
>the laws of logic
Irrelevant. You don't need to know 'the laws of logic' to know you are a being which is being. The 'I am' is the salient concept thing here. Thinking is ONE of the things that 'I ams' do. One need not even appeal to ones own specific type of intellection to know of ones being-ness. One realizes that the experiencer is experiencing even in a dream.
Do you understand that the cogito was supposed to be the ultimate foundational grounding of all truth? It doesn't work because it relies on all those other presuppositions. Descartes was trying to boil everything down to the one indubitable certitude but it was a failure. This is why foundationalist epistemology does not work and the transcendental argument for God is superior.
>Descartes was trying to boil everything down to the one indubitable certitude
Yes, true. The certitude of the fundamental ontic status of consciousness, or the experiencer/observer
>It doesn't work because it relies on all those other presuppositions
You don't have to make any pre-anythings to know that you are experiencing an experience.
>Descartes was trying to boil everything down to the one indubitable certitude
>but it was a failure
No, it established the incoherence of doubting your own consciousness. This is the thing that can be known with the most certitude. A probability of unity. see here in this green text
>In the posthumously published The Search for Truth by Natural Light, he expressed this insight as dubito, ergo sum, vel, quod idem est, cogito, ergo sum ("I doubt, therefore I am — or what is the same — I think, therefore I am")
>This is why foundationalist epistemology does not work and the transcendental argument for God is superior.
No, this is a misunderstanding. The salient aspect is one of ontology first, but in realizing the fundamental ontic status of one's own consciousness, one concurrently establishes the most epistemically justifiable fact, namely that one can know with certitude that one's consciousness exit and that this must be a first principle postulate, as planck knews as expressed in pic rel here
Bro, do you just repeat verbatim whatever Jay Dyer says? Try thinking for yourself. Dyer isn't even smart so choosing him as a guru is pathetic.
>A probability of unity
Was a mis-statement, of course. This is the wrong kind of certitude. The certitude is not one of the measure of the likelihood of an event happening or measure of plausibility. The sort of certitude of ones own consciousness (not the source of the CONTENT of consciousness mind you) existing, the experiencer of the experience, is a different and more fundamental certitude. Otherwise the post stands.
if someone as intellectually shallow as harris is your trump card then perhaps it's time to reevaluate your beliefs
Jay would absolutely destroy him in a debate
Sam Harris is a fucking clown swimming in contradictions.
Jay pussied out against the Dimond Bros. He will never recover. Was even publicly humiliated by them.
Jay makes papists seethe. They know their pope is a satanic jesuit, globalist, and fag enabler but they don't want to admit it.
His Hollywood schizo books any good?
Some months ago a anon gifted me Meta Narratives, thanks again bro.
just the truth
>the guy briefly converted to Catholicism because some baptist shitposter mindfucked him
I will NEVER take Jay seriously after reading that exchange what a sperg lmao.
More background on that?
Jay Dyer is a typical american prot cuck. Found some truth but mostly lost in unfounded personal psychoses much like the so-called gnostics he despise
No he's not.
He's a textbook Spiritual Protestant, m8.
>focused entirely on personalities
>ideas are just weapons for personalities to use against each other
>rejects any kind of organizational hierarchy
>bizarre conspiracy theories
>theology constructed entirely as rejection of something else
>rejects the idea of spiritual authority
He's no different than the legions of other orientalist Protties who got dabbed on by Fedoras and went East to try and find a real religion, he just happened to choose HECKIN POGGERS ICONS AND BEARDS instead of Buddhism or whatever.
>rejects any kind of organizational hierarchy
He's Eastern Orthodox you retard. There's always been hierarchy in the church from the fucking apostles.
>He's Eastern Orthodox
In Youtube videos filmed in the US.
Do I have to remind you who the Apostles were again? You realize we have to spread the word?
Fucking thank you, usually you goobers take like six posts of jerking off to get to this point
>WE have to spread the gospel
>not the hierarchy of actual Orthodox Christians who know what they're fucking talking about
The schism came later bro.
So first you say he can't be eastern Orthodox unless he's in a certain geographic location like faith is a fucking perk from a beacon. And then you say people haven't tried expanding the bounds of that faith?
This person is mentally ill
So? He completed his rigorous catehumen courses and got baptized and confirmed.
Then he shouldn't be claiming to have finally figured Christianity out and be selling it via youtube courses, he should be directing people to move to Russia/Greece/Serbia/whichever form of Orthodoxy he's LARPing as this week and seek spiritual guidance from that hierarchy.
Also, he should probably be encouraging the various orthodox denominations to actually sort how how orthodoxy works in America, and he should shut his fucking mouth because he's only helping the spread of Phyletism by promoting the OCA and it's weird negrolatry.
>promoting the OCA
He doesn't. He says they are too liberal. He is in ROCOR.
Why are you accusing Jay of the opposite of what he actually says?
>He is in ROCOR.
You are possessed by demons. Jay is a member of the one holy apostolic Greek Orthodox Church, and it will prevail against you and your Satanic brethren.
>Greek Orthodox Church
>He is in ROCOR
>converted to Catholicism
this is why no one takes you larpers seriously
Wait bro, we've been trolled.
You are not making any sense.
In what way? The OCA clearly condemns LGBT, and they go as far as anathematizing anyone within the church who supports it.
They still are liberal compared to Russian or Serbian or Bulgarian Orthodox.
Give examples. AFAIK, the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in America is the only one that's actually trying to be progressive.
GOA, OCA, and Antiochian are all compromised. They follow the ecumenist agenda. That doesn't mean their administering of the mysteries is graceless but you must be watchful.
The churches that totally reject all NWO psyops are ROCOR and the True Orthodox churches (often slandered as 'Old Calendarists).
>Ackshually, my church is the most based and redpilled
You are a FAG.
>(often slandered as 'Old Calendarists).
That's because many of them are fanatics and don't believe all the other churches' mysteries are valid, nor do they think SS. Paisios and Porphyrios are saints.
Those are the Matthewites. They are the actual zealots. For example, there's a Matthewite church in Colorado that claims to be the only Orthodox church in all of North America. They make everyone else look bad.
The Florinites understand that the Holy Spirit is present in all of Orthodoxy and they don't rule out His presence in other Christian denominations as well. Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina simply rejected the masonic-communistic conspiracy of ecumenism as put forth by the known freemason Meletios.
>chief focus is converting blacks
>political philosophy is literally "Liberalism"
I mean, come the fuck on, they're literally doing "Christian Nationalism" in the very article that you posted.
what are you talking about
you are just making stuff up
Jay never supports prosperity gospel. In fact he called Joel Osteen Satanic.
You are willfully blind
Youtube channel and book are both great. I've listened to a lot of atheist vs deist and atheist vs christian debates and Jay Dyer has been the most useful for me in learning about the truth. He brings things like metaphysics and pre-suppositionalism to the forefront of the discussion which are topics avoided like the plague by pur enlightenment societies. But learning even just the basics about these concepts really obliterates all the liberal, post-modernist, marxist and other secular worldviews. The books was a bit too much about conspiracies and less about symbolism for me but a good read still
good post tbh but I like his analyses of conspiracies. He is very knowledgable on the subject.
Jay Dyer is, one must say in the interest of salvation, an apostate fool. His religion is false. Jay Dyer has no faith. The only reason Jay Dyer had gravitated toward Eastern 'Orthodoxy' is that he is a rebel against God and he could not stand against the world. Jay Dyer rejects the known truth, and he is headed for Hell without any doubt. His palamite false doctrine of God is so stupid and anti-Christian that it's about as bad as Calvinism (although in a very different way). Uncreated things don't begin to exist. And yes, it was definitely Palamas' position that 'uncreated energies' have a beginning. He even doubled down on that nonsense when he was corrected about it. The Papacy is true, and Jay Dyer rejects what Christ instituted on that matter. Jay Dyer's bad will is profound. Jay Dyer is following a mob of rebels to Hell.
>Jay Dyer had gravitated toward Eastern 'Orthodoxy' is that he is a rebel against God and he could not stand against the world.
You've completely missed the point in all of it. The world is what's corrupt and evil and should be stood against. Store not ye treasures in the earth but in heaven because moths and thieves and all that. You realise there's a whole book in the Bible dedicated to the world's inevitable destruction and the revelation of all that is in His second coming?
You materialists can't even LARP correctly.
>The world is what's corrupt and evil and should be stood against.
you're all rank nihilists go read Nietzsche instead
refuted by Fr. Seraphim Rose
also that's not what nihilism means
I'm not nihilist for accepting the material will perish. I believe in a God and eternal life after death and objective morality, definitive purpose in life. Nobody on here knows what nihilism actually is but it certainly isn't that.
People on this board have been pushing this meme that Orthodoxy is "nihilist Christianity" which is total nonsense.
I also saw one anon say that Orthodoxy is fatalist. This is the complete opposite of reality. Orthodoxy are totally against fatalism. They emphasize free will probably more than any other Christian group.
People here just read Nietzche and think they've got it all figured out.
These people are simply religious about science. They assume everything will live forever in the material plane and even if the sun blows up 'the science' will have advanced far enough to be able to escape or prevent that from happening. That 'the science' will solve all of humanity's problems and humans will transcend their mortal state to become one with 'the science' (most of them don't realise this is antihuman not transhumanist). They have faith things on earth will get better because they have to otherwise there's nothing left without God. Their entire science depends on an appeal to authority and pretending it follows logic more than regular religion so therefore it must be more correct. And because the material plane is all they have, they will justify any and all atrocities to get to their perfect world.
>there's nothing left without God
This is the theist position on atheism. That you do see some atheists embrace it de facto is merely proof that they are, in essence, heretical christers and not actually commited to atheism. Notice how what it reveals about the theist's relationship with nihilism (or that of a poorly converted atheist who still agrees with Christianity-sans-God). For him, God has to exist because otherwise all he has left is the world he already denies. An Indic or Spinozist God won't do, neither will the Buddhist's nirvana, nor any sort of world-spirit, it has to be a world ruled by God from afar, or that world abandoned by him, which is unacceptable. When Nietzsche says God is dead, he is telling you to break out of that dichotomy. When he says we must become worthy of the deed, he is telling these half-christened atheists that to deny this God while keeping his morality is absurd
>world ruled by God from afar
That is deism which Orthodoxy regards as heresy. God is both immanent and transcendent. This connects to the essence/energy distinction. God's uncreated energies are everywhere and present in all things.
>God is both immanent
This is not true though. The whole point of the essence/energy distinction is to prove that God's essence is totally distinct from his energies, and that his essence is unknowable and totally unrelated to the energies.
>The whole point of the essence/energy distinction is to prove that God's essence is totally distinct from his energies, and that his essence is unknowable and totally unrelated to the energies.
The essence/energies distinction is extremely interesting in that it evidently comes from the same mode of thought as the purusha/prakriti distinction or the nirguna/saguna distinction, of course it follows that the essence being completely unknowable is also absolutely alone and distinct, and also all that really is, in the end this undermines all relativity, number, measurement and all means, so trinity, relationship (by extension any sort of "communion" is out of the question), being absolutely distinct, absolutely real and absolutely alone, the very reality of relativity, which includes
all creation characterized by difference, properties, qualities, subject-object relationships, categories, and by extension the whole human organism and individual that is subject to modification, or that which is conditioned by an adjunct faculty, that which has form or that which is qualified. No faculty can comprehend it, it can't be reasoned by the intellect, or assumed by the body, it is contactless and also the reality of everything in all its multiplicity which only has a contingent, illusory, rigorously null existence without relationship, because relation is inconceivable in absolute terms, and implies a causal sequence which is at odds with the absolute simultaneity.
Even though this is what follows from such a conception, it seems orthodox Christian mysticism has deviated into degenerate forms of tantrism which emphasizes the "energetic" substantial nature of the absolute, the creative energy which is communed with, in a state where multiplicity and unity really coexist, on an intellectual plane, where one ascends up a ladder of degrees, attaining angelic ranks or emanated status and degrees in proximity to a qualified locus which is concretized in a solidification of intellectual light, where the conditioned and unconditioned share in a single wholeness, and are symmetrically established with no subordination, or sublated contingency.
Even though it may be technically possible for an individual Hesychast to attain real liberation, and that for the liberated any sort of acknowledging of a relativity does not contradict the absolute, but that the general trend is to encourage new adepts to entertain relative conceptions like personhood and energetic procession, or states of angelic manifestation, is only evidence that at least the mainline orthodox have relative aims.
the very reality of relativity, which includes
all creation characterized by difference, properties, qualities, subject-object relationships, categories, and by extension the whole human organism and individual that is subject to modification, or that which is conditioned by an adjunct faculty, that which has form or that which is qualified *comes into question*
>where one ascends up a ladder of degrees, attaining angelic ranks or emanated status and degrees in proximity to a qualified locus which is concretized in a solidification of intellectual light,
Really though this is better than nothing, and the individual adepts of the world religions following this method become poles unto themselves, magnets of the odic fluid and currents, making them influential and of high-repute, they also fulfill all their fantasies, are guaranteed health and well-being, because of their great powers of mind-control, they become proficient in vampirism and their vitality increases above the level of other men. If you want power, you have to try at some level.
>God is both immanent and transcendent.
Keep making things up as you go along it's doing wonders for my impression of theology
I am not "pissed off at being" as I am not the one inventing copes about how life on earth is fake and it will be better when we're living our best (after)life
You do not have to be a materialist or "religious about science" to observe that Christianity in nearly all its incarnations takes the form of a world-denying doctrine which in its ultimate promise and evaluation of this life says we'd all be better off dead and then the mean people who were more powerful than me will stay dead while God revives the nice people who didn't upset me by exerting themselves. If your "definitive purpose in life" is to consider life a waiting room in God's office that's fine but don't expect other people to agree with you, some of us have things to do.
Seethe. We're not nihilists meanwhile you can't even comprehend the mortal world having meaning under a God because you're simply pissed off at being.
Your guru Nietzsche is a retard. "Life-denying", "values", all meaningless buzzwords.
And theology isn't full of meaningless babbling about essences and energies?
Not a theologist. I only trust in the Word of God.
sadly, more "meaningless buzzwords"
Why would I trust Nietzsche to face the ineffable sublime over Christ when it's apparent he fell victim to it just the same as all lesser men? This is what you Nietzsche fags fail to address, poking holes at the intellectualizing aspects of Christianity rather than what it actually preaches.
>why would I trust Nietzsche to be a better Christian than Jesus
Yeah I guess you're right you got me there. Since we all already agree with Christianity there is no reason to even entertain criticism of its foundations, and certainly not by non-Christians who are categorically wrong.
>say Christ is better than your guru at what he preaches
>devolves into nagger-babble when met with this conundrum
Sorry sweatie, no amount of smug posturing and hate speech will un-kill your god.
Nietzsche died too, so I don't see your point about muh ghosts.
With every reply you more agressively miss the point. If as you insist Nietzsche's criticism of Christianity is "meaningless buzzwords", one would expect you to establish a way of determining what is meaningful as part of that charge. Instead you merely "nuh-uh" as if that's any way to earnestly defend your nihilistic ideology which has been intellectually underwater for the last several centuries. It
The Papacy represents all that is wrong with the world which is no surprise it's the face of nu-christianity globohomo. How can you honestly look at the state of the Roman church and conclude it's the tree that bares good fruit. It doesn't hold up under the slightest scrutiny. Read Guette.
>the tree that bares good fruit
Where is that tree in your opinion? Serious question I personally dont see it anywhere
Meant a tree not the tree.
ok where is a tree
The RC church is a tree. Its branches do not bare good fruit (its staff and ruler) therefore it is not a good tree.
where is a tree that does bear good fruit you pedant
The Orthodox Church. Christ himself. The passionfruit tree in my grandparent's backyard. Proper exercise regimes.
> The Orthodox Church.
Cringe, from laymans perspective literally just different flavor of catholicism
More like *inferior flavor
>laymans perspective literally just different flavor of catholicism
Yeah but that's not true though is it
>ummmmm ackshually we have a fasting calendar so it’s really different
There are many theological amd philosophical differences. You don't know what you are talking about.
Abstract priestly wankery makes little difference to a layman.
Theists actually think saying 2/10 is an argument
atheists actually think saying "cringe" is an argument.
Orthodoxy represents the only pillar of morality that has always stood against the world. There's a schism for a reason! Which was the new and foreign and which was as it was?
Which one? There's like ten of them, none of them are in Communion with each other, and each one says that the other nine are wicked constructs of Satan.
>The Papacy is true
utterly brainfucked by priests
Papism is a mental disorder
>The Papacy is true
Your satanic Babylonian cult has nothing to do with true Christianity now fuck off to tradcath femboy twitter.
Is this that Orthodox guy?
No it's the other Orthodox guy
He seems really cool and vompletely up my alley but his vids are hours of a lovestream unedited. He can't afford an editor? I want an education not a parasocial relationship or a podcast that no-brainers play in the background of mindless work. I also wouldn't know where to start watching him.
>I also wouldn't know where to start watching him.
Here is a good starting place
>demented Jay haters can't find anything wrong so they have to literally make up false accusations against him
Orthodoxy exists only on Mount Athos; everything else is a meme.
May Saint Gregory Palamas bless you all.
>t. orthodog from an orthodog country who goes to church everyday
The one with the millionaire monks?
This attitude that some people have makes no sense.
>he's American so that means he can't be Orthodox, it's just a larp
>larp larp larp he's a larper
If you actually believe in Orthodoxy then you should believe that it is for everyone from every country.
Fr. Seraphim Rose was American and raised in a Protestant family.
Seraphim Rose is a homo and a shill as well
He was before he became Orthodox. He repented and said it was a terrible sin. He never as Orthodox tried to say that homosexualism is ok. Quite the opposite.
I watched one of his videos once and be looks like a small manlet. I don’t really read books by manlets sorry
He is 6'2".
I dont believe you. He has a small frame and small head I’d bet 5’6” max
he's a big guy
Jay’s mentally ill. Look how he behaves himself in debates. He’s the typical retard who reads a lot but never thinks for himself, and all he can do in arguments is forcefully repeat what others have told him, never actually addressing any unforeseen objections in real time. Narcissistic personality disorder mascarading as manliness.
I read Esoteric Hollywood 1 & 2. Watch a movie, read a chapter. Really worth doing.
Why do so many anons on this board think Nietzche is the king of philosophy
he wasn't that good tbh
im trans btw
dont know if that matters
Jay would own Nietzche in a debate.
Nietzsche's entire project is trannyism distilled into its most barest essence.
Nietzsche is a sledgehammer. He told you as much. You can let go of him once you've cleared the obstacle. However, the sort of people who now infest the board largely affirm the things he critiqued, so we shall require his services for the foreseeable future.
Nietzche was wrong and you must move on. Fr. Seraphim Rose objectively refuted him in his book on nihilism. You need to stop talking down to people who know more than you. Nietzche has nothing of value to offer aside from some decent critiques of modernity which Orthodox Christians would already agree with anyway.
>objectively refuted him in his book on nihilism
lol doubling down on skydaddy because you are a conflicted homosexual is not a refutation
Read Fr. Seraphim Rose. Nietzche was proven objectively wrong.
Can you even attempt to explain why? Why should I take your claims on faith in "Father" Sneedhim Rose? No father of mine.
They're a bit like people who canvass for jehovah's witnesses... there's an 83 IQ just-so explanation for everything
The guy you're talking to is a Dyerite fanboy. He's been repeating Dyer's talking points over and over in this thread without justification.
You must be at least 18 to post here.
I don't care that he's a priest. That doesn't in any way whatsoever qualify him in terms of being correct. It does tell us something about his ideological inclinations, as does his taste for man-ass
You people are all the same.
>just read Nietzche bro
You're like the trannies who just say
>just read Marx and Frankfurt School sweaty
Rent free, and you still won't even provide the gist of Sneedhim's argument against a position of Neetzsche
>Read Christcuck #2837472984 this time god is proven real.
>Literally says the same shit as everyone else since Paul the israelite.
YOU should read it, dumb underage LARPing cunt.
>Read Fr. Seraphim Rose.
I don't read American homosexuals, sorry
>Christianity is... le bad, because... my nose tingles
Too many shallow deboonk videos for my liking.
how can you Americans fall for this type of stuff?
How did you fall for the covid "vaccine"?
How did you fall for LGBT propaganda?
How did you fall for feminism?
How did you fall for evolution?
How did you fall for atheism?
I’m glad to see you putting dyer on the same level as all of that shit maybe there’s hope for you
Atheists have no argument.
Dyer’s TAG argument is a good critique of materialism but it fails by trying to infer an overly-ambitious conclusion. While it’s true that materialism as a metaphysical system can’t account for such things as consciousness, truth, morality, reason, and knowledge, it’s not at all clear that Christianity is the only coherent worldview which can. There are multiple metaphysical systems propounded by various philosophers which provide an account of these things. Dyer ridiculously claims that these fall short because somehow “only the Trinity can answer the problem of the One and the Many”. If you believe that, you are functionally retarded.
More importantly, Christianity is not purely a metaphysical system. It also makes specific historical claims. So if you wanted you could take all of the metaphysical elements and throw out the historical claims. Eg. You can preserve a Trinitarian God and man being made in God’s image, but you can throw out Jesus of Nazareth, the Bible, and the Church. Then you would have a system which, according to Dyer, gives a perfect account of the world, but which is not Christian.
In short, trying to prove any religion with apodeictic certainty is foolish. At some point it’s just going to break down to faith and personal experience.
>Dyer ridiculously claims that these fall short because somehow “only the Trinity can answer the problem of the One and the Many”. If you believe that, you are functionally retarded.
Just for fun, posit a God with infinite “persons” (whatever that even means) rather than just 3. Does this God do less to account for the problem of the One and the Many than the Christian God?
Or if you say 3 is necessary, then why can’t we posit a non-Christian Trinitarian God? Why can’t we say “our philosophical inquiries force us to admit that God has 3 persons, but that’s as much as we can know”? My point is, even if a Trinitarian God were philosophically necessary (HIGHLY doubtful), there is no reason to conclude that God incarnated as Jesus Christ, or died, or instituted the Orthodox Church, or any of the specific historically contingent claims the Orthodox Christian makes.
Are you saying the point of philosophy is to ask questions and generate meaningful discussion rather than mindlessly suck the dick of any author who says mildly reactionary things? Shocking
>Dyer ridiculously claims that these fall short because somehow “only the Trinity can answer the problem of the One and the Many”.
Trinity isn't even exclusive to Christianity. Like most American orthodox Christians, he doesn't know much about other religions.
Do orthofags really?
Politics brain. Both of you. Read more homosexuals
Yes unfortunately there are extremely liberal, "woke" people within the Orthodox Church, but there also are lots of people who are the total opposite of that, so cherry picking some examples of liberal ones to try to make the church seem pozzed is not a good argument and it does not disprove the faith. It really just proves that there are subversive infiltrators which Jay talks about and they are funded by powerful NGOs such as Fordham in Britain.
WOWEEE who knew a religion could be so BASED
So the "Orthodox" are at American protestant levels of "vote your conscience"?
I was making sweet love to your mother last night and she told me to remind you to take your meds.
>look gaiz I'm postin from my orthodox meme folder am I based now????
I think I broke him
Saint Paisios prophecied in the 80s that there will come a mandatory "vaccine" which will be a forerunner of the mark of the beast.
Lol, religion was literally created to contain and entertain retards like you. In an earlier age you’d be a serf picking onions out of the ground and eating them like apples.
Fr. Savas Agioritis in Greece did an exorcism on someone who became possesed by a demon after getting the covid vaccine. The demon confessed that the covid vaccine was created in a Masonic ritual and it has demons inside it.
There was one Greek Orthodox priest who got the first covid vaccine dose. While he was standing in line he had a deep sense of foreboding and something telling him not to get it but he did anyway.
After getting the shot, immediately was overcome with a terrible sense of shame. At night, he could quite literally see the devil's face right in front of him, taunting him and saying "Now you are mine."
The priest went through this for forty days until finally it went away after he was begging forgiveness.
He refuses to get the second dose and he warns everyone to not get the covid vaccine.
wow just like my bibble stories it must be true
I don't doubt that he's a good debater, but I don't see a single shred of humility in him. I'm still an inquirer in the Orthodox Church, but aren't you supposed to be humble and fight your passions?
He has a certain Cali vibe about him. It's popular with the kids. I was surprised to learn he's Eastern Orthodox, they always seem so somberly dressed.
>Heh, you think some things are true? Therefore god.
Also literally believes everything in the bible happened and that the world is 6000 years old.
Jay fanboys are truly number than naggers, literally falling for some retard who talks confidently.
If you don't believe the things in the Bible happened you aren't Christian.
Jay Dyer >>>>>>>> Jordan Peterson
Modern philosophy is a joke, isn't it lads? 🙁
Jay Dyer berates anybody who is not a part of his israeli death cult, yet has to use Plato, a man who Jay's church says is burning in hell, to give any sort of metaphysics to this cuck religion.
>Yes I believe the elites of society sacrifice children to demons.
lmao what kind of nagger brained retard are you? They obviously do, you don't even have to be a theist to acknowledge such.
Jesus was sacrificed to a volcano demon
>a man who Jay's church says is burning in hell
No one in the Orthodox church believes this.
I'll stick to what ny priest says, thanks.
What's his obsession with purple and having no taste in design? His brain has become and incoherently demonic mess after reading too much.
>muh Illuminarty muh freemasons
get that Boomer conspiratard shit out of here