Pages

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

A den of angry Calvinists and misanthropes

To my knowledge, this is (at least) the second time that Rauser has played the "angry Calvinist" card.

i) How does he know what mood I'm in when I do posts about his stuff? Is he a mind-reader? What is his evidence that I'm angry when I do a post about him? Is that a projection based on what his own mood would be if he did a similar post? Is he an angry, misanthropic progressive? 

ii) Likewise, consider the manifest fallacy of presuming that because someone is a Calvinist, whatever they say is motivated by Calvinism. 

iii) It's revealing that Rauser's chosen allies are atheists and heretics (e.g. Dale Tuggy). That's his center of gravity. That's where his sympathies lie. 

iv) Rauser is a fashionable bigot. He indulges in sweeping stereotypes he couldn't begin to prove. It's funny how "progressive Christians" like Rauser lack any capacity for self-criticism. They picture themselves as tolerant, unbiased, open-minded thinkers, but in reality they are the mirror image of the Manichaean outlook they impute to fundamentalists. A stark, black-and-white polarity between the good guys and the bad guys. They cast themselves in the hero role in their own movie while casting religious and political conservatives as dastardly villains. All Rauser needs is a cape and Batmobile to complete his self-image. 

11 comments:

  1. Never ceases to fascinate how, when bested and unwilling to carry on with logical, step-by-step arguments, people resort to the "oh, you're angry, everyone who disagrees with me is hateful and mad, they should get psychiatric help!" card. Even if they're professional theologians.

    It's almost as if the Calvinist doctrine of depravity was accurate, or something.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BTW, does Triablogue have a "submissions" form anyway? I've been wrestling with Matthew 1:17 - http://mothwo.blogspot.com/2019/07/three-times-fourteen-generations.html.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is there a difference between omitting individuals and omitting generations?

      Delete
    2. David, i recommend checking out this VIDEO.

      Delete
    3. > "Is there a difference between omitting individuals and omitting generations?"

      These seem to me to be functionally equivalent, in terms of the difference they make to the summary count then performed.

      Delete
  3. Count me as one of those angry blood thirsty Calvinists.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's kind of catchy, actually - just kind of rolls off the tongue. Steve, have you considered putting something like that on your doormat?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. might scare away Mormon missionaries and JWs.

      Delete
  5. Classic case of projection.

    We believe in election. And are part of the elect. Calvinists are quite happy.

    It's the Arminians who are scared and angry that they might lose their salvation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I sometimes feel like Rauser is the so called Christian version of John Loftus. The Atheists have Loftus, we have Rauser.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was SURE his tweet was going to end with: "you'll never see a more wretched hive of scum and villany."

    ReplyDelete