Stupidity I can't respond to as comment-banned at r/Academic Biblical

Yeah, since I've been cut off from commenting, but not banned from the group (yet) I can look at stupidity but can't comment. So, on occasion, doing a compilation over several weeks, I'll fire away here.

Like this guy, who gets it right that for the (semi-OCCASIONAL) martyrdom (he omits what's in that previous parentheses) prison was the "holding pen" before execution, and that it didn't exist much else in the ancient Mediterranean, then spoils it with this:

The Mamertine Prison in Rome may have held Peter and Paul in prison before their executions

Uh, no, Cochise, in almost all likelihood, neither was killed in Rome and neither of them even got to Rome. With Paul, that last 1/4 of Acts is fictional, as is the ideal of Nero persecuting Christians for the Fire of Rome, mainly because it's likely a Christian interpolation in Tacitus, and even if "his," it's him doing a double bank shot to smear both Christians and Nero.

==

Then, good moronity by someone trying to take a traditionalist line on the Torah vs Malachi on dating, then bitching when he gets pwned. He posts a lot at exjew, which looks like its own unique Reddit swamp. Also, I used the word "Torah"; why is an ex-Jew using "Penteteuch"?

==

An ex-Muslim, per his comments elsewhere, now claiming to be an antitheist, not just an atheist, apparently trolling for Christian-based ways to deconvert Muslims.

==

And, there's the mix of good, bad and ugly comments on an actually good post asking about just how much does the Talmud talk about Jesus. Most of the worst posts are from people who probably also falsely claim antizionism is antisemitism. Yes, Yeshua was a common Jewish name at the time of Jesus. Did the rabbis 200-500 years later have that much reason to talk about that many other Jesuses, though? No. Not just no. Of course not. When a Jewish scholar like Amy-Jill Levine, as cited by one commenter, says Jews have things in the Talmud to be apologizing for, and another commenter attacks that commenter, you have what? Goysplaining?

==

Via a post there, but not the post itself, how an otherwise good Smithsonian piece can discuss in detail how Mary Magdalene eventually became labeled a whore, including mentioning the great variety of early Christian literature, and even mentioning Karen L. King's book about her, "The Gospel of Mary of Magdala," and yet, never use the actual words "Gnostic" or "Gnosticism" is beyond me.

==

A comment on another thread claiming that Peter was a "businessman" and likely literate in Hebrew aas well as Aramaic? Literate enough to at least possibly have written a Sabbath poem that was the subject of medieval Jewish legend? Citing this seven-year-old untenable comment as support? And, on the "businessman" angle, believing Gospel tales as truth that James and John were personally known to the Sanhedrin? Oy.

==

An MA in theology exercising a mix of laziness and bad education in having to ask for books discussing Jesus as the Word of God?

==

And, this person, dissing on Francesca Stavrakopoulou, claiming she used to be "more respectful" in the past, and this guy's only been on Reddit under current name for less than a month. I don't think "God: An Anatomy" was fantastic, but it was 3 3/4 stars solid. Also, the mods let him POST, not just comment, with no more than three weeks on Reddit and ergo no more than three weeks on the sub.

Classical music woes in San Antonio

Actually, per a very good piece by the Texas Observer, and previously unknown to me, it's ultimately "woe" in the singular — and that's union busting.

The Observer names names, and links at least one of them to the Alamo City now having dueling symphonic-focused classical music organizations, the second one started after the start of COVID, that of course hit the classical music live performance world hard, around the globe.

I had no idea that San Antonio had the state's first symphony orchestra and other things. White flight from the city of San Antonio itself is figured as one problem in its decline. OTOH, that didn't hurt Dallas or Houston, so it seems the problems are deeper, probably encompassing the union-busting but not limited to that. (I have no idea of how well San Antonio does on other fine arts.)

That said, contra an insinuated part of the Observer's framing, rich folks in other larger, newer cities, also view things like this as a "recruitment amenity." Just like pro sports teams.

Only Sky gets more shit wrong

I wrote, 14 months ago, about how the Atheist Patheos site had gotten a lot of shit wrong in its first month. I debated about going back there again, with subscription screens and donation screens and such, and didn't for a long time. But, recently, I did. And, boy, I don't need to do that again for a while.

First, a lot of it isn't even secularist or secular humanist or atheist on ethics or other things. It's generic US librul, with a dash from across the pond.

Second, within that, in its repeated writings on the Russia-Ukraine War, it's very very much US/NATO Nat-sec Nutsack librul. And with that, let's dive in.

OnlySky Media was founded by the atheist contingent formerly at Patheos after Patheos essentially said, they say, that they had to be nice to theists.

So, they formed their own sandbox. And, to be honest, there's a fair amount not to like.

First, when I decided, hey, since I missed out on Patheos atheists' rise to fame, and a few bucks, and then got blocked from commenting by not-a-bible-scholar Gnu Atheist Neil Carter (one of the OnlySky gang), let's see if I can't hook up there, especially since they say they're open for contributors. (More on individual contributors getting shite wrong below.)

In their request for submissions, they say:

New columnists are added continually based not only on quality but on whether the proposed column fills an unmet need. We already have religious criticism pretty well covered.

Uhh, no, as I note below, in follow-up to what I noted originally, as well as things outside religion.

First, inside religion?

Jonathan M.S. Pearce, as already documented here in giving a guest poster space trying to defend Bart Ehrman's most recent book, or directly here, as linked there, cutting blank checks to Jesus mythicists, has gotten issues of biblical criticism wrong. And, I mean, easily identifiable as wrong. I identify him as being a semi-Gnu, like Croft. Within religion, his piece claiming circumcision is a mark of slavery is full of holes on issues such as his ignoring acts of religion as cost-paying signaling. Add in that Hector Avalos, whom he cites, is a Jesus mythicist fellow-traveler. (Being a self-proclaimed agnostic on both the historic Jesus as well as mythicism makes you a mythicist fellow traveler. As is Pearce himself IMO.)

Then there's Paul Golin, not previously critiqued, talking about why an atheist Jew celebrates Hanukkah. First, as far as being historical? The events afterward didn't play out exactly as presented in 1 Maccabees. I've blogged about that before. I blogged about that more at my main blog. He also ignores, contra Shlomo Sand and many others, as I have also discussed, that Hanukkah is originally pagan. Since the menorah ran dry, since Hanukkah has pagan roots and since, per Yonathan Adler, the Torah in general wasn't widely observed until AFTER the Maccabean revolt, if Golin is intellectually honest in act as well as thought, he's just doing a Jewish-tinged solstice event.

As for having other things covered? Phil Zuckerman supposedly writes the Secular Symphony, but his vertical had nothing about classical music one year ago. Today? His 10 most recent posts have ONE about music and it's not about classical music.

Then, back to Pearce, re the Russia-Ukraine war? In writing about things like "Putin's Russian sacrifice at the Chinese altar," too cute by half, he's himself decided to sacrifice at the US-NATO altar of abomination of desolation. 

And, do I really need a secular humanist, let alone a librul as compared to a leftist, a traditional conservative or a libertarian, to tell me that AI isn't all it cracks itself up to be?

Note: I misspelled Pearce's name originally. That's been corrected. As for his claim I'm wrong otherwise?

You've substantively shown precisely nowhere where we have got things wrong, but merely that you disagree with certain stances. This is an assertion-as-opinion piece at most.

— Jonathan MS Pearce (@ATipplingPhilo) April 20, 2023

Nope, Jonathan: 

The "assertion as opinion piece at most"? That covers Pearce himself, REPEATEDLY during his time at Patheos. That's why I've got the receipts. Specifically, contra the Tippling (Tippled too much) Philosopher? At Patheos, I pointed out specific wrongs where he went down the Nazareth didn't exist in Jesus' time road of mythicism, cited non-academic mythicists and more. ... As also noted, you're even wronger on the political.

There you are.

And no, I don't expect OnlySky in general, or Pearce in particular, to get any better in the next year. And, he's just as tetchy as he was two or more years ago.

And, yes, the political bothers me as does the Gnu or semi-Gnu Atheism. Especially given, per one of my previous blog posts, with this link, Pearce is already a documented Islamophobe. As does the fusion of secular humanism and atheism I noted a year ago. None of that is likely to change. (Sadly, Patheos totally 86-ed all atheist blogs when chasing away said bloggers; the Wayback Machine may have them, but maybe not.)

Spanky has since told me all about his separate "channel" for geopolitics and talked about a genocidal dictator. I trumped him with the 2014 Odessa genocide, which he didn't directly refute, the Amnesty International report on Ukrainian war crimes, reading Ivan Katchanovski and more.

He came back with a shitload of shit. After again saying watch my videos (like History for Atheists with his podcasts?) he came on with smears. Said I was being a Putin apologist. Called Katchanovski a "Kremlin apologist," and cited this blog with his name on it, full of post-Maidan smears and half truths, plus the Bulwark, as proof. Claimed, contra his OnlySky piece, that he does actual complexity on this issue. Said the AI piece was controversial.

I called him out on the straight smears. Called him out on his "complexity" claims being hypocritical. Said I knew AI had been called controversial and knew by who and why. Muted and exited Twitter convo.

But not before letting him know that he's really "The Self-Besotted Philosopher."

And, on the misspelling of his name originally? I apologized, said I would correct it, and did. Never a thank-you back. Self-Besotted Philosopher, or Asshole.

Top blogging, first quarter of 2023 — Tacitus, Reddit, more

Let this slip by a bit, but only by a couple of weeks.

Here's a roundup of my top-10 blog post, by readership, in the last three months.

No. 1 and 8 are related. They're part 3, "miscellaneous issues," and part 1, "ritual purity and foods," of my extended review of Yonatan Adler's "The Origins of Judaism."

No. 2 and No. 4? Also related. No. 2 said "Biblical subreddits are not the answer," from recently, building on No. 4, from early this year, talking about "A new sheriff at r/AcademicBiblical." Further contretemps with said person got me banned, about which I posted, but too late in the quarter to hit the top 10.

No. 3 and 10 are also related, from late 2021 and early 2022, respectively. No. 3 asks, "If the Tacitus passage on Nero, the Great Fire and Christians is an interpolation, why?" No. 8 is "More thoughts on Tacitus" etc.

No. 5? Observing Pauline self-contradiction on the issue of food sacrified to idols.

No. 6? An extended book review, wondering if Americans, and their art museums, have really moved that much beyond Philistinism of a century ago.

No. 7? "Does the Dallas Museum of Art need a $175 million overhaul?" I'm skeptical, until other avenues are tried first. Click above for details.

No. 9? I thought, and still think, that pastors worried about ChatGPT doth protest too much.

Handwaving about the Nones?

 Tis true that Christianity, in both fundagelical and more liberal versions within Protestantism (and parallels within Catholicism) in the United States has shown itself more resilient than might be expected, but Joseph Slaughter and others, in this CNN piece, appear to be engaging in handwaving.

As for the "browning" of America saving Christianity? Perhaps (and it's true about Latino evangelical Protestants) but, it won't be the same as White fundagelical Christianity. Latino and Korean immigrants don't have the same take on issues like guns as do White conservative Christians. And, to the degree that at least some of those White conservative Christians are anti-immigrant, conservative Christianity will fracture more. White Christian nationalism is indeed referenced in the piece.

Citing recent SCOTUS rulings is a mug's game. Other than Barrett, the wingnut justices are all older. And, fundagelicals are indeed losing steam among younger White voters. 

In addition, while Latinos and sub-Saharan Africans may be fundagelical Christians, along with South Koreans? Indians, Chinese and other immigrants most certainly are not. That "browning" is itself not monolithic.

As for Nones and spirituality? I know that. But, spirituality doesn't translate into support for Christianity as an organized religion, especially if "tax the churches" gets more support. Beyond that, Hans Gustafson, by melding the two metaphysically, is engaged in an Overton Window play.

As for a churchgoing rebound recently? Yes, I blogged about that myself. It's most likely COVID-related and will thus fade again.

And, trumping that resurgence? Gallup reported last year that belief in a god had plunged. That's metaphysics, not "organized religion."

Christianity won't be extinguished. But, slowly and unevenly, its political and societal influences will both fade.

Another pseudoskeptical fail by Michael Shermer

Conspiracy: Why the Rational Believe the Irrational by Michael Shermer
My rating: 1 of 5 stars

This is an expanded version of the Goodreads review for inside baseball Skeptics™,pseudoskepticism reasons. Semi-regular readers here should know that I'm not a huge fan of Shermer, and this book only makes it worse. 

Let's dig in on the expansion.

This is a horrible book, not on the conspiracy theories, which I don't need Shermer to tell me, but on him totally getting wrong the one actual conspiracy he discusses, which is why this is 1-starred on a grok.

Rather than there being JUST and ONLY an Austrian conspiracy against Serbia in 1914, the assassination of Franz Ferdinand instead traces directly through one "Apis," head of both Serbian military intelligence and the secret society named The Black Hand, and also directly or semi-directly through confederates of Apis in the nationalist organization Narodna Odbrana, to Serbian Prime Minister Pasic. All of this and more is documented by Christopher Clark in the excellent book "The Sleepwalkers," which Shermer ACTUALLY REFERENCES and then ignores for Tim Butcher's "The Trigger," which is
A. A piece of crap and
B. Only about 10-20 percent about lead assassin Gavrilo Princip and 80-90 percent directly or indirectly about Tim Butcher.

Shermer's right that this is arguably the world's deadliest conspiracy. He's dead wrong about where the conspiracy started.

==

The rest of the book, without this egregious ax-grinding, would probably be 3 stars, no more, so, even without this, it's not worth a read. It's a basic definition of conspiracy vs conspiracy theories, basic overview on why many people believe in conspiracy theories, and how to try to talk to them.

But, surely Shermer could have found something else to discuss as a true conspiracy. Rather, it appears that, following in Butcher's footsteps despite having read Clark's documenting the likely ties to the Serbian government, and despite mentioning the Black Hand, even in an overall superficial treatment (and even talking about an assassination conspiracy, though trying to limit it to just the Black Hand, if that), he thought he could use some intellectual judo to show an Austrian conspiracy.

In reality, despite Conrad having been pushing for pre-emptive war with Serbia for years, even after the assassination, the Dual Monarchy was divided on going to war. And, trying to treat its Byzantine turns in just a few pages will be a good way to get superficial treatment even if not wrong — which, of course, Shermer is. And, I can say that as having read "The Sleepwalkers" TWICE. 

==

It's also bad for those other, inside baseball reasons.

First, citing libertarian pseudoskeptic and convicted felon Brian Dunning will get you nowhere in my book.

Second and related, attacking the tobacco merchants and climate change deniers when, at a minimum, I don't think you have ever publicly called out Penn and Teller for promoting both of them, and I'm not sure they've ever backtracked on climate change, is an issue. You yourself, in fact, albeit to a lesser degree than Dunning, have mixed libertarianism and skepticism at times.

In addition, you and Dunning blocked me at Skepticblog, in part because I called out both you and Dunning on the libertarian pseudoskepticism, and you and the Not-So-Always-Amazing Randi also had at least a couple of toes in the world of #MeToo problems, and also, at Skeptic mag, you've been at a minimum, a racialist fellow traveler. And, to tie this all into one nice neat bow, the actual Serbian conspiracies, of which its prime minister almost certainly had some foreknowledge, and its army intelligence even more? Driven by ethnic-based Serbian nationalism, which isn't too many stones' throws away from racialism, as Serbia's post-1989 history shows. (Not that Croatia's been a lot better.)

View all my reviews

Where's the basil, Bon Appetit?

This is not an April Fool's joke. Basil is missing from Bon Appetit's list of 20 essential spices. It doesn't even hit the honorary mentions at bottom, where rosemary sneaks in.

Beyond my not being a big fan at all of allspice, fennel or nutmeg, the list has other problems. Yes, it lists paprika separately from "chili [misspelled by them] powder," but really, one should have a milder and a hotter red chile powder and a green, like, Hatch green chile powder. It does, eventually, get into red chiles, but doesn't discuss greens, let alone Hatches, at all. Beyond that, another smoked chile, like chipotle, can be substituted for hotter varieties of paprika.

Sage doesn't even hit the honorable mentions list. Nor does either summer or winter savory. All of those are big in soups and stews.

It does mention mustard (seed) as an essential, and riffs on horseradish and wasabi in talking about it, but doesn't list either of them as essential.

And, while there are a number of East Asian spices, where's nori?

Also, no spice blends, nor the role that mentioned individual spices may play in such blends, are mentioned.

Pass.

Not just on its list, but pass on a frou-frou cooking mag.

Beyond that, to use proper culinary definitions, many of the items listed, as well as the biggest item missed, are herbs, not spices. So, if we're really talking about, say, essential kitchen seasonings? Let's add spicy condiments like Worchestershire, or kind of similar modern recreations of Roman garum, or liquid smoke, or miso.