Absolutely amazing converZation. Pageau even more prophetic than usual, and this quote by Dr Vervaeke particularly struck me: “This is partly due to the blinders placed on us during the Enlightenment, the idea that reality was tamed… we confused intelligibility with domestication.” There’s decades of life experience and reflection in that one.
@@amertlich No psychology has proved our emotions are first and the most powerful. We beleved we had tamed humans but just have a good bridal. Human nature snaps the bridal quickly when provoced or motivated. For example Im my country if you riot you get 5 years prison but pepole still riot. When interviewed some say things like "I dont know what happened ? i just went to watch"
From a Christian perspective, it just feels like what John is talking about is a lot of people doing a lot of work to just arrive at the same place Christianity already exists within, practically speaking. It reminds me of the secularists who started talking about "Game A and Game B" a while back. I listened to the basic description of that and I thought, "Isn't this just the Christian image of the lion laying down with the lamb? Isn't this exactly what Christians mean when they talk about the Kingdom of God?" It often feels like they've sailed away from the shores of Christianity then turned around and unknowingly landed back on the same continent and declared it a new world. Edit: And to be clear, I'm not disparaging John. I really like him and what he's doing.
This is a great comment, I suspect the act of taking the ship out and returning to the same shore may be in service of reviving the shore in our moment. It seems to be the process that can naturally and convincingly "re-establish" the shore as the place of maximum flourishing given the nature of the last century and some justified modern requirements. Not changing the shore, but justifying/ reviving it's place as the ultimate place of arrival and existence.
i'm an atheist. Do I really have to listen to this whole podcast...all 1 hours and 50 minutes of it, to get what you're saying? If so that's alright, I'll do something else. But if not, can you provide a brief summary - what the heck is Game A and Game B and why is it the same as Christianity? I'm sorry I just have things to do, I can't sit and listen for that long
@@radscorpion8 Oh, they don't mention the Game A/B thing in this podcast, it's just something that secularists came up with a while back that made me think the same thing. John's whole project and the "advent of the sacred" is much more complicated. This is going to be a way oversimplification and I encourage you to look it up if you're interested: Game A is the game you play to win (competitive) and is conceived as the game societies currently play, for the most part. Finite, zero-sum, etc. Game B is conceptually a goal to reach that is an infinite and cooperative "game" that societies should move toward. No more antagonistic competition, no predatory behavior, etc. It's a bit of a utopian idea which I would say echoes the ideas of Communism, but more general and applicable to more than just economics. The Christian reference that I specifically mentioned was the symbol of the lion and lamb, which both represent Jesus at the same time, and is often depicted in imagery as a lion and lamb together in peace and harmony. This was just the symbol that popped into my head when I heard about Game A/B and I think Game B is, if not THE central idea of Christianity, definitely one of the main themes.
@@mattywildthing It would be alright, if modern secularists (et al.) would've just sailed out and explore the world to return back into Christianity. Live and let live and see which approach to life has a liongerlasting, fulfilling effect to the individual and community whlesale. As such was the effect of the enlightenment the enlightened weren't pleased with doing just that, but rather kept close to the shore to bomb it into smithereens, in order to prove their superiority. Granted, it's a cycle and phenonmenon that happened before through history on and on again, so there isn't much for us to do than just to do endure the burden of staying on the path of faith, in the time of adversity.
52:00 dangers of pursuit of the sacred…”trying to lock it all down, pursuing purity and purity codes. (That) is just as dangerous as looseness.” Amen. Hyper-order and hyper-chaos are bad. And even worse! one can be deceived by being moderate. Learn to see. Purify your eye.
1:07:49 Taken from an essay on Ivan Illich's reading of the parable of the good Samaritan: While the Incarnation opens this revealed horizon of relationality cultivated through the personal performance of the works of mercy, Illich nevertheless contends that this horizon also carries with it the possibility of its rejection, corruption, and subjugation. “There is a temptation to try to manage and, eventually, to legislate this new love, to create an institution that will guarantee it, insure it, and protect it by criminalizing its opposite.”[5] According to Illich, the gradual institutionalization of the church from rise of Western Christendom paved the way of secularization and facilitated the rational bureaucratization of human interaction through the systematic parsing of the world into neat categorical divisions: public/private, secular/religious, fact/value, objective/subjective.[6] As Charles Taylor concludes, “For Illich, there is something monstrous, alienating about this way of life. The monstrous comes from a corruption of the highest, the agape-network. Corrupted Christianity gives rise to the modern.”[7] . . .
The first part of your comment brings to mind John Calvin in Geneva. It’s no surprise secularity shows up after this extreme attempt to institutionalize and weaponize Christianity. Now that we have achieved relative freedom of thought and religion we are called to dialogos in order to achieve a better understanding of, practice of and establishment of a world (society) that works for everyone. A world where all are welcome, everyone is loved and peace prevails. God never forces us, always invites us.
5:00 i respect deeply that John is not married to his ideas, he’s married to the pursuit of truth. Models of repentance are possible when one is not married to the thing, but instead the process
So glad that John arrived in time at the Advent. And he is bearing gifts, too! The Sacred cannot resist a cleaned-up heart....."a new world is being born now" deeply resonates with me, I understand (again...)what you are registering.
26:54 John Vervaeke on being challenged by those who have “heard what he has not heard and seen what he has not seen…” ❤ Open to the Truth outside the truth that you currently apprehend. 😊
Hey, my wife is a Waldorf teacher too. And yes, I have noticed that all the various traditions in her school take on a very religious undertone to the kids who lack any kind of religion at home. Also to their parents in many cases, since it's a charter school which requires a high degree of parent involvement relative to public school.
This is great. Thank you Paul for always facilitating great conversations and thoughtful perspectives. As a young pastor, I love these conversations and the stuff you post/share. Blessings!
In Chinese culture, being polite is ironically seen as rude since it implies a distance between individuals. I feel this way listening to Vervaeke bend over backwards to ensure everyone is feeling respected. It’s simply not necessary and is almost condescending.
I agree. He comes from the world of academia. Maybe that is how they have to talk to each other or they are fired like Jordan Peterson. Also, he's Buddhist so it might come from that influence. It affects me the opposite of what I think he is trying to create. You said it best, it creates a distance between us.
It's just like there's no way to approach dialogue without upsetting someone 😅 maybe he's genuinely trying to have empathy or something. The Chinese get a lot wrong, that's for sure
I think also one push back for the idea that John talks about there being no resilience today is that perhaps things are actually getting harder. The stories that were solid before and gave a ground for people are all dissolving. One simple example, the fact of the welfare state dissolving (including in it the idea of "retirement", work rights etc) in a situation where there is not the extended family anymore, and sometimes not even the nuclear family anymore, is terrifying.
Anything above subsistence, above Somalia, is luxury. Reality is that we only live day to day. In better times the odds are better you will live to see tomorrow. Practical and metaphysical anxiety control.
@@williambranch4283 I think it is different. In Somalia I bet people have extended families. To make an analogy to the Hindu caste system, the situation of the liquid modernity is not that of the shudra, the lowest caste, but that of the pariah, a person who has no caste, no center, no stability. And I am not saying everyone who lives in a modern context experiences the same level of liquidity. There are many people who live in "bubbles" of solidity and the things I am talking about do not even resonate with them.
Maybe... But I struggle with the idea that things could possibly be generally harder than any other time in history. Certain specific challenges might be different, but harder? I don't know...
Harder in some cases, certainly, but I think what's really going on is an increase in complexification. As we continue to make progress in our understanding of the world, the amount of data that is assimilated by these narratives is constantly increasing which forces them into the reciprocity of relevance realization. The rigid dogmatism struggled to keep up and the fragmentation of protestantism unfolded. We don't get to understand from first hand experience what a world without dramatic groundbreaking revolutions looks like. Every century now is marked by industrial revolutions and agricultural revolutions and scientific and technological revolutions and media revolutions and communication revolutions and on and on and on. These religions manifested dominion in ages when the biggest socio-economic upheavals for thousands of years came in the shift from bronze to iron weaponry. We just went from horse drawn carriages to lockhead Martin f-22 raptors in 100 years.
I'm glad that John brings up the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution and the beginning of political utopian thinking and all the atrocities that way of thinking justified in the minds of the perpetrators. I'm always beating the drum of this great BBC documentary that's here on YT called "Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution". It goes through this way of thinking and the effects it had.
John, we need this polemic, "Against The Enlightenment". Your opening salvo is dynamite. Perhaps an anonymous posting on Substack can get things rolling, but I would like to see a broadside posted in the AHA vestibule in Washington D.C....... Something like this has been done before....'>......
I believe that truth from all ancient traditions can be circumscribed into a one great whole. While critics may see this as syncretism, believers view it as a restoration. Restoration theology is unique in its openness to ongoing revelation, free from the dogmatic constraints that limit most traditions. There is a Christian tradition that emphasizes restoration rather than ossification of doctrine. Institutions naturally tend to ossify; their role is to conserve and protect. However, when they begin to protect ideology rather than the living will of God, they risk falling into apostasy. I agree with John that we can build stronger relationships and communities by assuming good faith and respecting each other. I hope we all seek truth sincerely and openly. I have learned much from understanding and studying the Orthodox perspective and other wisdom traditions.
I agree that there is a line that can be successfully walked here. I understand why people have recoiled from it when it's done badly and ends up in a kind of "moral relativism / all religions are correct" sort of place, but even from a Christian perspective if all civilizations have lived in the world of God since the beginning of time it's highly likely that there is at least SOME identification of a unified truth that has always been there but known by other names throughout time and place.
The entire John Vervaeke project is just a fancy way of screaming the old interjection: For the love of all things sacred! And I love it, I will put it back into practice myself. :)
Love to see you with Pageau, but hopefully, you guys will come back to earth soon and talk about daily life in modern culture. Jordan doesn't talk about cleaning rooms anymore. We need more of it.
Do you think there's more crying in college or have people lost the shame of crying in their professor's office, when in the past people would cry alone in their dorm? (a private vs. public display of emotion).
Jonathan is selective in his reading of Rev 20-21 ignoring that the very Nations whose glory is offered up (and it's ἐθνῶν not βασιλεία) are destroyed in the previous chapter, and it is no earthly King on the throne of the heavenly city.
9:30 “…all the disastrous dichotomies of modernity..” ❤ yes! I’d call it the scholastic/academic Mind vs the Nous. 10:55 “the guts of rigorous academic philosophy.” Yep.
Great discussion! Thanks. Jonathan’s question “How do we bring it together?” We don’t. It’s already together. All we have to do is see it. We don’t need a new direction. We need a deeper understanding of the direction we have been going and will continue to go. A good war? How about a good peace? War is the way animals engage the sacred. Humans are capable of clearing the air in less destructive ways. Yes, the new foundation is personal first, hopefully averting the historical. You're not wrong about the gym bro approach, but "even more deliberate" doesn't mean just more of the same medicine. It means reformulating the medicine for 21st century illnesses. If John wants a challenge, here’s one. Using language that can be construed, by those so inclined, to mean ‘reason may now be gleefully abandoned,’ is courting disaster. Extend *and include*. Please. ( I know you do, but it's scary to me how much negativity I hear these days toward reason ). “Awe is not a virtue.” Thankyou! Hearing about transcendence or being told you can do it is not the same thing as experiencing it. Imagining oneself as transcended can bring hubris, but actually having the authentic experience cannot. It may bring a healthy confidence, but not hubris. Talking about transcendence and engaging the concept intellectually are very different from receiving the gift of transcendence. No need to make the long, dark return to Christianity. There is no return. Make the long, laborious climb beyond branded religions to Generic Bio-Cultural Consonance. In the recent Dawkins/O'Connor/Peterson video, Jordan, a gifted learner/teacher with a generous heart and an instinct for leadership, confesses no knowledge of the meaning of "resurrection". Meanwhile, he is leading millions of young men, in particular, toward some destination the location of which he has no knowledge. Is this leadership, or wandership? Heart: right place. Head: adrift in a sea of knowledge. The Advent of the Sacred is not a historical event, but a psychological event related to cognitive development. John is right - not everyone will be taught, but it can be taught. It's more like skill-building than memorizing. The advent itself cannot be stolen nor earned, but a suitably furnished home stands a better chance of attracting it. In the final analysis, it is a gift - not a purchase. Advent is Resurrection is Salvation is... a Piagetian stage of cognitive development beyond Formal Operational Stage. Possibly? I’m here to learn. . .
In eight places in the Bible, Jesus is compared to the Sun. Four times in the NT. Shades of Constantine and Sol Invictus ;-) ... the four times in the OT, could be referring to messiah Cyrus, and his personal deity, Ahura Mazda ;-))
Flags are symbols of belonging. I heard a wise man say a few years ago "we have a crisis of belonging". Belonging really is a form of meaning that is grounded in a person's self identity. Pride flags are for people who have been rejected, isolated and shamed, that they may feel the opposite of those things: acceptance, community and pride. These are valuable and meaningful healing experiences. I don't see that flag being worshipped, merely flown in celebration and to signal safety to those at risk. Flags of nations are open to broad interpretation - what does America mean to a Trump voter vs a veteran vs a migrant vs a prisoner?
In my view one possibility that exists in the liquid modernity we have today is this "breakdown", this "death", but without the constructive part after it. Like a baptism where you get drowned, or descending into hell and getting stuck there, not ascending to heaven after. In my experience this appears when contemplating one possibility that exists today where you uproot yourself for a career and you never root yourself again. It is different than becoming a monk. In the latter case, you also die to your family, to your surroundings etc, but you root yourself in a new community. The perspective of the "global citizen", which sometimes appears to me as a possibility, or even sometimes it seems it is forcing itself to me, where you uproot yourself to never root yourself again.
I just can't get away from the feeling that Vervaeke & Peterson dream of understanding as salvation ('enlightenment') - I can belong if I can attach meaning to it (nonreal/virtual/scaled)
An interesting thing to do as persons speaking publicly (perhaps) is to listen to yourself and listen for where one 'talks' as if one is not an organism in the midst of dependent being with - where it seems or feels experientially (in the midst of/from/for) that one has in-sight from an out-side rather than an honesty of always-with-IN. Just a thought. My sense is each time we speak toward or about we pretend we are not wIth IN but rather pre-tend a special difference for ourSELVES(?)
It's exactly what I am trying, and probably failing, to do with GrimGriz. Advent the sacred by the iconostasis of *random* card pulls. I think by now we can say I should move on but I still think there is something there.
Religion that's not a religion is a deliberate paradox for scientific experimentation, where as the philosophical silk road, is a story with a bunch of paradigms, that together reconstruct the paradox. The name change is an interpretation of the sacred from science towards the religious. I believe John is more motivated to change science than religion now, yet he needs to keep dipping into religious terminology to get the correct phrasing, to how. The sacred, is an aura around a centralising idea, and the christians are wary of experimental uses of sacredness. Not an unfounded fear (by others piggybacking later on rather than John), but the momentum has allowed its investigation.
I have been reflecting lately on how the fastest growing Christian movements seem to be either the very traditional practices, or the hyper-charasmatic ones. I think both stem from a longing for the sacred.
35:40 "Why should the accursed both be not the best and the worst?" Reminds me of India's untouchables (the lowest of society) and the Brahmin (highest of society, holy men, untouchable). "I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren." "Who was neighbor (friend, brother) to the good Samaritan? The one who had Mercy." (why do you call him good?...there is one good...) "Love your enemies." "Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down his life for his friends." "Christ became a curse for us." "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree." "Lay down your life, take up your cross, and follow me." "This is the second death." "Let us go with him, that we may die with him." If we are truly followers of Christ, we will take the second death on behalf of our enemies. I will see the christians in hell. That is heaven. I will them in oblivion. That is where the greater love is.
I have a lingering sense that Paul’s final question wasn’t adequately addressed, in particular by John. To my mind, Paul was drawing attention to the redemptive promise of Christian eschatology: that in the end, our agitated hearts come to rest in God’s eternal love. Where is this to be found in John’s transcendent naturalism? And if nowhere, does his proposal have the narrative and cultural gravitas to bind a collective? Perhaps more importantly, is it a legitimate spiritual terminus, or more so a gateway to something more ultimate, namely, salvation in Christ? To be fair to John, he did say that he doesn’t foreclose the possibility of his return to Christianity one day.
Very nice! JV wrapped up the conversation well. The valence seems to be in the philosophical -- a ground zero of worldview. The coming world he is talking about will hypothetically be like a worldview extinction event (yielding new species). Gnosticism and scientism won't be able to exclude the other and could be unviable if the discoveries are as dramatic as he posits.
Ah the symbolic... John has bookshelves in the backdrop; Paul has bookshelves but they are blurred and he's the focus; Jonathan has the Symbolic World icon and a table underneath art. John was raised Catholic where the Eucharist is their thing and now consumes knowledge and displays his books clearly. Paul is a Protestant where the gospel is their thing and that means your relationship with the gospel which means there is distance between you and your books. Jonathan is Orthodox where participation in the liturgy is their thing so his art and others art can be put on display together in praise of God. This should be good
@@williambranch4283 I was concerned here to point out that his upbringing was in a Protestant "fundamentalist" (his description) church. He could not be further from Aquinas in his rejection of Jesus Christ.
1:47 Can you someone explain to me how what Jonathan said in his video on hell as being “now” is different from what Jon is saying about heaven also being “now”? th-cam.com/users/shortsPcjFqpqyM_4?si=Osv14wjVc5kQxbg1
Pageau's concern over the bloody advent of the sacred is central. But to the midwife, the advent of the sacred is a birthing bell. I think that's what John is doing here.
Further thoughts. The process of pregnancy to birth inspires awe. And so the key virtue of the midwife is reverence, and knowing-becoming what is needed to afford a/the good transition. But re: PVK, they are not the parent.
Advent and Sacred. It’s funny to think that the etymology and hermeneutics of 'the sacred' actually imply that we are the arbiters. Words like ‘sacred’ carry roots that suggest something is designated or set apart by us. It’s as if the definitions of the words themselves show our agency in choosing what to revere. The linguistic roots of "sacred" in Latin sacer (meaning “set apart” or “consecrated”) indeed suggest that sacredness originates in the act of distinguishing something as special or separate. This process implies a human role in recognizing, defining, or assigning value to the sacred. This makes Vervaeke and Pageau’s discussion on our authority over the sacred even more intriguing-language itself seems to affirm our role in creating sacredness!
Humans make meaning, we aren't handed absolute value. The Objective denies the very existence of the Subjective. Why? Slavery to external ideologies and institutions. Are you as hollow as Ken and Barbie?
Jon V is WAAAAAAY to smart for my brian. I get tangled up keeping with his thought He aplears to be secular and i just dont connect w him still he is a great person.
Sacrifice: The cost in lives : WW1:; 25 million WW2:; 85 million The great influenza pandemic was considered a function of the conditions of WW1:; 50-100 million The second Sino-Japanese war( 1937-45/ not technically part of the world wars) :; 23 million The Chinese civil war (1937-49/not part of the world war):; 9.9 million The Russian civil war(1917-22):; 7.7 million Russian famine ( 1930-33) :: btwn 5.7-8.7 million The great Chinese famine ( 1959-61// the USA thought that there was troup movement in China in preparation for an invasion // it was only after Nixon normalized relations with China that the truth of the famine came to light):; 15-55 million ( generally thought to be about 30 million)
The sacred sacrifice: Armistice Day November 11, 1918signed at 11:11. 106 years ago today. Claimed by Germany as a Carthaginian peace. It set up the conditions which lead to Hitlers rise to power and a continuation of the First World War( initially termed the Great War). The conditions of the armistice were broken by Germany under Hitler. In breaking said armistice it thereby continued hostilities set as conditions of the armistice. A Carthaginian peace is the imposition of a very brutal peace intended to permanently cripple the losing side. The term derives from the peace terms imposed on the Carthaginian Empire by the Roman Republic following the Punic Wars. After the Second Punic War, Carthage lost all its colonies, was forced to demilitarize, paid a constant tribute to Rome and was barred from waging war without Rome's permission. At the end of the Third Punic War, the Romans systematically burned Carthage to the ground and enslaved its population.-Wikipedia An armistice is a formal agreement of warring parties to stop fighting. It is not necessarily the end of a war, as it may constitute only a cessation of hostilities while an attempt is made to negotiate a lasting peace. It is derived from the Latin arma, meaning "arms" (as in weapons) and -stitium, meaning "a stopping".-Wikipedia Had Great Britain and France not demanded such a high price on Germany and her allies. The second world war may well have been avoided. The treaty of Versailles was negotiated by the American president Woodrow Wilson. His intent was to not make the terms of the armistice as unbearable as they turned out to be. However, he had a little political power over the angst of Great Britain and France. The brutality of the war, the conditions of fighting had made the popularity of a vengeance towards Germany, that anything other than what the leaders of Great Britain in France presented in the treaty of Versailles would have led to the political destruction of the politicians, writing the peace treaty. Curiously, it was just such the vision and remembrance of a vicious war that upon engagement in the second world war demanded those politicians pacify the rise of Hitler. The propaganda in the first world war made Germans out to be vicious animals in order to encourage the will to fight. However, the memory of such propaganda in the face of Hitler generated disbelief that such propaganda was actually true of Hitler.
Vervaeke's 'tonos'? Leans toward the conceptual capture (think Stalin, Nazi, Buddhism, Vedanta...) 'u-topos' of mass understanding vs the chaos-mess of 'hell is other people' ?
@@swerremdjee2769 Honestly he's a joke. I don't understand anything he's talking about, because he's so vague. But I do know he's coming from a secular worldview, and in that case declaring anything as being "sacred" is contradictory and ridiculous.
A “New World” has been being born anew for five centuries now, since Columbus. What the modern day has failed to understand, is that such always certain Old World to New World advances, are the very historically returning ontology of the kingdom of Heaven, as formed in judgment therein and thereon, in relation to the prophetic and apostolic founding of the Church and of Scripture anew, and together; and that, precisely thereon, as said, in relation to the Lord, showing such anew, of himself, on each such occasion, at those finally universal heights or horizons. Indeed, this becomes his always certain “testimony”, and directly given “witness”, at all such times, which Saint John then bares an afterward written “record” of, in judgment of just such certain nationally established religious and political institutions, of themselves, and together, which have, by then, already morally fallen - (hence, such universal imperial expansions of the marketplace) - and yet, presume a moral justification, nevertheless, by the actual lie of an otherworldly or supernatural deity, then unduly abstracted from the alone human history and culture in which scripture expressly originated - (I am the Lord God which led thee out of Egypt). The New Jerusalem of Revelation, is our Washington DC today in relation to the full continental expansion of the US now; just as it was Rome previously in relation to the full continental expansion then of Western Europe in relation to the Roman Empire, inevitably uniting East and West together. Hence, John was not only on the isle of Patmos in figurative representation of the once colonial advance of the Greeks through the Japhetic tribes of Noah, coming from Asia Minor; just as the seven churches which were then, in fact, in Asia Minor, were a reflection of the once western reaches of the most Ancient Civilizations of the Middle and Near East. But he was and is recreated today by John Kennedy, and the Kennedy family on the isle of Martha’s Vineyard, in relation to the Old World foundations of Catholicism upon Rome obviously, and going back two thousand years in such scriptural prophecies. In turn, of course, Paul is - and quite appropriately in Romans 1 - an admitted debtor, both, to the Greeks, in such a then newly universal imperial expansion of the marketplace like that since created anew by Western Europe today; and to the Barbarians in such a New World advance, then, as said, of Rome and Western Europe, mirrored yet again - also as noted - by such a same expansion in the US now. This becomes the writing on the Lord, the name of the city of God - which is the new Jerusalem brought down from heaven in the fulfillment of just such scriptural prophecies and judgments; just as it is the Jerusalem in Isaiah 1, which was once full of judgment - but now murderers lodge in it - and so that it is purged by the Spirit of judgment through the Lord, himself, and its judges restored as at the first - and whereby it then becomes the Holy City.
“Orthodox” Christianity is built on the sacrifice of Arius as a scapegoat. I am questioning the validity and goodness of that sacrifice and thereby the whole world created by that sacrifice. I might also add that Calvinism similarly is built on the sacrifice of Servetus.
No. Christianity is built on the sacrifice of God Incarnate, who fulfilled the types of the two goats, the one which was slain, and the one which took away sins.
JVK can get tiring to listen to now. All this talk of Nirvana and flowing water are things I can still just find in the Bible. I also don’t like his shallow remarks about American society being something nightmarish. He’s in Canada and many can’t or can barely afford to live. From here so much of America looks by like a bastion of freedom now.
Sacred:( from Latin ‘sacer’ , “holy” ). That which is regarded & revered as holy or able to induce an experience of the divine. Awe, wonder & special. In ancient times a waterfall, a great tree, a mountain, thunder and lightning, the sun, moon and stars etc. An unusual person. Sacrifice is the human process of “making something sacred”. A person, place or thing. I see Paul & Jonathan immediately “because of their form of Christianity “ conflate the two, sacred and sacrifice. This hermeneutic leads quickly to conflating Hiroshima with the Holy. I don’t think so. George Floyd and Hiroshima are evil IMO, not Holy & sacred. The power of the atom and death in general may very well lead to experiencing the sacred, but not in the ways used here.
Thanks Paul I wouldn’t have had a chance to undersstand and follow this development without your help After the first philosofical serie I had no patients to listen to John V and his inplanting of new terms .. thinking models ..like having to learn a new language … I hadn’t been able to understand and connect without your explanations and building of bridges in between the different explanation models ..perspectives Now it is the monolithic minds collapsing Now to this point The advent of the sacred (not the advent of cognitive science ..) Finally John is using frame breaking ...the antropsofic language ..how come it’s not just this usual technicality teknological language sound which sounds as teknomusik for my senses ..
Jonathan looks like he's getting in shape!! You love to see it. I want him to live long and prosper.
My guy skateboarding
@@ezekielcarsella getting shredded while shredding
🖖🏻
you know who looks better? Sean "The Dowell" McDowell
Absolutely amazing converZation.
Pageau even more prophetic than usual, and this quote by Dr Vervaeke particularly struck me:
“This is partly due to the blinders placed on us during the Enlightenment, the idea that reality was tamed… we confused intelligibility with domestication.”
There’s decades of life experience and reflection in that one.
Another way of looking at it would be that we were willing to be tamed by scientism and are now realizing that’s not the master we were looking for.
@@amertlich No psychology has proved our emotions are first and the most powerful. We beleved we had tamed humans but just have a good bridal. Human nature snaps the bridal quickly when provoced or motivated. For example Im my country if you riot you get 5 years prison but pepole still riot. When interviewed some say things like "I dont know what happened ? i just went to watch"
What's up Matt
why did you put a z in conversation
@@radscorpion8 That's how Paul VaderKlay spells it.
It's the meaning boys!!! Super excited for this
Meaning Bros 💪🙏
From a Christian perspective, it just feels like what John is talking about is a lot of people doing a lot of work to just arrive at the same place Christianity already exists within, practically speaking.
It reminds me of the secularists who started talking about "Game A and Game B" a while back. I listened to the basic description of that and I thought, "Isn't this just the Christian image of the lion laying down with the lamb? Isn't this exactly what Christians mean when they talk about the Kingdom of God?"
It often feels like they've sailed away from the shores of Christianity then turned around and unknowingly landed back on the same continent and declared it a new world.
Edit: And to be clear, I'm not disparaging John. I really like him and what he's doing.
This is a great comment, I suspect the act of taking the ship out and returning to the same shore may be in service of reviving the shore in our moment. It seems to be the process that can naturally and convincingly "re-establish" the shore as the place of maximum flourishing given the nature of the last century and some justified modern requirements. Not changing the shore, but justifying/ reviving it's place as the ultimate place of arrival and existence.
i'm an atheist. Do I really have to listen to this whole podcast...all 1 hours and 50 minutes of it, to get what you're saying? If so that's alright, I'll do something else. But if not, can you provide a brief summary - what the heck is Game A and Game B and why is it the same as Christianity? I'm sorry I just have things to do, I can't sit and listen for that long
@@mattywildthing
This is the hope, I think.
I wish John all the luck he needs.
@@radscorpion8
Oh, they don't mention the Game A/B thing in this podcast, it's just something that secularists came up with a while back that made me think the same thing. John's whole project and the "advent of the sacred" is much more complicated.
This is going to be a way oversimplification and I encourage you to look it up if you're interested:
Game A is the game you play to win (competitive) and is conceived as the game societies currently play, for the most part. Finite, zero-sum, etc.
Game B is conceptually a goal to reach that is an infinite and cooperative "game" that societies should move toward. No more antagonistic competition, no predatory behavior, etc.
It's a bit of a utopian idea which I would say echoes the ideas of Communism, but more general and applicable to more than just economics.
The Christian reference that I specifically mentioned was the symbol of the lion and lamb, which both represent Jesus at the same time, and is often depicted in imagery as a lion and lamb together in peace and harmony. This was just the symbol that popped into my head when I heard about Game A/B and I think Game B is, if not THE central idea of Christianity, definitely one of the main themes.
@@mattywildthing It would be alright, if modern secularists (et al.) would've just sailed out and explore the world to return back into Christianity. Live and let live and see which approach to life has a liongerlasting, fulfilling effect to the individual and community whlesale. As such was the effect of the enlightenment the enlightened weren't pleased with doing just that, but rather kept close to the shore to bomb it into smithereens, in order to prove their superiority. Granted, it's a cycle and phenonmenon that happened before through history on and on again, so there isn't much for us to do than just to do endure the burden of staying on the path of faith, in the time of adversity.
52:00 dangers of pursuit of the sacred…”trying to lock it all down, pursuing purity and purity codes. (That) is just as dangerous as looseness.”
Amen.
Hyper-order and hyper-chaos are bad.
And even worse! one can be deceived by being moderate.
Learn to see. Purify your eye.
A Meaning-FILLED conversation. Thank you for sharing Paul! 💪🏼❤️
1:07:49 Taken from an essay on Ivan Illich's reading of the parable of the good Samaritan: While the Incarnation opens this revealed horizon of relationality cultivated through the personal performance of the works of mercy, Illich nevertheless contends that this horizon also carries with it the possibility of its rejection, corruption, and subjugation. “There is a temptation to try to manage and, eventually, to legislate this new love, to create an institution that will guarantee it, insure it, and protect it by criminalizing its opposite.”[5] According to Illich, the gradual institutionalization of the church from rise of Western Christendom paved the way of secularization and facilitated the rational bureaucratization of human interaction through the systematic parsing of the world into neat categorical divisions: public/private, secular/religious, fact/value, objective/subjective.[6] As Charles Taylor concludes, “For Illich, there is something monstrous, alienating about this way of life. The monstrous comes from a corruption of the highest, the agape-network. Corrupted Christianity gives rise to the modern.”[7] . . .
Thanks. That's interesting.
🤓☝️
The first part of your comment brings to mind John Calvin in Geneva. It’s no surprise secularity shows up after this extreme attempt to institutionalize and weaponize Christianity. Now that we have achieved relative freedom of thought and religion we are called to dialogos in order to achieve a better understanding of, practice of and establishment of a world (society) that works for everyone. A world where all are welcome, everyone is loved and peace prevails. God never forces us, always invites us.
You did something clever here, Paul, in prepping us with that earlier teaser. Vervaeke's opener here is very worth a second listen!
The three of them are so cute together. Each has their perfectly fitting background and vibe.
Big 3.
5:00 i respect deeply that John is not married to his ideas, he’s married to the pursuit of truth. Models of repentance are possible when one is not married to the thing, but instead the process
I think that goes for Christian faith as well. Hold onto it, but not so tightly that there is no room for wisdom.
So glad that John arrived in time at the Advent. And he is bearing gifts, too! The Sacred cannot resist a cleaned-up heart....."a new world is being born now" deeply resonates with me, I understand (again...)what you are registering.
26:54 John Vervaeke on being challenged by those who have “heard what he has not heard and seen what he has not seen…” ❤
Open to the Truth outside the truth that you currently apprehend. 😊
The wait is finally over, super excited for this one.
Hey, my wife is a Waldorf teacher too.
And yes, I have noticed that all the various traditions in her school take on a very religious undertone to the kids who lack any kind of religion at home.
Also to their parents in many cases, since it's a charter school which requires a high degree of parent involvement relative to public school.
This is great. Thank you Paul for always facilitating great conversations and thoughtful perspectives. As a young pastor, I love these conversations and the stuff you post/share. Blessings!
In Chinese culture, being polite is ironically seen as rude since it implies a distance between individuals. I feel this way listening to Vervaeke bend over backwards to ensure everyone is feeling respected. It’s simply not necessary and is almost condescending.
I agree. He comes from the world of academia. Maybe that is how they have to talk to each other or they are fired like Jordan Peterson. Also, he's Buddhist so it might come from that influence. It affects me the opposite of what I think he is trying to create. You said it best, it creates a distance between us.
wtf no
@@andrewternet8370 arguing in favor of over-the-top civility by saying “wtf no” is truly fine art!
It's just like there's no way to approach dialogue without upsetting someone 😅 maybe he's genuinely trying to have empathy or something.
The Chinese get a lot wrong, that's for sure
@@CScott-wh5yk Nah I just think you’re pulling this Chinese culture reference from your behind like mans never had Chinese family members fr fr
I think also one push back for the idea that John talks about there being no resilience today is that perhaps things are actually getting harder. The stories that were solid before and gave a ground for people are all dissolving. One simple example, the fact of the welfare state dissolving (including in it the idea of "retirement", work rights etc) in a situation where there is not the extended family anymore, and sometimes not even the nuclear family anymore, is terrifying.
Anything above subsistence, above Somalia, is luxury. Reality is that we only live day to day. In better times the odds are better you will live to see tomorrow. Practical and metaphysical anxiety control.
@@williambranch4283
I think it is different. In Somalia I bet people have extended families. To make an analogy to the Hindu caste system, the situation of the liquid modernity is not that of the shudra, the lowest caste, but that of the pariah, a person who has no caste, no center, no stability. And I am not saying everyone who lives in a modern context experiences the same level of liquidity. There are many people who live in "bubbles" of solidity and the things I am talking about do not even resonate with them.
Maybe...
But I struggle with the idea that things could possibly be generally harder than any other time in history. Certain specific challenges might be different, but harder? I don't know...
Harder in some cases, certainly, but I think what's really going on is an increase in complexification. As we continue to make progress in our understanding of the world, the amount of data that is assimilated by these narratives is constantly increasing which forces them into the reciprocity of relevance realization. The rigid dogmatism struggled to keep up and the fragmentation of protestantism unfolded. We don't get to understand from first hand experience what a world without dramatic groundbreaking revolutions looks like. Every century now is marked by industrial revolutions and agricultural revolutions and scientific and technological revolutions and media revolutions and communication revolutions and on and on and on. These religions manifested dominion in ages when the biggest socio-economic upheavals for thousands of years came in the shift from bronze to iron weaponry. We just went from horse drawn carriages to lockhead Martin f-22 raptors in 100 years.
@He.knows.nothing No amount of F-35 will save you.
1:47:39 This point by John about what makes someone religious or not is 🤌❤🎯
Jesus Christ is my exemplar.
I'm glad that John brings up the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution and the beginning of political utopian thinking and all the atrocities that way of thinking justified in the minds of the perpetrators. I'm always beating the drum of this great BBC documentary that's here on YT called "Terror Robespierre and the French Revolution". It goes through this way of thinking and the effects it had.
This got really good in the second half! Definitely worth the listen.
John, we need this polemic, "Against The Enlightenment". Your opening salvo is dynamite. Perhaps an anonymous posting on Substack can get things rolling, but I would like to see a broadside posted in the AHA vestibule in Washington D.C.......
Something like this has been done before....'>......
I believe that truth from all ancient traditions can be circumscribed into a one great whole. While critics may see this as syncretism, believers view it as a restoration. Restoration theology is unique in its openness to ongoing revelation, free from the dogmatic constraints that limit most traditions.
There is a Christian tradition that emphasizes restoration rather than ossification of doctrine. Institutions naturally tend to ossify; their role is to conserve and protect. However, when they begin to protect ideology rather than the living will of God, they risk falling into apostasy.
I agree with John that we can build stronger relationships and communities by assuming good faith and respecting each other. I hope we all seek truth sincerely and openly. I have learned much from understanding and studying the Orthodox perspective and other wisdom traditions.
I agree that there is a line that can be successfully walked here.
I understand why people have recoiled from it when it's done badly and ends up in a kind of "moral relativism / all religions are correct" sort of place, but even from a Christian perspective if all civilizations have lived in the world of God since the beginning of time it's highly likely that there is at least SOME identification of a unified truth that has always been there but known by other names throughout time and place.
Always a wonderful talk when the three of you get together.
Incredible conversation! Much appreciated.
The entire John Vervaeke project is just a fancy way of screaming the old interjection: For the love of all things sacred!
And I love it, I will put it back into practice myself. :)
love you guys
I've had a big part of creating these bonds :)
Love to see you with Pageau, but hopefully, you guys will come back to earth soon and talk about daily life in modern culture. Jordan doesn't talk about cleaning rooms anymore. We need more of it.
Rooms are not being cleaned!!
Wow! The best converZation in a while 😊 (so happy now:)
Yeah, it was a good one.
1:26:38 “you can’t get rid of the sacred. You can only snuggle it.”
God and Mammon.
Snuggle with the sacred
@ smuggle.
But my mistype works.
@@WhiteStoneName Freudian slip ... gay? ;-)
Do you think there's more crying in college or have people lost the shame of crying in their professor's office, when in the past people would cry alone in their dorm? (a private vs. public display of emotion).
possibly. Maybe we're just a bunch of old men but I really do think there is a spirit of fragility in the culture.
@@PaulVanderKlay I think both are probably going on and both are oriented in the same direction so it would make sense for both to occur.
PVK in 39:00 is doing the LORD's work. We need thick and dark sacrum.
Jonathan is selective in his reading of Rev 20-21 ignoring that the very Nations whose glory is offered up (and it's ἐθνῶν not βασιλεία) are destroyed in the previous chapter, and it is no earthly King on the throne of the heavenly city.
9:30 “…all the disastrous dichotomies of modernity..” ❤ yes!
I’d call it the scholastic/academic Mind vs the Nous.
10:55 “the guts of rigorous academic philosophy.” Yep.
Descartes .... invented the modern mind but lost his nous ;-)
Mind vs Nous. Same thing, different focus. One can inform the other.
Great discussion! Thanks.
Jonathan’s question “How do we bring it together?”
We don’t. It’s already together. All we have to do is see it.
We don’t need a new direction. We need a deeper understanding of the direction we have been going and will continue to go.
A good war? How about a good peace? War is the way animals engage the sacred. Humans are capable of clearing the air in less destructive ways. Yes, the new foundation is personal first, hopefully averting the historical.
You're not wrong about the gym bro approach, but "even more deliberate" doesn't mean just more of the same medicine. It means reformulating the medicine for 21st century illnesses.
If John wants a challenge, here’s one. Using language that can be construed, by those so inclined, to mean ‘reason may now be gleefully abandoned,’ is courting disaster. Extend *and include*. Please. ( I know you do, but it's scary to me how much negativity I hear these days toward reason ).
“Awe is not a virtue.” Thankyou!
Hearing about transcendence or being told you can do it is not the same thing as experiencing it. Imagining oneself as transcended can bring hubris, but actually having the authentic experience cannot. It may bring a healthy confidence, but not hubris. Talking about transcendence and engaging the concept intellectually are very different from receiving the gift of transcendence.
No need to make the long, dark return to Christianity. There is no return. Make the long, laborious climb beyond branded religions to Generic Bio-Cultural Consonance.
In the recent Dawkins/O'Connor/Peterson video, Jordan, a gifted learner/teacher with a generous heart and an instinct for leadership, confesses no knowledge of the meaning of "resurrection". Meanwhile, he is leading millions of young men, in particular, toward some destination the location of which he has no knowledge. Is this leadership, or wandership? Heart: right place. Head: adrift in a sea of knowledge.
The Advent of the Sacred is not a historical event, but a psychological event related to cognitive development. John is right - not everyone will be taught, but it can be taught. It's more like skill-building than memorizing. The advent itself cannot be stolen nor earned, but a suitably furnished home stands a better chance of attracting it. In the final analysis, it is a gift - not a purchase.
Advent is Resurrection is Salvation is... a Piagetian stage of cognitive development beyond Formal Operational Stage. Possibly?
I’m here to learn.
.
.
Deep
Wow. Thank you. I'm here for the comments, you made trying to listen to John and Paul worth it. (Just venting) 😇
Brilliant. Couldn’t agree more!
New worlds are born all the time.
In eight places in the Bible, Jesus is compared to the Sun. Four times in the NT. Shades of Constantine and Sol Invictus ;-) ... the four times in the OT, could be referring to messiah Cyrus, and his personal deity, Ahura Mazda ;-))
23:37 re: Jonathan’s worry of the advent of the sacred in…nationalism and pride flags, etc.
Amen.
Me too.
Flags are symbols of belonging. I heard a wise man say a few years ago "we have a crisis of belonging". Belonging really is a form of meaning that is grounded in a person's self identity. Pride flags are for people who have been rejected, isolated and shamed, that they may feel the opposite of those things: acceptance, community and pride. These are valuable and meaningful healing experiences. I don't see that flag being worshipped, merely flown in celebration and to signal safety to those at risk.
Flags of nations are open to broad interpretation - what does America mean to a Trump voter vs a veteran vs a migrant vs a prisoner?
In my view one possibility that exists in the liquid modernity we have today is this "breakdown", this "death", but without the constructive part after it. Like a baptism where you get drowned, or descending into hell and getting stuck there, not ascending to heaven after. In my experience this appears when contemplating one possibility that exists today where you uproot yourself for a career and you never root yourself again. It is different than becoming a monk. In the latter case, you also die to your family, to your surroundings etc, but you root yourself in a new community. The perspective of the "global citizen", which sometimes appears to me as a possibility, or even sometimes it seems it is forcing itself to me, where you uproot yourself to never root yourself again.
I just can't get away from the feeling that Vervaeke & Peterson dream of understanding as salvation ('enlightenment') - I can belong if I can attach meaning to it (nonreal/virtual/scaled)
A relation that 'makes sense' at my scale (tree in the garden?)
An interesting thing to do as persons speaking publicly (perhaps) is to listen to yourself and listen for where one 'talks' as if one is not an organism in the midst of dependent being with - where it seems or feels experientially (in the midst of/from/for) that one has in-sight from an out-side rather than an honesty of always-with-IN. Just a thought. My sense is each time we speak toward or about we pretend we are not wIth IN but rather pre-tend a special difference for ourSELVES(?)
Maybe hunger for concepts (capture-language) or modes/systems (abstractions/scaling artifice) are alarms in this regard?
I.e. evaluate our language in relation to sacred text languages or where we resonate with whatever 'sacred' intimates in our experience?
Thanks
Jonathan's face at 9:25 when he John functionally says "I'm speaking with gods." LHM.
It's exactly what I am trying, and probably failing, to do with GrimGriz. Advent the sacred by the iconostasis of *random* card pulls. I think by now we can say I should move on but I still think there is something there.
Gym bros mentioned, opinion accepted 🔱
Religion that's not a religion is a deliberate paradox for scientific experimentation, where as the philosophical silk road, is a story with a bunch of paradigms, that together reconstruct the paradox. The name change is an interpretation of the sacred from science towards the religious. I believe John is more motivated to change science than religion now, yet he needs to keep dipping into religious terminology to get the correct phrasing, to how. The sacred, is an aura around a centralising idea, and the christians are wary of experimental uses of sacredness. Not an unfounded fear (by others piggybacking later on rather than John), but the momentum has allowed its investigation.
I have been reflecting lately on how the fastest growing Christian movements seem to be either the very traditional practices, or the hyper-charasmatic ones. I think both stem from a longing for the sacred.
35:40
"Why should the accursed both be not the best and the worst?"
Reminds me of India's untouchables (the lowest of society) and the Brahmin (highest of society, holy men, untouchable).
"I could wish myself accursed from Christ for my brethren."
"Who was neighbor (friend, brother) to the good Samaritan? The one who had Mercy." (why do you call him good?...there is one good...)
"Love your enemies."
"Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down his life for his friends."
"Christ became a curse for us."
"Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree."
"Lay down your life, take up your cross, and follow me."
"This is the second death."
"Let us go with him, that we may die with him."
If we are truly followers of Christ, we will take the second death on behalf of our enemies. I will see the christians in hell. That is heaven. I will them in oblivion. That is where the greater love is.
I got 15 ads on this and 7 or 8 were Jewish ads
Wow!
1:24:08 Vervaeke’s challenge to Paul
And the “blindspot”. This is all Peter Rollins stuff, PVK.
Reverse Buddhism. Dichotomies in Abhidharma are to be recognized, so they can be transcended.
Awesome!
I have a lingering sense that Paul’s final question wasn’t adequately addressed, in particular by John. To my mind, Paul was drawing attention to the redemptive promise of Christian eschatology: that in the end, our agitated hearts come to rest in God’s eternal love. Where is this to be found in John’s transcendent naturalism? And if nowhere, does his proposal have the narrative and cultural gravitas to bind a collective? Perhaps more importantly, is it a legitimate spiritual terminus, or more so a gateway to something more ultimate, namely, salvation in Christ? To be fair to John, he did say that he doesn’t foreclose the possibility of his return to Christianity one day.
Very nice! JV wrapped up the conversation well. The valence seems to be in the philosophical -- a ground zero of worldview. The coming world he is talking about will hypothetically be like a worldview extinction event (yielding new species). Gnosticism and scientism won't be able to exclude the other and could be unviable if the discoveries are as dramatic as he posits.
I keep thinking this questions is about how you dress up "the naked truth"...
I'm thinking the whole conversation is about how you dress up "the naked truth". Thank God for Jesus and parables.
Pastor Paul why am I banned from Bridges of Meaning
Pastor Paul whatever I did I didn’t do it
talk to the BOM admins about it.
@@PaulVanderKlayPastor Paul idek who they are or what I did
I'm interested in learning what JV has to say on the sacred.
These kinds of conversations make me question the lack of suffering in heaven. Does suffering invested with meaning become heavenly?
Sruggle rather than suffering. Suffering is how you react to struggle.
I am reminded of the open wounds Christ has on his new resurrected body. Along these lines...
Thank you Paul
💥
No podcast version?
oops, I was out of town when I posted it and I forgot. Thanks for the reminder. I'll make it so.
@PaulVanderKlay
Thanks.
Ah the symbolic... John has bookshelves in the backdrop; Paul has bookshelves but they are blurred and he's the focus; Jonathan has the Symbolic World icon and a table underneath art.
John was raised Catholic where the Eucharist is their thing and now consumes knowledge and displays his books clearly. Paul is a Protestant where the gospel is their thing and that means your relationship with the gospel which means there is distance between you and your books. Jonathan is Orthodox where participation in the liturgy is their thing so his art and others art can be put on display together in praise of God.
This should be good
I think you are wrong about John's upbringing. From what I remember from previous conversations, he was in some sort of Protestant group.
@@anselman3156 John's emphasis on Semantics and logic are rather Aquinas.
@@williambranch4283 I was concerned here to point out that his upbringing was in a Protestant "fundamentalist" (his description) church. He could not be further from Aquinas in his rejection of Jesus Christ.
1:47 Can you someone explain to me how what Jonathan said in his video on hell as being “now” is different from what Jon is saying about heaven also being “now”?
th-cam.com/users/shortsPcjFqpqyM_4?si=Osv14wjVc5kQxbg1
The real self realization of reality 1:.15 :21 religio definition
So John has gone from Engineering to Banking
On Wednesday I'm doing an analysis of the films Arrival and Interstellar as films that inaugurate "the reenchantment" darkly.
Dystopias are realistic unlike utopias.
What is King Aragorn's tax policy? How does the kingdom look on Earth? It is the Church. The Church is the kingdom.
The sacred within the profane is actual Kingdom. The profane is only potential Kingdom.
And this is why I subbed.
Pageau's concern over the bloody advent of the sacred is central. But to the midwife, the advent of the sacred is a birthing bell. I think that's what John is doing here.
Further thoughts. The process of pregnancy to birth inspires awe. And so the key virtue of the midwife is reverence, and knowing-becoming what is needed to afford a/the good transition. But re: PVK, they are not the parent.
Advent and Sacred. It’s funny to think that the etymology and hermeneutics of 'the sacred' actually imply that we are the arbiters. Words like ‘sacred’ carry roots that suggest something is designated or set apart by us. It’s as if the definitions of the words themselves show our agency in choosing what to revere. The linguistic roots of "sacred" in Latin sacer (meaning “set apart” or “consecrated”) indeed suggest that sacredness originates in the act of distinguishing something as special or separate. This process implies a human role in recognizing, defining, or assigning value to the sacred. This makes Vervaeke and Pageau’s discussion on our authority over the sacred even more intriguing-language itself seems to affirm our role in creating sacredness!
Humans make meaning, we aren't handed absolute value. The Objective denies the very existence of the Subjective. Why? Slavery to external ideologies and institutions. Are you as hollow as Ken and Barbie?
It is God who tells us what we ought to hold sacred. Man made alternatives are poor substitutes.
@anselman3156 Yes, that may be, but we must choose to follow instruction. Or advice? Guidance?
@alohm When we are illiterate peasants ... As literate, I will choose my own savants.
@@williambranch4283 Good luck, esp today ;) am i right?
Jon V is WAAAAAAY to smart for my brian. I get tangled up keeping with his thought
He aplears to be secular and i just dont connect w him still he is a great person.
Three Kings 👑👑👑
Sacrifice:
The cost in lives :
WW1:; 25 million
WW2:; 85 million
The great influenza pandemic was considered a function of the conditions of WW1:; 50-100 million
The second Sino-Japanese war( 1937-45/ not technically part of the world wars) :; 23 million
The Chinese civil war (1937-49/not part of the world war):; 9.9 million
The Russian civil war(1917-22):; 7.7 million
Russian famine ( 1930-33) :: btwn 5.7-8.7 million
The great Chinese famine ( 1959-61// the USA thought that there was troup movement in China in preparation for an invasion // it was only after Nixon normalized relations with China that the truth of the famine came to light):; 15-55 million ( generally thought to be about 30 million)
The transformation of potential Kingdom to actual Kingdom, the profane to the sacred ... costs every single life.
@ the “gods” demand sacrifice. The war gods? No the gods of human stupidity/ ignorance/ hybris / ate’… moral blindness
This dude with glasses… has he readed Wolfgang Smith?
The sacred sacrifice:
Armistice Day November 11, 1918signed at 11:11.
106 years ago today.
Claimed by Germany as a Carthaginian peace. It set up the conditions which lead to Hitlers rise to power and a continuation of the First World War( initially termed the Great War). The conditions of the armistice were broken by Germany under Hitler. In breaking said armistice it thereby continued hostilities set as conditions of the armistice.
A Carthaginian peace is the imposition of a very brutal peace intended to permanently cripple the losing side. The term derives from the peace terms imposed on the Carthaginian Empire by the Roman Republic following the Punic Wars. After the Second Punic War, Carthage lost all its colonies, was forced to demilitarize, paid a constant tribute to Rome and was barred from waging war without Rome's permission. At the end of the Third Punic War, the Romans systematically burned Carthage to the ground and enslaved its population.-Wikipedia
An armistice is a formal agreement of warring parties to stop fighting. It is not necessarily the end of a war, as it may constitute only a cessation of hostilities while an attempt is made to negotiate a lasting peace. It is derived from the Latin arma, meaning "arms" (as in weapons) and -stitium, meaning "a stopping".-Wikipedia
Had Great Britain and France not demanded such a high price on Germany and her allies. The second world war may well have been avoided. The treaty of Versailles was negotiated by the American president Woodrow Wilson. His intent was to not make the terms of the armistice as unbearable as they turned out to be. However, he had a little political power over the angst of Great Britain and France. The brutality of the war, the conditions of fighting had made the popularity of a vengeance towards Germany, that anything other than what the leaders of Great Britain in France presented in the treaty of Versailles would have led to the political destruction of the politicians, writing the peace treaty.
Curiously, it was just such the vision and remembrance of a vicious war that upon engagement in the second world war demanded those politicians pacify the rise of Hitler.
The propaganda in the first world war made Germans out to be vicious animals in order to encourage the will to fight. However, the memory of such propaganda in the face of Hitler generated disbelief that such propaganda was actually true of Hitler.
The war between good and evil, both inside and outside ... happens night and day.
Vervaeke's 'tonos'? Leans toward the conceptual capture (think Stalin, Nazi, Buddhism, Vedanta...) 'u-topos' of mass understanding vs the chaos-mess of 'hell is other people' ?
The sacret is what is at the top of the persons value hierachy...
So in Vervaeke's case status
I cant take Vervaeke serieus anymore, i hope more people share this sentiment
@@swerremdjee2769
Honestly he's a joke. I don't understand anything he's talking about, because he's so vague. But I do know he's coming from a secular worldview, and in that case declaring anything as being "sacred" is contradictory and ridiculous.
How is it that supposedly intelligent, educated men don’t understand the concept of dialogue?
AI bois got me down but I guess it ain`t so bad
pro-tip: if you suspect it ain`t real, listen on 2X speed - if it still sounds perfectly clear, chances are you`re listening to an unreal boi
but who said "real" is better anyway??? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
A “New World” has been being born anew for five centuries now, since Columbus.
What the modern day has failed to understand, is that such always certain Old World to New World advances, are the very historically returning ontology of the kingdom of Heaven, as formed in judgment therein and thereon, in relation to the prophetic and apostolic founding of the Church and of Scripture anew, and together; and that, precisely thereon, as said, in relation to the Lord, showing such anew, of himself, on each such occasion, at those finally universal heights or horizons.
Indeed, this becomes his always certain “testimony”, and directly given “witness”, at all such times, which Saint John then bares an afterward written “record” of, in judgment of just such certain nationally established religious and political institutions, of themselves, and together, which have, by then, already morally fallen - (hence, such universal imperial expansions of the marketplace) - and yet, presume a moral justification, nevertheless, by the actual lie of an otherworldly or supernatural deity, then unduly abstracted from the alone human history and culture in which scripture expressly originated - (I am the Lord God which led thee out of Egypt).
The New Jerusalem of Revelation, is our Washington DC today in relation to the full continental expansion of the US now; just as it was Rome previously in relation to the full continental expansion then of Western Europe in relation to the Roman Empire, inevitably uniting East and West together.
Hence, John was not only on the isle of Patmos in figurative representation of the once colonial advance of the Greeks through the Japhetic tribes of Noah, coming from Asia Minor; just as the seven churches which were then, in fact, in Asia Minor, were a reflection of the once western reaches of the most Ancient Civilizations of the Middle and Near East.
But he was and is recreated today by John Kennedy, and the Kennedy family on the isle of Martha’s Vineyard, in relation to the Old World foundations of Catholicism upon Rome obviously, and going back two thousand years in such scriptural prophecies.
In turn, of course, Paul is - and quite appropriately in Romans 1 - an admitted debtor, both, to the Greeks, in such a then newly universal imperial expansion of the marketplace like that since created anew by Western Europe today; and to the Barbarians in such a New World advance, then, as said, of Rome and Western Europe, mirrored yet again - also as noted - by such a same expansion in the US now.
This becomes the writing on the Lord, the name of the city of God - which is the new Jerusalem brought down from heaven in the fulfillment of just such scriptural prophecies and judgments; just as it is the Jerusalem in Isaiah 1, which was once full of judgment - but now murderers lodge in it - and so that it is purged by the Spirit of judgment through the Lord, himself, and its judges restored as at the first - and whereby it then becomes the Holy City.
Rah-nay-sawnce
this should be a gooden
IT was really good
+
“Orthodox” Christianity is built on the sacrifice of Arius as a scapegoat. I am questioning the validity and goodness of that sacrifice and thereby the whole world created by that sacrifice. I might also add that Calvinism similarly is built on the sacrifice of Servetus.
Politics cuts deep.
No. Christianity is built on the sacrifice of God Incarnate, who fulfilled the types of the two goats, the one which was slain, and the one which took away sins.
@@anselman3156 Which Christianity is the real one? Sectarianism started long ago, Christianity the institution is a Roman god with clay feet.
@@anselman3156 I used to sport a goatee, I refuse to be scape goated ;-)
@@williambranch4283 shaving is scrape goatee
JVK can get tiring to listen to now. All this talk of Nirvana and flowing water are things I can still just find in the Bible.
I also don’t like his shallow remarks about American society being something nightmarish. He’s in Canada and many can’t or can barely afford to live. From here so much of America looks by like a bastion of freedom now.
Advent is next month, so a little early ;-)
But perhaps the anti christ will have an alternative seasonal observation.
starts this Friday for New Calendar Orthodox, so not early at all ;-)
Sacred:( from Latin ‘sacer’ , “holy” ). That which is regarded & revered as holy or able to induce an experience of the divine. Awe, wonder & special. In ancient times a waterfall, a great tree, a mountain, thunder and lightning, the sun, moon and stars etc. An unusual person.
Sacrifice is the human process of “making something sacred”. A person, place or thing. I see Paul & Jonathan immediately “because of their form of Christianity “ conflate the two, sacred and sacrifice. This hermeneutic leads quickly to conflating Hiroshima with the Holy. I don’t think so. George Floyd and Hiroshima are evil IMO, not Holy & sacred. The power of the atom and death in general may very well lead to experiencing the sacred, but not in the ways used here.
Thanks Paul I wouldn’t have had a chance to undersstand and follow this development without your help
After the first philosofical serie I had no patients to listen to John V and his inplanting of new terms .. thinking models ..like having to learn a new language …
I hadn’t been able to understand and connect without your explanations and building of bridges in between the different explanation models ..perspectives
Now it is the monolithic minds collapsing
Now to this point The advent of the sacred (not the advent of cognitive science ..)
Finally John is using frame breaking ...the antropsofic language ..how come
it’s not just this usual technicality teknological language sound which sounds as teknomusik for my senses ..