The Monstrosity of Christ
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 พ.ค. 2023
- In today’s lecture, we delve into Slavoj Žižek’s book “the monstrosity of Christ.”
If you’d like to support these open-access lectures, and help me keep teaching them for free, please join my patreon: www.patreon.com/jenalineandjulian
You can download the audio here:
/ audio-lecture-2-82709405
Thank you so much,
Julian
#zizek #hegel #christ #theology #philosophy
This is part of an ongoing series on Žižek’s engagement with Christianity. The previous lecture was titled ‘the divine madness’ and can be found here or as a download on patreon.
That was breathtaking. Thank you so much. This helped me address many great riddles.
This is the second lecture in a new series on Žižek & Christianity. If you’d like to access all the lectures as audio downloads, please consider becoming a patron. Thank you to all the patrons who support me in keeping these lessons free and open-access online. You are hugely appreciated! Link is: www.patreon.com/jenalineandjulian
You are a jewell of a teacher. I've know quite a few from around the world. Listening from Portugal.
As a beginner in philosophy, thanks so much for the enjoyable and not so abstract way to understand Hegel.
Excellent presentation! Keep up the great work! That was profound.
Very nice job! Thank you for sharing!
Hi, im new to the channel. Theme of this vid was exactly in tune with my thoughts right now, I’m after reading some zizek and meister eckhart. Thanks for that.
Greetings from Poland
Wow!! Wonderful presentation; thanks. Will dig out your others. Haven't had so much fun with philosophy and theology since I was a grad student - in mathematical physics! As an ex-Catholic kid, let me say it's all coming back to me, Doctor! Not that I believe it, but that despite that fact - it damn well should be! Shows up all fundamentalisms as the thin, thin gruel they are. No 'there' there, at all. Starting with the coronation of His Sublime Irrelevance, was a superb rhetorical trope. You'd have done brilliantly in the ancient Athenian agora.
Very interesting video this is my 2nd time watching. Zizek is fascinating
Now this is the Zizek that is really intriguing.
Instant sub.
Fun content!
Let’s go bro, AWESOME
I mean skips over the hypothetical that Jesus then did a resurrection thing and thus went beyond the "failure of dying" bit. Personally i think the obsession with the tortured and dying christ image was the holy roman empire saying to all people, "Don't remember you are god or this will happen to you".
Then do it. Why haven’t you or anyone else done it?
@@Godbuzz I mean, i'm working on it, but a major difficulty in permanently maintaining other layer of consciousness is, the massive limitations of the shared cultural and linguistic framework we have to use to survive with each other, and the taboo and stigma of wandering around in profound absorption. tends to freak people out which then has those knock on effects on social survival. Heck even just being direct and honest to people makes them freak out or at best become incredibly awkward. Short version, because human culture is based on bullshit,and being lost in thought. not on truth.
@@richardallan2767it’s not that complicated
@@Aquaticphilosophia Well i'm being verbose. Which is the problem, but the only way to communicate in this way. So, please elaborate, what is the method?
@@richardallan2767 holding the belief that water is consciousness will make the path obvious. You can master yoga in one moment if you really see this clearly. I vlog about it a little.
Thank you for this thoughtful and very useful concise analysis of Žižek’s viewpoint! I have been studying him for a long time. Subscribed!
I believe, however, that the true Hegelian dialectic mechanism at work here is highly esoteric Vedic-Zoroastrian-Mithraic-Gnostic Astrotheology from World Age Passage to World Age Passage in the Cosmic reset of the "Snakes and Ladders" of the always .01% controlled "Leela Board" each time out in 2,160 year Cycles.
The question now is WHO are the Archetypal "Caesars", Archetypal "Pontius Pilates", Archetypal "Chief Priests, Scribes and Pharisees", Archetypal "Money Changers in the Temple", and Archetypal "MIC Judases" in every currently existing society in the Nuclear Age of ICBM "Flying Nails" built to "Crucify" everyone this time around as we go from the Age of Pisces to the Age of Aquarius on the accelerating ticking clock.
Study the DREAM of the 1978 Film "The Deer Hunter" very closely that came out of the streets of the 1960's and the anguish of the Vietnam War. (Me. U.S. Army 1969-1971). We are essentially in "Giorgio de Santillana" and "Hertha von Dechen" meets "David Warner Mathisen" meets "Dr. David Ulansey" meets "Dr. Dennis R. MacDonald" on Homer and the New Testament Writers. The 1998 Film "Saving Private Ryan", therefore, is not about ... where we have been ... but about ... where we are going.
Please elaborate?
@@RollYOUrD1ce The Symbolic Allegorical Story of the "Great Hippie Rabbi Seer from Galilee" who was murdered by those FIVE Archetypal Spiritual States of Being in the Zoroastrian World Age Passage of the "Age of Aries" to the "Age of Pieces" is an ASTROTHEOLOGICAL FUTURE PROPHECY about the hapless spiritually illiterate idiots and morons who will be murdered by "Flying Nail" COSMIC WEAPONS created by the exact same FIVE Archetypal Spiritual States of Being in the NEXT Zoroastrian World Age Passage of the "Age of Pisces" to the "Age of Aquarius" in 2,160 years. This was common knowledge in the streets of the 1960's by people who lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962 and the Vietnam War and started spiritually searching.
Start investigating by reading the 1969 Classic book "Hamlet's Mill" by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechen and start to read between the lines via the other authors mentioned. The profession currently running on this knowledge the most after the materialism of the 1980's, are Screenwriters in Hollywood. This insight, therefore, has been encoded into many Films that are completely over the average American's head.
Study the letters-numbers call back response versus the lit numbers on the Bingo Board in the famous "Bingo Game" Scene in the VA Hospital in the Allegorical Film "The Deer Hunter" (1978). You will get THREE DATES - don't forget to subtract "15" from 1859 for the "O" because the call back is "BING" and not "BINGO" - from the 19th Century that you will have to understand to be prepared for what is coming: 1844, 1863, and 1892. You will then have to understand the significance of "150" in Babylonian Cosmology. 1892+150=2042. People will have to understand the Cosmic significance of that year in terms of Nuclear Weapons. People have to start to grasp Cosmic Allegory, Metaphor, and Simile to navigate the concept of Vedic-Zoroastrian-Mithraic-Gnostic "World Age Passage Archetypal Eternal Return". I am hard at work on my own Book on this, but it is on the back burner right now while I work on a Feature Film Script with major Film Industry contacts because of the great Worldwide success of the 2016 Film "ARRIVAL". We are going to another shore of consciousness in a very Earthly D-Day "landing" in 2042 per the Allegory of the 1998 Film "Saving Private Ryan".
Here are some books to read to start to get clued in:
1-"Hamlet's Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge And Its Transmission Through Myth"_Giorgio de Santillana_Hertha von Dechen_1969_2015
2-"Astrotheology for Life: Unlocking the Esoteric Wisdom of Ancient Myth"_David Warner Mathisen_2017
3-"Islands in the Sky: The Four-Dimensional Journey of Odysseus through Space and Time"_Rose Hammond_2012
4-"Synopses of Epic, Tragedy, and the Gospels"_Dennis R. MacDonald_2022
5-"The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World"_David Ulansey_1991
6-"The Mithraic Origins of Christianity: Questioning the Mithras-Christ Connection"_Allan Di Donato_2021
7="Iranian Leviathan: A Monumental History of Mithra's Abode"_Jason Reza Jorjani_2019
Here is my Book Title but it is going to be a good while to finish yet with 325+ books in the extensive Bibliography!
Film is a Collective Waking Dream ...
"Archetypal World Age Passage: SEVEN FILMS You Must Understand for Your Descendants to Survive the 21st Century."
THE SEVEN FILMS
"The Best Years of Our Lives" (1946)
"The Poseidon Adventure" (1972)
"The Deer Hunter" (1978)
"The Dark Crystal" (1982)
"Saving Private Ryan" (1998)
"O Brother Where Art Thou" (2000)
"Whale Rider" (2002)
I hope this helps in Nineteen years! Good luck to you and yours!
nonsense
It's Hegelian how you started doing the lectures online because of a catastrophe, proof that the best of things arise from great failures 😊
Yes a beautiful example of hegelian dialectic. Which is why hegelian dialectic is so useful.
Lol
but it’s only a “proof” in retrospect
From Portugal !
Watching you from Brasil 😄
Hello from gray and muddy Estonia!
I thought you guys were colorful now in capitalism
I find this, as with most philosophy, a mixture of really interesting and self-serious/pretentious
3:50 Let us begin.
Thanks lol 😂
1st time viewer Minnesota, USA.
Watching in London UK
What verse is it that talks about worshipping god as one when facing and many with one’s back turned?
I'm very new to philosophy. I'm in my first year of undergrad and have been reading almost exclusively Plato and Aristotle all year, but what you are describing about Hegel having unified ontology and teleology sounds very Aristotelian. Assuming that teleology is from the Greek, "telos," it makes a lot of sense to me. Aristotle is (in my limited reading experience) very obsessed with what things are for (their "that for the sake of which," as it is frequently translated) as the first and foremost cause of their being. I might be failing to distinguish the "cause of being" and just the "being" of a thing, but it seems that Aristotle was on more or less the same path long beforehand. I guess I'm just curious about how Aristotle and Hegel's ontologies/teleologies differ, and in what ways they are the same.
For Aristotle, each form has its own telos whereas for Hegel the telos of all history is freedom. Aristotle incidentally rejected the study of history altogether as un-philosophical because he saw it as merely the study of particular instances rather than universal principles. He has a rather more static view of things, whereas for Hegel telos actually undergoes changes over time as humans attain more self-knowledge, which he equates with greater freedom. The other thing to note is that Hegel is talking specifically about humanity, whereas Aristotle thought of himself as a natural philosopher (an antecedent concept to scientist) more generally. So yes, they both place importance on some kind of telos but they differ significantly on what that means.
I noticed the 1000 USD goal on Patreon is to write an intro to philosophy book.
What’s the situation on that/
See the ebook tier 😊
Particle man, particle man
Doing the things a particle can
What's he like? It's not important
Particle man
Is he a dot, or is he a speck?
When he's underwater does he get wet?
Or does the water get him instead?
Nobody knows, Particle man
Triangle man, Triangle man
Triangle man hates particle man
They have a fight, Triangle wins
Triangle man
Universe man, Universe man
Size of the entire universe man
Usually kind to smaller man
Universe man
He's got a watch with a minute hand,
Millennium hand and an eon hand
When they meet it's a happy land
Powerful man, universe man
Person man, person man
Hit on the head with a frying pan
Lives his life in a garbage can
Person man
Is he depressed or is he a mess?
Does he feel totally worthless?
Who came up with person man?
Degraded man, person man
Triangle man, triangle man
Triangle man hates person man
They have a fight, triangle wins
Triangle man
th-cam.com/video/vOLivyykLqk/w-d-xo.html
Birdhouse in Your Soul is still one of my absolute favorites!
Triangle Man is an absolute bop.
Hell, most of the songs on Flood are bops: Letterbox, Someone Keeps Moving My Chair, Women and Men, etc.
You're Gonna Miss My Big Ol' Body...It's In its Prime And Not Too Shoddy.
Your point about kings and judges being powerful BECAUSE they are not equal to their symbolic position is what comes to mind whenever I see someone lambaste the Kardashians.
From Trinidad & Tobago
Hello from Mexico City
Baguio City: 120 mi north of Manila, 1 mi above the Sea.
Interesting
Austin, Texas 🤠
The shit Jesus went thru man im just glad i have him in my life🎉
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last/slouches its head toward Bethlehem to be born?" -Yeats
Love the metal band album name 😉🤣
46:48 That is literally a point that was made in Dostoevsky's The Devils. Interesting...
Well, in that case the most appropriate thing is to drop “his” and say straightforwardly “I don want to be a subject” - his, hers, any royal, etc.
As someone who was a part of the ‘not my king’ protests, the majority of protesters are republicans not just anti-Charles. Thanks for this lecture it was really interesting :]
Question. Before Christ, what did people say as an equivalent for what we say now, in anger frustration, amazement etc. ie. "Jesus Christ!!''?
Hi from Nono New York
My god, I actually understood that.
Now I'm attending church.
I'm glad you did, he left me behind.
Cheers for the video from Montreal 😊 That said, I think your critique of the slogan “Not my king!” is unfair; a protest slogan cannot be expected to be as precise as one can be in a lecture or a written text.
'a protest slogan cannot be expected to be as precise as ... ' Sorry; it not only can, it must be; no room except for the point, the whole point, and nothing but the point!
This idea that the one who protests against the king paradoxically affirms it's power as a symbol. What would be a real riot than for Hegel and Lacan? What is the possibility of being a revel in this perspective?
Theology weak sauce.
Men have always known God is fiction. The Temple of God serves the best meat, & if Gods existed, She would have no need of men for teachers. Thanks for the reply.
How is it possibly ethical to suggest the equivalent of a notion we all travel with one foot in a stranger's fantasyland, using fictional vocabulary: prophecy, prayer, etc. We have Moses: World's worst navigator leading a party as if travel were best done with one foot in fiction.
If Christianity were so good, why are the Jews unconvinced?
The religious lack any standing for a vacuum of quality-control. The Jews have a joke: God made Mormons so Christians would know how Jews feel. As the crowds increased, Jesus said, "This is a wicked generation. It asks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah, who was sacrificed overboard & the raging sea grew calm." The sign of Jonah is the superstitious working their way to a majority & good people dying.
Need we add more?
Should we ignore it was secular law & order ending the inquisitions, the witch killing? Nothing fails like prayers in a children's hospital. We don't recommend prophet as job description. We know them by their works & Christians have attempted to put their new wine in the old Jew wineskin. They both come from genital mutilation spun up with circumcision as a shortcoming.
We know them by their works, the vocabulary of fiction, of spin.
I like Zizek's perspective and definitely think there's something to it, but one has to keep in mind that a lot of the not-even-that-fine details are left unaccounted for. For instance, it seems to ignore the actual contents, i.e. stories, of the New Testament except for the obvious climax. One could say it's just flavor text in order to make the climax possible, but I find the text far too strange for that. Reading it, you don't really get what's going on most of the time, and neither do Jesus' followers. Just think of Revelations. And pitching the Catholic church as a pioneer when it comes to theatrical ritualistic performances means ignoring most of the religions we know about. Just a couple gripes I have with this more or less superficial interpretation.
Revelation? I agree with those in the very early Church who said it had no place in the New Testament Canon, then under development. It's John's revenge porn against Rome; nothing to do with salvation thru Christ as mediator. I still want to see the Imax movie version, tho!
@@davidwright8432revenge whereWhere?
"It's no longer the task of man to be reunited with god in the above, because God made it's task to be reunited with man trough Christ".
Sadly I’n no philosopher or even a formal student of philosophy - not a rigorous thinker and often a bit foggy-headed … so my head spins at this … and perhaps I have no business here - except that as someone who has deconstructed his faith I find what I can glean from these insights somehow helpful. So: thank you!
I find points of similarity with the Death of God theology of the Irish theologian Peter Rollins. It is devastating for a person who believed in an interventionist deus ex machina God - to realise there is no “Other” - although at times I wonder if panenentheism (as articulated by McGilchrist) may turn out to be the case. No one knows of course…
In the way i think of it, any God that is responsible for the fates of man and directly interferes HAS to be imperfect considering the atrocities of human history.
But a God that is the root of all things, complete and thus needing nothing, is fairly reasonable for theological thought (in my opinion)
@@markop.1994 But then why that god?
@@renato7184 im not sure i understand your question. Are you asking me to elaborate on this concept? I would explain differently to a religious person than to an athiest.
@@markop.1994 there's no reason to call that "god" it's just nature
@@scambammer6102 Baruch Spinoza called it god and nature, he also reffered to it as substance. The vedic hindus call it Brahman (ultimate reality) and claim its identical to God. HP lovecraft called it Yog Sothoth and made it the highest god in his pantheon. Many Sufi poets proclaimed ecstaticly that "all is one in god and that god is everything" in their mystic poetry. I sometimes call it the Archetype of Archetypes, surely if its not God then i cant fathom what is. Older than any cult of man is the religious extacy if falling in love with the universe, nature, god, and ones higher self.
The gap is transposed with what?
A king needs a king of kings to function. Authority must stay symbolic. Most of the uk is strongly atheist yet still went along with it, he’s a false idol. Pagans.
Yes, that's what I realised at the coronation. They are his 'representatives' on earth but he remains the king of kings - stuck in the pyramid hierarchy of abstracts.
12+ years of catholic influence and education made me an atheist...now a marxist shows me what such beauty lies within the idea of the crucifixion and the trinity...I mean, eh, whatever, keep rolling.
lemme guess, "catholic" school 100% composed by irreligious progressists, or weird parents that had not a single actual clue about theology?
I have almost the same experience. Strangely whilst I had suspicions about the church, I never really doubted Jesus. I think Jesus and the church are two completely separate 'ideas' - follow me don't worship me.
@@orangesurfboard2238 This 'follow me' idea shines through brilliantly in Joseph Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces book. The concept is about the universality of the journey, of going to hell and coming back.
@@orangesurfboard2238 not really, it was Christ who founded the Catholic Church and it is the same to this day
@@elio6861 I would say Constantine created the Catholic Church. The kingdom of heaven is not of this world, as Jesus said.
I feel like this idea is powerful if you don't rewind the clock past the third century or so. Much division and innovation was required to come to high Christologies and trinitarianism and it seems that these are taken for granted by the philosophers. Very unlikely, imo, that any of this can be attributed to the real Jesus, whoever he was.
4:00
There are just too many ads
How are you so young!
28:54
Arkansas USA
... and yet He is the risen Jesuschrist,
nah
Never seen this channel. I believe christ is a monstrosity though. Wait a minute...I actually HAVE seen one of this guy's videos before. Can't remember what the title or even the subject was. I don't remember diskiking it though. I like Zizek. Here goes nothin
LIVERPOOL!!!!
Jesus looks high as hell in that thumbnail.
Nightmare fuel
The bible talks a lot about people getting stoned.
So does the speaker
He was on something to take that sort of beating without a sound.
Hegel needs to discover gummies.
11:16 NOT YOUR SUBJECT [with an arrow pointing down toward the sign holder]
question is, did Christ know what he was doing? or was he psychotic? While he was being crucified, did he know his crucifixion was contingent but also a necessity to change the coordinates of reality?
If Christ was psychotic, it begs the question then of why almost all his Apostles and a great deal of the early church chose torture and execution over sacrifice to pagan idols.
He did not question the Father (who is love). Only in the garden he asks for a bodily pardon. Also, it is revealed that Jesus didn't entirely understand what his role was when he says, Father why have you forsaken me? It is here where he realises that it was him all along.
The problem of Zizek is the engagement on etnocentrism on topics like the imigrantion crisis
Basically, when you read Zizek he is and and has always been against the humanitarian dimension of immigration. For example, bracketing the immigrants as a very moral population for whom every states are to be blamed for. He argue that those States needs to recieve those immigrants who are primarily the main reason for its crisis.
Some ethnicities are better than others. Some cultures are barbaric and should be treated as such
For me the problem of Zizek is that he's a liberal who thinks to be a communist.
@@nihalmangrati5336 So they should go back to their own countries? Yes.
Alhamdullilah for Islam and it's clarity.
A clarity that satisfies the heart and the intellect.
I heard the Quran just doesn't make any rational sense in any language?
Seems on-brand anyhow...
Clarity? More like simple stupidity and lack of intellectual reflection
Someone once told me Christians only hang around Zizek to feel cool, lol. As a Christian I can laugh at myself. Chesterton was therapeutic in that way.
EDIT: Also, I am not sure if I can commit to a monthly thing. Can I just send you some money?
*Islamic Jesus has entered the chat*
elvis has left the building
I find the argument that Christ or Christianity is "monstrous" strange to accept since that implies some sort of standard of "strangeness" or an absolute moral standard which apart from social construct is difficult to justify for someone who is rejecting objective moral values.
1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach[b] to save those who believe. 22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Nah. The "atheist coin" you mentioned is way too much over generalization. Many atheists do not consider christ to have ever lived at all. To an atheist it is a story and always will be. If you want to go on and say a religion was invented, and that is objectively and historically true, then yes....a religion was invented. We can agree on that. Some dude in the past that either existed or was invented later on and assembled from a legend or is a composite kind of literary character...doesn't make it factual. That takes physical evidence. For a supposed son of a supposed god we are all supposed to acknowledge...there is very little evidence at all to measure up to the supposed importance and profound meaning. Mostly we just have a bunch of stuff and stories passed down and hearsay.
Christianity was very much endorsed by the Romans and promoted or be aware of it. Why did the Romans promote it so much? Because it kept crowns on their heads that's why. Not because of any earth shaking thing that suddenly changed the world. It is still the same old nastiness that has always been in human society. Xtianity has had 1800 years to fix it and still nothing but a perpetuation of what were already Roman sentiments from their time.
Im joining you from ..
Your moms bedroom.
Žižek doesn't understand Judaism and neither do you. The rest is good content.
Kings replaced by poet musicians with nothing to say beyond estrus. Christians are still moonies.
Too much time spent on King-this, King-that, King King King King King....No "monster", no "Christ", just King blah blah blah King, blah blah blah...there's at least 20 chess sets worth of "kings". If somebody wants to reply with the time stamp of when this gets to what title said this was about, I'd appreciate it....I'm going to go look for a video where the subject matter has something to do with the title....That's a thing people do, you know?
This is complete bs, if you want true and deep philosophy you should read Dan Brown.
You mean the guy who wrote the DaVinci code? Bruh what are you smoking?
You’re just Jesus in one of his distressing, disguises, looking for attention
why would God had to reconcile with himself?
He wouldn't. At least not in Christian theology. But if you looked at Hegel's Absolute as a god, then it constantly needs to reconcile with itself. This Absolute contains all the dialectical relationships that constitute reality and reason for Hegel. So the apparent contradictions are being reconciled to themselves via sublation, as this god manifests himself more and more completely. In Christian thought, Christ reconciles man with God, but from the Hegelian perspective of the absolute as diety, man is a part of god in some sense, so Christ's actions would be the reconciliation of God to himself. For the record, this understanding of the Hegelian Absolute is pantheism, and while I'm no expert, I'm not aware of anyone who seriously regards Hegel's philosophy as remotely Christian. CS Lewis, for instance, regarded him a pantheist. Zizek, who I'm not super well versed in, seems to build a great deal off of Hegel, so that would explain the perspective on Christ that you find in this video.
@@qwertyuiopqwerqwererty thanks for the context
@@qwertyuiopqwerqwererty Hegel is not, as many assume, a full-blown pantheist. But by clearly departing from the Creed he earns his status as a Christian heretic.
yeah but god isn't real so who cares
Though I'm also of a mostly atheistic disposition, I think this bears saying. Though perhaps not constitutive of "reality" in whatever sense we mean it, Christian theology and hermeneutics are perhaps the oldest traditions of literary interpretation and theory in the western canon, and are likely well worth serious consideration, if approached with the correct level of skepticism.
Lol you didnt watch the video did you
@@MMurine "Christian theology and hermeneutics are perhaps the oldest traditions of literary interpretation and theory in the western canon" lol if you ignore everything before that. The bible is garbage compared to ancient Greek literature. Gilgamesh is vastly superior to anything in the bible. The bible is authoritarian tripe. "Hey Abe murder your son because I said so" -yahweh
I mean, you did click on the video…
Yeah, but what is God to you?
What an interesting idea and great presenter. Shame that this is about Zizek's drivel.
If Zizek is drivel, how come his ideas can be usefully discussed?
This makes no sense, when he is actually discussing Zizek's 'drivel'?
What a wonderful video describing the many ways people can support you financially and thanking everybody under the sun who has ever done so. I bailed after the third minute of that nonsense.
Why not talk about the onto logic status of Santa Claus? Cmon. Phil of Religion was OVER 100yrs ago. 200 years ago. No wait. 500yrs ago.
I can walk into any Catholic Church and see that religion is still alive.
@@ClayB05 Religion is still alive but NOT the Philosophy of religion.
@@jefffudesco9364 replaced with something far less interesting I’d say. Any modern philosophy worth their salt would say the story of Christianity is still the best way to describe the ontology of being. Probably why people have been contending with the idea for 2000 years. A story about some dude in the desert that died that on a cross? Why? I’m still trying to get to the bottom of that myself. But the depth of it knows no end. Even if a resurrection never happened, you have to wonder why so many people have been trying to figure out its importance all this time. I do think zizek is onto something.
@@ClayB05 I think you are confusing the a popular HEROIC STORY that goes back b4 historical Jesus with "THE ONTOLOGIC TRUTH OF BEING". I dont get it. What do you mean that people have been "contending" with it? Is this "contending" like the contending we do over the existence of gods? I thought a powerful govt leader made Xtianity, or the belief that legendary Jesus, like Thor, was godly, the PUBLIC LAW of the Roman Empire and,therefore, by traditional disposition, the law of subsequent empires.What do you mean by the ONTOLOGIC TRUTH OF BEING other than parroting some of Heideggar's profound word salad?
@@jefffudesco9364 i guess you want me to give you the definition of ontology? You can google that yourself. Never read any Heidegger. You also know what i mean by ‘contend’. I’m not doing your work for you. There’s more literature out there about Christ and Christianity than any other subject. There’s probably a reason for that and i doubt it’s just that it became the state religion of an empire. So I’d say get started. You’ll surprise yourself.