Esoteric Christianity | with Michael Martin and Nate Hile
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- This video is a repost from Nate’s channel, ‘Grail Country’. We discuss Valentin Tomberg’s book ‘Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism’ and Christian esotericism more generally, how different esoteric perspectives unfolded throughout history, Rosicrucianism, freemasonry, perennialism and how these traditions deviate from Orthodox mysticism. We also discuss evolution and natural selection as a mythical narrative.
Original video: Christian Esotericism with guests Jonathan Pageau and Michael Martin (Grail Country): • Christian Esotericism ...
Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism: www.amazon.com/Meditations-Ta...
=======================
Timestamps:
00:00:00 - Coming up next...
00:01:15 - Intro music
00:01:40 - Introduction
00:02:56 - Tomberg's ‘Meditations on the Tarot’
00:05:17 - Tomberg's traditionalism
00:07:06 - Discerning esotericism
00:10:04 - Foucoult's Pendulum
00:11:24 - A Christian esotericism
00:14:01 - When the salt loses its savor
00:17:05 - Using esotericism to destroy the world
00:19:09 - Sophiology, ecumenism and perennialism
00:25:54 - The integrative possibility of Christianity
00:28:54 - Returning to the incarnation
00:31:44 - Pride and good intentions
00:38:27 - The polarity of our current moment
00:43:53 - Natural selection and Genesis
00:51:33 - Embodying traditional Christianity in the modern world
00:57:25 - The church litmus test
01:01:39 - Apocalypse and antichrist
=======================
- The Symbolic World website and blog: www.thesymbolicworld.com
- Merch: www.thesymbolicworld.store
- The Language of Creation (Matthieu Pageau): www.amazon.com/Language-Creat...
- Carving workshop: jonathanpageau.thinkific.com/...
The Symbolic World podcast:
- Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0gI8bUw...
- Apple podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
More videos from The Symbolic World:
- Clips Channel: / jonathanpageauclips
- French Channel: / jonathanpageaufrançais
- Bitchute: www.bitchute.com/channel/page...
- Dtube: steemit.com/@symbolism
Join the conversation:
- Unofficial Facebook discussion group: / 1989208418065298
- The Symbolic World Reddit: / thesymbolicworld
Support this channel:
- Website: thesymbolicworld.com/support/
- Patreon: / pageauvideos
- Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/jonatha...
- Paypal: www.paypal.me/JonathanPageau
Social media links:
- Facebook: / thesymbolicworld
- Twitter: / pageaujonathan
- Instagram: / jonathan.pageau
My intro was arranged and recorded by Matthew Wilkinson.
My website designers, Anomalist Design: www.anomalistdesign.com/
I've been interested in the esoteric since I was a kid, but Christianity gave me the real meat my teeth were looking to sink into. Recently, my eye was caught on a book that claimed to give insight into dark things. In it there was a passage about stumbling upon a black snake in a dark room. That night, my wife dreamt she was bitten by a black snake. I'm like Nope! I think sometimes people with a curious bent don't view their curiosity as the potential liability that it is.
Y'know this is actually what I'm scared of in my studies. I'm very aware that when looking at some of these things it's like starting into the mouth of a Shark trying to count teeth.
I just wanted a taste!
🍎🐍😢
Just because you had spiritual gifts Doesn't make you or your gifts and abilities "evil" or "satanic". From what I read, you literally threw away your gifts for a belief system aka. organized religion for fear of "going to hell".
@@rebelmnk2382 I think God recognizes I'm a very experience oriented person. Since becoming a Christian I've had much more elevated spiritual experiences ranging from the ecstatic to seeing directly answered prayer. All of the mysticism with none of the ego insecurity or dealing with the shady intermediaries.
Amen. It's like that proverb, curiosity can kill the cat. Or something like that.
Fundamentalism in childhood. Esoterism in adolescence. Orthodox mysticism in maturity.
Thank you for this video! This is a very personal matter for me, because it was my interest in the esoteric, mysticism, and even "magic" that eventually led me to convert from Baptist to Orthodox. And then from there, in my serious love for the Orthodox Church, as I "deep dived" into her spiritual teachings, this eventually led me away from the "occultish" spirituality, as everything I needed had already existed in the beauty of Orthodoxy! Glory to God For All Things!
I share a similar story. I am still a fan of Mystical Orthodoxy. The work by Robert Amis is great.
@@leondbleondb Mystical Orthodoxy is what initially drew me to the Orthodox Church ☦️, and still, to me is what separates it from all other forms of Christianity. Orthodoxy has the fulness of the faith, including the reality of what is truly mystical.
I had no idea there was a mystical orthodoxy so thanks for writing that
@@cosmicdancer6169 Almost everything in the Orthodox Church is Mystical, because our God Himself is so full of Mystery, since He is so far above anything we could imagine on our own. And the searching to understand and know Him never ends, because He is infinite.
I was raised on the Narnian Christian mysticism of CS Lewis. Raised in Methodist Churches, I fell in love with Jesus Christ at a very young age-undoubtedly in part from being introduced to those books. I eventually landed in full-blown Evangelical circles, but by my 40’s I began to have major struggles with the Evangelical account of “justification”, “sanctification” and heaven and hell (ie., primarily Calvinist Penal Substitution theory, which CS was reluctant to accept as well). I was deeply convicted about the nominalism and impotence of my own faith to overcome many of my sinful habits. I was also deeply disturbed by the nominalistic and arbitrary accounts of God’s righteous judgment in this Evangelical narrative. What really sounded the death knell for me on all that was when my Baptist-trained pastor began introducing the crackers and grape juice of “Communion” with the words, “These elements are not magical, they are not mystical….” making very explicit the emptiness of the Baptist rite. It occurred to me to ask, “then what really is the point?” I realized this Baptist “Communion” was by its very nature and theological framework in actuality merely a “communion” with my own intellectual meditation on the events of the gospel as conceived in that scheme and with my own self-effort toward compunction in light of that. It was most definitely not an actual partaking and participation in Christ….It should go without saying such a form of religion has power to save absolutely no one!
The Eastern Orthodox Church “in a Mystery” is Christ in His fullness manifest on earth, my only true spiritual home.
What a great way to spend my afternoon laying on the floor of my studio looking up at the clouds and listening to the weaving of some of what my thoughts have been into a tapestry that might be brought into being. I'm on my journey to becoming Catholic after many years of searching. I, too, believe that Christians will find themselves in need of underground Churches. Dr. Gavin Ashenden was the first to alert me to this and at the time I thought "No way" but now, now, I see that this will happen. And with that, it is also one of the most exciting times to re-discover being Christian.
Welcome home! God bless you!
I love this channel! Jonathan, you are identifying and exploring very interesting connections 😌💭💖⭐️🎄
I will admit that my experience of going to church has been kind of "punching the clock" but I do not see how it could be otherwise. For example, I actually thought about this recently, the people that I developed the stronger bonds with were people that I have worked almost daily for a couple of years (which would be a kind of "lower" aspect of a community), but I do not encounter them at church for this "higher aspect" of what a community should be. At the same time, having done a sort of "lone wolf spirituality" for years, I can say that there is no substitute for this fragmented experience of attending church on Sundays. It is better than nothing.
I think it is that idea that we are not in a situation, most people at least, in which the people we deal daily with (working, trading etc) are the same people we celebrate together the higher aspect of life. The challenge is how to be the "mediator" between these two aspects.
Jonathan, you are really beginning to grow into the role you have been called to do - guarding the light in the darkness. Guys, this was another important conversation on our way into the night.....let's keep our lamps filled with oil, we never know when the bridegroom comes....
I got a newsletter from a Franciscan Spirituality Center recently. In about 12 large pages worth of material, not exaggerating, there was not one mention of Jesus Christ. I was so saddened. Catholics, Christians, _do not give up on the Cross!_
This is shocking. I've noticed this before also. Saw a video about an audience hall the pope uses near Vatican city (think it's John 6th audience hall) and there was just no Christian imagery in there, not a single cross
Riveting and fascinating discussion. Thanks for uploading, sir. 🙏
Tomberg wrote the "Meditations on the Tarot" so readers would imbibe spiritual enzymes from the pictures and his explanations. If a person continues on the Christian-Hermetic spiritual path, these spiritual enzymes eventually will produce spiritual sight: perceiving Christ in the spiritual world and will guide a person into living in the Divine Will. For a more technical explanation of this path, see a book by Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange "Three Ages of the Interior Life". The same path to living in the Divine Will is described in a much simpler manner in the Holy Love messages about the Journey through the Chambers of the United Hearts of Jesus & Mary.
Thanks for sharing
the conversation got good at the end, and relevant to the times
Lovely conversation and fun to listen to even though the matter is partly complicated :)
Jonathan it was a delight to watch you and Michael together in conversation. I hope at some point we can talk again. I think what Tomberg has to say about evolution is significant, despite your misgivings about Teilhard de Chardin (Tomberg is not talking about the Omega point). Next time I will probably talk more :)
This conversation derails from the topic at hand at about half way. Would love to see more discussion on esoteric Christianity which I think is getting a bad deal.
@@leondbleondb That's a fair criticism and the tone was more critical than I would have liked.
I wouldn't have returned to Christianity (after growing up among fundamentalist young earth creationists) had evolution not been affirmed and affirmable by large swathes of the tradition and intelligent and pious theologians (key for me being Pope John Paul II's acknowledgement, and Pope Francis' Laudato Si).
Saying its a purely horizontal Satanic illusion is no better than, is in fact worse and more delusional in some sense, than the young earth creationists putting their head in the sand, because you're going from saying scientists doing good work are in fact deluded about the nature of reality and are part of a secular conspiracy against Christians, to saying they are technically correct but that are part of a cosmic Satanic conspiracy, thus denying the intelligibility of reality and history in favor of a fideistic conspiratorial gnosticism. This goes toward the reciprocal narrowing of conspiratorial paranoia already rampant and which I know both Nate and Jonathan have been rightly concerned about.
Denying evolution in our era is gnosticism, and no revival of Christianity is going to occur without accounting for the reality of the evolutionary process (and this does not mean slandering and handwaving it away as an evil "horizontal illusion"). De Chardin has done good pioneering work in this area along with his current Catholic popularizer John Haught (even if as Michael said not everything he thought is worth incorporating, inevitable for any creative pioneer), as have the metaphysics of Whitehead and Bergson, which as John Milbank has argued will end up being the some of the most important philosophers of the 20th century. As Milbank writes "A renewed metaphysics should not seek to suppress the primacy of becoming and the event either in nature or culture. It should not recognize divine order in the world despite the flux but through and because of it, albeit in its series of complex and always relatively stable and consistent punctuations. The participation of finite being and intelligence in the godhead needs now to be re-thought in terms of the vital flow of historical becoming which will take account of the way in which, while ontological structures provide the setting for events, the latter can also exceed the import of pre-given structures."
This also affords the intelligibility of e.g. miracles as temporally concentrated emergence vectors analogous to the emergence of life from chemistry. But both should always be understood as an interpenetration of emanation and emergence, as John Vervaeke rightly emphasizes as the nature of all reality and which Eriugena, Nicholas of Cusa, and St. Maximus also recognized.
My inpression of Tomberg and Steiner on this issue was that they were reacting against the psuedo-scientism and new age spiritualism of Blavatsky et al. and got caught up in the traditionalist school's reactionary Orientalism that conceieves of all genuine novelty as an aberration, in contrast to the Judeo-Christian affirmation of the significance of history and claims of radical events that change (even cosmic) history. Guenon's purely Top-down, emanation only Hindu model is neither Christian nor able to account for the reality of things like evolution (not to say he and the traditionalist school don't have genuine insights), and led him to the psychoses alluded to above (literally repeating the fundamentalist young earther cant about dinosaur bones being put there to make you question your faith) when such paranoid gnosticism is taken in. John Milbank brings some of this to light here: czcams.com/video/3uLSRekiUV8/video.html
The concern about the problem of natural evil is understandable, but there are many ways to address even this that don't end up as conspiratorial gnosticism.
For example, a response similar to David Bentley Hart answering infernalists on why God didn't just create the paradisiacal state from the start, by saying that cosmic history is part the very process of creatures being drawn from nothingness with real if partial freedom throughout the ontological hierarchy, even if sin and evil are and were in some sense a tragic contingency; evolution can be accounted for by this same logic. Of course, this all makes much better sense when you don't have a voluntarist conception of God, which causes plenty of other issues.
De Chardin of course already deals with all this to some extent, as do C.S. Lewis and Sarah Coakley by arguing that a pre-biological or trans-temporal angelic fall (these principalities also given some kind of freedom along with all creation) which created the parasitism of death / decay / entropy that evolution fights against, a self-organizing movement toward greater complexification (trampling down death by death, sacrificing for future beings and being)
So there's already that route as well if you want to address all past natural evil as contingent, without needing to criticize the evolutionary process itself.
Whitehead also argued that evil goes all the way down the scale of being and is fundamentally parasitic and ultimately self-destructive, similarly to Pageau and going back to Augustine that evil is nothing in itself but is parasitic upon being, which is good. The process of evolution is in some sense seeking the goodness convertible with being in sustaining being and its complexification (emanation+emergence). And as Aquinas argues preserving one's life and the life of one's descendents is indeed a good. Humanity is simply called beyond this natural good as cultural and political and spiritual (self-reflective and rational) animals.
Even then evolution already has self-sacrifice for the whole built into it, including beyond direct lineage through inclusive fitness and group selection. The issue is conceiving of evolution in purely material and individualistic terms (e.g. the reductionism of the selfish gene model, which made a convenient metaphor in the ascendent Neoliberalism's greed is good heyday in the late 70s)
Sam Adams, who Nate has spoken with on his Transfigured channel, has several excellent discussions around Christianity being the paradoxical summit of the evolutionary process. See Sam's talk with David Sloan Wilson (czcams.com/video/9CAyvVdNSzI/video.html), an evolutionary biologist arguing eloquently for multi-level selection (which includes what was once attacked as impossible by many biologists under the more reductive Darwinian model as group selection) which includes cultural evolution and religions as intrinsic to this process. Without all this you get an ontological duality of nature and culture that led us to our moment of ecological collapse via pillaging nature as mere mechanical resource.
I highly recommend the work of theologian Conor Cunningham, a colleague of John Milbank, who wrote an excellent book arguing for the Christian intelligibility of theistic evolution against the polarisms of reductive Darwinism and religious fundamentalism and that has been positively reviewed by Stanley Haeurwas, Charles Taylor, William Desmond and David Bentley Hart, among many others: www.eerdmans.com/Mobile/Products/8226/darwins-pious-idea.aspx
- Presentation on his book Darwin's Pious Idea: czcams.com/video/w3k8kMabvjw/video.html
- Short Video on why theology should study evolution: czcams.com/video/w3k8kMabvjw/video.html
- It was also adapted into a BBC documentary series: czcams.com/video/E6Sk_4qz_m0/video.html
Perry Marshall has also been doing good interesting work from a more Protestant perspective arguing for Evolution 2.0:
czcams.com/video/oG6dTuQ5z1U/video.html
czcams.com/video/edz5YCmPYps/video.html
I also highly recommend checking out Wynand de Beer's book From Logos to Bios: "Evolutionary theory in light of Plato, Aristotle and Neoplatonism". He's an Orthodox scholar from South Africa who did his dissertation o Eriugena, whom he draws on in his work, which has been praised by Wolfgang Smith as well, and has parallels to Sam's ideas about Aristotelianizing Darwinism.
YT interview: czcams.com/video/dzPw6OS1njQ/video.html
Evolution also does indeed have value as a narrative that affords intelligibility and aspiration, as De Chardin for example exemplified, and I think this potential is untapped, largely to be fair because of its reductive interpretation as purely random and physical, or else something like primitive Social Darwinism and then the association with eugenics. David Sloan Wilson is excellent here in showing the fractal truth of evolution at various scales in multi-level selection, very analogous to Jonathan's language. It would be great to see them have a talk. Also, Michael's comment on Darwin as developing a system of British Imperialism is off the mark at the personal level at least. Darwin himself was very careful with his language about his findings, would have been horrified at some of the distortions of his theories and directions that "Social Darwinism" engendered, and seems to have been a loving and pious man.
I think an understanding of evolution also affords and inspires more care, compassion and empathy for the rest of creation. And intelligent ecological thinking allied with religious wisdom is desperately needed in our age.
@@CrystallineWyvern I think Jonathan needs to interview you on this! Thanks for the thoughtful comment and links to resources…
I need 4 more parts of this conversation
Excellent conversation!
For those interested - there is an amazing graduate-level lecture on the history and roots of Perennialism on Justin Sledge's Esoterica YT channel.
I'd take anything he says with a huge grain of salt
Thank you guys for mentioning example of John Dee the way you did. Its super appropriate these days to remember him like this. I was wondering when will one of Jonathans discussions at least mention him. He gave me some serious questions to deal with couple of years back.
Where is Dee mentioned, or what was Jonathans take. Thanks if you have a mo. (Am watching this in chapters.)
In Colombia and pretty much Latam, we still have the precession tradition during Holly Week
Sadly those traditions are being lost in Mexico, thanks to our adoption of modernism, the masons back in power and our own cowardice.
That was a wonderful conversation! Speaking of Revelation and current times, while in NA churches are being destroyed or repurposed, in Romania they are building the biggest Orthodox cathedral ever with elevators and everything with the most fitting name : People's Salvation's Cathedral . Look it up, it's insane !
Yeah the people who are “New Ager’s” have lost much of the true “Savor” largely because of dogma related issues with Christianity. Those who attribute everything Godly to quote “The Universe” and peace. They are lost in a way they miss the deeper truths of Christianity. One can call on Jesus’s name in a way unlike any other. I don’t care what you believe something about Jesus Christ is far different than any other. They forget what a young man he was. And the profound wisdom he spoke of. Clearly came from a higher place than himself. Anyway just found the channel I love it brothers! Keep up the good work! Sincerely-Justin
Just starting to watch more Pageau. Wonderful to see good discussions on these topics. Has he spoken about Dr. David R. Hawkins? Or A Course in Miracles?
Beautiful!
Hey Jonathan. I was wondering if you ever thought about going on the syncretism society podcast? I think a lot of people would benefit. Thank for the video!
53:54 we Catholic Latinos, our spirit is melted with the Hispanic Catholic Church. Our processions are part of our social divine identity with God. Virgin Mary, the holy mother, is our protector and she intercedes for us to her son and to the almighty God Father. That is why for hundred of years we celebrate her in all of our Churches, now is part of our living experience as subjects, this has afforded us agency since we have memory.
You know this is something that happens quite casually in the Catholic Church. You can look at liturgies in India, Africa, South-East Asia and see just how much of the local tradition and culture is imported. While the core is kept pure. It is truly amazing. That's why, although I am "traditional", I am not narrow minded that all Catholic liturgy needs to be the Extraordinary form and in Latin. I think those who think that have not left their bubble much and don't understand there are almost a billion Catholics world wide. Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners!
The widgie board example, the hot phone line to Jesus, is hilarious.
Very interesting talk as usual. Just curious @Jonathan Pageau, at some point you mentioned something about Greek Orthodox, and laughed, but didn’t finish your thought. What was the laughter about?
The advaita approach is only a partial aspect of reality, in Christ we have the whole, because it answers the dual reality of experience without passing it over or ignoring it by simply being aware. Christ enters into our duality into our mind and affections and deals and corrects them there bringing his awareness in. Thus perpetuates body/mind life instead of its annihilation.
Response to your critique preview before i watch the whole video:
The evolution narrative does say what we should do in the most cut and dry basic sense, which is survive and ensure the next generation will survive. We evolved large brains to predict the future, we know if we "kill and compete, and take" with no regard for a social structure and being able to work with each other using our capacity for communication, the resulting future is chaos and the predators of the world are able to come down and eat us when we are weak and alone.
The means to survive in you laid out in your example of an "evolution narrative" is like the predator's or psychopath's version of that narrative.
Yeah it's a bit of a strawman or misunderstanding from his part, prisoner's dilemma describes why its not a great idea to become hyper competitive the way that he describes. Any rational actor, whether the narrative be evolutionary or materialist or Christian or traditional, would be able to arrive at the conclusion that cooperation and social harmony are better strategies (in most contexts). I'm ambivalent about this particular subject but I think it's important to give it a fairer shake than that.
I'd love to know what you all think of Rudolf Steiner. I have to say... If it wasn't for Anthroposophy, I never would have found my way back to Christianity. It was in reading Steiner that I first discovered the concept of the LOGOS. I feel like there's some deep worth to Anthroposophy. It's also a huge education movement with Waldorf Schools... bringing a soul life back in to education. Not like other esoteric traditions ... its has grown in to quite a movement.
Yes, me too! It was doing Waldorf homeschooling and reading the Bible that brought me back in, especially listening to Steiners lectures. He made me comfortable with the word "Christ" for the first time.
@@amybowman9906 I literally would not have imagined even remotely that I would be reading the Bible ever! And there I was, reading Steiner's Gospel of St John lectures!
Not to mention bio-dynamic farming which was credited as the inspiration for modern permaculture/hugelculture. Almost as if much of what Steiner did was intended to plant seeds for our times. Bible says ‘by their fruits, you shall know them’; as such, and by definition, Steiner was a force of good for the world.
@@tara_artist Those lectures alone brought me back to the sacraments and to the Catholic church and you can't have a discussion of esoteric Christianity without Steiner. You can't talk about Valentin Tomberg without mentioning In 1925, Tomberg joined Rudolf Steiner's Anthroposophical Society. He was asked to withdraw from the Anthroposophical Society in the Netherlands. Steiner made a good case for reincarnation and evolution of consciousness of humanity. He also gives a good reason why the church suppressed the teaching of reincarnation to make the one individual life more relevant of understanding Christ. There are hints in reincarnation in the final chapter of John 21:20-23
20 Peter turning about, saw that disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also leaned on his breast at supper, and said: Lord, who is he that shall betray thee?21 Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith to him: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? follow thou me. 23 This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die. And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but, So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? John emphasizes that she said I didnt say he wont die but he will remain till I come.
You can also view it that he wrote revelations but also reincarnation. There is also the transfiguration of Elijah and John the Baptist. I really think you can't have a discussion with out Rudolf Steiner on Christian esoteric teachings.
Very intriguing discussion gentlemen. 🤓👍
Regarding timestamp 1:10:27 being described here is what is known as a "midwit." "Midwits, having little evidence of their brilliance, constantly engage in displays of marginal intelligence." To quote author, podcaster, and internet troll for liberty, Michael Malice.
Excellent discussion, gentlemen. A minor quibble: Charles Williams was never a member of the Golden Dawn. He was a member of Waite's Fellowship of the Rosy Cross. Since I've been watching this type of video lately, I have found it curious that so many of these discussions leave out actual Tarot practice. One of the reasons for Tomberg's book was his statement at p. 590: "For the whole work of the Martinist-Templar-Rosicrucian group was founded on the Tarot. Study of the Cabbala, Magic, Astrology, Alchemy and Hermeticism was guided and inspired by the Tarot. This gave the whole work an exceptional coherence and organic unity." I wonder why there isn't a deeper dive into that topic? Thanks!
Good discussion. One comment though...Micheal I invite you to investigate eastern orthodoxy...rocor.
Blessings to all of you.
Jonathan. I would love to see you have a conversation with the de-occultist from Philadelphia, Mark Passio.
You're a damn genius Jonathan Pageau!
Near 1:05, post-WWII was the second hit. Post-WWI was worse but the tendency was to abandon optimism and progressivism and turn back to the reassurance of religion.
One has to keep in mind that there are three Rosicrucian initiation paths. One for the head, one for the heart (which the Grail Mysteries are part of), and one for the will. Thought, Feeling, and Action. The reason you find this "heady" is that you're focusing on only ONE of these initiations, the one for the head. You're probably Grail/Heart types so while this stuff is "interesting" to some extent, it doesn't hit you in the heart center which is where you live. It is not "lesser" or "wanting." It is just not for you, in this lifetime.
Can you elaborate more on where I can read about the three paths? I’ve been reading up on Rosicrucianism but I haven’t yet gotten to the threefold path division of it
Yes, “that’s the God I’m going to stick with”, we’ll said.
Evolution & Nazi ideology kinda go hand in hand, ya know? Just a thought. I mean, they kinda do.
@Nicholas Morrell says someone who would have been murdered under their regime immediately.
That would be the other ”E” world (eugenics). Where instead of survival of the fittest, mere mortals decide who the fittest are a priori
@Nicholas Morrell It wasn't perfect. I have quite a few criticisms. I prefer figures like Corneliu Zelea Codreanu and Jose Antonio Primo De Rivera. But then again, maybe those figures are only so unsullied because they never actually held power themselves.
Does anybody have a link to the Tomberg book. Can't seem to find it
Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey Into Christian Mysticism
My parish came back from the dead during C-19
You are one of the lucky ones! Many had to leave their Churches over it.
Praise be to God through Our Lord in the Holy Spirit.
Around 25:00 Pageau refers to the "incarnational principle." Can anyone define this briefly?
I suspect this has to do with the central Orthodox Christian premise that God became a Man to reveal Himself to us, to heal us and bring us into union with Him, and Who remains incarnate and manifest on earth in His Body, the Church. This is THE Way we as embodied created rational beings encounter and know God. God is not only transcendent in His Being, He is also immanent in His energies (which are also God Himself in His Self-manifestation to us) revealing Himself to us within all of Creation but only fully in Jesus Christ. Christ is the Uncreated One who is the Light (and “Logos”) by which we see and understand everything else (the “logoi” of created things).
Kerry Livgrins journey - seeds of change.
I wonder if Jonathan ever finnished reading Meditations on the Tarot.
These topics resonate deeply with me as a young person who left Christianity many years for the esoteric. This book looks interesting but makes me nervous. I am well versed in tarot but should we be looking at it? Isn't it divination after all? You make excellent points. Im just cautious about further exploration on these subjects.
You can learn about the archetypal meanings of the cards without using them for divination. It's still a bit dangerous though, in particular if you have a curious mind and especially a past involvement in such things. I myself came to Orthodoxy out of occultism, and I would be nervous to engage with that stuff personally. If you do decide to engage with it, just make sure your time spent on it and your enthusiasm for it doesn't outstrip the time and enthusiasm you have for Christ, the Church, the Bible and the writings of the Saints.
I identify with your post, try the following book: A different Christianity by Robert Amis
@@leondbleondb I don't see it on Amazon
Thanks
I am so pleased to see the idea of Theosis is becoming more and more an interest among the churches west and east. Most likely the translations of the Philokalia and CZcams has sparked this interests and is now drawing so many Protestants to the Orthodox Church. I will predict the idea of Theoria will be the next spiritual question of the day. Now that the final 5th volume of the Philokalia is being circulated in part these days. It seems that Father Kalistos has held the best for the last. With the final couple of books about the way to Theoria.
If Theosis describes the process of becoming deified by man. The idea of Theoria has been lost over the years. The Christian revelation is Theoria and the vision is the highest of the monks aims. It is said the vision was common in the early church as the revelation early on seemed to be the foundation of the church. We know how so many were inspired to be a martyr after seeing the Father through the Son. But this idea and experience has been lost to the modern day Churches even most Orthodox. But have no doubt that for the monks that this is their secret dream. They have read from the Saints all about their visions and how it changed their lives. We can not forget that Christianity is the highest revelation given to man. The Christian Revelation of the Father known through receiving the Christ. The experience is so far beyond the unitive experience all the so called non dual naturalist religions strive for.
Thank God Evolution has finally been proven to be mathematically impossible and just wrong. It will just take a hundred years for the culture to learn and accept this fact that we can verify today.
Let’s hope that the End Days and Armageddon doesn’t become the next question of the day. It would be interesting to track the number of web searches around these concepts.
Pls excuse my ramblings I’m quite tired and cannot think. I am just so glad to see ppl interested in esoteric questions and in the Orthodox Church.
"it was our plan, we talked ahead of time" 😂😂
48:00 I don't understand how the evolution narrative is inherently mythological. Can anyone recommend any Pageau videos that expand on this and explain it fully? I'm interested to learn more.
Myth means story. Narrative means "a narrated account; a story." Any world view is a story you tell yourself to make sense of things.
I came here to post a similar comment. Why does evolution as a theory of how life propagates in the patterns that it does, in response to the totality of internal and environmental pressures, necessarily have to involve a mythos or narrative? Pageau even defended evolution as being a useful framework for describing certain patterns of being in the natural world...
I don't think the concept of evolution itself seeks in mythological narrative to justify certain moral perspectives. Though if the point is that perhaps some who champion evolution do so, then fine. But that's not necessarily a criticism of evolution itself as a theory used to understand rise and fall of populations of (particularly non human) species.
Everything in its right place. Why can't evolution be a useful theory without having to serve a higher hierarchical function of echoing down underpinnings of morality and the narratives used to communicate it? Can't a predictive model be just that?
@saved by the word Evolution is a biologic model of how the genes possessed by a given population are (generally gradually) modified over generations to facilitate environmental adaptation. Whether post- or predictive depends on one's temporal frame of reference. And no, evolution would not need to be a fundamental axiom of anything except biological adaptation. Sure, perhaps the biological structure underpining the mind and its faculties, and therefore certain base elements of its function, may be influenced by this biological adaptation, but this in no way means it is the responsible prime source for all thought and morality itself. That is, we could still be as moral or amoral if our biology adapted to the environment under a different paradigm, or not at all. I don't understand the need to couple the two so absolutely.
And regardless of what Darwin may or may not have wrote or said on colonialism, he was often misconstrued by a variety of institutions and their representatives either for an excuse to commit amoral acts (eg, eugenics) or out of fear (eg, “we are descended from monkeys”). Using Darwin“s political, etc, views, to justify or discredit Evolution is an exercise in strawmanning, nothing more.
And finally, God's creation, involving a model for biological adaptation such as evolution, or not, is great either way, and just as capacious for human morality. Deciding that evolution is incompatible is more of the hubris of placing limits on God.
"In the beginning there was a point infinitely dense and it exploded..."
@@cynanomite you are calling evolution biological adaptation. I agree all of creation does this over time. However it’s not evolution. It’s biological adaptation. They are not the same thing. Evolution implies that we are more intelligent than we used to be. I’m not so sure that’s the case. Plus kids are not taught evolution is a theory. They are taught it’s an objective truth.
Man, I was really hoping gurdjieff and the fourth way were going to be discussed. The fourth way is sometimes referred to as an esoteric Christian system. Some really interesting Christian thought/thinkers and people coming out of it. Maurice Nicoll!
No one ever talks about Gurdgieff who called his system esoteric Christianity
One of the reasons i think christianity is true is because its a religion that can be simple or complicated depending on the person. Both intellectuals and average people can appreciate it which makes sense if god wanted us to have a relationship with him
Exactly. It goes as deep as you want to go. But my 88 year old grandmother with no formal education who attends mass twice a week can also get everything she needs for salvation too.
@Gate-of-Dawn you gotta read about St Savvas the New and St Paisios. Two "simple" men and they have very interesting stories and lives
The same way a harbor is not made out of boats, reality is not made out of truth. It is made out of things
that resonate with truth.
i used to be the psychedelics guy. i still think its a powerful tool of death and rebirth to break materialism, but the rebirth aspect is where i got into trouble. my aim was better than but still off target.
In my estimation the difference between psychedelics and the Church to becoming spiritually healthy us like the difference between a guy that works out with steroids vs a guy that simply creates a strict exercise and diet regimen focused on healthy activity and food. The steroids might take you to new places fast and for a time you might look and feel better, but it'll never last. It's not designed to. And in the mean time you made yourself less healthy than you would have been if you had chosen thr right path.
@@BarbaPamino I don’t have too many problems with the comparison , even steroids have a place in the world. Not saying everyone should take them . But it’s very simple to just say psychedelics bad . They’re a tool that most people use incorrectly . maybe if my family or local culture wasn't aimed completely away from god in the first place they wouldn't be useful
@@plimithsock anything can bring you back to God after the fact but shouldn't be encouraged on the outset. Something bad has to happened for something like steroids or psychs to be used. Where as prayer and a proper spiritual diet with an orthodox focus doesn't need your life to take a turn for the worse first and should be used as a way of life from the outset.
@@BarbaPamino i 100% agree . this would be better if i could speak to elaborate but you are right
Same here but with cannibis edibles. Began an ego death but that ended up making me depressed.
Question, what school of theology did you attend? I’m not trying to be confrontational here, I find your work extremely interesting, it’s just that you speak with a great deal of authority and on that basis I would assume that you know Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic (for Daniel) and Koine Greek and have read the bible in untranslated manuscript form, and have studied theology and higher criticism in a formal setting…right?
Your comment is interesting in part because you're of course aware that Jesus was challenged by the Jewish leaders in a very similar way, Where do you get your authority?
No one's experience of God can come from books or study except that what one finds there points you back to listening to or experiencing in other ways your connection to God that was always there.
It seems to me that the value of all the study you refer to is that it enables you to put your experience of God into words and images familiar to other people with access to the same works. Also, this kind of study can make you a better guide to others, as your can point them toward meanings that support coming to experience God and away from petty disputes or outright inversions.
Jonathan sees the forest and helps many others see it. Whether or not he knows every detail of every needle of every tree is secondary. Interesting, illuminating perhaps, but secondary.
In the field I teach, for instance, your question is never considered in hiring or performance evaluations. It is assumed you will encounter details for which you don't have an immediate or definitive answer. But competent practitioners know where to find the answers and how to put any given question into context such that learners don't "miss the forest for the trees" as they say.
So is it right to assume the definite article in the phrase "the son of God" given the original koine? The answer to that question and the significance of the answer are teleological. What is the goal of the discussion? Helping people tap into their own connection to God? In that case I would concede the point either way for that ultimate good. "That sabbath was made for man, not man fir the sabbath." For me, the same sentiment applies to all of scripture as well.
The Orthodox Church is its own living school of theology which members participate in according to their own individual inclination and capacities. This Orthodox “school” seems to be Jonathan’s point of reference when he speaks authoritatively on a point of theology. It encompasses one’s whole sacramental participation, not just the teachings of the Scriptures and their interpretation in the Church Fathers and application in the Ecumenical Councils, but most importantly the application of Christ’s commands seen throughout the ages in the lives of her Saints and present-day holy Elders in sacramental communion in the Orthodox Church. It is not accessible in the same way outside her bounds. True “theology” in an Orthodox sense is the real experience of the Living Lord Jesus Christ within His Church. It is neither abstract nor academic and it can never be accessed via the intellect alone. That is why we always invite seekers of Christ to “Come and see.” The Scriptures invite us to “Taste and see that the Lord is good.”
@@lornadoone8887 Thank you again! You have such a very eloquent way of describing our Holy Church!
Tomberg was a student of Rudolf Steiner.
"We shouldn't do that" @ 1 : 07 to the extent that we members of the "human" species want to use our language to specify "protocols" (a.k.a. "rules") according to which we can all agree (to "agree") to interact with each other "intelligently", as a sustainable (and "self-sustaining") "intelligently self-aware network [of inter-dependant 'producer/consumer' I/O devices]"-super-organism.
As far as I got, Steiners view on evolution is incarnational. It is man incarnating, learning by mistake, and shedding the animal forms, which are the incarnations of the building blocks of the human soul, which are still within us, so that when we see majesty in a lion we are recognizing something that is now part of us, and when we see the gluttony of a shark, we are also seeing something within us.
I am no expert, but from what I found on the subject, there were several evolution theories, actually. The Darwin's one was actually refuted through mathematical means (basically, if an individual got a beneficial quality through a random mutation, it will disappear in the progeny). It was recalculated (smth like "you need an area large enough and then it's possible for a mutation to remain"), and what we now have is called "the modern evolution theory". Because it's not the original one. There were also a couple of others. One, I think, was called "a synergistic evolution theory", which theorized that - yes, evolution is going on, but new qualities and species can appear suddenly and in large numbers in a certain area or in certain conditions because of reasons we don't yet understand. That theory couldn't provide (or guarantee) a materialistic take on the cosmology, so it never got much attention. By studying the history of the evolution theory I came to conclusion that an agenda was always the main priority about it.
Add 20:56 to the time stamps given…
But the rosecrustioanism didn't only become the later abberations. It also replenished a lot of tradition in the mean time. It's sort of like the parable of the sower. What lands in good soil, grows up there. The other will grow for a while and will then be eaten by opportunists. It's inevitable and a recurring pattern.
Can anyone recommend a good book for a beginner who wants to understand esotericism?
Meditations on the tarot has been life changing for me 🐝
@@E_915 I have been interested in this book for years. Is the writing accessible for someone who hasn't really studied the subject before?
@@spikylittlemind8058 I wouldn’t say I was very versed in esotericism prior to reading this book but I made effort to learn as I go and it has been incredible. Incredibly valuable wisdom in the book. Take your time with it. I mean that seriously. It opens your heart to so much more.
@@E_915 Thank you! I will!
Check out Nate’s channel with him and his nerd friends: @GrailCountry on CZcams.
Enjoyable conversation
Context: Tomberg was the student. Steiner was the teacher.
Think on that for awhile.
Burn all the books!
How would you respond to the criticism that the optimal long-term strategy for genes passing on is a stable ethical society which doesn't rape or use violence. Societies that use force are unstable in the short-term and usually collapse, so the rational option is ethical behaviour?
@Cheddar Shady If I had to predict what Jonathan would say to this, it would be that even if that's true, it also has no use. Retrospectively, or outside of time, we can intuit how natural ethics necessarily emerges. However, we're in the here and now, what do we do with the information that balancing domination & empowerment is necessary for stability & survival. Do we end up with arbitrary utilitarianism? How are we defining peace or socialising? etc. Then we're back to Genesis-style thinking.
@saved by the word survivorship bias - the societies that reached today are, generally, law-abiding peaceful societies. The rest imploded/evolved.
@saved by the word *long term strategy*. You can't extrapolate today's fraction of history. Natural adjustments occur for various reasons but always trends towards peace, 'ruly' countries are happily committing sociocide via abortion so cannot be regarded as biologically ethical.
@saved by the word I'm not making a biological or philosophical argument, it's mathematical. Survival of a stochastic process (your genes/lineage) with endless covariables (other people & environment), necessitates peace otherwise risk of ruin wins in the end. The variance is violence.
@saved by the word violence being selected for adaptive value is exactly what I said with variance being violence. It's an adjusting mechanism, stabilised by underlying long term peace, but I think we're in two different mathematical mindsets. I'm not saying lack of violence causes ethics, I'm saying violence necessarily eliminates unethical individuals (overthrow), so the result is a more ethical population, via survival.
Michael Martin is hilarious. I had no idea
You need to make a clip from this about bulldozing Churches to make more room for shopping malls and cell towers, shocking people into asking themselves the right questions.
I’m fascinated by this subject but am always disappointed that people don’t talk about hyper real spiritual experiences, like NDEs, OBEs etc. These are rife in the new age, and also in certain strands of Pentecostalism.
Some of the visions are horrifying, and often contradictory. I wonder what the hell’s going on, and I’d like to find a system of thought that integrates these things.
The closest I’ve come is Bernardo Kastrup and Patrick Harpur’s writings, but I don’t find much reassurance there. I still find the Kosmos to be inherently tricksterish and not trustworthy.
Any ideas where I should look next?
Do these things exalt Christ or self? There is your answer.
Read "The Soul After Death" by Fr. Seraphim Rose ☦
As much as I enjoy Jonathans videos on Orthodox Christianity I am usually disappointed when non-(Orthodox) Christian currents (such as esotericism or paganism) are discussed. He cannot help but speak of these things in an annoyingly dismissive and almost arrogant matter (I know he has said so himself, so I feel free to confirm it here). This video is a good example. I came here to learn something about Christian esotericism, perhaps with the merits and criticisms, in balance. While I did expect three 'good' Christians to express some reservations towards esotericism I hadn't counted on over an hour of negativity. Waste of time.
I agree. With the enormous praise this book has received, I expected intelligent review and fair critique.
Skepticism towards evolution is naturally selected.
Hasn’t the church always been exclusive? We have acceptable ways to exclude From say the Eucharist in the Catholic mass.
The telos of the eucharist, is coffee hour!
Propaganda is for the mid-wits. Brilliant insight to end on.
Whosoever meaneth me.
Esoteric meaneth not me.
This conversation derailed from the topic at about halfway.
Ah, yes. The Baltimore Catechism. I remember it well. "Who made me?" "God made me."
Sorry, I'm like 1 year and 12 minutes in and I'm wondering how Jonathan can ,in all earnest, dismiss the role of the freemason's in our culture and. Catholic Church. It's a huge accoutrement to the "cathedral".
Rudolf Steiner
Have people here read Jean Hani?
I've read the book on Liturgy. It was pretty good, but then there was a bit talking about supposed Kabbalistic symbolism in the Liturgy, and that kind of ruined the whole thing for me.
@@joer9156 I've read his books on the Symbolism of the Christian Temple, the Liturgy, Divine Craftsmanship, and the Black Virgin. It is only with this last one that I took issue. What he says about the sephirot in the book on liturgy, if that is what you mean, is not necessarily cabalistic, but it's an interesting point of coincidence between St. John's Apocalypse and Cabala that asks for explanation.
@@Facconti what did he say about the sephirot
@@leondbleondb He links the seven lower sefiroth to the seven candles on the altar (always in Byzantine rite, in the Roman usually six with the crucifix as the seventh, but a seventh candle is placed instead of the crucifix when a bishop celebrates). He in fact asserts that these candles are related to the seven candles/spirits that sorround Christ and the seven eyes of the Lamb in St John's vision, and the seven eyes on the rock in one of the prophets. The altar of course stands in the Mass as Christ-Rock-Lamb being the place of the theophany. Hani thinks the sefiroth are related to these, and he is not alone. Drach, the French Rabbi who converted in the 19th century, believed the same, as well as others.
It’s all about our world view. They want to control everyone’s worldview. It must conform to their standards or you will be ostracized and persecuted deplatformed you name it. Not just evolution but LBGT, immigration, economics, social justice etc… nevertheless I believe there firm adoption of evolutionary theory as absolute truth is foundational to the rest of their dogma’s.
Unfortunately I did not get much out of this discussion.
When Michael said Eastern rite Catholicism is "basically the same thing" as Orthodoxy, oof... Hopefully he digs a little deeper
The liturgy is pretty close.
The subject matter predates the Great Schism from a theological perspective, as the early Church Fathers were mystics. Catholicism still has it's mystics, believe it or not ;^)
I think there are two reasons people see the differences as bigger than they are (at least in Europe and Americas): so many Orthodox are converts from an anti-Catholic Protestantism, and so many Orthodox clergy work overtime to be sure their flock doesn't get absorbed into the larger Catholic Church. There are real differences, to be sure, but the biggest obstacles to union seem more to do with attitude than theology.
@@josephtravers777 As does Orthodoxy.
@@artdanks4846 No doubt. I have great admiration for all monastic
Nice discussion.. wish you guys had been better prepared to discuss Tomberg's ideas on evolution, it seemed like only Nate had actually read and understood it a little
Marty Leeds
Hermaneutics- sort of what Hermes did.
18:13 That's cute.
In what way?
@@artdanks4846 Hermetics actually has a tradition, discipline and experiential results. Under Franz Bardon's teachings it is flourishing and growing. I know Jonathan is a nice guy but he is blinded by 'mine is the best one'.
God = Life
Christ = at One with Life
I think magic is not attention that forms manifestation it is instead non causal manifestation.
Good insight. But non causal manifestation through a specific ritual. But undoubtedly it is man trying to play God? Inverting the hierarchy? That is my current thinking.
31:06 who? Soloviak? google skills are failing me.
Tomberg was an estonian, not russian
Esoteric is the Church. Mary Magdalene is the first ascetic in Christianity, why is that still kept secret, or covered?!
I find the idea of reincarnation explanatory within a christian framework. I am not arguing it is real, just how it would integrate. It wouldn't be something we're stuck in, but would be the point, to go back and live, life itself is the purpose, so it doesn't need a higher justification, it's just a consequence of the overflow of God into creation.
I find it hard to understand imaginatively how when we die, we're now finished being in the world. Well there's the resurrection, which of course IS reincarnation. So we'll just hang around in clouds until some point later?
Right now I get around this problem by thinking that my conscious self will interact with future generations and help them live incarnated, until one day we'll all live together incarnated.
But I think it would make more sense that we simply were resurrected as new bodies as an ongoing process. Perhaps not immediately after death, but at the right time, when our personality would be of help to move the story forward, or when it would be good for our soul.
It would also give a lot of understanding, it would help loving ones enemies, as one could now imagine being ones own enemy the next time.
Again, I am not saying it is true, just that it would help me to live as if it was true in this way.
Jonathan, this talk was good on many levels, but on the intellectual it was only a comment on a comment (like battling with our own sin) and it doesn't propose an idea forward. I'm trying to puzzle out the relationship between the pattern of Revelation, and your strange yet holy attempt to save the people outside the Church by talking about these intellectual/aesthetic issues. I know how hard it is not to fall into a more perennialist/populist narrative.
You're right in talking about what's at hand without falling into a rational-dogmatic approach and seeing when you can engage. It has to be done in terms of desire and love. At the same time, I believe there's an esoteric element in what you're trying to articulate in regards to what we should do as a society moving forward in the sense that it feels like "decoding the fathers" in an age where even the Church leadership doesn't prescribe clear solutions. It's possible that it's the kairos of the times whenever society is spiritually upturned and we should just moving in faith without having certainty we're moving in the right direction spiritually but trusting that God is guiding us.
I still think you should take your own advice regarding not concentrating on our sins, and maybe lay out the pattern in a more systematic way for clarity. So whenever we have doubts we can always go back to that frame, which would be like a fleshed out explanation of the image of everything. It would be just one book, with infinite possible additions concentrating on each element of the cosmology.
czcams.com/video/LcbyUfY_WMI/video.html
This plus
This one is my interpretation of his map
czcams.com/video/gD2o3qwHSqI/video.html
Mountains and persons.
the problem is that jonathan makes the same mistake that weinstein does in thinking that evolution's "telos" only extends as far into the future as weinstein conceives.
What evolutionist try to make it not theological? And why?
I wouldn't have returned to Christianity (after growing up among fundamentalist young earth creationists) had evolution not been affirmed and affirmable by large swathes of the tradition and intelligent and pious theologians (key for me being Pope John Paul II's acknowledgement, and Pope Francis' Laudato Si).
Saying its a purely horizontal Satanic illusion is no better than, is in fact worse and more delusional in some sense, than the young earth creationists putting their head in the sand, because you're going from saying scientists doing good work are in fact deluded about the nature of reality and are part of a secular conspiracy against Christians, to saying they are technically correct but that are part of a cosmic Satanic conspiracy, thus denying the intelligibility of reality and history in favor of a fideistic conspiratorial gnosticism. This goes toward the reciprocal narrowing of conspiratorial paranoia already rampant and which I know both Nate and Jonathan have been rightly concerned about.
Denying evolution in our era is gnosticism, and no revival of Christianity is going to occur without accounting for the reality of the evolutionary process (and this does not mean slandering and handwaving it away as an evil "horizontal illusion"). De Chardin has done good pioneering work in this area along with his current Catholic popularizer John Haught (even if as Michael said not everything he thought is worth incorporating, inevitable for any creative pioneer), as have the metaphysics of Whitehead and Bergson, which as John Milbank has argued will end up being the some of the most important philosophers of the 20th century. As Milbank writes "A renewed metaphysics should not seek to suppress the primacy of becoming and the event either in nature or culture. It should not recognize divine order in the world despite the flux but through and because of it, albeit in its series of complex and always relatively stable and consistent punctuations. The participation of finite being and intelligence in the godhead needs now to be re-thought in terms of the vital flow of historical becoming which will take account of the way in which, while ontological structures provide the setting for events, the latter can also exceed the import of pre-given structures."
This also affords the intelligibility of e.g. miracles as temporally concentrated emergence vectors analogous to the emergence of life from chemistry. But both should always be understood as an interpenetration of emanation and emergence, as John Vervaeke rightly emphasizes as the nature of all reality and which Eriugena, Nicholas of Cusa, and St. Maximus also recognized.
My inpression of Tomberg and Steiner on this issue was that they were reacting against the psuedo-scientism and new age spiritualism of Blavatsky et al. and got caught up in the traditionalist school's reactionary Orientalism that conceieves of all genuine novelty as an aberration, in contrast to the Judeo-Christian affirmation of the significance of history and claims of radical events that change (even cosmic) history. Guenon's purely Top-down, emanation only Hindu model is neither Christian nor able to account for the reality of things like evolution (not to say he and the traditionalist school don't have genuine insights), and led him to the psychoses alluded to above (literally repeating the fundamentalist young earther cant about dinosaur bones being put there to make you question your faith) when such paranoid gnosticism is taken in. John Milbank brings some of this to light here: czcams.com/video/3uLSRekiUV8/video.html
The concern about the problem of natural evil is understandable, but there are many ways to address even this that don't end up as conspiratorial gnosticism.
For example, a response similar to David Bentley Hart answering infernalists on why God didn't just create the paradisiacal state from the start, by saying that cosmic history is part the very process of creatures being drawn from nothingness with real if partial freedom throughout the ontological hierarchy, even if sin and evil are and were in some sense a tragic contingency; evolution can be accounted for by this same logic. Of course, this all makes much better sense when you don't have a voluntarist conception of God, which causes plenty of other issues.
De Chardin of course already deals with all this to some extent, as do C.S. Lewis and Sarah Coakley by arguing that a pre-biological or trans-temporal angelic fall (these principalities also given some kind of freedom along with all creation) which created the parasitism of death / decay / entropy that evolution fights against, a self-organizing movement toward greater complexification (trampling down death by death, sacrificing for future beings and being)
So there's already that route as well if you want to address all past natural evil as contingent, without needing to criticize the evolutionary process itself.
Whitehead also argued that evil goes all the way down the scale of being and is fundamentally parasitic and ultimately self-destructive, similarly to Pageau and going back to Augustine that evil is nothing in itself but is parasitic upon being, which is good. The process of evolution is in some sense seeking the goodness convertible with being in sustaining being and its complexification (emanation+emergence). And as Aquinas argues preserving one's life and the life of one's descendents is indeed a good. Humanity is simply called beyond this natural good as cultural and political and spiritual (self-reflective and rational) animals.
Even then evolution already has self-sacrifice for the whole built into it, including beyond direct lineage through inclusive fitness and group selection. The issue is conceiving of evolution in purely material and individualistic terms (e.g. the reductionism of the selfish gene model, which made a convenient metaphor in the ascendent Neoliberalism's greed is good heyday in the late 70s)
Sam Adams, who Nate has spoken with on his Transfigured channel, has several excellent discussions around Christianity being the paradoxical summit of the evolutionary process. See Sam's talk with David Sloan Wilson (czcams.com/video/9CAyvVdNSzI/video.html), an evolutionary biologist arguing eloquently for multi-level selection (which includes what was once attacked as impossible by many biologists under the more reductive Darwinian model as group selection) which includes cultural evolution and religions as intrinsic to this process. Without all this you get an ontological duality of nature and culture that led us to our moment of ecological collapse via pillaging nature as mere mechanical resource.
I highly recommend the work of theologian Conor Cunningham, a colleague of John Milbank, who wrote an excellent book arguing for the Christian intelligibility of theistic evolution against the polarisms of reductive Darwinism and religious fundamentalism and that has been positively reviewed by Stanley Haeurwas, Charles Taylor, William Desmond and David Bentley Hart, among many others: www.eerdmans.com/Mobile/Products/8226/darwins-pious-idea.aspx
- Presentation on his book Darwin's Pious Idea: czcams.com/video/w3k8kMabvjw/video.html
- Short Video on why theology should study evolution: czcams.com/video/w3k8kMabvjw/video.html
- It was also adapted into a BBC documentary series: czcams.com/video/E6Sk_4qz_m0/video.html
Perry Marshall has also been doing good interesting work from a more Protestant perspective arguing for Evolution 2.0:
czcams.com/video/oG6dTuQ5z1U/video.html
czcams.com/video/edz5YCmPYps/video.html
I also highly recommend checking out Wynand de Beer's book From Logos to Bios: "Evolutionary theory in light of Plato, Aristotle and Neoplatonism". He's an Orthodox scholar from South Africa who did his dissertation o Eriugena, whom he draws on in his work, which has been praised by Wolfgang Smith as well, and has parallels to Sam's ideas about Aristotelianizing Darwinism.
YT interview: czcams.com/video/dzPw6OS1njQ/video.html
Evolution also does indeed have value as a narrative that affords intelligibility and aspiration, as De Chardin for example exemplified, and I think this potential is untapped, largely to be fair because of its reductive interpretation as purely random and physical, or else something like primitive Social Darwinism and then the association with eugenics. David Sloan Wilson is excellent here in showing the fractal truth of evolution at various scales in multi-level selection, very analogous to Jonathan's language. It would be great to see them have a talk. Also, Michael's comment on Darwin as developing a system of British Imperialism is off the mark at the personal level at least. Darwin himself was very careful with his language about his findings, would have been horrified at some of the distortions of his theories and directions that "Social Darwinism" engendered, and seems to have been a loving and pious man.
I think an understanding of evolution also affords and inspires more care, compassion and empathy for the rest of creation. And intelligent ecological thinking allied with religious wisdom is desperately needed in our age.
Lots of great insight from the Christian lens, but there’s an odd need to label everything from none orthodoxy esoteric sources as “weird”, or insinuating that there will invariable be negative outcomes for those who practice those ways. This just isn’t true. Certainly I’ve met aa many Christians who have slipped into spiritual bypassing, delusion.
( Do Christians And Jews and "OTHER" non-Muslims go to Heaven? )
Quran 2:62
'' Those who believe (in the Quran) and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures) and the Christians and the Sabians->ANYAllah< Is The Protector Of Monasteries, Churches, Synagogues And The Mosques )
Quran 22:40
[They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, " Our Lord is God " And were it not that God checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of God is much mentioned. And God will surely support those who support Him. Indeed, God is Powerful and Exalted in Might.
Note: Why did Allah protected Churches and Synagogues if they worship false Allah ?
( Why Are There So Many Different Religions In The World ? )
Quran 5 48
''...... If God wanted He could have made all of you a single nation.( ie single religion ) But He willed otherwise in order to test you in what He has given you (ie Scriptures) therefore try to excel one another in good deeds. Ultimately you all shall return to God then He will show you the truth of those matters in which you '' >DISPUTE verb < not noun like other religions
Islam mean "submission" to God
( The above verse saying is that God will not accept a religion from the >MUSLIM< and the Non-Muslims but total "submission" to God )
Question: How Can Muslim And the Non-Muslim "submit" to the God?
Answer: Be kind to other human beings and Do not lie, Do not steal, Do not cheat, Do not hurt others, Do not be prideful and Do the charity work.
Note: If you obeyed all the ABOVE Allah-God's moral laws "YOU" submitted to God.( ie Islam mean "submission" to God )
The only people who will enter Paradise those who '' Submitted to God '' ( ie by Good Deeds )
God does NOT accept your religion of birth but only ''Your Total'' Submission to Him.
( God Allows Interfaith Marriages And Eat Food From the Christian And Jew And Vice Versa )
Quran 5:5
''This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And lawful in marriage are chaste women from among the believers (ie Muslim ) and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture (ie Christian and Jew) before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking [secret] lovers. And whoever denies the faith - his work has become worthless and he in the Hereafter will be among the losers.''
Note: > Only < Islam allows interfaith marriages (>14 hundredsSame God< but They are >ALL Corrupt< more or less, some more than others from their original foundational teaching. The older religion are MORE corrupted than newer religion.
Question to Muslim and Christian:
Does God / Allah only answer your pray ?
And God / Allah does not answer non Muslim / non Christian pray?
Did Allah '' Canceled '' all other religions Judaism and Christianity?
Quran 5:48
'' And We have revealed to you [O Muhammad] the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture ( ie New and old Testament ) and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. >>>TO EACH OF YOU WE PRESCRIBED A LAW AND A METHODone nation>differ qualified < for to enter Paradise )
On the day of judgement God will ''NOT'' judge humanity bases on Sunni Muslim sect VS Shia Muslim sect ''NOR'' by Muslim VS non-Muslim >but< Doer of Goods VS Doer of Evils.
'' YOUR " birth in the Muslim's family is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise.
'' YOUR " religion / sect / foot long beard is NOT a > qualification < for to enter the Paradise.
The > qualification < to enter Paradise is > Faith in God and Good Work
What makes your belief actually the truth and not a glorified opinion others share?
Then why do you force them to pay the jizya and try to force them into the gutter when walking past them?
Forgive me but it seems like a lot of autistic people are drawn to acadamia, esotericism and spirituality in general. But these folks interact with the subject matter very mechanically and the heart does not seem to be engaged at all. This whole conversation could have been about the Marvel Universe and would have been equally enlightening.
It's even the same within the church.
A lot of the really academic types missing the point in that they turn Christianity into an intellectual pursuit. They then have a tendency to look down on the 'simple' Christians who try to follow the commandments, go to church and raise families.
They often become far too legalistic and are more concerned with knowledge than salvation.
Lol
1:00:10 propaganda is for the SOPHOMORES