'Jordan Peterson the heretic', with Jonathan Pageau
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2018
- What is the relationship between Jordan Peterson's thought and traditional Christianity? In what ways is he a heretic? And how does it relate to direct mystical experience?
Jonathan Pageau carves religious icons, and is an expert on religious symbolism, which he discusses on his CZcams channel, 'The Symbolic World': / @jonathanpageau
This is the second part of Rebel Wisdom's discussion with Jonathan Pageau, the first addressed Jordan Peterson's recent debates with Sam Harris: • Jordan Peterson/Sam Ha...
To help us make more of these films, please consider sponsoring us on Patreon: / rebelwisdom
Monster between categories, like the boss at end of the level
More like the loading screen that sometimes crashes the game.
Monster Boss between stages 4 and 5 - Wigglypuff
Monster Boss between stages 25 and Order (heaven) - Crazy Red
3. 2. 1. Fight!
This video might have just brought me back to Christianity. I’ve been listening to Peterson for a few years now and have been agnostic/atheist for about 8years. This has just filled many gaps for me. I feel like I want to go to church lol
welcome \
Peterson helped bring me back to Christianity. Some of his guests and sources, including the Pageau’s, have really helped me strengthen my faith.
More people who are listening to Dr. Peterson need to know that he listens to Jonathan Pageau.
jlloydb1of9
He listens also to Tammy, his parents, his children and friends. He even claim listening to the public when he lectures !
Eric Reygaerts Jonathan's CZcams channel offers much information for free and his brother, Mathieu, is an author (The Language of Creation); the Pageau brothers deserve some attention, imho.
@@jlloydb1of9 This is a great information, got this book today for my kindle, love this book immediately.
Jonathan is literally and symbolically Jordan’s right hand man. Tammy is his Wendy-Bird.
In response to Pageau's comment about Jung and Gnosticism @22:50. Jung actually distances himself from this category in his autobiography. Here:
"If, therefore, we speak of "God" as an "archetype," we are saying nothing about His real nature but are letting it be known that "God" already has a place in that part of our psyche which is pre-existent to consciousness and that He therefore cannot be considered an invention of consciousness. We neither make Him more remote nor eliminate Him, but bring Him closer to the possibility of being experienced. This latter circumstance is by no means unimportant, for a thing which cannot be experienced may easily be suspected of non-existence. This suspicion is so inviting that so-called believers in God see nothing but atheism in my attempt to reconstruct the primitive unconscious psyche. Or if not atheism, then Gnosticism. Anything, heaven forbid, but a psychic reality like the
unconscious."
Also, is Jonathan not pulling the equivalent move to say that Eastern Orthodoxy is correct over Protestantism? Why is he justified to return to an earlier or different form of Christianity but others are not?
Gnosticism had a long history, right back to the early years before the establishment of the Church. If you are willing to back before Luther, and Catholicism, why not go right back to the beginning?
Probably because gnosticism was a heresy that sprung up after Christ's ministry, and because it did not comply with Jesus's actual teachings. Therefore it was abolished by the early patriarchs, thereby deeming it invalid and unnecessary as any serious practice on the spirit of Christ.
'Every morning, waking up, is a resurrection' is an idea I feel makes sense.
Hey Rebel Wisdom, I'm loving the stuff you're putting out at the moment! Keep it up please!
This interview, especially at the beginning has been among the most incisive interviews you've done in this series. Keep up the good work. Thank you for what you do. Cheers!
The discussion at 22:39 - Jung doesn't "stop there". He recognised these patterns, and applied them to the psyche - he did not *reduce them* to the psyche.
Great point! Society today still remains unready to fully appreciate his depth of understanding, including Jordan.
Yeaown Yes. His biographical/autobiographical account, "Memories, Dreams, and Reflections" goes into great detail on this. Jung was very careful about not reducing the metaphysical to the psychological. He was extremely religious and spiritual, but recognized (more than Jonathan does here) that even if he could sense and believe the embodied truth of God that this was not proveable with science beyond the idea of the archetypes (and collective unconscious, "God-image," etc).
Agreed. Jonathan is a Jungian manqué. Jung's fascination with gnosticism was derived from its investment in coming to know the inner and outer world through knowledge and insight, which correlated with the key Jungian concept of individuation; likewise his brilliant exegesis of the alchemical writings. And as you say, if the collective unconscious means anything it's that the psyche itself doesn't "stop there".
@@indestructiblelion3548 Hello. There is an essay available online titled "An Introduction to the Religious Thought of C.G. Jung" by Phillip Sherrard. It may be of interest to you. Good day.
Thanks for your time, guys! Great content.
I've avoided listening to Jonathan because, for some reason, I thought he'd be 'too Christian' for my taste. I'm now finding it's more the case (though not quite the case) that he's actually closer to Christian 'like' me. If that makes sense. I'll be listening to more in the future. Thanks, David and Jonathan ❤.
"Too christian for my taste"... man
That's funny considering it's the exact opposite for me. I'd wish he'd talk about apologetic more and be more dogmatic, but I guess if he's bringing people into the fray it's fine.
I really love Jonathan Pageaus talks.
That analogy to music, as just particles moving, is great.
Jonathan is absolutely right on track. Till now, religion was something that was taught from the top. Jordan is building religious faith from the bottom. There is for me no better way to start from an atheist or even agnostic place. We have to try to understand the religious message with our rational mind and science, integrate it, and live it with our hearts. Rationality and science are new tools at our disposal to crack the code. The only way to counter atheism and secular humanism is to use their own methods. Good work !
Eric Reygaerts better yet simply include them and integrate the various methods in the big picture.
Momma Llama
You are absolutely right ! I was just putting the focus on the enlightenment values that most atheists are claiming.
Eric You've leaped to conclude "God". Now you argue from your conclusion.
Crow
Sorry, English is my third language. I did not understand what you wrote.
Eric You've leaped to the conclusion that "God" is real. Now you argue from that position.
Did he say that Peterson has visions when he takes mushrooms?
Stephen Garrett yes he did.
Is that a problem?
AG GGG I think it's great, but I don't know how much Peterson would want it out there that he takes mushrooms. I'm sure the media can spin it as a problem, and he already has enough trouble with them.
@@deladonics He's said it in interviews. But he hasn't taken them a lot.
No ! he was referring to the word psychedelic and the commenters comment
Wittgenstein - "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
Pageau - "That's not the right move"
Pageau - 1
Wittgenstein - 0
The dangers of attempting to articulate the ineffable is always misunderstanding. But the misunderstanding has already happened, so the ones who truly perceive the ineffable need to speak up - truthfully.
Jordan says something and Jonathan goes whoa than Jonathan says something and Jordan goes whoa then they put it on CZcams and I’m like whoa.
whoa man. whoa
Yawwn.
I'm just starting to listen to Jonathan a little more. But after listening to Jordan Peterson a lot, one thing that I really appreciate about Jordan Peterson that really stands out when I listen to other people is just how precise Peterson's speech is.
He has said that he thinks precise speech is extremely important, and it really shows especially when I listen to other people. Even when Peterson is not giving a lecture or something that's pre-planned, his speech is still extremely precise. Whereas I found myself frustrating listening to the beginning of this because it's like he has a good thought, and he starts to explain it , and then he just sort of gives up and Rambles a little bit.
I hope either I get used to his style or that he becomes a better speaker or has become a better speaker
Just FYI, I'm nearly certain that Jordan Peterson has, in fact, identified as Christian.
When someone asked him straight up if he was a Christian, he straight up responded yes. He is reluctant to answer specific questions on traditional, widely agreed upon dogma.
I think he says he's a cultural Christian but his own particular views are complicated.
@@RSanchez111 That answer may have been to Jesse Lee Peterson. If you listen to Jesse Lee Peterson's stuff then you will understand why he said that he is Christian
@@RSanchez111 link?
@Mr K Evidence or false opinion
What sets videos like this aside as valuable, even remarkable, is the level of discourse amongst the comments. Yes, thank you Peterson and the Pageau brothers. But thank you, all seekers of the Truth.
It is interesting that in my profession that we have a network firewall that "stands guard" at the boundary of our internal network (order) and the external network,the internet (chaos)
Jonathan should read Jung's Red Book.
Fascinating discussion. I've been tempted by Peterson to return to church for a while, I feel a hair closer to attending now.
You ever make it to Church? I'm on that edge right now.
Jung went deep into alchemia ' parapsychology ' yoga ' mantra ' esoteric ' & Gnosticism ' even pageau more rational then Jung ' Jung used astrological occultism as symbolism and a fervent of cosmology
This is gonna be good !
I live in Sweden and I am a Protestant. But I didn't become a Christian until my 20ths. Sweden is Protestant. And the Swedish Church very weak. I became Christian in private. I tried to go to the Protestant Church, but it was mostly old ladies sewing, speaking about that, the Priest didn't really answer my question. Were I lived it was only the Protestant Church a baptist church and a pentacostal church. I started to go to the Pentacostal Church. But I dud not get my intellectual questions answered. They were almost dismissed. I found C S Lewis that I found very satisfying. But no Church that gave me this kind of deep. I was drown to the Catholic Church moved to Stokholm and started University. I found a Catholic Chirch that had a course that I went to. But I think it was for people with a basic knowledge. And sorry to say but the Teatcher was so boring, and some things didn't make sense. I liked the liturgi but was skeptical to much of the teaching. I havn't actually seen any Orthodox Church in Sweden. I moved around and ended up in a middke sized city. I came a but far from God even if I always had my faith. Than I started to watch Jordan Peterson. And I knew he wasn't really Christian, but saw it from a psychological perspective. But I was amazed, there were some things I realized he did not get because he did not have the spiritual aspected; but I realised what a deept the Bible have. I had never seen the psychological level before. Psychologi and Religion was almost opposites to me. And he lead me to Jonathan Pagaeu. I started to watch his videos, and some others but most his, and got interested in the Orthodox faith. But I search for it here in the city of Örebro. But there were none. As I expected. Then one day I passed by a chapel nearby were I sometimes had been to a sermon of the Protestant Church, it had been closed due to covid. Suddenly this man jumps out and asked me if he could help me.He told me they were a small group planning to start an Orthodox community in this chapel near my house. He also told me he and his wife had been to an introduction course to the Orthodox faith that was going to take place again in the autumn near Örebro. Yesterday I got a message that tomorrow they will have the first Sermon. I thought it is a story a little it worth telling relating to the beginning of your conversation.
I don't think it's all about order vs. chaos. I think it's about life vs. death, or being vs. not being. God is the great I AM.
Life - like a garden or a city - can be described as 'ordered chaos'
and death - like an untended garden or city - a 'return to chaos'.
The order of the City of God and Eden are one [Rev22v2 & 34:50].
@differous1 I ageee. There is something beyond order and chaos as one can never pinpoint either one. And yet everything has some chaos or order in it
It is likely that Chaos was associated with death and order with life.
thank you for revealing how you came to value the symbolism of the bible, and the sensibility of the Orthodox theology. It makes sense to me. I
Looks like a cross between Jesus and Luke Skywalker
Andrew Carroll highly underrated comment
The argument of God to an material atheist, is like explaining a Sunset or rainbow to a blind man. You will not be able to bridge the barrier. Without getting. Them to the point of understanding meaning.
I've been an atheist all my life til JBP and jonathan came along and got to some of the real issues
Can anyone recommend books that can fast track knowledge on symbolism, allegory, etc.? I aspire to view things similar to Pageau & Peterson
Huge fan of your stuff! Always helps me put the puzzle together more coherently. A question I would love you to ask Jordan Peterson or Jonathan is involving his idea of Truth and the death of Jesus. (Using Jordan’s axiomatic structure) He says that reality is that what selects, and that what it selects is “true” (sufficiently true). He makes the claim that “truth serves life”. It’s known in the Bible that Jesus is “the Truth” and if you replace his name with “truth” for the most part it’s still coherent. If jesus is that which is most “true” and truth serves life... why did Jesus die? The response I would expect is that his death and his story has “served life” by becoming the underlying structural belief systems that founded the modern wester world. (Judeo Christian ethic) In a sense his death was true because it allowed us to continue to live. (Saved us from our sins) (Using really lose symbolic terminology, don’t barrage me please)Just an interesting question I think.
In Petersonian terms I think you might say that the death of Jesus is symbolic of the death of Truth which must take place to make way for higher versions of Truth. This is informed by the idea that all earthly understanding is partly informed by truth, partly informed by illusion.
Love the art work, kept finding myself looking at that instead of him while he was talking
Pageau really does speak like a Jungian with different terminology. (Chicken egg problem I suppose)
I think I see what jonathon means talking about Peterson and jung, it’s a sort of glorifying the accumulation of the objects rather than the whole. It’s like how 6 represents the completion of work but 7 represents totality. I think Jonathan is referring to that. People get caught up in what truly is an amazing psychoanalysis of these traditions and stories, don’t misunderstand, but forget about the stories and traditions themselves. It’s a sort of settling for a lesser thing that is understood rather than continuing the journey to the inexplicable.
The massive audiences for lectures, debates, etc, of a spiritual/intellectual kind, are leading toward a new 'belief system'. Add the massive audiences for pop music and sports, and we have most of the world population in the necessary state of awe.
jesus lives through us, my take on the resurrection ..any thoughts ?
The day of judgement is every day. You can seperate "stupid" Christians by The question if they believe that Jesus comes again. He wont. Its about beeing and living a Logos life. Thats why I love JBP and JP way of christianity The church sucks really at delivering this message.
Why do you knot spend some time on gobleketepe and the last time there was a splash Paul rankle Carson goematetric?
Jonathan should read The Red Book.
I can't stand it. Jonathan is a genius in my eyes. Every single video he's in, he says something that I've noticed to be true, but could never really put my finger on to define. His explanation of capitalism around 44:00 is spot on.
I'm reading his brother's book (slowly) and it's hard to process. It's like a new way of thinking, learning how to actually connect things together. It's fascinating and I feel dumb. It's great.
great dialogue
If you read Jung's Red Book, it's a combination of psychological and religious experience. I don't think Jung is a reductionist, but trying to bridge the gap between science and religion in his time. It's complicated
Lifelong Christian and avid reader of Jung:
Most of Jung's writings only strengthen the reality of Christianity and its structure.
p.s. He wasn't a Gnostic (but is often called one) and would consider Gnosticism an imbalance.
"Most of Jung's writings only strengthen the reality of Christianity and its structure."
Archetypes exist as widely held ideas, not objective realities.
Not necessarily. Santa exists in reality.
You've made my point; failure to distinguish between reality and mental fabrication. There is little to say to a person who defends delusionary thinking.
This is absurd, unless you think that consciousness holds no primacy and are a materialist/naive empiricist, which is also absurd. Do you understand quantum theory or the fact that matter does not exist until it is observed?
ArtificialxSky already commented about Jung's thoughts on God.
I've never observed you, ergo you don't exist. QED.
Pageau has some interesting thoughts, that actually add a lot more substance to religious metaphors and parables that really doesn't seem all that religious in nature. When he talks about identity it is closer to the kind of thought I would say inspired me in my understanding of person, who is the late Carl Rogers is my biggest influence in psychology. Who a certain someone, as a religious analogy, uses his name in vain, is how I feel. I wish more Christians were like this Pageau. Instead we have Christian fundamentalism and it just brings Christianity down. I personally have not even believed in the historical Jesus but would find the Celestial Christ interesting. Seeing Jesus in terms other than an actual person makes more of an impact on me, seeing the story like a Brothers Grimm like story full of morals and meaning. How can that happen when we have Christian apologists who insist in debating that God as a being exist, Jesus existed in the flesh, virgin birth happened, the crucifixion happened, the resurrection happened. None of that needed to happen and wouldn't have devalued Christianity once upon a time. It likely would some what now because of all the probable institutionalized fraud related to Christianity for at least 1000 years that I know of but maybe more. And then members of Christian faith refusing to distance them selves from corrupt institutions and Christian fundamentalism. Sorry, got in a rant there.
Taking something from Operating System Design, even if you view feel the need to view something from a hierarchical perspective since for most of us in the west it is easiest to understand a system when laid out into a hierarchy and easiest to convey meaning to peers with, I think in some ways we must really consider a layered approach, where a layer for a specific purpose could float above another layer that is normally on top. You can think of it like if you had a bunch of layers of oil with a different viscosity so when settled they will tend to sit with the least dense rising to the top how ever by applying pressure, dipping a stir stick in, or shacking the solution the layers can temporarily be in dynamic position, until they settle. That can purposefully be applied like intentionally pushing part of a layer out of position. This can is an approach taken in Operating System design where it is very difficult to make a strictly hierarchical structure because some features need to kind of temporarily be above, hard to explain, much easier to demonstrate. I kind of picture it like a snakes and ladders board (board game) where you sometimes need to and can take a ladder up to another layer.
What does Operating Systems Design have to do with all this sociology, psychology, society, economics and politics? You might ask. A whole lot, there is actually a whole lot more perspective in this area where it is more engineers and philosophers of a different kind. I don't hear a lot of talk about integration in this area with other disciplines. I get the communication style differences, but it would be a huge loss to not look into this stuff. Much of it overlaps as it is much mental abstractions in all these areas. All this different perspective does help us all with our own greater understanding of our world and ourselves.
@31:15 That's a quote from 1 Corinthians 15;12-19
Dang, I love that Jonathan! ❤️
Great analogy about the ipod. I find it helpful to compare materialist/ideaist perspectives extrapolated across time to help people understand the difference.
Ex: which is more real, this pencil (say you're holding a pencil..)? or the idea of a pencil? Likely they choose the actual pencil because you can see it, touch it, etc. Then ask what about tomorrow, which one will be more real tomorrow? Pencil again. What about in a year, in ten years, a thousand years? Maybe there's not a single pencil in existence at that point, but the characteristics/essence/pattern of pencil remain completely unchanged. Helps to illustrate that the common sense criteria for what makes something "real" are sort of crude and don't hold up well to scrutiny. Then you can scare them away by taking the extreme and saying "REALITY ISNT REAL THERE NEVER WAS A PENCIL EVERYTHING IS PATTERNS"
the biggest contribution jordan is making right now is to deliver values to people who are predisposed by their biology to appreciate the material more than the sublimated, or the classically real more than the abstract and modern.
i definitely think that some people have no problem putting on labels like christian, but for me and a lot of other people who are interested in information harvesting, putting that label on onesself almost feels like a hard limit to where you can allow your mind to go. i haven't seen sufficient reasons to put that hard limit on myself.
i was different than a lot of atheists because i grew out of my atheistic rebellious pseudo-rationalistic phase after reading psychology books when i was a young kid. i knew from reading people like nietzsche, oliver sachs, malcom gladwell, and machiavelli at a very young age that people were not operating under a scientific paradigm when they lived. i couldn't reconcile that psychic irrationality within mankind with the dogmatic christian and postivist liberal dogma that the adults in my life embodied. i also didn't like christianity when i was a teenager because i felt like it disempowered the individual, so i became a pagan/magician. it took me until i was in my mid 20s to realize that the stories in the bible actually overlapped the power that paganism (and by extension, science, seeing as science is a direct result of early enlightenment alchemy) afforded me, because it taught me where to aim the gun. more importantly, it taught me the value of life. i'm convinced that rationality is a tool, rather than a gateway to a statement of objective facts, and that morality cannot be argued for or against, it must be seen or felt.
the problem is, i think a lot of christians are still in this disempowered state where most of the teachings of jesus are made irrelevant via a false pedestalization of jesus that the man himself preached against. i think jesus would see many churches today as pale imitations of his work, and i don't think i'm alone in that vision. most agnostics i've met who aren't posessed by irrational and ironic hatred for faith are in line with nietzsche when he says "there was only one christian, and he died on the cross." they're put off by people who make magical claims and don't have magical results. they see the results of science, much like the wizards in the pharoah's court, and conclude that because christians are not producing snake-staffs of their own, that they must be false prophets and troublemakers.
i can't say i blame them, but jordan is slowly bringing the magic and morals back, because he binds the material with the spiritual. i think the church doesn't produce results anymore, just produces a bunch of hot air by and large. and worse, there are many misbehaviors and scandals within the church that give the hot air a musty, dank aura like a dungeon.
This comment is severely underrated and needed. Thank you for your time!
It’s futile to imagine ‘spiritual’ community developing, which looks less Christian than Christianity did because all attempts to ignore Christ are attempts to avoid reality. ‘Who do you say I am?’ Is the Big Question and no clever atheist has found a way around it.
'where is the woman in all this?' is the problem I have with all this work, though I do have greatest respect and interest in it, having watched many videos now on this subject by the ' dark web' folk ( mostly men ).
The world needs more philosophers like Dr. Peterson. He's doing a good
service by introducing young people to philosophy. You, too, can be a
philosopher. The love of wisdom is the most powerful freedom one can
have. But as a beginner where do you start? Well, I recommend starting
with the classics such as Plato's Republic and working your way up.
Having a good foundation with the classics will help you develop your
philosophical understanding more easily. It's kind of like a cheat sheet
because once you've read Plato your mind is quickly opened. Try it.
And by the way, for the religious people here, philosophy is not incompatible with religion. Philosophy is complementary to religion and science. They work best when they work together. In fact, only a fool would give up his religion for philosophy. The key point is that if you study philosophy, you will take the first step in a lifelong journey to understand your existence. It's like that movie "the Matrix". Which pill will you take - the truth pill or the illusion pill?
I really enjoy listening to this kind of discussions, and really appreciate them, but if you live in the common world, you will find that most people are not capable nor interested in having even a remotely similar conversation. Drinks,fashion,sports,gadgets,and many others are on people's minds.
I was lucky enough to listen to Faithless in my teenage years,and stumbled upon an interview about the band. The reporter was talking about the weird combination of a Buddhist rapper and electronic music. So, really enjoying their music, i thought, i really don't know what Buddhism is all about. So i looked into it, and having a bit of knowledge on science, on quantum physics, Carl's Sagan cosmos, everything suddenly made sense.
And i don't understand why scientists refuse to make the connection between God and scientific reality. What are they waiting for? Yogis said thousands of years ago that we are energy, and science proved it. Christianity says God is in everything. What more does it take to see that there is truth in all religions and accept it?
People generally accept either science without religion or religion without science. I think we have to first come to an agreement between these two to be able to help the common man to even start thinking about the importance of God in their lives.
That being said, thank you for your work. Hope one day i will be privileged enough to meet one of these people and have a conversation, not only seeing them on CZcams and wondering where are they spending their time, 'cause i can't seem to find any around.
I’d recommend you read Carl Jung’s Red Book or Aion. I’d love to hear you talk about your reaction to the Red Book. I’ve been on a quest to find the most profound books and understand as much of them as I can. So far the Red Book is the most profound I’ve found. Jung doesn’t quite take the approach against Christianity that you described in this video.
The dark night of the soul is profound; William Blake is also quite something...
Well done gents, excellent
Love you guys
JP presents some very interesting insights on The Fall. However, I do have a problem with how he characterises it as a positive like “becoming conscious”. I suppose that may be what the “knowledge of good and evil” means. But, that is not at all presented as something positive in the Bible.
It relates to what leibniz said, that we live, despite everything, on the best of all possible worlds.
Did someone mention "quantum".......
Regarding the argument, that Christianity has arisen because it manifests something about how reality is structured: why does Christianity manifest something of how reality is structured over and above any other view-point which has arisen?
Why is it that there are manifestly different interpretations of reality operating in different cultures?
You can argue that they share some underlying truth, but then you are not arguing for Christianity and its particulars but rather for religiousness or spirituality itself.
Dennis Prager really got me to understand the sacred dichotomies of the Old Testament.
A lot of what you said Jonathan, keeps bringing me to this question, “Why orthodox and not catholic?”
Modern Catholics do seem to be surface level believers like you’ve mentioned but it’s tradition is as rich as orthodox.
Maybe the catholic culture rn is less appealing and not focusing on the mystic vision as much as our orthodox friends, but that is STILL in its tradition. Why be a part of the fragmentation? Why not lead Catholics with your insight and help bring back more orthodox mystic culture to Catholicism?
As a catholic I find myself learning so much from orthodox teaching but then realizing it’s also catholic teaching lol. It just seems the culture of orthodoxy and those a part of it are hitting the more enriching parts of tradition and sacred mysteries than the current Catholics are. But once again that doesn’t mean that those teachings aren’t catholic. I think it speaks to how many Catholics are surface level like warm participants. It also speaks to this general move of Catholic Churches trying to dumb things down to reach more people which is obviously an error. But does that mean that Catholicism is wrong in itself? You speak about how the individual and society are subject to the same short comings. You talked about that in reference of the church.
At this point maybe I’m rambling lol
I would pay to hear you deep dive into this conversation.
Fun fact is that the "orthodoxy" is a creation of Mehmed the Conqueror of Constantinople, a muslim, the last emperor Michael XI Palaiologos mended the scism before he died and ended the constantinopolotian patriarchy, transfered it to pope's jurisdiction, as he knew the only way to fight the enemies of Christ was trough unity.
I feel that a large problem is that modern parents dont realize the absolute necessity of teaching their children the HARSH consequences of the lessons they themselves have learned. They dont remember that a young person has no perception of extended time periods and long term action-reaction situations.
They try and shelter them and somehow feel they will just absorb lifes wisdom without teaching them simple straight forward rules about negotiating suffering.....
As an Eastern Catholic (Maronite), i can say we also have the Mystical as the core of our theology.
unfortunately my friend and brother, your confession is getting latinized by the minute. The Papacy has no care for your traditions as they have none for the "Greek Catholics," all they care about is subjugation to the see of Rome. I beg you to return to the faith of your fathers in the Orthodox Church, so that you may join the Body of Christ and rid yourself of the false Latin dogmas
I’ve been getting close to being able to explain God as a concept.
It relates to a base state of neurosis in the conscious being.
The mind is a rationalisation machine, and consciousness breaks the ability of it to rationalise itself.
It breaks itself in reflexive consciousness because it uses the contents of itself to interpret external stimuli, which are added to the contents, creating a new state of normal which instantly invalidates the previous conclusion, because that conclusion relied upon the pre-conclusion state of the mind for validity.
There are temporary novelties and feedback mechanisms that can overwhelm the irrationality/neurosis/anxiety.
Amongst these are the religious rituals, almost any addiction, particular ideas are dominant.
These ideas as constructive additions to the mind are compelling in a way where the psychic event they create is normalised quickly, and relied upon as ‘normal’ because the alternative, truely normal state is neurosis and anxiety.
Paul Vanderklay is a calvinist... Jonathan??
Jonathan was calling out all his friends on this video. Peterson is a heretic, I'm a Calvinist, lions and tigers and bears! :)
I am a Calvinist to don’t tell anyone...
Need some holy orders for a valid sacrament. Greek Orthodox or Catholicism actually have apostolic succession, the latter being to the rock peter.
Yes, it may be that Jung did not, as in the quote below, think that mapping the archetypes of the subconscious did not in any way deny the objective reality of what those archetypes represent. I get the idea from Peterson that the archetypes represented in myths are realities rooted in human evolution and the experience of environment and the needs of our species. He stops short of accepting scripture, or myth, or subconscious archetypes as representing an objective (ie not dependent upon our perception) theological and cosmological structure of reality. The Bible is generally much more frank, however multifaceted and laced with mysteries and paradoxes. It is a frank book.
It's interesting that some people feel their to sophisticated to except traditional christianity. Lots of effort to complicate it but comes down to simple pride.
I agree emphatically about Jordan not explicitly stating he is a Christian. I was an atheist when I started listening to him and other apologists and had he came out and said he was a Christian I don’t know that I would have let my guard down to absorb the information. I agree that it works to his and our benefit to keep his identity somewhat ambivalent. It’s a shinier lure to draw in the fish who only stay in the deep.
44 ish he talls about the gnostic texts. I wonder if he is dismissing it to fit his theory. The Gospel of Thomas for instance appears to be a source material for the synoptic Gospels. I'm not sure it has to be subversive to acknowledge the value of any of these texts - it shows the richness of the early Christian movement. Given the difficulties with the Christian churches, all of them, in this time maybe the uncovering of these texts is exactly what is required to reboot the church - Bede Griffith said: " If Christianity cannot recover its mystical tradition and teach it, it should just fold up and go out of business"
Jung played a instrumental role I the starting of AA...
He has to.play down his belief for the same reason that Jordan does (professional.reasons)
That was Alan watts
How close is JP to actually seeing the truth of the Orthodox church?
I watched till the end..... holly shit
jung does realize that its an underlying reality. Jonathan needs to read some more
25:00 I enjoy Jonathan's work, but his comment about the "just" thing here could easily be turned on him. He so often takes the Fundamentalist approach and says that Christianity functions on all of these levels just not that one.
I like the atheist church part
For what its worth.... Jordan Peterson has indeed referred to himself as a Christian in a public format. Understandably he understands things in a way most traditional Christians would, at least initially, have a problem with. But, he does self identify as one. Below is a link to at least one clip where he address this. I think there are a few other clips lurking around as well.
czcams.com/video/RIB05YeMiW8/video.html
37:38 Jordan Peterson uses shrooms?? 😂😂
Jonathan your making the Resurrection too complicated .
Thinking of Romans 10:9 and 10
Vanderklay was sure referring to this from 1 Corinthians 15: the Apostle Paul speaking
12But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.
Are not the buffers demonstrated in day the Gospel of Mark? Jesus traverses these buffers but is met with resistance
"The resurrection means that the world can participate in God..." The resurrection of Christ is the beginning of the new creation, the beginning of our resurrection, of our new birth as an advance on our resurrection, of eternal human life in God. The resurrection is the work of the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of God raises us to new life, then to resurrection, then renews the whole of creation. Yes.
‘The natural world can be transfigured.’ And this transfiguration is the resurrection, but the natural world already is transfigured, already is whole. We just have to see it, recognize it. The resurrection story in the Bible is built around the older story of the hibernation and emergence of the bear. The bear is a central being worshipped by early Europeans (and other cultures) as the wise old man, the being that stands and walks on 2 feet, like humans, that knows where to find food (berries, honey etc), and a being that mysteriously seems to die (disappears from view during the winter months), but reappears in the spring, fully alive. Read ‘The Sacred Paw,’ which explains how important the bear is to early cultures and discusses the ceremonies associated with the bear (like marriage, for ex). Cave bear skulls and bones were found in caves like Chauvet, placed on an altar. The resurrection of Christ is part of this story of the bear. We have to see how the animals are an integral part of life on earth and of human experiences on earth. Indigenous peoples understand this.
Did I hear "Revolations" (plural) @34:45? Jonathan, I think your former Protestant roots are showing! ;)
are you Peterson's brother or what ?
I wonder if he actually does like Kanye. That seem so unlikely to me.
Bros go to church! I started attending orthodox services and it’s been nothing accept amazing
Lystomania, I think is the world for person worship. Just have to say, since it is disturbingly obvious in this bubble self named "intellectual dark web". David (and Hall) seem to have a point they try to make, lost in all the else. Ideas are talked quite incoherently, sensemaking a dream. Let alone the understanding what collective means, sad I realize this is just taken as an "opposite" thought, while in the root it truly is not. "intuitive understanding that this is so when he said it" are, to me, worry some sentences/ideas... But I have my own opinions of Peterson and some of his ideas, and those are not important. Blind trust towards a person easily explaining (while sometimes contradicting himself, and actually recruiting is done by others), I feel uncomfortable with..
Dude stop listening to Kanye West!
6:40 Knowing trumps believing. Jesus was a better pagan than Constantine. I want to here more from David Fuller.
36:30 "The true believer lives in both worlds." -Muhammad
39:00 Real science is done religiously.
43:15 Islam saved Europe from the dark ages.
Jordan overestimates Jung- that is his weakness. Jung is not even accepted as a subject in german universities( well that does not mean too
much, but there is something profoundly illogical in Jungs´s writings)
One of Jung's deepest early insights was that people living within a rationalistic logical framework had terrible trouble trying to integrate their own deepest of experiences.
Following Nietzsche's lead, his model took account of the irrationality of rationality and the rationality of irrationality.
One way to understand this might be that he explored the science of religion and the religion of science, thus breaking apart Cartesian dualism.
He was also heavily influenced by Kant to the point that he called his work Analytic Psychology in his honor. Of course, Kant was perhaps the most rationalistic and logical of all, for all his Christianity.
To say that Jung was illogical is a complete misunderstanding of his complex character and work.
jbp basically has said he thinks it reflects the structure of reality
Te word Christ is a title not a name, same with Buddha, we all have the capability of becoming a Buddha or Christ if were serious about taking a good look at ourselves. This thing we call self is a fabrication and collection of ideas and beliefs handed down through the generations. It's my feeling that when we strip away the ideas and beliefs of social and cultural indoctrination we find our true nature, that's my experience. All the ideas and beliefs we've collected since childhood were given to us. Just because someone believes something doesn't make it true now does it!? I find it astonishing what you can get innocent children to believe and carry throughout their lives and pass those beliefs to their children and so on, we've been indoctrinated into mental slavery of subjective ideas and beliefs. In my opinion early Christianity was hijacked by emperor Constantine for political reasons and the Gnostics were deemed to be heretics and persecuted. Christianity over the last fifteen hundred years resembles nothing of it's earliest teachings. I've watched the all biblical series by Dr. Peterson and found them well thought out and thought provoking and recommend listening to them.
"mystical expirience have to..., its have to be like that and that, do that...". Poor mystical experience, you put such a heavy burden on it
This is the beginning of The West 2.0
*tosses a comment to the algorithm*
Jonathan says he's never done psychedelics. I call bullshit :-)
Jorden Peterson understands the value of these ideals, but not the reality of there actualization. My father was a communist, but even he realized the value Christianity gave to people and society. Even though the communist, like their corporate fascists, seek, to [co-op] Christian values for their own maniacal, evil purposes, they will all be conciliatory, but disingenuous, to their beneficial effects. Even the postmodernist will acknowledge the positive affirmations bestowed by Christianity on the greater good of humanity, even though they see themselves, allied with the communist in the destruction of western society and the church. [Put enough sugar in excrement and it will always taste good!] Unfortunately for J.P. and his comrades, being a Christian would be like putting a monkey suit and saying: I now understand the greater meaning of the world. Sadly, he preaches information, devoid of all its true meaning. [See Paul Campbell] - The leftist loved him - because he stripped away all its real connection to humanity. J.P. denounces the postmodernist but he's little more than an extension of their beliefs and their warfare on western civilization.
jbp clearly believes in god, and that god is the christian one
Neither Jordan Peterson or Jonathan Pageau adhere to traditional (orthodox) Christianity. Pageau's journey has led him into a quasi-"Christian," religious syncretism. Jordan Peterson, similar to Carl Jung, is on an intellectual/spiritual journey using forms of "natural theology*," teetering on the fence between theism and pantheism. Conservative, evangelical Christians (CEC) hold an appreciation for BOTH objective propositional truth (the Bible) and subjective "spiritual" (mystical) experience. However, we are careful to anchor our experiences in the objective truths. (I speak as CEC of nearly 50 years).
* Natural theology is a type of theology that provides arguments for the existence of the Transcendent based on reason and experience. This distinguishes it from revealed theology, which is based on an "inspired" Scriptural Canon.
Good leave his trace in all of us, and all religions are only search for him.
Pageau is so right, quite a better listen than whatever Peterson says. Its clear and accurate, and true according to tradition from what I can tell. It matters if you are to talk about other people's beliefs, it is a matter of respect, which some people lack and would just steal words and lie about them, what people used to call heretics. Also the "logos" is not "your truth", it is just truth, which should be the same for everybody. Its a Greek word, and it means something, and it does not mean opinion, that is "doxa", which is totally different. Opinions are like garbage, everybody has some.
That's just your opinion ' but I understand your point.
33rd
الصحيبي لعايلة تاعك اي هنا في جزاير خخخخخخ