Jordan Peterson opened the door for me and I decided to return to Church one year ago. I am Catholic and raised in the new age Church fell away probably 18 years ago. I oddly enough was super attracted to the Traditional Latin Mass and I haven’t missed a Sunday in a year. I will say I feel much more whole as a person then I did one year ago and I had been a mess for awhile since the loss of my father. To anyone who read this good luck!
God bless you and welcome back. I think you might appreciate this quote by the great Hillaire Belloc: ""One thing in the world is different from all others. It has a personality and a force. It is recognized and (when recognized) most violently loved or hated. It is the Catholic Church. Within that household the human spirit has roof and hearth. Outside it, it is the night."
@@veilofreality Awesome that resonates with me thanks for sharing! I’m the youngest of seven and the other six would think I’m crazy for going back and actually becoming a parishioner. I’m sure they will all eventually find out and I will get ridiculed but idc at this point because my life if better and is more meaningful with it than without.
Good to hear God is at work in your life. About the catholic church it is important to remember that our saviour is not the institution but the person of Jesus. He can work through broken vessels but is our ultimate authority.
One of my favorite podcast style talks you have done. Sargon was one of the people who initially led me to Jordan Peterson, who in turn led me to your work. It's great to finally see you two meet.
I wish more people would read Ken Wilber. He figured all this stuff out a long time ago. Way more consistent thinker than Peterson, who's intellectually a complete mess.
@@eliteakm Brief History of Everything is where most people start, me included. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality is the magnum opus though. However, it's all super easy to read, maybe just because he's such a lucid writer. He gets a lot of flack for being just a new age writer but he's way more than that. Once you read him all the different strands of thinking swishing around in your brain finally find some cohesion. The only problem I have with him is that he can be very repetitive, but then if your ideas are correct how can you not repeat yourself?
“When I went over to Mordor for the first time, I had to explain to my wife and my family that people over there are very different. It's a strange world compared to my nice house in the Shire.” - Frodo
Sargon sounds like CS Lewis’ journey. Watch out that you don’t go on any trips to the London zoo, or you may end up the most unwilling convert in all of Britain.
@Vela S You can almost interchange any number of possibilities at first except the world that exists, exists as an object of design and design without a designer is chaotic; which the physics and beings of this universe are not. For instance people often throw out the 'Flying Spaghetti Monster' argument without realizing that according to the rules they set for their universe's creation it would actually make a Flying Spaghetti Monster as possible to exist as any other existence which it is not. We know it doesn't exist because we understand that the design of the universe excludes certain beings. The question then is whether this designer or designers that made the universe are personal or not? If they aren't then similar to the first answer there is no purpose and life which is a personal force is meaningless and simply an errant formation and in the end the personal forces will decay along with the universe. The main problem with the impersonal force creating is that the design of the universe is constant and there is no reason for an impersonal force to remain constant at all. The laws of physics for instance are predictable and constant, yet there would be no reason for an impersonal force to keep such 'laws' and it wouldn't even flow like a river. The world would be as likely if not more likely to be like the world of the movie Inception except even that has too many physical laws... It would instead be more likely to flow everywhere and nowhere at the same time and a universe with laws would be rarer than the universe without them. It's this that leads towards a personal designer or designers as then the universe would rightly be expected to conform to laws as a designer always makes something for a purpose and it is this that explains why everything just works. People often think that because we can program a computer to do something like create a universe (The Singularity argument) that this means that you can create an impersonal universe, but this forgets the simple fact that the computer itself is a designed construct and was created with the goal of calculation in mind which is a logic construct. It's precisely why the computer can be relied upon to work, because it has been designed to do so. Then you get to the part of whether this God or Gods are good or bad or does that concept even exist in the first place and I think this is an interesting indicator that the creator is good as the very fact that we ask this question is derived from our own reality of existence and understanding that certain actions are good and bad. Are we flawless at determining what is and what isn't? No; but we ascertain it from our own existence that to have it taken away without a 'badness' on our part is bad for instance and from there we learn that other peoples lives have the same inherent value as our own, because if they didn't then there would be no reason not to have our own life taken. There are obviously many different morals you learn in life through this means, usually this means that something is 'good' when it provides for a person without it taking from another something that was theirs (bad). I think of it as morals that are derived from life itself, yet frequently misunderstood or ignored as each of us has individual agency or desire. I agree with you though that CS Lewis was an angsty child, his arguments sound 'good', but strip away the emotional pleadings and it's found very wanting. Sorry if the reading's a bit long, but the question needs a bit of character length and at the very least I think this explanation shows why people believe in a God rather than simply existing for existence's sake. I take the view that the reason we need Jesus or God is because a personal material force (ie. us) without guidance is destined to decay; which is why there's a call to a moral goodness as that ultimately is the only thing of value out of a decaying world... what we learn and do along the way.
I used to go to church and felt like I was among ridiculous people. Then one day God showed me my own ridiculous self. Humility is a hard pill to swallow but necessary. You don't go to church to do God favors. The church is Christ's bride and you must protect her at all costs. You also do it for yourself and community. To leave your children your culture you have to sacrifice your time and energy to preserve it.
A number of my friends had a new atheist phase. At some point they abstracted their understanding of divine agency beyond 'beard man in cloud land', which seemed to help push them back towards theism eventually.
What makes this so sad, is the realization that English Catholicism was actually such a rich, hearty, healthy culture; that it produced many great martyrs and saints, almost all of our cultural holiday traditions in the English speaking New World, amazing folklore and mythos... but they've done such a great job of burying that since Henry VIII that Sargon, a history buff and English man, doesn't even realize that. 😭
@@actually5004 From someone with access to the endless wealth of free information on the internet, that's the most snobbish, elitist, silly thing I've heard since the last time I heard a Leftist try to insult someone. 🙄
I've always found atheism to be especially anti-Christian, at least in the sense that they are much less forgiving of Christianity's inconsistencies than they are of other faiths. If you listen to them discuss other religions like Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Hinduism etc they typically ignore their most obvious problems and focus on the beauty of the narrative.
'Christianity's inconsistencies ', as practicing Catholics we 'believe' in mystery not inconsistencies. The mystery compels us to contemplate the Truth. That Truth is a person, the person of Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity. All of human history is defined by One person, AD, Anno Domini, the year of Our Lord. That is reflected in every area of your life, DOB, your passport, utility bills, bank statements and is even held in Islamic and communist countries. The belief systems you list will always be inadequate. For example, why does a Buddhist country, Japan, have an image of Christ on its national flag? The Rising Son. Every Catholic alter piece honours that by facing East. Ne Timeas.
Well, Western atheists will (for obvious political reasons) focus more on the dominant Western religions. It would be weird if all atheists equally critiqued every religion.
@@davidh.503 To which former clergy do you refer? Permit me to suggest exploring the concept of original sin i.e the darkening of the intellect. In our original state, our emotions where subverted to the will and the will subverted to the intellect. With the arrival of original sin, that was inverted and without the Divine virtue of Grace we remain in the dark. This is an eternal, unchanging teaching of the Catholic Church.
Islam is approximately as bad as Christianity. Buddhism has the benefit of including something profound in a way in which the Abrahamic religions don't.
As a former new atheist, the answer is to orient themselves towards God. And yes, Church fathers were very helpful for me, particularly Aquinas and Bonaventure.
Aquinas and Bonaventure aren’t “Church Fathers,” but maybe mislead “Church step-sons,” who wrote in Latin long after the Pope got excommunicated in 1054. The writings of the Church are in Greek, based on the Greek Bible. Augustin went astray on original sin due to his using a Latin translation of the Bible. Augustin also was a misogynist who should have married the mother of his son, instead of founding a homosexual misogynistic clerical group.
Aquinas is not a church father, nor is Bonaventure. "church father", "doctor of the church", etc are a very specific titles, not just a funny thing you add to whoever you think deserves.
@@wybuchowyukomendant They are the titles given by the only church instituted by Christ, Our Lord, the Catholic Church. All other "churches" are either schismatics or heretics and have no spiritual authority. You obviously are of those groups, which is easy to tell based on your poor argumentation and lack of any rational or logical argument. You are obviously a very ignorant and prideful person, may God have mercy on you.
Thats a fascinating discussion. What is also fascinating that the orthodox guy Jonathan from post-catholic post-protestant Canada returns me, the guy from orthodox Ukraine, back to my orthodox faith. We live in a really strange world...
good for you, my friend. I'm Catholic but as the years pass and my understanding deepens I look at Orthodoxy with greater and greater respect and awe. You really have a treasure in your tradition, one well worth cherishing.
A major problem our society has is an epidemic of narcissism. Those new atheist are guilty of that more than most. They are so smug and full of themselves, they can't believe in some greater than their self. They will never be able to find God until they will humble themselves (nor will they be able to be very intelligent; when you think you know it all, you can't learn anything).
It was in my forties that I first discovered the incredible intellectual traditions of Christian theology, starting with David Bentley Hart's critique of postmodernism, and it led me out of atheism into Catholicism. The New Atheists have succeeded only in encouraging ignorance of these traditions, but once you see what's actually there...
It seems almost like a rite of passage for many of us when we hit 40 to think "This can't be what life is supposed to be". Accumulating as much money as possible, seeking comfort and entertainment. That's what modern society seems to encourage.
@@existentialhangover1124 You're right, I think, though in my case it was a bit different - I'd never really grabbed on to the "money-comfort-entertainment" ideal. At least not consciously. I'd rejected it before learning how Christianity made such beautiful sense of rejecting it.
The problem with any such atheism, ironically, is their tendency to pick up 'religion' in in other [and often more dangerous] forms. 'Religion' that was baked in one person's mind in a day kind of thing.
Yes, whether the Universalist "church" or The Satanic Temple, they ape God's truth. Even the "true" atheists are just doing what they did during the French Revolution, turning "reason" into a religion, like they did when their state-sponsored atheistic religion, the Culte de la Rasion desecrated Notre Dame by hosting the Fete de la Raison. They mocked our Lord and our Lady, dressing prostitutes up as the personification of "philosophy."
Except that it's impossible for science and empiricism to be religion, literally by definition. These are not spiritual beliefs, but observable, replicable experiments that reveal certain aspects about the nature of reality. That said, there is no "faith" or "belief" required, as is the case with religion.
By the way, what about us agnostics? I'm personally open to the idea of God, (or a God) possibly existing. I just happen to think it's infantile and stupid to presume that any scripture from any one specific religion could give us those answers, knowing what we know now about the universe.
I used to see things like this. I had dropped religion studying science and attended skeptic new atheist conferences but found they were missing the actual figurative truths of these narratives. Several years later I was an ecologist who couldn't trust human convention and was suicidal so often that I was willing to sacrifice everything to seek a true purpose and carve out a niche doing the job the Bible and my professors had told me to - stewarding my world. I immersed myself in nature thinking she would tell me what rules to follow or kill me in the process. What happened is that truth itself turned out to be the same thing as love and literally physically manifested answers to my questions in a manner that only a conscious, supernatural creator could. So I kept following threads of evidence over years until I knew it was true enough to be reverentially spoken to as God. I explored eastern spiritual disciplines to where they could not answer. I had a kundalini awakening but entrusted it to God and at that point He began to push the Bible on me. And it became apparent that of all narratives, this one could not be figuratively true without being literally true. I reassessed my new atheist arguments and they all fell apart given what I had experienced. They told many lies that seem sensible to anyone who has not witnessed miraculous signs and wonders. I recommend that you try talking to what you sense as truth/love and follow the evidence. I am now a fool to intelligent people like me but the truth set me free. God bless you.
Excellent conversation btw. I never watched you before Jonathan and made my comment before you said you were Orthodox. I've been to two liturgies now and it seems my journey is taking me there. Maybe why your video was suggested by the algorithm along with many other resources that make me feel more at home lately on a spiritual and intellectual/opinionated level. Look forward to more. :)
Thank you for this. I, too, had my experience with God. I feel that it was my moment of true salvation; a rebirth. And it came when I understood God’s love. I knew at that moment I would never be the same.
Brilliant Jonathan! I found it not only to be an interesting and useful conversation, but actually a unique kind of tutorial on how to evangelise in the postmodern world
Yes, nobody wants to be that guy, who is the religious nut. It takes sophistication and patience to tread that path. But atheism has nothing to offer me. So, this is it, here we go, we're gonna make it. We have to.
@@brando3342 your talking about moral boundaries. I'm not. I am referring to persons that have been educated or indoctrinated into stupidity. Persons that have rejected common sense in favor of a feel good ideology.
No Sad Onions! Well not exactly. I'm also referring to rationality and logic, which I'd assume you refer to as "common sense" here. Problem is, without God there is no grounding for those things including morality.
I would say that humans are hardwired to desire rather than to worship. And it just so happens that the desire for comfort and structure is both strong and common. Religion provides both, especially in dire times.
@@nistarok123 Desire to worship especially one's self. Desire to have more money and someone comes along and says " don't desire that". And, you will counter " I will what I want, NO ONE can stop me" Money becomes god. Buddhism wants to eradicate " desire" but that eradication is also a form of desire
Aard - I think he basically ment that... ‘desire’ might be the more accurate description though for a lot of situations! It’s desire and worship really 👍🏻
This guy: "I have a RUclips space where I give my opinion. I really see the value in Christianity, the Christian story, the Christian ethic. Our culture is suffering without it." Also this guy: "Oh I am NOT going to church."
Sargon decries the breakdown of the hierarchy in society, yet he will not take himself to church, which is a representation of the ultimate hierarchy: worship of God. Wonder if he’ll listen to his own words and realize.
Brilliant conversation. Jonathan is so freaking smart, i always wonder what he reads, what authors he recommends, etc. He seems like such a pure, organic thinker.
I don't think I was smart enough to understand everything in this conversation, but what I could I enjoyed. I grew up catholic and I went down a bad path of addiction, got sober, I have done AA, but it brought me to a relationship with God, and now I really stand in new testament, I appreciate the old as well, but as I developed an actual relationship with God, its taught me many truths.
If you see this, that’s wonderful to hear. I would definitely recommend praying the good ol’ rosary. It’s really the Bible on beads in that each “mystery” is an event in the life of Christ or in his mother Mary which points to Christ or was done by God. That structured, repetitive framework through which one can meditate on what God has done is really excellent for deepening one’s relationship with Him and it really helps with developing a pattern and a discipline in life. God bless you!
@@jefffinkbonner9551 thanks. It's crazy 2 years ago I wrote this and have been blessed with a daughter and many good things have happened so I'm glad people still comment after awhile. I'll deff look more into that and thank you.
I'm sympathetic to Sargon's plight. I was raised secular but have always been artistic/intuition focused, so when God was eventually outlined to me in a sophisticated manner, I knew I already believed in Him. That thing Dostoevsky and Bach pointed to --- that's what Christians mean when they say God. I don't think the more analytically minded have that direct path (that sounds snobby so let me stress that I'm not putting value on one type of human or the other). For a lot of modern people, belief in God means, "if I fly high enough in a spaceship and look out the window I'll see a bearded guy floating around". Of course no one will believe that. Sargon, deep in his philosophy, does not have a way to intuit God. Aquinas's proofs for God's existence rely on presuppositions Sargon does not share. There isn't an intellectual path to belief through philosophy. Art, even our modern art created by non-believers, does present that path to God (this is unavoidable --- what a secular person calls "good art" is synonymous with "art that points to God". Even us degenerate moderns want Truth and Beauty. Of course, art can be degenerate and subversive, but if it doesn't point to God on some level it will be boring art no one likes) .It's no accident that romanticism is chronologically the first place western society went when people started to lose their belief in God. The same path can be reversed: rote materialism => romanticism => belief in God. As a side note, this is the secret ingredient to Jordan Peterson. He is a hybrid analytical/artistic type. When he struts around stage on the verge of tears, talking about suffering and heroic overcoming, he is embodying the romantic artist. No one would ever say JBP struts around stage like a psychologist. He struts around like a rock star. That's what gives him such an immediate and direct line between the modern mind and God. When he interprets the bible, he's not interpreting it psychologically. Sure, he brings in his psychological knowledge. But he interprets the bible as art. His bible series is exactly what an art critic does when he interprets a novel.
@@christopherapodaca2373 haven't heard of him, I'll check him out. I'm sure there will be exceptions, as in everything, but I think most modern people that go from pure secularism to religion will have a romantic/artistic angle (this is saying nothing of those who go from religion to atheism and back to religion, which is a different thing).
I love everything you said, except the last bit. Interpreting the bible psychologically is what he’s after. Symbols (art) come straight from the psyche. Its a small thing for me to split hairs about, I agree otherwise. He’s got soul, so it doesn’t come off like a dry scientist, he comes off as a romantic. Anyway!
@@mudhut4491 yeah I was leaning into that to make a point, but it's certainly not wrong to call his interpretation psychological. If you saw "Psychological Study of the Bible" sitting on the shelf, you'd expect something from a materialist perspective about how mass delusion is built into the human condition. But JBP takes the biblical stories, and unwinds the themes, analyzes the character's motivations and actions, much like literary analysis. To me that's more on the art side, but agreed, there is no hard line where art ends and psychology begins.
Once he breaks out of his secular shell, I hope he humbly takes a fresh look at Christianity, letting go of his false assumptions about religion, religious people, and everything he's been taught about them. The real danger is in trying to invent some "new and improved" Christianity. The only reason to do that is out of pride, so you can reconcile "we need religion" and "Christianity dumb thing for dumb people" without ever having to admit you were wrong. That way you don't have to fearfully face the living God--you can just keep being your own god and feel nice and in control. As atheism expires (as it was always meant to), people are going to be presented with a counterfeit Christian-ish religion. It'll be modern, unifying, rational, and very appealing... it will seem like a natural evolution of humanity. But it will be even more horrible than atheism is now. That's why they had to stamp out Christianity as much as possible and sour people against it, otherwise they would never accept the sham. Let's pray that Sargon is delivered from this trap.
@@rogerspable There is only one Truth, and that is Jesus Christ. All I can tell you is that He can assuredly be found in His church, the Orthodox Church. That's the church which Jesus built, against which "the gates of Hades shall not prevail."
@@ebonifragaria It's a pretty radical view in today's society that you insist there's one truth, and that it shouldn't be secular. The concern is that a push all the way to one dogma will cause the pendulum to swing back even harder to the opposite dogma. I hear you that Christianity may undergo misrepresentation for it to be installed, but the same is being done with atheism/secularism, that it's being purposefully used as a flag to push social and identity divides.
We all make mistakes. Also Clergy. But christianity does not think this is extraordanary. The question is rather if Jesus is the one he claims to be? And the implications for induviduals and society. One of my "outputs" of the conversation here is that debunking is easy- but the point is what to put in its place? The host here suggested virtue (Aristoteles). A hierarki of ways of being. Jonathan Pageau project is to show how any hierarki of any human sort is bound to failure. My take is the three stages of Kierkegaard. Aestetics. Ethics. Religion. Thhis conversation reminded me of Kierkegaard. Found the conversation to be in a mutual respective tone. Bless them both for their effort of understanding rather than just debunking. Exuse my poor english. Im a guy from Kristiansand, Norway.
@@davidh.503 He says as he tips his fedora. The cheeto dust fell from his lips and landed on his fat belly where his "debate me" shirt failed to cover. The smell of his BO so strong it escaped from his reddit page and soured the world.
The pure amount of converts from irreligious/atheist households i encounter at church, especially coming from that upbringing myself, really puts a nail in the idea you have to grow up religious to believe in God.
@@spiritmatter1553 That's the trouble with certain terms. Atheism is a lack of a belief, and as such cannot be a belief system in itself. What you are likely referring to is "humanism" which is a belief system surrounding the maximization of human flourishing using reason rather than an appeal to God, which has recently been popularized by the "New Atheists". However, one can be an atheist and not a humanist and vice versa.
I've been amazed how strong the desire to shake hands is. Being English I never did it as much as a European would. This elbow bumping, foot tapping just doesn't do it for me!
@@AndyJarman I agree. Every now and then I encounter someone brave enough to offer a handshake and I always accept it gladly. Wish I was brave enough to offer myself.
I used to be atheistic too, then as I got older I actually have begun reading the Bible and learning from the ancient wisdom and the structure of the mental spiritual journey to wholeness and yes, Unity w God and for myself,... Christ as the Redeemer.
So you read that the Jew's "God" was only an Earth-made Volcano, then? The one that Palestinians already worshipped-- prior to both Judaism and "Christianity"...
@Pedro Cavalcanti A Volcano-- is not a "He"... "Yahweh" was the Volcano tribe of the Pre-Palestinian peoples... A Volcano does not have "morals"... And neither does the Bible have objective morals.
@Pedro Cavalcanti No. Morality is an objective standard by which you judge the actions taken by an individual-- and see whether they hurt or help "well-being"... No "God of transcendent nature" has ever been shown to exist-- ever.
This is a wonderful discussion! Thank you guys for this. I love how it’s a conversation where a non-believer and believer can speak in such a civil way.
Listening to Jonathan makes you realize that thinkers like Sam Harris spend a good amount of time knocking down straw men when speaking about "religious people."
I agree, I think Sam Harris is probably the best of the bunch because he's so clear-headed, but he doesn't have any deep knowledge of the religions he's talking about. He is only barely aware of their texts, histories, figures, etc. This only limits true discussion and repeats the same arguments.
Jonathan is not the most well known type of religious person though. He certainly wasn't the type on center stage in the mid 2000s when Sam et al came online, the sort that was replacing school science textbooks with creationist literature against mandate. Your framing is a bait and switch that's not an honest conversation. Jordan Peterson for example is a new phenomenon, one that many atheists can agree with, not the kind of young earth creationist fundamentalist and biblical literalist that the New Atheists were reacting to. It's not the same thing at all.
@@TheJeremyKentBGross I disagree. Listen to Sam's latest conversations with Jordan Peterson. Also, if Sam is attacking a belief system, it's on him to steel man it.
@@TheJeremyKentBGross Great point, it seems like Sam Harris and his peers were instrumental in pushing back against wave of Christian fundamentalism in the USA. The New Atheists should be commended for that because it seems like they really succeeded, I don't see many creationists or literalists around anymore and the new generations Christians today seem sharper and more sensible than those from before.
@@AJ-me1dg Is there a newer one since the Pangburn ones? I listened to those multiple times. Being in agreement with large parts of what both of them have to say, I found their conversations both thrilling and frustrating because often they don't understand each other. Peterson started out as glib about the New Atheists as Sam initially was to him. I'd wager the future has to be somewhere between them. But Sam has been losing points with me for years now on his TDS. I think it's just a defense mechanism from being called racist for criticizing Islam, which needs to happen.
I am A Muslim and I liked this video. As a former Philosophy major who was inspired by Soren Kierkegaard, these two guys are very intelligent. I recently put up a video saying "Science did not matter" as believed by several existentialists. The reason Nietzsche and others believed that is because we do not live according to science; we live according to our feelings. These guys get it.
@29:50 'We have been fortunate enough to live to a time when virtue, though it does not triumph, is nonetheless not always tormented by attack dogs. Beaten down, sickly, virtue has now been allowed to enter in all its tatters and sit in the corner, as long as it doesn't raise its voice. However, no one dares say a word about vice. Yes, they did mock virtue, but there was no vice in that. Yes, so-and-so many millions did get mowed down - but no one was to blame for it. And if someone pipes up: "What about those who ..." the answer comes from all sides, reproachfully and amicably at first: "What are you talking about, comrade! Why open old wounds?" ' -Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
A thing that changed everything for me is the notion that religion isn’t an institution or a set of beliefs, in any specific sense, but a thought pattern of how beliefs play out. If you consider your foundational values (the values which anchor and enable your perspective of the world) as a type of “psychological god”, then anything can potentially behave in a religious way. From that, I think it’s easy to argue that a group communicated psychological god, result in the establishment of metaphysical ones, and thus physical institutions representing them over time. A problem then, is when those institutions are established enough to have self-interest in their own continued existence. (Fear of lightning and what it means for my survival, is an unknown, fear motivated survival is a foundational value, group communication of that fear proceeds to personify the concept of lightning so that we are comfortable with the unknown of it, it keeps the fear in check because it rationalizes that we can’t control it and personifying it means that it has its own patterns eroding at our conception of the unknown of it, enough time we call it zeus, the unknown isn’t fully gone so Zeus becomes more instantiated, institutionalized, and given enough time the psychological power we’ve given to it establishes the authority of priests who are now motivated to continue their position - where there’s now a break between the causal origination of the concept and the reason for the institutions existence, people are still bound to it but the institution is no longer bound to the people.) When traditional religions break, new ones form, the pattern keeps playing out, people will constantly play out religious patterns with almost anything, social, economic, political, cultural, even logic can be valued as a religious pattern. It’s like we’re revisiting Nietzsche’s Ubermench all over again
David H. You an Atheist? Atheists are some of the most faithful people to come across. They have no doubt their doctrine is correct even though their evidence cannot explain or disprove the divine. I guess you belive in yourself? A very dangerous thing that, since people that belive in themselves the most are lunatics in an asylum. They belive in themselves so strongly that no one can convince them that they aren’t Napoleon lets say. I am no denier of science, and science has given many wonderful things and discoveries. But prove love to me. We know it exists, but what is the rationality behind it? Do you seriously belive that the love you feel to your mother, father, a dear friend or your own child is just a chemical reaction and nothing more? Can you, by a rational scientific study or formula, explain love? Can you explain why we make art? Why we love to create? Can you use the scientific method to prove God is not real? Evidence can be found in reasoning and logic too you know. You might like Lewis who was a very devout Atheist up til a point.
@@christianbjorck816 I have ZERO beliefs that I hold that are based upon a lack of evidence. Dishonesty will not "Score you points"... Atheism is the rejection of the assertion that a "God" exists. It is the position of not being convinced that you are correct. IT DOES NOT HAVE A DOCTRINE-- STUPID SACK OF SHI*.
Wow, Carl has really evolved so much. This was a great conversation. Someone should recommend Catherine Pickstock's After Writing to him. I think it will give him the philosophical framework to embrace what he's resistant to.
Spengler talks about 'poetic and vital' societies; archetypes might be the mythical world of King Arthur and the search for the Holy Grail. Modern Western society has lost it's poetry. Lost its vital, clear, heart.
There's also the second religiousness coming at the end of a civilization, which is exactly what we see now with emerging competing religious systems(even if a lot of them we wouldn't name religions) It's mostly like what happened in the first centuries AD, ending with the win of Christianity
good take on Spengler, I was thinking Carl was stumbling across Technics without really knowing , 'materialistic' etc. seems like he's been doing his reading since getting whipped in 2017 bloodsports
@@Benjamin-ks2rq I think I'm stumbling thru' Spengler like Carl. I've barely skimmed his work, but his predictions have become such stark reality in recent years I think we're all becoming experts. (I'm going to reuse that 'bloodsports' reference lol)
John David John David Ebert channel has a hyper modernity podcast where he also has discussed Spangler his work on his channel and within the hyper-modern contacts Don the current Euro I suggest his work for Sargon and Jonathan especially if they're not familiar I followed his work and Jonathan's especially in regarding the symbolism in mythology mythological world in the modern era it would be great to have more discussions on that topic involving Spengler and the seasonal aspect of the civilizations in these times
As a remedy for sargon i'd reccommend C.S Lewis's Essay's His fiction and a little about his life, is what really helped me for in the secular world we live in. Reading wise that is.
This brings back something Bishop Barron said recently during a talk with Jonathan, that the new atheism basically served to 'purify' religious understanding, by renewing and getting us passed cognitive blocks and blindspots that festered within Christianity.
Sargon has evolved exponentially since I first found him in 2016 or 17 busting on crash course take on guns germs and steel. This flame throwing gamer continues to shift towards a really interesting thinker and conversation partner. I think Jonathan showed him a few different ways of thinking. What a great conversation.
I could see Sargon reading some Chesterton and changing his tune on God. He's an evolving person, he has no idea where he might end up on this journey.
loved it! Jonathan, your video "Anthropology of mysticism" made me think to myself "I cannot not consider myself a Christian anymore". I thank you for that from the bottom of my heart.
Carl, I think the lord must be working on me as the idea of going to church has been a bone of contention in my journey back to Christianity. Listening, I feel inspired to find a church which will help me deepen my faith further. I have written to you before but I’m sure my story is lost in the many many comments. You remind me of the brainwashing of scientism in our British schools, we just can’t look outside of the box of the 5 senses! It took me 10yrs of living in the US South to figure out my thinking was so narrow! I see this meeting took place 5 months ago, but I believe I was meant to hear it now. Grateful to you and your guest!
If I had to guess JP has actually little if any exposure to Eliade, which, if anything, makes the convergence of ideas that much more illuminating and likely to be revealing something real.
@@peten5426 I agree. I have a feeling that Jonathan, however, has read Eliade. Specifically because of the vocabulary he's using. When people start talking about "cosmic images" and "sacred spaces", they've usually at least read The Sacred and The Profane. I could be wrong, I'm not a consistent viewer of his.
@@tm23822 Belying some of my own ignorance however I'm at least somewhat certain this sort of language is also to be found in the Eastern Christian mystics like Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor, two prime inspirations of JP. All mostly beside the point though as what really matters is that this sort of language, from across eras and traditions, is all pointing to some essential aspect of existence and that JP is particularly adept at synthesizing these ideas and making them relatable to our current 21st century condition.
Sargon needs to attend traditional liturgy and engage in prayer and meditation and Eucharistic adoration. Comprehending the love of God is difficult and takes more work than reading philosophy
@@juliannkretonn4623 If I thought he was sincere, I think prayer would be enough. He seems to think being English will suffice Hmm. Do I see a slight resemblance to Henry VIII?
Excellent video. I will always be an atheist but i do see the value in the mythos many religions create with the parables/allegory that teach value and meaning.
Do you know the etymology of 'secular', Sargon? It comes from a word meaning, and I'm paraphrasing from memory so this won't be perfectly accurate you're welcome to look it up, 'of one cycle'. There is no 'secular' replacement for religion because secularism excludes a pluralistic meta-history and a meta-reality.
About the fool, I heard an amusing storiy (as it usually goes with those things, hard to know if they're true): - People were afraid to tell the king he had lost his ships in a naval battle, so the fool was entrusted in giving him the news. He arrived and solemnly announced: "Your majesty, the brave men of your naval force firmly proved to the enemy they are much better swimmers!" Goes to show how the fool can be the only one to speak truth to the king
My experience of parish life is that the authority of the priest and the imperative of the liturgy affords a space where family heads can meet on neutral ground and establish connections that would not otherwise happen. Indeed, religion for many, is a stable means of family formation and reproduction. And thanks be to God for that.
Just for the record: I am subscribed to both Jonathan's and Sargon's channel, and RUclips sent me no notification for this. Joke's on them: I manually check for updates here.
haven't listened to the whole thing yet, but a conversation about what the new atheists miss should really start with their absolutely woeful arguments on the topic. what pisses people off about them is that they have genuinely bad and irrational arguments for their views but walk around with the arrogant presummption that they won the argument and are waiting for everyone else to catch up.
I used to always ask the atheists "how do you affirm non belief"? I didn't know how to articulate it the way these guys do but essentially I was trying to ask "what do you replace God with". Most people aren't intellectually sophisticated and still just replace God with some other diety (feminism, anti racism, BLM, transgender... etc etc...).
Great discussion. So many of the talking points and questions here are addressed in C.S. Lewis' Abolition of Man (should be required reading) and G.K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man. These are both masterpieces in my opinion. I'd love to know if Sargon or Jonathan have read these.
The Abolition of Man is brilliant and is what got me into Lewis. I came across it on this great channel dedicated to him that does continuous illustration along with audiobook m.ruclips.net/video/idgYLTnSzxI/видео.html
Now I believe Sargon has read a lot of CS Lewis and I recall (Although I can not find the video I heard it in) some of the lotus eaters (Carl's crew) talking about the book in question.
I wish I had seen this sooner. I’ve also come to the realization that we needed the post-modernists to understand what it is that we’re actually experiencing and what we do and believe in. That belief in God, partaking in tradition and ritual, having traditional families and values are all meaningful and much more deeply thought out than we understood. It is definitely part of God’s Great Awakening and this heartens me. It give me great optimism when things can seem so grim.
Technology made it possible for us to not physically need our neighbor. Without that need we self segregated. Self segregation has perverted the pattern of reality.
I would love to see Sargon and Peter have a conversation. He's currently keeping me sane with his crusade against lockdowns and the nonsensical policies we are currently tolerating.
Jordan Peterson opened the door for me and I decided to return to Church one year ago. I am Catholic and raised in the new age Church fell away probably 18 years ago. I oddly enough was super attracted to the Traditional Latin Mass and I haven’t missed a Sunday in a year. I will say I feel much more whole as a person then I did one year ago and I had been a mess for awhile since the loss of my father. To anyone who read this good luck!
God bless you and welcome back. I think you might appreciate this quote by the great Hillaire Belloc: ""One thing in the world is different from all others. It has a personality and a force. It is recognized and (when recognized) most violently loved or hated. It is the Catholic Church. Within that household the human spirit has roof and hearth. Outside it, it is the night."
@@veilofreality Awesome that resonates with me thanks for sharing! I’m the youngest of seven and the other six would think I’m crazy for going back and actually becoming a parishioner. I’m sure they will all eventually find out and I will get ridiculed but idc at this point because my life if better and is more meaningful with it than without.
Good to hear God is at work in your life. About the catholic church it is important to remember that our saviour is not the institution but the person of Jesus. He can work through broken vessels but is our ultimate authority.
@@BenWeeks Yes, our Savior is Jesus. But He left us a Church, and we should not ignore it.
Same here. Latin mass is where it’s at, although in the southeast of America it can be hard to find.
Chesterton really hit the nail on the head with, “When a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes anything”
@Fritz Feuer Yes. There’s only one God. The rest are demons.
@kprop yes
@Fritz Feuer
Yes.
@Fritz Feuer Yes.
@Fritz Feuer, yes, specifically, the Risen Lord Jesus Christ, Second Person of the Triune Godhead.
One of my favorite podcast style talks you have done. Sargon was one of the people who initially led me to Jordan Peterson, who in turn led me to your work. It's great to finally see you two meet.
I wish more people would read Ken Wilber. He figured all this stuff out a long time ago. Way more consistent thinker than Peterson, who's intellectually a complete mess.
Love your channel dude
@@zootsoot2006 Which book would you recommend if i would only want to read one of them?
@@eliteakm Brief History of Everything is where most people start, me included. Sex, Ecology, Spirituality is the magnum opus though. However, it's all super easy to read, maybe just because he's such a lucid writer. He gets a lot of flack for being just a new age writer but he's way more than that. Once you read him all the different strands of thinking swishing around in your brain finally find some cohesion. The only problem I have with him is that he can be very repetitive, but then if your ideas are correct how can you not repeat yourself?
@@zootsoot2006 Thanks, i think i'll read one of them or both, let's see.
"The modern man can hardly get away from ritual except by entering a ritualistic church." -GK Chesterton
I have recently found Chesterton and he inspires my imagination like no other! 😁
@@kerriepaterson He's a prophet of our times.
If that ritual is Modern Man's Morning Bean Juice Extravaganza, is it worth getting away from at all?
(This post brought to you by the coffee gang)
@@dylanwight5764I love the way you put that. I've never heard that. I might share it with my church group.
Oh good. It's here!
The one. The only. The-hopefully going to be Catholic one day. Paul VanderKlay!
Just be patient. His Denomination has to dissolve from the inside out first.
@@TheJelanii No, you have to say, "Paaauuuuuul VaanderKlaaay" He's a contender!
Oh good, you're here!
Now its time to see what you have to say about it!
“When I went over to Mordor for the first time, I had to explain to my wife and my family that people over there are very different. It's a strange world compared to my nice house in the Shire.” - Frodo
Plus, Gay 'love'.
@@cameront3914It's a joke. He's actually quoting Carl and comparing him to Frodo and his journey.
Sargon sounds like CS Lewis’ journey.
Watch out that you don’t go on any trips to the London zoo, or you may end up the most unwilling convert in all of Britain.
And DEFINITELY avoid people with last name "Tolkien."
Ah, lightning doesn't strike twice, mythologically speaking...
He is on twitter now spreading divisive and un-Christian hatred
@Vela S You can almost interchange any number of possibilities at first except the world that exists, exists as an object of design and design without a designer is chaotic; which the physics and beings of this universe are not.
For instance people often throw out the 'Flying Spaghetti Monster' argument without realizing that according to the rules they set for their universe's creation it would actually make a Flying Spaghetti Monster as possible to exist as any other existence which it is not.
We know it doesn't exist because we understand that the design of the universe excludes certain beings.
The question then is whether this designer or designers that made the universe are personal or not?
If they aren't then similar to the first answer there is no purpose and life which is a personal force is meaningless and simply an errant formation and in the end the personal forces will decay along with the universe.
The main problem with the impersonal force creating is that the design of the universe is constant and there is no reason for an impersonal force to remain constant at all.
The laws of physics for instance are predictable and constant, yet there would be no reason for an impersonal force to keep such 'laws' and it wouldn't even flow like a river.
The world would be as likely if not more likely to be like the world of the movie Inception except even that has too many physical laws...
It would instead be more likely to flow everywhere and nowhere at the same time and a universe with laws would be rarer than the universe without them.
It's this that leads towards a personal designer or designers as then the universe would rightly be expected to conform to laws as a designer always makes something for a purpose and it is this that explains why everything just works.
People often think that because we can program a computer to do something like create a universe (The Singularity argument) that this means that you can create an impersonal universe, but this forgets the simple fact that the computer itself is a designed construct and was created with the goal of calculation in mind which is a logic construct.
It's precisely why the computer can be relied upon to work, because it has been designed to do so.
Then you get to the part of whether this God or Gods are good or bad or does that concept even exist in the first place and I think this is an interesting indicator that the creator is good as the very fact that we ask this question is derived from our own reality of existence and understanding that certain actions are good and bad.
Are we flawless at determining what is and what isn't? No; but we ascertain it from our own existence that to have it taken away without a 'badness' on our part is bad for instance and from there we learn that other peoples lives have the same inherent value as our own, because if they didn't then there would be no reason not to have our own life taken.
There are obviously many different morals you learn in life through this means, usually this means that something is 'good' when it provides for a person without it taking from another something that was theirs (bad).
I think of it as morals that are derived from life itself, yet frequently misunderstood or ignored as each of us has individual agency or desire.
I agree with you though that CS Lewis was an angsty child, his arguments sound 'good', but strip away the emotional pleadings and it's found very wanting.
Sorry if the reading's a bit long, but the question needs a bit of character length and at the very least I think this explanation shows why people believe in a God rather than simply existing for existence's sake.
I take the view that the reason we need Jesus or God is because a personal material force (ie. us) without guidance is destined to decay; which is why there's a call to a moral goodness as that ultimately is the only thing of value out of a decaying world... what we learn and do along the way.
@@mikebenire3979 physics ... predictable and constant...quantum not so much
I used to go to church and felt like I was among ridiculous people. Then one day God showed me my own ridiculous self. Humility is a hard pill to swallow but necessary. You don't go to church to do God favors. The church is Christ's bride and you must protect her at all costs. You also do it for yourself and community. To leave your children your culture you have to sacrifice your time and energy to preserve it.
best anime crossover this year
10/10
Hahaha yesss
I get crossover element but don't understand how this related to anime. Can someone fill me in on what I'm missing?
@@kevinkanzler495 It's a meme
I would argue Peterson was better, but great episode anyway
Sargon is talking a lot like someone who's gonna be Christian in a couple years 👀
Lol he really is. It’s great!
A number of my friends had a new atheist phase. At some point they abstracted their understanding of divine agency beyond 'beard man in cloud land', which seemed to help push them back towards theism eventually.
shhhhh
This is the equivalent to Dave Rubin meeting Larry Elder. Thumbs up if you know what I’m talking about.
Pray for it.
What makes this so sad, is the realization that English Catholicism was actually such a rich, hearty, healthy culture; that it produced many great martyrs and saints, almost all of our cultural holiday traditions in the English speaking New World, amazing folklore and mythos... but they've done such a great job of burying that since Henry VIII that Sargon, a history buff and English man, doesn't even realize that. 😭
Are you implying that an uneducated ex-Applebees employee isn't exactly a history buff or intellectual at all?
@@actually5004 From someone with access to the endless wealth of free information on the internet, that's the most snobbish, elitist, silly thing I've heard since the last time I heard a Leftist try to insult someone. 🙄
@@Randaed I mean I like Applebee’s he is my favorite waiter.
@@actually5004 Your comment says more about you than you intended I think.
All of Britain was gloriously Catholic before the reformation rebellion.....and it will be again
I've always found atheism to be especially anti-Christian, at least in the sense that they are much less forgiving of Christianity's inconsistencies than they are of other faiths. If you listen to them discuss other religions like Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Hinduism etc they typically ignore their most obvious problems and focus on the beauty of the narrative.
'Christianity's inconsistencies ', as practicing Catholics we 'believe' in mystery not inconsistencies. The mystery compels us to contemplate the Truth. That Truth is a person, the person of Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity. All of human history is defined by One person, AD, Anno Domini, the year of Our Lord. That is reflected in every area of your life, DOB, your passport, utility bills, bank statements and is even held in Islamic and communist countries. The belief systems you list will always be inadequate. For example, why does a
Buddhist country, Japan, have an image of Christ on its national flag? The Rising Son. Every Catholic alter piece honours that by facing East. Ne Timeas.
Well, Western atheists will (for obvious political reasons) focus more on the dominant Western religions. It would be weird if all atheists equally critiqued every religion.
"Christianity" was fully debunked in 2010 by former Clergy... Why wouldn't one be against a lying death cult?
@@davidh.503 To which former clergy do you refer? Permit me to suggest exploring the concept of original sin i.e the darkening of the intellect. In our original state, our emotions where subverted to the will and the will subverted to the intellect. With the arrival of original sin, that was inverted and without the Divine virtue of Grace we remain in the dark. This is an eternal, unchanging teaching of the Catholic Church.
Islam is approximately as bad as Christianity.
Buddhism has the benefit of including something profound in a way in which the Abrahamic religions don't.
As a former new atheist, the answer is to orient themselves towards God. And yes, Church fathers were very helpful for me, particularly Aquinas and Bonaventure.
Aquinas and Bonaventure aren’t “Church Fathers,” but maybe mislead “Church step-sons,” who wrote in Latin long after the Pope got excommunicated in 1054. The writings of the Church are in Greek, based on the Greek Bible. Augustin went astray on original sin due to his using a Latin translation of the Bible. Augustin also was a misogynist who should have married the mother of his son, instead of founding a homosexual misogynistic clerical group.
Aquinas is not a church father, nor is Bonaventure. "church father", "doctor of the church", etc are a very specific titles, not just a funny thing you add to whoever you think deserves.
@@wybuchowyukomendant They are the titles given by the only church instituted by Christ, Our Lord, the Catholic Church. All other "churches" are either schismatics or heretics and have no spiritual authority. You obviously are of those groups, which is easy to tell based on your poor argumentation and lack of any rational or logical argument. You are obviously a very ignorant and prideful person, may God have mercy on you.
Church fathers are Orthodox like Saint John Chrysosotom or St Basil
If only Sargon would learn this himself
Thats a fascinating discussion. What is also fascinating that the orthodox guy Jonathan from post-catholic post-protestant Canada returns me, the guy from orthodox Ukraine, back to my orthodox faith. We live in a really strange world...
Christ is risen
Truly He is Risen
@Fritz Feuer thats unfortunate, buddy
@Fritz Feuer listen man, I’m no native speaker , that’s fascinating talking to you, I learn a lot of new words. Thanks, buddy.
good for you, my friend. I'm Catholic but as the years pass and my understanding deepens I look at Orthodoxy with greater and greater respect and awe. You really have a treasure in your tradition, one well worth cherishing.
A major problem our society has is an epidemic of narcissism. Those new atheist are guilty of that more than most. They are so smug and full of themselves, they can't believe in some greater than their self. They will never be able to find God until they will humble themselves (nor will they be able to be very intelligent; when you think you know it all, you can't learn anything).
Hey man, don’t let something pesky like truth or humility get in the way of a good ego!
It was in my forties that I first discovered the incredible intellectual traditions of Christian theology, starting with David Bentley Hart's critique of postmodernism, and it led me out of atheism into Catholicism. The New Atheists have succeeded only in encouraging ignorance of these traditions, but once you see what's actually there...
It seems almost like a rite of passage for many of us when we hit 40 to think "This can't be what life is supposed to be".
Accumulating as much money as possible, seeking comfort and entertainment.
That's what modern society seems to encourage.
@@existentialhangover1124 You're right, I think, though in my case it was a bit different - I'd never really grabbed on to the "money-comfort-entertainment" ideal. At least not consciously. I'd rejected it before learning how Christianity made such beautiful sense of rejecting it.
I'm really glad to hear Sargon speaking about this. Shows his intellectual development.
He needs to brush up on his deep-ecology though lmao
The problem with any such atheism, ironically, is their tendency to pick up 'religion' in in other [and often more dangerous] forms. 'Religion' that was baked in one person's mind in a day kind of thing.
Yes, whether the Universalist "church" or The Satanic Temple, they ape God's truth. Even the "true" atheists are just doing what they did during the French Revolution, turning "reason" into a religion, like they did when their state-sponsored atheistic religion, the Culte de la Rasion desecrated Notre Dame by hosting the Fete de la Raison. They mocked our Lord and our Lady, dressing prostitutes up as the personification of "philosophy."
Except that it's impossible for science and empiricism to be religion, literally by definition. These are not spiritual beliefs, but observable, replicable experiments that reveal certain aspects about the nature of reality. That said, there is no "faith" or "belief" required, as is the case with religion.
By the way, what about us agnostics? I'm personally open to the idea of God, (or a God) possibly existing. I just happen to think it's infantile and stupid to presume that any scripture from any one specific religion could give us those answers, knowing what we know now about the universe.
I used to see things like this. I had dropped religion studying science and attended skeptic new atheist conferences but found they were missing the actual figurative truths of these narratives.
Several years later I was an ecologist who couldn't trust human convention and was suicidal so often that I was willing to sacrifice everything to seek a true purpose and carve out a niche doing the job the Bible and my professors had told me to - stewarding my world. I immersed myself in nature thinking she would tell me what rules to follow or kill me in the process.
What happened is that truth itself turned out to be the same thing as love and literally physically manifested answers to my questions in a manner that only a conscious, supernatural creator could. So I kept following threads of evidence over years until I knew it was true enough to be reverentially spoken to as God. I explored eastern spiritual disciplines to where they could not answer. I had a kundalini awakening but entrusted it to God and at that point He began to push the Bible on me. And it became apparent that of all narratives, this one could not be figuratively true without being literally true. I reassessed my new atheist arguments and they all fell apart given what I had experienced. They told many lies that seem sensible to anyone who has not witnessed miraculous signs and wonders.
I recommend that you try talking to what you sense as truth/love and follow the evidence. I am now a fool to intelligent people like me but the truth set me free. God bless you.
Excellent conversation btw. I never watched you before Jonathan and made my comment before you said you were Orthodox. I've been to two liturgies now and it seems my journey is taking me there. Maybe why your video was suggested by the algorithm along with many other resources that make me feel more at home lately on a spiritual and intellectual/opinionated level. Look forward to more. :)
Thank you for this. I, too, had my experience with God. I feel that it was my moment of true salvation; a rebirth. And it came when I understood God’s love. I knew at that moment I would never be the same.
@@eurodelano Beautiful. I'm overjoyed to hear that. May God continue to bless you!
that sounds like the right attitude. only going to work for a seeker with some honesty and humility though.
@@colmwhateveryoulike3240 I see Him everywhere now.
Brilliant Jonathan! I found it not only to be an interesting and useful conversation, but actually a unique kind of tutorial on how to evangelise in the postmodern world
Yes, nobody wants to be that guy, who is the religious nut. It takes sophistication and patience to tread that path.
But atheism has nothing to offer me.
So, this is it, here we go, we're gonna make it. We have to.
The motto I have had all my life is "fools wander where wisemen fear to tread." Which seems to fit this time in history.
@No Sad Onions!
Maybe a Christian might say "... where wise men know not to tread."
@@brando3342 your talking about moral boundaries. I'm not. I am referring to persons that have been educated or indoctrinated into stupidity. Persons that have rejected common sense in favor of a feel good ideology.
No Sad Onions!
Well not exactly. I'm also referring to rationality and logic, which I'd assume you refer to as "common sense" here. Problem is, without God there is no grounding for those things including morality.
@@brando3342 I agree, but I have met moral people without common sense.
@@nosadonions3231 That's a misdefinition because morality is a common sense.
Humans are hardwired to worship. Man will become insane if he can't. so we worship money. prestige, intelligence, popularity. respectibility etc
I would say that humans are hardwired to desire rather than to worship. And it just so happens that the desire for comfort and structure is both strong and common. Religion provides both, especially in dire times.
@@nistarok123 Desire to worship especially one's self. Desire to have more money and someone comes along and says " don't desire that". And, you will counter " I will what I want, NO ONE can stop me" Money becomes god.
Buddhism wants to eradicate " desire" but that eradication is also a form of desire
Jun Acebedo - dang!
Aard - I think he basically ment that... ‘desire’ might be the more accurate description though for a lot of situations! It’s desire and worship really 👍🏻
Man desires to worship God because he is our creator and he deserves our worship.
This guy: "I have a RUclips space where I give my opinion. I really see the value in Christianity, the Christian story, the Christian ethic. Our culture is suffering without it." Also this guy: "Oh I am NOT going to church."
34:38 love John's laugh in the background; like, here we go again with the we can do it without a church idea
51:19 "The fact we live on an island and there weren't any major threats on this island."
*Angry Scottish noises*
No one can hear them...
Great talk, would love to see you two talk more in the future!
This was one of the best dialogs ive heard from either of you in the YEARS that ive been following you both. Cheers
Great to see two smart men discussing things that actually matter!
Sargon "smart"
@@Jonathan-hp4rb I lol'd so bad.
Sargon decries the breakdown of the hierarchy in society, yet he will not take himself to church, which is a representation of the ultimate hierarchy: worship of God. Wonder if he’ll listen to his own words and realize.
Liberalism has made every man into his own false Idol
If you don't believe in God, you will become a god unto yourself.
This is an incredible conversation, it seems every minute is packed with value, thank you!
Your profile pic is fire 🔥
It's like going back to 2017.
Brilliant conversation. Jonathan is so freaking smart, i always wonder what he reads, what authors he recommends, etc. He seems like such a pure, organic thinker.
Right, such a smart guy. How do I get myself to think in a similar way? Well, how to think… period
Great conversation, more of this please!
I don't think I was smart enough to understand everything in this conversation, but what I could I enjoyed. I grew up catholic and I went down a bad path of addiction, got sober, I have done AA, but it brought me to a relationship with God, and now I really stand in new testament, I appreciate the old as well, but as I developed an actual relationship with God, its taught me many truths.
If you see this, that’s wonderful to hear. I would definitely recommend praying the good ol’ rosary. It’s really the Bible on beads in that each “mystery” is an event in the life of Christ or in his mother Mary which points to Christ or was done by God. That structured, repetitive framework through which one can meditate on what God has done is really excellent for deepening one’s relationship with Him and it really helps with developing a pattern and a discipline in life. God bless you!
@@jefffinkbonner9551 thanks. It's crazy 2 years ago I wrote this and have been blessed with a daughter and many good things have happened so I'm glad people still comment after awhile. I'll deff look more into that and thank you.
I'm sympathetic to Sargon's plight. I was raised secular but have always been artistic/intuition focused, so when God was eventually outlined to me in a sophisticated manner, I knew I already believed in Him. That thing Dostoevsky and Bach pointed to --- that's what Christians mean when they say God.
I don't think the more analytically minded have that direct path (that sounds snobby so let me stress that I'm not putting value on one type of human or the other). For a lot of modern people, belief in God means, "if I fly high enough in a spaceship and look out the window I'll see a bearded guy floating around". Of course no one will believe that. Sargon, deep in his philosophy, does not have a way to intuit God. Aquinas's proofs for God's existence rely on presuppositions Sargon does not share. There isn't an intellectual path to belief through philosophy.
Art, even our modern art created by non-believers, does present that path to God (this is unavoidable --- what a secular person calls "good art" is synonymous with "art that points to God". Even us degenerate moderns want Truth and Beauty. Of course, art can be degenerate and subversive, but if it doesn't point to God on some level it will be boring art no one likes) .It's no accident that romanticism is chronologically the first place western society went when people started to lose their belief in God. The same path can be reversed: rote materialism => romanticism => belief in God.
As a side note, this is the secret ingredient to Jordan Peterson. He is a hybrid analytical/artistic type. When he struts around stage on the verge of tears, talking about suffering and heroic overcoming, he is embodying the romantic artist. No one would ever say JBP struts around stage like a psychologist. He struts around like a rock star. That's what gives him such an immediate and direct line between the modern mind and God. When he interprets the bible, he's not interpreting it psychologically. Sure, he brings in his psychological knowledge. But he interprets the bible as art. His bible series is exactly what an art critic does when he interprets a novel.
@@christopherapodaca2373 haven't heard of him, I'll check him out. I'm sure there will be exceptions, as in everything, but I think most modern people that go from pure secularism to religion will have a romantic/artistic angle (this is saying nothing of those who go from religion to atheism and back to religion, which is a different thing).
I love everything you said, except the last bit. Interpreting the bible psychologically is what he’s after. Symbols (art) come straight from the psyche. Its a small thing for me to split hairs about, I agree otherwise. He’s got soul, so it doesn’t come off like a dry scientist, he comes off as a romantic. Anyway!
@@mudhut4491 yeah I was leaning into that to make a point, but it's certainly not wrong to call his interpretation psychological.
If you saw "Psychological Study of the Bible" sitting on the shelf, you'd expect something from a materialist perspective about how mass delusion is built into the human condition.
But JBP takes the biblical stories, and unwinds the themes, analyzes the character's motivations and actions, much like literary analysis. To me that's more on the art side, but agreed, there is no hard line where art ends and psychology begins.
@@chrisc7265 bingo. Great take on the mix of art and science.
Bless you 🙏🏾
Sargon is still not quite there, yet. I am praying for his conversion.
Take action, wear your sunday best and knock on his door.
Once he breaks out of his secular shell, I hope he humbly takes a fresh look at Christianity, letting go of his false assumptions about religion, religious people, and everything he's been taught about them. The real danger is in trying to invent some "new and improved" Christianity. The only reason to do that is out of pride, so you can reconcile "we need religion" and "Christianity dumb thing for dumb people" without ever having to admit you were wrong. That way you don't have to fearfully face the living God--you can just keep being your own god and feel nice and in control.
As atheism expires (as it was always meant to), people are going to be presented with a counterfeit Christian-ish religion. It'll be modern, unifying, rational, and very appealing... it will seem like a natural evolution of humanity. But it will be even more horrible than atheism is now. That's why they had to stamp out Christianity as much as possible and sour people against it, otherwise they would never accept the sham. Let's pray that Sargon is delivered from this trap.
@@ebonifragaria What denomination are you advertising should be brought against secularism?
@@rogerspable There is only one Truth, and that is Jesus Christ. All I can tell you is that He can assuredly be found in His church, the Orthodox Church. That's the church which Jesus built, against which "the gates of Hades shall not prevail."
@@ebonifragaria It's a pretty radical view in today's society that you insist there's one truth, and that it shouldn't be secular.
The concern is that a push all the way to one dogma will cause the pendulum to swing back even harder to the opposite dogma.
I hear you that Christianity may undergo misrepresentation for it to be installed, but the same is being done with atheism/secularism, that it's being purposefully used as a flag to push social and identity divides.
Didn't expect to see these two together. Really fantastic video!
bless this guy for giving christian thought a real chance
"Christianity" was fully debunked in 2010 by former Clergy...
David H.
😂😂😂😂
We all make mistakes. Also Clergy. But christianity does not think this is extraordanary. The question is rather if Jesus is the one he claims to be? And the implications for induviduals and society.
One of my "outputs" of the conversation here is that debunking is easy- but the point is what to put in its place? The host here suggested virtue (Aristoteles). A hierarki of ways of being. Jonathan Pageau project is to show how any hierarki of any human sort is bound to failure.
My take is the three stages of Kierkegaard. Aestetics. Ethics. Religion. Thhis conversation reminded me of Kierkegaard.
Found the conversation to be in a mutual respective tone. Bless them both for their effort of understanding rather than just debunking.
Exuse my poor english. Im a guy from Kristiansand, Norway.
@@davidh.503 He says as he tips his fedora. The cheeto dust fell from his lips and landed on his fat belly where his "debate me" shirt failed to cover. The smell of his BO so strong it escaped from his reddit page and soured the world.
@@MilesTraveler That how your Biography starts?
“I go to a lot of churches as a tourist, not for religious reasons”, say that again slowly Sargon ;)
I was going to do something really productive this afternoon and then saw this come across my feed. I have no regrets. Great conversation.
The pure amount of converts from irreligious/atheist households i encounter at church, especially coming from that upbringing myself, really puts a nail in the idea you have to grow up religious to believe in God.
Do these people say why they went from atheism to believer? Fascinating.
We're in an age of re-enchantment and a refutation of pure nihilistic materialism.
It's always hilarious to me how the most damning case to be made against atheism is that it becomes religious. Really makes you think.
Because the pushers of it at the top are NEVER atheists. The propagation of atheism historically is one weapon of War.
I see atheism as just another belief system, i.e., religion.
@@spiritmatter1553 That's the trouble with certain terms. Atheism is a lack of a belief, and as such cannot be a belief system in itself. What you are likely referring to is "humanism" which is a belief system surrounding the maximization of human flourishing using reason rather than an appeal to God, which has recently been popularized by the "New Atheists". However, one can be an atheist and not a humanist and vice versa.
In light of recent events, shaking hands may fall into myth and legend as something people once did.
I've been amazed how strong the desire to shake hands is. Being English I never did it as much as a European would.
This elbow bumping, foot tapping just doesn't do it for me!
@@AndyJarman I agree. Every now and then I encounter someone brave enough to offer a handshake and I always accept it gladly. Wish I was brave enough to offer myself.
That didn't happen at all thank god :D I had like one person try to elbow bump me throughout all of it and I asked him if he was doing Muay Thai
I used to be atheistic too, then as I got older I actually have begun reading the Bible and learning from the ancient wisdom and the structure of the mental spiritual journey to wholeness and yes, Unity w God and for myself,... Christ as the Redeemer.
So you read that the Jew's "God" was only an Earth-made Volcano, then? The one that Palestinians already worshipped-- prior to both Judaism and "Christianity"...
@Pedro Cavalcanti There is also no "Being" hinted at-- with chemical processes, following eternal, naturalistic cause and effect guidelines.
@Pedro Cavalcanti A Volcano-- is not a "He"... "Yahweh" was the Volcano tribe of the Pre-Palestinian peoples... A Volcano does not have "morals"... And neither does the Bible have objective morals.
@Pedro Cavalcanti No. Morality is an objective standard by which you judge the actions taken by an individual-- and see whether they hurt or help "well-being"... No "God of transcendent nature" has ever been shown to exist-- ever.
@Pedro Cavalcanti Worshipping of idols -- is not a crime--- nor is it relevant to Reality being without a "God" / or other imaginary being...
Sargon seems to be just a redpill away from the Christpill
His piles of money keeps him away from that
This is a wonderful discussion! Thank you guys for this. I love how it’s a conversation where a non-believer and believer can speak in such a civil way.
Listening to Jonathan makes you realize that thinkers like Sam Harris spend a good amount of time knocking down straw men when speaking about "religious people."
I agree, I think Sam Harris is probably the best of the bunch because he's so clear-headed, but he doesn't have any deep knowledge of the religions he's talking about. He is only barely aware of their texts, histories, figures, etc. This only limits true discussion and repeats the same arguments.
Jonathan is not the most well known type of religious person though. He certainly wasn't the type on center stage in the mid 2000s when Sam et al came online, the sort that was replacing school science textbooks with creationist literature against mandate.
Your framing is a bait and switch that's not an honest conversation.
Jordan Peterson for example is a new phenomenon, one that many atheists can agree with, not the kind of young earth creationist fundamentalist and biblical literalist that the New Atheists were reacting to. It's not the same thing at all.
@@TheJeremyKentBGross I disagree. Listen to Sam's latest conversations with Jordan Peterson. Also, if Sam is attacking a belief system, it's on him to steel man it.
@@TheJeremyKentBGross Great point, it seems like Sam Harris and his peers were instrumental in pushing back against wave of Christian fundamentalism in the USA. The New Atheists should be commended for that because it seems like they really succeeded, I don't see many creationists or literalists around anymore and the new generations Christians today seem sharper and more sensible than those from before.
@@AJ-me1dg Is there a newer one since the Pangburn ones? I listened to those multiple times. Being in agreement with large parts of what both of them have to say, I found their conversations both thrilling and frustrating because often they don't understand each other. Peterson started out as glib about the New Atheists as Sam initially was to him.
I'd wager the future has to be somewhere between them. But Sam has been losing points with me for years now on his TDS. I think it's just a defense mechanism from being called racist for criticizing Islam, which needs to happen.
I am A Muslim and I liked this video. As a former Philosophy major who was inspired by Soren Kierkegaard, these two guys are very intelligent. I recently put up a video saying "Science did not matter" as believed by several existentialists. The reason Nietzsche and others believed that is because we do not live according to science; we live according to our feelings. These guys get it.
I agree, Sargon has idols. Telling that he didn't address it at all, he'd rather avoid it.
Nonsense
Cut him a little slack maybe?
he's searching, he'll probably get there in due time. currently he's still too prideful
@29:50
'We have been fortunate enough to live to a time when virtue, though it does not triumph, is nonetheless not always tormented by attack dogs. Beaten down, sickly, virtue has now been allowed to enter in all its tatters and sit in the corner, as long as it doesn't raise its voice.
However, no one dares say a word about vice. Yes, they did mock virtue, but there was no vice in that. Yes, so-and-so many millions did get mowed down - but no one was to blame for it. And if someone pipes up: "What about those who ..." the answer comes from all sides, reproachfully and amicably at first: "What are you talking about, comrade! Why open old wounds?" ' -Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
A thing that changed everything for me is the notion that religion isn’t an institution or a set of beliefs, in any specific sense, but a thought pattern of how beliefs play out. If you consider your foundational values (the values which anchor and enable your perspective of the world) as a type of “psychological god”, then anything can potentially behave in a religious way. From that, I think it’s easy to argue that a group communicated psychological god, result in the establishment of metaphysical ones, and thus physical institutions representing them over time. A problem then, is when those institutions are established enough to have self-interest in their own continued existence.
(Fear of lightning and what it means for my survival, is an unknown, fear motivated survival is a foundational value, group communication of that fear proceeds to personify the concept of lightning so that we are comfortable with the unknown of it, it keeps the fear in check because it rationalizes that we can’t control it and personifying it means that it has its own patterns eroding at our conception of the unknown of it, enough time we call it zeus, the unknown isn’t fully gone so Zeus becomes more instantiated, institutionalized, and given enough time the psychological power we’ve given to it establishes the authority of priests who are now motivated to continue their position - where there’s now a break between the causal origination of the concept and the reason for the institutions existence, people are still bound to it but the institution is no longer bound to the people.)
When traditional religions break, new ones form, the pattern keeps playing out, people will constantly play out religious patterns with almost anything, social, economic, political, cultural, even logic can be valued as a religious pattern.
It’s like we’re revisiting Nietzsche’s Ubermench all over again
Oh my goodness, Jonathan!!! This is epic! The work you’ve been doing is opening up so many minds/hearts.
Thank you for down to earth, candid talk between gentlemen.
Sargon should read ALL the C.S. Lewis.
Agreed. I think he would find his attitude and manner of thinking to be very imteresting.
Amazing! Keep the conversations going.
We only wanted to play Video Games !!!
But muh ideological subversion
From the First of Us to the Last of Us Too
@@mrRambleGamble cool pun
Well i wasnt expecting this crossover
Read CS Lewis Screwtape Letters, puts faith in a really interesting perspective.
Shoot - just read CS Lewis. Any book of essays by CS Lewis.
O'Ambitious One True!
"Faith" is belief without evidence, or in the face of evidence to the contrary... What about that is "interesting"?
David H. You an Atheist? Atheists are some of the most faithful people to come across. They have no doubt their doctrine is correct even though their evidence cannot explain or disprove the divine.
I guess you belive in yourself? A very dangerous thing that, since people that belive in themselves the most are lunatics in an asylum. They belive in themselves so strongly that no one can convince them that they aren’t Napoleon lets say.
I am no denier of science, and science has given many wonderful things and discoveries.
But prove love to me. We know it exists, but what is the rationality behind it?
Do you seriously belive that the love you feel to your mother, father, a dear friend or your own child is just a chemical reaction and nothing more? Can you, by a rational scientific study or formula, explain love?
Can you explain why we make art?
Why we love to create?
Can you use the scientific method to prove God is not real?
Evidence can be found in reasoning and logic too you know.
You might like Lewis who was a very devout Atheist up til a point.
@@christianbjorck816 I have ZERO beliefs that I hold that are based upon a lack of evidence. Dishonesty will not "Score you points"... Atheism is the rejection of the assertion that a "God" exists. It is the position of not being convinced that you are correct. IT DOES NOT HAVE A DOCTRINE-- STUPID SACK OF SHI*.
One of your best conversations, Jonathan. Great work. Greetings from Mexico.
Wow, Carl has really evolved so much. This was a great conversation. Someone should recommend Catherine Pickstock's After Writing to him. I think it will give him the philosophical framework to embrace what he's resistant to.
Spengler talks about 'poetic and vital' societies; archetypes might be the mythical world of King Arthur and the search for the Holy Grail.
Modern Western society has lost it's poetry. Lost its vital, clear, heart.
He also talks about the inversion of hierarchies in the West, and the consequent mob rule.
There's also the second religiousness coming at the end of a civilization, which is exactly what we see now with emerging competing religious systems(even if a lot of them we wouldn't name religions) It's mostly like what happened in the first centuries AD, ending with the win of Christianity
good take on Spengler, I was thinking Carl was stumbling across Technics without really knowing , 'materialistic' etc. seems like he's been doing his reading since getting whipped in 2017 bloodsports
@@Benjamin-ks2rq I think I'm stumbling thru' Spengler like Carl. I've barely skimmed his work, but his predictions have become such stark reality in recent years I think we're all becoming experts.
(I'm going to reuse that 'bloodsports' reference lol)
John David John David Ebert channel has a hyper modernity podcast where he also has discussed Spangler his work on his channel and within the hyper-modern contacts Don the current Euro I suggest his work for Sargon and Jonathan especially if they're not familiar I followed his work and Jonathan's especially in regarding the symbolism in mythology mythological world in the modern era it would be great to have more discussions on that topic involving Spengler and the seasonal aspect of the civilizations in these times
He's completely missing the point. 'we need a non religious version'....that's already where we live. He needs to find God.
This was a great conversation. I really enjoyed it.
As a remedy for sargon i'd reccommend C.S Lewis's Essay's His fiction and a little about his life, is what really helped me for in the secular world we live in. Reading wise that is.
This brings back something Bishop Barron said recently during a talk with Jonathan, that the new atheism basically served to 'purify' religious understanding, by renewing and getting us passed cognitive blocks and blindspots that festered within Christianity.
By literally playing devil's advocate 😅
Sargon has evolved exponentially since I first found him in 2016 or 17 busting on crash course take on guns germs and steel. This flame throwing gamer continues to shift towards a really interesting thinker and conversation partner. I think Jonathan showed him a few different ways of thinking. What a great conversation.
I'm of the opposite belief, he have stayed the same just crystalized his thoughts.
I would be interested in hearing more about Sargon's views on Aristotle.
@@trbry. I hope he doesn't become crystalized beyond salvation
I could see Sargon reading some Chesterton and changing his tune on God. He's an evolving person, he has no idea where he might end up on this journey.
loved it! Jonathan, your video "Anthropology of mysticism" made me think to myself "I cannot not consider myself a Christian anymore". I thank you for that from the bottom of my heart.
It's not just predictive, it's definitional Carl
First Tom Holland, then Douglas Murray, now Sargon... The dominos fall
Carl, I think the lord must be working on me as the idea of going to church has been a bone of contention in my journey back to Christianity. Listening, I feel inspired to find a church which will help me deepen my faith further. I have written to you before but I’m sure my story is lost in the many many comments. You remind me of the brainwashing of scientism in our British schools, we just can’t look outside of the box of the 5 senses! It took me 10yrs of living in the US South to figure out my thinking was so narrow! I see this meeting took place 5 months ago, but I believe I was meant to hear it now. Grateful to you and your guest!
I'm coming from Sargon's following. Someone has read Eliade. Good talk.
If I had to guess JP has actually little if any exposure to Eliade, which, if anything, makes the convergence of ideas that much more illuminating and likely to be revealing something real.
@@peten5426 I agree.
I have a feeling that Jonathan, however, has read Eliade. Specifically because of the vocabulary he's using. When people start talking about "cosmic images" and "sacred spaces", they've usually at least read The Sacred and The Profane. I could be wrong, I'm not a consistent viewer of his.
@@tm23822 Belying some of my own ignorance however I'm at least somewhat certain this sort of language is also to be found in the Eastern Christian mystics like Gregory of Nyssa and Maximus the Confessor, two prime inspirations of JP.
All mostly beside the point though as what really matters is that this sort of language, from across eras and traditions, is all pointing to some essential aspect of existence and that JP is particularly adept at synthesizing these ideas and making them relatable to our current 21st century condition.
@@tm23822 He has a reading list on Patreon, that includes "Images and Symbols", so I'm pretty sure he has read some Eliade.
Are you proud of how he destroyed UKIP?
This was such a great conversation, I’d love to hear a follow up in the future
"In the year 2020, the theists and atheists will work together to heal the world."
This year has definitely produce more absurd realities.
what's this quote from?
@@infidelcastro6687 oops, sorry. It's not a quote from anyone, just me. Apologies for the confusion.
@@Kuldirongaze1 oh, gotcha. well, hopefully it happens soon anyway
Wonderful conversation, thank you for putting things so artistically, so beautifully!
These two youtubers are on my list of favorites...watch them often.....really interesting perspectives they both have
I like rediscovering these.
Sargon needs to attend traditional liturgy and engage in prayer and meditation and Eucharistic adoration. Comprehending the love of God is difficult and takes more work than reading philosophy
He does but if my example means anything just watch more RUclips videos on authentic Christianity and find people who badger you into it lol
@@juliannkretonn4623 If I thought he was sincere, I think prayer would be enough.
He seems to think being English will suffice
Hmm. Do I see a slight resemblance to Henry VIII?
Thank you both!🩰
Excellent video. I will always be an atheist but i do see the value in the mythos many religions create with the parables/allegory that teach value and meaning.
This was a great conversation, thanks!
Do you know the etymology of 'secular', Sargon? It comes from a word meaning, and I'm paraphrasing from memory so this won't be perfectly accurate you're welcome to look it up, 'of one cycle'. There is no 'secular' replacement for religion because secularism excludes a pluralistic meta-history and a meta-reality.
Best birthday present I’ve gotten in a while!! Thanks guys
This was really enjoyable, great talk guys!
This was a GREAT interview.
I was one of the new atheist and now I'm catholic so there is hope for every one 😂
God bless you and ¡Viva Cristo Rey!
About the fool, I heard an amusing storiy (as it usually goes with those things, hard to know if they're true):
- People were afraid to tell the king he had lost his ships in a naval battle, so the fool was entrusted in giving him the news. He arrived and solemnly announced: "Your majesty, the brave men of your naval force firmly proved to the enemy they are much better swimmers!"
Goes to show how the fool can be the only one to speak truth to the king
My experience of parish life is that the authority of the priest and the imperative of the liturgy affords a space where family heads can meet on neutral ground and establish connections that would not otherwise happen.
Indeed, religion for many, is a stable means of family formation and reproduction.
And thanks be to God for that.
Yeah... I just use Tinder.
@@dylanwight5764 That’s degenerate
That is a good product but not the intention of the Gospel, even the secular world can produce it.
The combination of people I never imagined, but I enjoyed very much! Thank you both :)
Sargon, if you're reading this, check out Paul VanderKlay.
ruclips.net/video/ddxnyuZD-BA/видео.html
And he just posted a video talking about Sargon
Next on too watch :) Vankerclay reviews this
Just for the record: I am subscribed to both Jonathan's and Sargon's channel, and RUclips sent me no notification for this. Joke's on them: I manually check for updates here.
Those reductionists made me so so angry I was besides myself. This is so good to hear.
Great discussion man!! Keep up the good work!!!!!
haven't listened to the whole thing yet, but a conversation about what the new atheists miss should really start with their absolutely woeful arguments on the topic. what pisses people off about them is that they have genuinely bad and irrational arguments for their views but walk around with the arrogant presummption that they won the argument and are waiting for everyone else to catch up.
I used to always ask the atheists "how do you affirm non belief"? I didn't know how to articulate it the way these guys do but essentially I was trying to ask "what do you replace God with". Most people aren't intellectually sophisticated and still just replace God with some other diety (feminism, anti racism, BLM, transgender... etc etc...).
Great discussion. So many of the talking points and questions here are addressed in C.S. Lewis' Abolition of Man (should be required reading) and G.K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man. These are both masterpieces in my opinion. I'd love to know if Sargon or Jonathan have read these.
The Abolition of Man is brilliant and is what got me into Lewis. I came across it on this great channel dedicated to him that does continuous illustration along with audiobook m.ruclips.net/video/idgYLTnSzxI/видео.html
Now I believe Sargon has read a lot of CS Lewis and I recall (Although I can not find the video I heard it in) some of the lotus eaters (Carl's crew) talking about the book in question.
I wish I had seen this sooner. I’ve also come to the realization that we needed the post-modernists to understand what it is that we’re actually experiencing and what we do and believe in. That belief in God, partaking in tradition and ritual, having traditional families and values are all meaningful and much more deeply thought out than we understood.
It is definitely part of God’s Great Awakening and this heartens me. It give me great optimism when things can seem so grim.
Technology made it possible for us to not physically need our neighbor. Without that need we self segregated. Self segregation has perverted the pattern of reality.
Thank god for intellectual conversations like this that are still happening in such daunting times.
Sargon is the new peter hitchens.
Peter Hitchens coldly stares down his nose at this comment.
@@bourbonchicken this reply made me laugh.
Give it 10 years!
I would love to see Sargon and Peter have a conversation. He's currently keeping me sane with his crusade against lockdowns and the nonsensical policies we are currently tolerating.
The only reason Sargon does RUclips videos is because he got fired from Applebees.
The new atheist movement fizzled out hard. The apologetic response came late, but in force.