Відео

@@antonyreyn That’s an intriguing connection. Do you think it has any impact on Tolkiens work? I’m ashamed to say I know very little about Beowulf.

@@pjulian777 well he would have known this from young and there is Nominative Determinism, example my GF name was Redmile and he married someone born in Redmile Leics. Great video cheers

@@DarthPreamp No worries Daniel, I hope it assists! I’m planning a piece on Kerouac soon with an emphasis on the same themes, writing which feels like it comes from somewhere else than your own conscious mind. Cheers 👍🏻

@ I’m a composer, and this idea of “reporting” happens, in a way, when I write. It definitely comes from somewhere else. I wonder if this is common in highly creative people?

@ I think so. I often hear songwriters speak of being some kind of antenna, pulling down material out of the ether… I’m not surprised to hear a composer say that too! Terence McKenna (the great psychonaut) was very into this idea, if you’ll forgive me for quoting: “A relationship to a disincarnate intelligence is the precondition for authentic shamanism. Nowhere in our world do we have an institution like (that that we do not consider pathological) except in the now very thinly spread tradition of the muse. That artists alone amongst human beings are given permission to talk in terms of “my inspiration” or “a voice which told me to do this” or “a vision that must be realised”. The thin line, the thin thread of shamanic descent into our profane world leads through the office of the artist.” And he thought that the task of Art was quite literally to save the world 🌍

@ 🪬That’s really a very interesting quote. Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

@@DarthPreamp No problem, I had a look at one of your pieces and it sounded beautiful.

@@R.P-e2z Thanks RP, I don’t think I could have put it any better! I love the idea of a brokenhearted man trying to resurrect his lover, I have written similar stories but not quite couched in that way. I’ll definitely look further into it 👍🏻

@@Sidionian Thanks for your comment. It is interesting to see Tolkien refer again and again in his letters to his recurring dream of the Great Wave rising out of the West to drown the world, which he specifically relates back to the Atlantean tradition. Do you have any specific sources that show Tolkien grappling with Neoplatonism, Gnosticism etc? I’d love to hunt them down if you could point me in their direction. I have always had this idea that Tolkien intuited a lot of these things rather than learned them, perhaps from his (Jungian) collective unconscious or something similar… thanks again for the comment!

Thanks for your comment! That sounds exactly like the kind of work Tolkien is speaking about. If you would like to share some of your poems I would be most interested to take a look... is there anywhere I can find you online?

@@Paul-hw3tl No. You’re clutching at straws and I think you know it 😊. However if I claimed that this was the only worthwhile video on this platform then yes, that methodology would be fine.

@@pjulian777 you are right, the argument is weak and a little besides the point. maybe thats because i dont understand what the purpose of this is. you are saying the evidence is so bad it could as well be made up (this is my interpretation), but at the same time the texts hold a tremendous cultural and moral value. so this makes it sound like the gospels are a standalone work and you can evaluate their truthfulness without taking into account what lead to their creation and what followed after and all the external sources that point to the same events referred to in the gospels.

@@Paul-hw3tl The fundamental purpose is to speak the truth against damaging lies that are being propagated. More specifically I want to suggest to people that spiritual uncertainty - agnosticism I suppose - is very liberating and is the true path to insight. Or more poetically: to liberate those still in bondage to the perverted Gods of men. Thanks for developing your point in a second comment I appreciate it!

@@pjulian777 so your claiming ro speak truth by not being able to tell whats truth? Just asking because now im really confused.

@ Yep. The truth is that there is no absolute truth, especially when you are considering narrative material whether spoken or written. There are degrees to which you can be persuaded, though: are you persuaded that it’s possible? plausible? Likely? Very likely? Beyond any reasonable doubt? Any time you hear a person you know tell a slightly whacky story you go through this process.

@@lennierofthethirdfaneofchu7286 Hi Lennier and thanks for the question. The probabilities are based on the generally accepted estimate of how many humans have lived, which is 100 Billion. An event like the virgin birth of Jesus is claimed to be the only such event amongst those 100 billion births, ie one in 100 billion. The probability of a story with two such elements can be obtained by multiplying the probabilities together. Does that make sense?

​@pjulian777 It seems that when calculating the probability, you are treating the two events as completely independent or naturalistic. Assuming a naturalistic explanation for the miraculous events (virgin birth and resurrection), then I agree with how you conducted the math. However this is not the claim that the gospels make. They assert supernatural methods. Thus, if a man was supernaturally born of a virgin, the probability of other supernatural events occurring in his life cannot be calculated using the same odds as an average person. For example, it would be disingenuous to say that Bill Gates children have the same likelihood of becoming a billionaire as an average person. When you accept the children's paternity (akin to accepting the virgin birth), you must take care to account for the effect that will have on the probability of becoming a billionaire (rising from the dead). [This analogy may not be perfect, but I hope it helps to convey my meaning] I don't disagree with the assertion that the gospels make highly unlikely claims. Yet, in general I do not find probabilistic arguments to be a very strong argument against the claims of the gospels. The gospels are special BECAUSE they claim unlikely events. Finding that, in fact, Jesus's life was very uncommon is a simple agreement with the writers themselves. The unlikely nature of the events described demand healthy skepticism. However probability alone is no basis for disregarding the claims of the gospel writers. Whether or not the evidence available is sufficient in regard to the magnitude of the claims is a different topic, and is something that I do not believe was portrayed in good faith. If I've made an error in my reasoning or misrepresented your stance lmk

@@hoyt7794 HI Hoyt. Thanks for the comment. When you start positing the existence of an omnipotent supernatural deity things get very squirrelly very quickly. For example: if you state that this God did X at a certain point, you necessarily imply that this God could have done one of an infinite number of other things (not-x) at that same point. The probability of you being correct is therefore infinitely small. So it's actually worse for you than going with the naturalistic probability. The Scholastics tied themselves in knots over these kinds of arguments, can god make a rock so heavy that God can't lift it etc. The broader point you make is something that I think is at the real heart of these issues. "The story is so crazy that it must be true" has seduced very good thinkers down the years (including Tolkien and C S Lewis) and it is one of the secrets of the longevity of the Catholic Church. They multiply these absolutely crazy doctrines (transubstantiation, Purgatory, Limbo, infallibility) and the end effect is that people throw up their hands and say: well it's all so bonkers that I guess it must be true! My advice would be: don't give in to this heuristic. A story that sounds crazy is most often crazy. An extremely unlikely story is usually BS told by someone with something to gain from it, or someone who is bona fide nuts. Thanks for your comment, I really appreciate the thought you put into it. I might say: I'm not an atheist, in case you were wondering. Cheers!

@@pjulian777 This becomes a tautology. Book says unlikely event happened-you confirm event is unlikely by book’s statement. Better, “Book claims impossible event happened with no evidence.”

@ These events are not impossible. They are just extremely unlikely. And there is not “no evidence”. There is just extremely poor evidence. I think we need to speak with precision in these things, statements like yours are a gift to apologists who have no problem disproving them and boy do they love to latch on to such stuff!

@@djdndjdnbffndjdjd5809 Of course. Both of these events are claimed to be one-time-in-human-history events. 100 billion people have lived (according to the best estimate I could find) and only one was born of a virgin, only one was dead for three days and then resurrected. For each event it’s 100 billion to one, for a story with both of these elements you just multiply the probabilities by each other. A good question to ask is: if I told you that last Easter I died and was resurrected, what sort of evidence would you need to disprove the vast implausibility of my claim? Would any evidence be sufficient?

​@pjulian777 you are treating a miracle as though it were a natural event, and then using its rarity to prove that it didnt happen. The assumption that it is based on is clearly nonsense. If we followed your logic, for it to be real, it would need to happen multiple times. But if it happened multiple times, because it is a natural possibility, it is obviously not a miracle. To somehow mischaracterise the Christian claim of Jesus as "finally, a guy happened to get really lucky and be born of a virgin AND be resurrected" is either a deliberate error or a tragic and fundamental misunderstanding of the faith. Not even touching on the idea of jut multiplying the two probabilities together, as though they were independant of one another.

That's a great question and it depends upon the standard of proof that you are after. If it's beyond reasonable doubt I would say yes, you can safely abandon your search for that via ancient texts. Balance of probabilities? Might be achievable but it would require very good contemporaneous documentary evidence with strong corroboration even for fairly mundane assertions. The likelihood of claimed miracles can be assessed for some such claims. Christians themselves claim that the virgin birth was a once-in-human-history thing. Roughly 100 Billion people have been born. That gives you (roughly) a hundred billion to one against. It's a mighty big number. How do you possibly displace it? Another way of thinking about it is: if I swore to you that I had died and been resurrected at Eastertime 20 years ago, what evidence would you require to allow you to be convinced of it? Whatever answer you give to that question, and i hope you're honest and stringent, you'll need to increase it massively if you are looking back 2000 years because evidence had an innate propensity to deteriorate over time. Uncertainty is the touchstone of all genuine spiritual claims. If you get used to it you might find it very liberating. Thanks for the comment!

@@timthetiger1665 Tim thanks for your comments. I’m not suggesting that the gospels are worse than any other material of similar vintage, or that the material is inherently deceptive or designed to be so. I’m just calling for intellectual humility and the recognition that this is (by proper evidentiary standard) really very poor evidence of anything, let alone the miraculous claims made by Christians. I am not an atheist by any stretch, but I do advocate for appropriate agnosticism in relation to spiritual matters. Thank you for your comment I do appreciate your willingness to engage with the substance of the matter!

@@AgentThursday Hi Agent Thursday! Not quite sure why you have identified this as clickbait, if you could give me a bit more detail I would happily reconsider the piece. Or are you a Christian who just disagrees with the material?

@@typical_watcher4599 Thanks for your comment, if you could elaborate on how this is misleading I might be able to correct for it, the evidentiary analysis is based on 20+ years of legal experience.

Or are you simply a Christian who disagrees with the piece, and would prefer other Christians not be exposed to it because it might endanger their faith?

@@mandalovescatspandas1781 And you ❤️🙏

@@rosepetals8181 That’s beautifully put ❤️

@@Sarah-mx3tg To a very large extent these are things I learned from you, for example “the Fallen Queen who will rise instantly to save us” is more or less a direct quote. And in this arena that is how it should be ❤️❤️❤️

BEAUTIFUL 🙏✝️💕👁️💕😇🌈🦋💝

Bratwurst hated vandalising water. Chopping down a living tree would have been ten times worse 😢

It’s completely impossible. That’s why it’s funny 🤣

@@pjulian777 Undoubtedy! Reminds me of the old Flying High movie where a jet-powered Boeing 707 flies through the sky with the sound of a piston-propeller DC-7.

@@ronlucock3702 Ah yes I remember! I wonder whether that inspired the gag…

Thank you. Two years ago I was certain that this violence would happen, with the Proud Boys and Antifa facing off in the streets amongst so many armed militia… there has been a bit of a lull that has me doubting whether that’s correct… the calm before the storm? I truly hope it doesn’t happen.

Certainly owes a debt. There’s probably more political commentary in it, a touch more philosophy, more digs at the new agers and also a more definite mockumentary style. Thanks for your comment!

Indeed. But try telling the neo-stoics that…

Thanks Bob! I have had critics who explain why the smoke couldn’t possibly be produced by the craft and I have to gently say: that’s kinda the gag…

@@pjulian777 I'm there for you, bud.

I fear you may have graced this video with more erudition than is warranted. Thank you for your subscription, and for the wind-related factoids. Let us hope that the brave pilot Bratwurst continues to guide us from beyond the grave 😊

Thank you Sarah! I wouldn't be relying on you to act as airbag if the much puffier Bratwurst failed to deploy... did you get the joke about his little brother's name? I hope you are still managing to integrate your soul with your soul body and your mind spirit. All my love❤

Thanks for your comment. I happen to think that any man who seeks dominion over a woman is not a good man but a weak man, an insecure man, perhaps even an abusive man. I don’t see much room for agreement between us but I do appreciate the comment.

I would agree that I am way out in left field. But depending on the play, that position can become the most important one in the arena. I also agree that I would benefit from a “mental redo” and that seems to be underway. Thanks for your comment 👍🏻

So… you’re saying that heretics should be murdered and Jews persecuted for their faith? I’m pretty sure that’s against both the UA-cam terms of service, and also (of course) a criminal offence in most decent countries. Hopefully you have your identity firmly disguised! 🥸

I don’t think I’m lying. At worst I might be mistaken or deluded. But even if I were lying: do you think that compares in any way with the horrific and brutal crimes perpetrated by our church in every phase of its existence? Isn’t it bizarre that this brutal institution should demand repentance from me, when its hands are so steeped in the gore and suffering of the innocent? I think you need to reconsider your position, lest you endanger your own soul. Our church should bow down before us and repent, not the other way around. Thanks for posting!

The one, holy, catholic and apostolic church is the Orthodox Church. Repent.

@@pjulian777 you are engaging in a logical fallacy by hating on the Catholic Church because of the action of its adherents. Catholics are equally horrified when these occur. But consider the fact that non Catholics also engage in this behavior. It would be grossly unfair to say “See those Protestants over there? That proves the whole Protestant church umbrella is of the devil!” Again a logical fallacy. There will always be sinners in every group that do heinous things. The legitimacy of a faith tradition must be judged based on its belief system.

@@pero33403 So do you agree with me that the Roman Church is a demonic abomination? In a manner of speaking I mean…

@@N1IA-4 This “few bad apples” idea is the logical fallacy. The horrors in which this church has engaged have always gone right up through the bishops and cardinals to the Pope. If you want to talk apples, the whole thing is rotten to the core. But that’s just my view, you are of course at liberty to disagree ❤️

It’s not really intended as satire, which may explain why it’s not funny… I do have some comedy material coming up, keep an eye out for it! Thanks for commenting.

I have read scripture. I have also written New Scripture. But most importantly: I have had very intense and very direct spiritual experience, next to which all the writing in the world looks very thin and haggard. Thanks for your comment!

@@pjulian777 - You learn, practice, and preach the doctrines of demons.

@@rubiks6 No the Catholic Church does that, this is the point of the video. I have never murdered anyone, or tortured anyone, or abused a child… this is demonic, calling out this behaviour is definitely not.

@@pjulian777 -Well, we don't disagree on everything. The Roman Catholic Church is very much evil and demonic. Pointing that out does not make you any less demonic.

I think that sounds like a good plan, it’s much better for you to go on an inward journey. Thanks for commenting 🙏

Want the truth, then go to the source of it. Roman Catholic church. Plenty of great books available.

@@andrew-xr1de sorry, I won’t be looking to an organization that hoards mummified body parts and worships (ok, venerates, or whatever you call it) them as holy relics. I’ll look to the Bible.

@@andrew-xr1de I was born into the Church, that gives me quite a bit of data 😊

I’m pretty sure I have a fair idea, but if you could provide a bit more detail I would happily consider it 👍🏻

Thank you 🙏

Hi Petar. These are very worthwhile questions, and your comments about the truth are very true. We don’t seek to invent a new religion, in fact that’s the last thing we aim to do… rather we seek to build a repository of stories that tend to uplift and console people, without these pointless arguments about whether a particular story is “true” in a literal or historical sense… and the only gospel we preach is: Love One Another. Thanks for your interest, please do take a look at the books if you have the time. Cheers!

@@pjulian777 Thank you for your reply. *_we seek to build a repository of stories that tend to uplift and console people, without these pointless arguments about whether a particular story is “true” in a literal or historical sense…_* Either A is true or it isn't. This is how truth works. Take Jesus for example. Either he was killed and resurrected as Christians claim, or was merely killed as atheist claim, or wasn't killed at all, as Muslims claim. The only sure thing is that they cannot possibly all be true, as they are contradicting each other. In an attempt to unify everyone so that we _Love One Another_ you are preaching a new version of truth- where actual truth doesn't matter, as long as we all get along. Truth is exclusive by its nature. As an example- by claiming that what really happened to Jesus doesn't matter, you are saying that what Christians, Atheists and Muslims teach about him is irrelevant. By contrast you're saying that what you teach is actually relevant, proper and true interpretation of history and reality. All attempts to change what is true is another attempt to establish what is true. Maybe it is true that it doesn't matter what Christians, Atheists and Muslims teach about Jesus. However, in claiming that, you are inventing a new position on what is true, right and proper. This is why I asked _Why intent a new religion?_

Petar I am a lawyer. I once worked on determining who might be entitled to dormant WWII era bank accounts, and I can tell you: even that far back, it is impossible to be apprised of the truth of even fairly mundane matters. Going back 2000 years, when the main evidence is non-contemporaneous hearsay accounts from anonymous authors? Even the idea that we can find the truth about these things becomes an exercise in hubris. I prefer to let such vain speculations go and instead focus on what makes a moral person, what makes a good and ethical life? And I think that love and service towards other people is the fundamental answer, and I am boosted by the fact that most if not all religions say the same basic thing. So although my approach might be a bit unusual, I am not really saying anything new when I "preach" a very simple gospel of love. Do you have a particular religious outlook? And if not I would be interested to know: how do you figure out how to live your life from an ethical point of view?

@@pjulian777 Thank you for your reply. That is an interesting observation about history. However, I do not think it is accurate to think that it applies to any religion. Major religions have millions of adherents and they all, believing that their own is true, safeguard how they came to their revelation. You can take all of them at face value and examine their claims. The way I see it, we can either try to follow truth as humbly and persistently as we can, or we can allow ourselves to be deceived in a sea of confusion. The world is full of people with contradictory statements, cultures and beliefs. What convinced me that Christianity in particular is true is that it insists that God is Truth. Truth is knowable, we have free will, because we are made in the image of God, to pursue Truth, and as a statement of belief, they insist that Truth is good for us. That is, truth is beneficial for us and it is in our best interest to humbly and lovingly seek it. We are not the source of truth, we can merely chose to seek it and live by it. This is the first of Ten Commandments, go love God with all your heart, mind and soul. All of these are in stark contrast to the Culture we live in. Everything is random, an accident. The truth is relative. What is true for you is not true for me. You are merely a moist robot without free will and are helplessly deluded into thinking that you could find out the truth. And if there is an absolute truth, why bother with it? Why make waves and make other people uncomfortable with your silly notion that truth is somehow important? When you start there, you’re incapable of thinking that you can be an independent agent, let alone pursue truth or find it. You cannot even begin to think properly. With belief that there is no truth, no reason or logic behind the world, you're stuck in mental mud of confusion. Everything is possible and nothing is true. Does that sound familiar? Now there are many many ways to reach the Conclusion that Christianity in particular is true. Just as there are many ways to show other worldviews are either flat out wrong, self-contradictory or clearly invented. Without making my reply unnecessarily huge, I will stop here. Please, feel free to ask anything and I will be happy to clarify.

Thank you Phillip, may peace be upon you as well.

You know that is quite the compliment, as it was a label used to describe the doughty and loyal St Peter. I bear his name, as it happens, and I feel blessed to do so. Thank you for your comment and your interest!

Hi John. Thanks for your comment. My aim is not to convert devout persons such as yourself - that being literally a fools errand - and I am sure that as a faithful Catholic you are also a decent person… engaging in the corporal works of mercy and other good deeds. I am more concerned with the ghastly sins of the institution, which I’m sure you’re aware of also. All the best with your faith journey, I feel certain that we would consider ourselves bound by the same basic obligations, including the obligation to speak out courageously against evil wherever we find it. Pace e bene.

@@pjulian777 There have always been evildoers *within* the Roman Catholic Church. Remember that it started right out of the gate with the evildoing apostle Judas Iscariot. Christ actually warned that there would be evildoers in the Church. Nowadays there seems to be a greater percentage of self-identifying Catholics than ever before doing evil within the Church. Now is the time for those who embrace the Church’s truth, goodness and beauty to stand against those evildoers… and also for those who seek that truth, goodness and beauty to find it in the (orthodox wing of) the Church. Pace e bene. ✝️

Thank you for your prayer, as you may have gathered I am also devoted to Her. May Her divine mercy wash away the sins of the world, and may She have mercy upon us. Amen.

Andrew I could not agree more. I think that western souls are best matched to western ideas, lest we get lost "in a maze of alien thought that we cannot hope to negotiate." Thanks for taking the time to comment.

That's very interesting. I have heard Marxism connected up with Jewish millenarianism but not with Buddhism. I will give it some thought.

Thank you for those wise words! What I have found is that Love is the thing common to all religions that can be distilled out, that "love one another" is the only true gospel. Hopefully you have come near that too.

I will look up "sophistes". Thanks for your comment.

​@@pjulian777 there is a Latin word called "lex parsimoniae", which also is known as "ockham's razor". Everything that is a religious concept only is an assumption. This can be proven by performative proof. So there is no doubt. But assumptions which don't help are not true because of lex parsimoniae. Furthermore theology requires logic to have assumptions and not there logical opposite. Hence there every logical contradiction also is a disproof for the existence of God. But people on't catch that for two reasons: 1) they don't think on them own, but believe. 2) there are afraid of hell, so they don' even assume that God would not exist. But in the end hell is impossible, because God is impossible. This is how religions work. So people who believe accept that they cannot understand, hence will do what others command them. That's why Vatican is very rich.

@@DEMOKRATEN-DEUTSCHLANDS I think Occam’s razor is a very useful concept. Perhaps not a law, because there are instances where its application may not be warranted, but certainly a useful rule of thumb. The problem is that people who are committed to a dogmatic religion are a very long way away from being able to apply this or any other genuine principle of thought. Their rationality has been fundamentally corrupted and it’s a very difficult thing to heal from. Thanks again for your comments!

If you ma understand the situation where you are in, you may orientate mentally. Hence you may solve problems. Hence you will have success (not the money stuff, but the experience in life, that it was you who figured out concepts that helped to overcome a problem). That the biggest pleasure possible and it strengthens your personality. So: working on solutions for problems is the key to a good life experience. Psychology is not needed at all.

Thanks for your comment. I have had "misery" suggested as a definition for Dukkha and have heard others. I think they are all roughly in the same ballpark. I think you're spot on with "being present in the world" which I also think is the path to spiritual health.