The split in the western soul, with Tim Freke
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 сер 2018
- What is the lost spiritual knowledge that needs to be reintegrated? Tim Freke is a philosopher and has spent decades studying religion and mystical traditions, from Taoism to Gnosticism. He is the author of a number of bestselling books including Jesus and the Lost Goddess: timfreke.com/
![ОРБАН приехал к ПУТИНУ и "отчитался" о поездке в Киев 😁 [Пародия]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_0ukDovOWq8/mqdefault.jpg)
Best UA-cam channel at the moment. You're nailing it again!
Christians choose the easy way, claiming resurrection was the core element of their belief,
to escape responsibility for their wrongdoings. Hence, there is the savior who cleanses all sins, having then free shoulders again, continuing sinning. In catholicism more evident than in protestantism, where self responsibility plays a more prominent role. Christ is and was always the door opener to the realm of light, for the ones following him in action, not in words, for them salvation is fact, when purified enough by following Christs example of light. I'm a profound lover of Christs Logos, criticizing this opportunistic mindset of christians, we see too often with much bigotry harming so, the reputation of Christ.
The resurrection belief was the starter, now we have to abandon our egoistic opportunism and take the tale of Christ more seriously: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for rich men, meaning egoists, to enter the kingdom of heaven". Historically it was important to get christianity started, seducing the crowds with the sugar of that easier way, but now, we have to follow Christ in heart and action.
Jordan Peterson does this and means it, asking us to take responsibility, to shoulder our crosses, with the sad exception of his dull excuses and rejection of all the facts pointing to a man made climate change. He seems not being ready to carry the resulting consequences, adapting his lifestyle in accordance with these facts, shattering so my trust in his truthful reasoning.
Christianity has the potential for the better, but carrying your cross is much harder, than just asking for redemption. This new page christianity has to open, but they rather want to stay in the past, what gnostics do less, being not so fixed on the scriptures.
Thank you to everyone who responded thoughtfully to this conversation. Apologies for not interacting earlier, my attention has been elsewhere. Mainly with getting my daughter safely of to university, which is a big change for all of us.
I don't talk much about my early work on Christianity anymore because I have become so tired of the insults and crass criticisms that ensue, which is evidenced from some of the comment below. I love disagreement and debate, but that is impossible when people make snap judgements after hearing a few statements in an interview which is condensed from decades of thought. So I writing this to appeal to you better nature when we connecting together around important topics on the internet. Please, debate the ideas don't attack people. Not just me ... with everyone.
For those that think somehow we haven't reached our conclusions on Christianity after a lot of research, please look at the enormous bibliography in our books The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess. I am sure we made mistakes. I actually haven't read either book through for 20 years as I've been too busy with my new work. I am sure there will be facts and style that seem outdated or immature to me now I am nearly 60. But if you want to dispute our findings, please actually look at what we say ... don't assume you know somehow based on very little.
It seems to me we should first try to understand what anyone is saying sympathetically, then use the critical mind to question that throughly. If we can do that with each other we can move towards truth together. Personally i love it when i discover i have been wrong about something, because it opens me up to something I didn't see before. The way we are connecting online via youtube etc. are opportunities to find a civilised, questioning, respectful way to enjoy the benefits of free- thought.
Thank you
I am a Christian ( a term I use as little as I can get away with ) because I have had a series of profound experiences which have had a particularly "Jesus flavour" ( Mike McHargue), at the heart of which are the old notions of repentance and grace/love. Essentially sanity or "salvation" depend on being continually reborn into a new awareness of everything which ignorance and personal failure can (when acknowledged ((confession)) no longer prohibit , in fact as Leonard Cohen put it so powerfully , it’s through those ”cracks that the light gets in.”
I see a great danger in modern spiritual notions of “the Kingdom of Heaven” not as the world as finally revealed when our personal lenses are wiped clean but as so much spiritual real estate, and this is somewhere I wouldn’t want to live in for a day , never mind all of eternity.
With deep respect, I don't use my "critical mind" on issues of Mystery. They are both vitally needed but address different needs of the human experience. Jesus is a real person and presence, this I "know" not from my reason or intellect but from a well formed conscience and conviction of soul (psyche). Blessings to your work.
Thankyou Tim. You are rebel wisdom personified.
It’s one thing to posit that the Jesus of the New Testament is a literary character based on a historical person. It’s a different thing to posit that there’s no historical Jesus upon whom the New Testament stories are based. Your position, Mr. Freke, is unwarranted by the evidence. But then, you just hand-waived all evidence as non-existent as if by that act you could make it disappear. But guess what, David Copperfield, the Statue of Liberty is still there even if you convince the crowd that it’s vanished.
I’m willing to listen to anyone in order to acquire wisdom. But when someone makes such a crass mistake about history with such confidence, it gives me pause and makes me suspicious about anything else that person says. Consider the source.
What matters is that Tim Freke's heart is in the right place!
What an absolute Gem
You're my new favorite UA-cam channel. Absolutely delicious interviews.
Thanks for having Tim Freke, he's great, love all his books, you guys at Rebel are the best.
'Rational Spirituality'; many thanks for that, Tim, that defines something i have been searching to put my finger on.
A fabulous discussion.
Thanks for this video, I really needed it today.
Especially fine episode! Thank you. Wonderful to hear Tim Freke’s ideas, as always 👍❤️
Brilliant. My favourite so far. I have to admit I judged a book by its cover years ago and had Tim Freke down as a Sam Harris type and refused to read the Jesus Mysteries. How silly of me.
Wisdom is love of love. So, be love. Just be here and do the best you can. Smile like you mean it. Love it.
Wonderful to see Rebel Wisdom with Tim!!!
You would be an authentic Christian Gnostic embedding pro-Christian symbolism - a real scholar working and published within the confines of the academy I assume. That certainly does make Tim an authentic heretic at least. Given how much time he has for Tim, what does that make Iain McGilchrist?
i think its brilliant what rebel wisdom is doing, creating a conversation of today.
tasteful thoughts, Mr Tim
what an uttermost joy to have discovered RebelWisdom. What profound nourishment for the soul.
"What has he found who has lost God. And what has he lost who has found God". - Ibn 'Ata' Allah Al-Iskandari (sufism)
Very good discussion. I do like the work of Joseph Campbell. My early exposure to his lectures has illuminated my curiosity.
One of my faves on this channel
Really enoyed that one! I will definitely get more into tims work
Guys great work and channel!
Great episode by a seasoned expert on integrated and experiential spirituality.
God is the big dreamer who dreams up matter, life, and then psychological experience (evolutionarily). It seems that part of this dream involves false separation which leads to suffering and seeking for redemption. That's what motivates all our actions (including getting caught up in historical debates about Jesus). Now ask who or what is seeking. Evolution is the process by which that questioning will take place on a greater scale, to the point in which collective reality is changed on a planetary basis.
Just found this gem of an interview expressing a call for us to look below the sea and note the depth of the iceberg we are standing upon as well as depth of the ocean our iceberg floats within, and then look up and consider how miniscule and vast our place in space is.
Thank again, RW!
Thanks. Another stream of interpretation that helps to substantiate the complexity of Rudolph Steiner ‘spirituality of science’ ....
Although it is good to cultivate a humble awe about the mystery of existence, and to have clarity about the nature of self, a pursuit of spirituality as an end in itself, including self-identifying as a "spiritual person", can be an ironic trap. It would sure be nice to be able to re-experience some peak spiritual moments again and again--the same way it would be nice to get a good dose of whatever drug, food, or sex craving. The integrated ("spiritual" if you want) person might seem very mundane if they were met walking down the street. The kind of dogmatism, bypassing, passive-aggression and woo we now encounter among the "spiritual-not-religious" speaks volumes to my point.
I think you're exactly right. Conventional religion got a bad reputation (not without some good reasons, mind you), but they wanna believe in something, so reject all rules (and all sense with it), bring on the woo and call it "spirituality". It's not a search for wisdom or insight or anything except pleasant, conveniently tuneable self-delusion.
I couldn't agree more Dan
How do I get one of those shirts?
mind blowing
Tim Freke is a freken prophet. Good on ye, Sir!
No one studied the Bible until Protestant Reformation? Seriously? I find it very difficult to wrap my head around the amount of ignorance in this statement.
They had letters and copies from the apostels.... traveling apostels, preachers & teachers, taught by the apostels and the holy spirit
Aquinas and Augustine- the JV team of theology.
*sarcasm intended*
Lucas Pattison yeah I guess when I open up one of the 10-volume set I have of ante Nicene fathers I'll find there's nothing actually in the books./ sarcasm off/
Hey Rebel wisdom guys, there is an author named Rod Bennet who has written two books on the early church. One is called the Four Witnesses and the other is called the Apostasy That Wasn't. You should interview him about the history of gnosticism and why it was opposed by the early church, and by the way, that opposition did not begin after the fall of the Civil Roman Empire, but began with Saint Paul.
Perhaps he means the historical document of the bible. How it came to exist in history. Secular study.
Im thinking this might refer more to the printing press. For most of Christian history, virtually everyone was illiterate and almost nobody had their own Bible. So naturally, (almost) nobody studied it themselves.
When Tim Freke said he hasn't met anyone who knows what we are doing here..who I am etc...I had the strong hit that Id like to sit in on interviews like this but soley meditating. With the intention of maximising the high vibration and tendency toward self realisation. The subtle realm is where the biggest breakthroughs spiritually are happening. I also strongly belleve that vibration can transmit through the internet on these long from videos.
The only 'knowing' that sustains me Joanna is beyond words ... that's for sure. Gnosis. And meditation is great way into that. Most of what I do is share that experience with people.
His criticisms of western Christianity sound about the same as the Eastern Orthodox Christians lol. The original idea of becoming a saint is basically the same as Jung's idea of individuation, becoming a fully realized person. There's of course some history in the Bible mixed in, but that's also not really the important part. He'd also be interested in the Orthodox idea of the Virgin Mary, or "Theotokos," which is something like "bearer of God," which is also a symbol of the church, which is itself a kind of symbolic macrocosm of our own microcosm, specifically the heart, or "nous" in Greek. Orthodox Church design is wild. I've also heard an Orthodox monk say that when he looks at people, he either sees Christ crucified or Christ resurrected. It sounds a lot like something a Buddhist would say compared to a western Christian.
In my view Eastern Orthodox Christianity maintained more of the original Gnostic spirit of Christianity
@@TimFreke1 depends what you mean by gnostic. Traditionally, its a trend of heresies, involving things like Docetism, and this whole system that pinned the God of the Bible as evil. However, they definitely maintained the aspect of self transformation, killing/tranformation of the ego, union with God, whatever you want to call it. It's much more of an authentic spirituality, and about carrying that spirit in day to day life. Gnosticism also has a thing about the material world being evil, and that one is to escape it into "higher" reality. Christianity is unique in that it's about tranfiguring material reality into the good, as Christ is the intersection of heaven and earth, which is symbolized in iconography by the mandorla, like the intersection of a Venn diagram.
Vincent van Flow Yes - there were many types of Gnosticism for sure. And of course none called themselves Gnostic.
@@TimFreke1 Just realized I was talking to the guy in the video haha.
This man is exciting. I agree with him so much.
So get this guy, Peterson and Gilchrist in a room...let em go....and watch the current. That last few minutes man....whew. The RW guys were left a bit speechless..lol
I've just recorded a conversation on the Isle of Skye with Iain McGilchrist - hope it will be on the internet soon - sign up to my newsletter or youtube channel to hear when timfreke.com/Connects/newsletter.aspx
I love Tim! :)
What's the one source he talked about at the end of the video?
The Potentiality for everything
One can never hear enough of the truth!
Thank you Tim. I'm not sure that people really understand the message of Jesus if they must insist on his historical existence.
Orthodoxy and heterodoxy exist in creative tension. As a Unitarian minister I am pushing a heresy; our heresy changes subtly as our movement evolves to reflect new understanding - though our community is based on shared values not shared beliefs. However, I don't want orthodoxy to crumble - certainly not in the face of the reductionism of the New Atheists which will not provide a basis for living. I want orthodoxy presented with conviction and joy. Fundamentalism can be dangerous - false science potentially turned to climate change scepticism, which is catastrophic. Orthodoxy, however, in its Protestant, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox forms is noble - though I have never personally been able to accept it because I wish the Spirit to be recognised as more free. Like Time Freke I am more interested in a Quaternity than a Trinity. Still one wonders if there is excessive mystification going on here.....
Keep up the good work rebel. Any chance you are planning an interview with Leo Gura from Actualized.org?
I was thinking the same. Please make that happen.
Please no!!!! That bloke set off my BS meter more than Doshin the creepy Zen master
wow by the end of it i was seeing how someone who writes more than he reads can really get carried away with platitudes and over simplified conclusions..quite informative on that level.
joanna scott thank you for very succinctly putting into words what I was thinking. This guy is such a lightweight intellectually that it is an embarrassment to listen to him
So, you think scholars works are a factual guarantee for quality, in a time when about 80% of papers out of humanities are fake, meaning not reproducible, so I think the pea counters in science have lost ground, by being trapped in their fog of details, losing the whole picture and in addition being more interested in their carriers than producing more substance for society as a whole, which is nota bene financing the nonsense they produce.
What is sadly discounted is how Tim has impacted the lives of many who, as a result, have experienced transformed lives which not only have improved their own life experience, but impacted positively their loved ones and friends... in my case, it has been profound. No intellectual has ever come close to doing this for me like Tim's books, workshops and web based workshops have done for me. His 4-way metaphor as he shared in this video is Tim's interpretation reflected back to us and the viewer can do what they wish with it, but for me, it is beautiful and I am not alone.
What a strange comment ... it's an interview Joanna. Read my book Soul Story and if you still feel the same fair enough. I've been reading books for over 45 years. If you look at the bibliography in The Jesus Mysteries you'll see it contains around 200 books just on this one subject. So ... what made you say this Joanna? Help me understand what was going through your mind? Why not just say what you disagree with and explain why. Then I can respond to that and we can converse to help clarify where we agree and disagree.
@@TimFreke1 how an earth you label your self as a 'rational spiritualist' and still entertain Jesus Mythicism I do not know. You lost all credibility the moment you supported what is at best, an unemployed 30 year old, basement dwellers' conspiracy - borne out of too much time and not enough reading.
The fact that Jesus of Nazareth existed is a historical fact accepted by almost nearly all scholars on both sides of the debate, Christian and non-Christian. The Jesus Mythicism 'theory' - if you can call it that - is pure fantasy.
1. If you'd like to apply a hyper skeptical view to the historicity of Christ , then you should also apply it to the rest of history. Jesus of Nazareth is one of the best attested figures in ancient history. If you take Jesus out of the world of first-century Palestinian Judaism, there are a thousand other things that you simply can't explain. You're also going to have to do away with other historical figures and events, such as Alexander the Great or the crossing of the Rubicon by Caesar, which has only 4 sources, and was documented 65 - 165 years after the event, and nobody questions its validity.
2. Even if you set aside the biblical references of Christ, there are still enough non-biblical, non-christian sources to put his life and ministry beyond question. Historians of his time such as Tacitus, Josephus and Pliny the younger all mention Jesus and his gathering whom worshiped in his name.
3. Jesus was a peasant carpenter - in his time the only people who would typically be written about were those of nobility, carved into currency or statues. He wasn't known at all on the world stage so the fact that he is even mentioned or that there is any evidence at all is a minor miracle.
4.
i) The 4 gospels are written down between 35 - 65 years after his life, Mark being the first and written within the lifetime of his first followers.
ii) We have thousands of these gospel manuscripts from various centuries. Until recently the earliest existing copies dated to around AD100-150, recently we have reason to believe one copy of the gospel of Mark dates to the late first century.
iii) Pauls letters were written even closer to the life of Jesus, citing and referring to creeds that were probably being recited by Jesus' followers from within a few years of his death.
iv) For many key figures of the ancient world, we have as few as 20 existing copies of the documents that detail their lives.
Why does the above matter?
Because contrary to popular belief, the number and nature of the historical document for the life and crucifixion of Jesus is extraordinarily strong, compared to other historical figures of the time. The closer the written documents are to an event that they describe, and the more of them we have to compare - the better their reliability.
Raised a Roman Catholic with a catholic education and years now watching you tube videos I have never heard anyone say that the gnostics may have been on to something positive how interesting.
"Oh, yes please!" I am behind that comment.
Ty
Tim is a genius
Great! Bit mystified why ken wilber wasn't referenced. Tim's theory is wilber 101
Overall I respect this author's viewpoints in this video and will read his books, but regarding the argument (at about 29 minutes) that science is literally soul-destroying, reducing the rich phenomenology of conscious experience down to a piece of meat, I think this poor argument nicely captures how modern spiritual seekers continue to resist what I would argue is at the very core of all relevant insights about spirituality and transformation. I refer to the insights of emptiness and non-self, or sunyata and anatta as they are called in Buddhist traditions. Forms are fleeting and void of any inherent suchness or absolute essence, but rather composed of interlocking processes upon processes--including the sense of self. The beginning phase of transformation, in which the sense of self is deconstructed before (hopefully) being integrated to the larger totality of psychic potential, or the descent to the underworld, the death of someone like Christ, the realization of the underlying impersonal and impermanent nature of all things, self-sacrifice, acknowledging the lump of meat as such, realizing one is born to die, etc.--it's all part of the same phenomenon which is vital to transformation, ie, the dethronement and relativization of that illusory set of psychic structures called ego. I would argue that the scientific viewpoint on consciousness emerging from meat is not "soul-destroying" but "soul-unlocking" since liberation and full individuation are only achieved after being deconstructed--and realizing the impersonal meaty nature of the impermanent phenomena which compose us precisely provokes the kind of healthy and humbling, and ultimately liberating, perspective shift of dethroning "I". Modern science--even full-on materialism--is not at odds with spirituality and soul-flourishing, but rather a doorway--at least for the brave who are willing to release their grip on the desire for immortality and a divine "plan" per se. True, there is nothing as scary and crushing as really facing head-on not only impermanence, but the lack of any real "I" in the first place, the lack of any enduring self or essence beyond collections of psycho-physical phenomena with various genetic and environmental inertias or tendencies. And to face the possibility that "I" (as a locus of subjective awareness with a continuity of experience and memory) may not continue after death. And as well the lack of any overarching meaning or purpose for existing. At the same time, nothing is quite as liberating and transformative as this insight. It opens the way for limitless possibilities and meaning-making. And it leads to the most personal empowerment, since that ultimately results when one takes personal responsibility for one's fate.
If spirituality is about transformation but only in the context of comforting beliefs about an afterlife or an absolute, enduring self, then that seems impoverished. If I had to say I was spiritual, I would rather mean it in the context of transformations which lead to flourishing in a this-world way, hanging no hats on any speculations about enduring selves and afterlives but facing the real head-on.
I like this
Great comments Dan. I'm familiar with what you are saying, because you will find a similar view in many of my early books. But eventually this didn't work for me. Now I'm a both/and man. For me it is both about waking up to emptiness and celebrating the individual self, which I suggest is not an illusion or throw away ... but rather the flowering of the evolutionary emergent process of existence. Both non-dual spirituality and reductionist science miss this, although both are saying much that I love also.
Tim Freke Please do not misunderstand me. I am all about the value of the relative self or individual, and in no way am advocating abandoning it. I am only advocating seeing it clearly. In fact my contention is that seeing the empty nature of self clearly is what allows for the transformation into a true individual. It is what makes a person free to make themselves. I am not denying the reality of the phenomenon of relative identity with its emergent transformative phases, individual uniqueness, and the value of experiencing all these to the fullest while they last. Neither am I denying the idea that forms may be on an eternally recurring trajectory of increasing complexity, and that a mental sphere is an inevitable occurrence. There are all kinds of possibilities. But with no evidence of continuity of relative self or even of bare consciousness after death, when there is no physical substrate to produce it, it is of no consequence whether or not I find that probability satisfying.
Dan Flynn Thanks for clarification. This is a difficult medium for me to discuss such deep ideas. But it sounds like the difference is simply that my experience has led me to feel that death is not the end. I could discuss all the massive NDE evidence and past life evidence and so on as many do, but this can be interpreted in different ways to fit different philosophical models. So there is arguably a huge amount of evidence or none at all - depending on one's starting place. My own view isn't actually a position i've reached by research of evidence, but rather from working with dying people for many years and being around the death of family and friends ... and indeed meeting my mum 6 months after her death (my account is on youtube if you're interested). So the challenge for me is - how the hello could that possibly be true given what science has revealed about reality. Of course as this is not evidential it can't possibly convince anyone else and isn't meant to. Merely to present an intellectual credible account that makes rational sense of the possibility of the immortality of the soul.
Thanks Tim Freke. Now we can get to the heart of the matter. First it was necessary to remove the red herring from the path. As is almost always the case, the person advocating seeing through the reification of self got accused of having a desire to abandon the relative self or individual completely. (Indeed, plenty of those who have adopted a no-self view have unfortunately understood it in this way, and so we hear plenty of deluded egos ironically talk foolishly about "destroying the ego".) Such willing resistance to ideas of impermanence, essence-lessness and the spaciousness of overarching emptiness of meaning is rooted in an understandable fear of self-destruction, nihilism and death. It is in everyone and every culture, so I completely understand.
But pointing out the relative and empty nature of self (and all forms perceived reifingly) is not the same as giving up on self. My overall position is that life can be just as meaningful and fulfilling without knowing answers to such questions as life after death, but knowing the emptiness underlying apparent forms. It is at the same point in my emotional life where I might like to cling to the idea of life after death, that instead I remember to go back to relinquishing all views and sit in emptiness. This removes the sting entirely. And, crucially to the point of valuing the individual, it results in renewed vigor to engage the world as an individual.
This is not a mentality of giving up. It brings greater ability to engage with the relative on its own level. Indeed, it brings psychological power and hardiness. People think the world needs an overarching purpose or meaning to make meaning in their own lives and be motivated, but this is a failure to appreciate, firstly, the great spaciousness of all-possibilities which ultimate background meaninglessness makes possible. Secondly, it is a failure of self-knowledge. Deep self-knowledge includes with it the awareness of the inertial tendencies which have evolved up to the point of producing this questioning mind. This natural momentum (produced by processes of natural selection and emergence rather than being some kind of essence such as elan vital, life force, will to life or will to power) is quite enough to sustain individual motivation, goal-setting, purpose-making, and fulfillment. No reason has to lie at the bottom of the heap--and indeed, I see no evidence of any overarching reason, which is wonderful! What is needed more than any particular belief or concept, is for mind to periodically get out of the way, allowing a loosening of rigid patterns, and allowing the behemoth beneath to carry forward. Then, having regained natural momentum, that personal motivation of the relative self is cultivated toward the most harmonious and epic possible ways of becoming within the phenomenology in which this subjectivity is embedded.
(The irony is, even though the non-self perspective has here been accused of giving-up on or abandoning the individual, the same nihilistic accusation can and has been lobbed at immortalists or next-lifers. "Dropping out" has a long and steady tradition among such types. Nietzsche's critique on this point is very appropriate. The next-life mentality has been part and parcel of a kind of nihilism which devalues this life here-now in favor of some unknown Absolute there-then, makes this flesh evil, and would welcome a cataclysm to see this world burn. This consequence, of course, says nothing about the validity or not of the idea of an afterlife--an argument from consequence is not good evidence for or against.)
Ultimately, I'm talking more about a transformative way of being rather than making an ontological statement. Ontology always has been and likely will continue to be ambiguous, perhaps never fully knowable, so why not get on with a method that works regardless of ontology? If there turns out to be a continuance of the individual after death, it will yet continue to be the case, phenomenonologically speaking, that a person is made up of components, which in turn are made up--and the return to viewless ground will always be at the heart of how to reset and re-invigorate the individual in this life or a next.
So, in the end, I don't see how hanging one's hat on the idea of life after death is even healthy.
It can prevent one experiencing the total alleviation which comes from grappling with viewlessness and emptiness, indeed from experiencing the very transformation of the individual ("lose your life to find it").
Don't get me wrong--I think thst to research the NDE phenomenon and seek an answer to the question of life after death is just as worthwhile as any relative pursuit. It might actually be true that there is life after death. Maybe there isn't even such a thing as time, necessitating a reframing of the question. Or perhaps each person has infinite versions of themselves in both our own universe and in multiple other universes or dimensions--making each of us a participant in our own unique, manifold archetype. Maybe there will be ways we could connect with these other versions of ourselves through technology to achieve some metalevel completeness. Or maybe it already happens to some degree naturally, in dreams and alleged ESP phenomena. Perhaps it turns out to be best understood in some quantum terms, or in some framework about information which never gets lost. Surely interesting questions, part of the dance of existing. But that isn't the same as hanging one's hat on one answer or other turning out to be right.
Any approach to personal realization which works regardless of ontological ambiguities seems superior to an approach hinging on motivated beliefs based on ambiguous evidence which you may at some moment come to secretly doubt. To me, that is a foundation of sand. Again even if there is life after death, (and I'll check out the video you referenced), it doesn't substantially change the equation of self-realization here and now.
Thanks for engaging. UA-cam comments are a great place for this kind of discussion, since it is where so many go to get ideas.
Great interview, I can't believe it has so few likes.
That was a profound talk, and I've never had much sympathy with religious ideas before. Interesting book that covers the origins of the Jesus cult:- "Jealous Gods and Chosen People: The Mythology of the Middle East" from which I got the possibility that Jesus may have been a charismatic radical (e.g. reaction to the money lenders), but after his death he was made into a classic fertility cult, because that was the default position that people were used to.
Hegel?
Schism - interesting point... but isn't the history of mankind a relentless chain of schisms where every link is a schism of schisms itself?..
Yes ... but i was certainly brought up to see a huge gulf between the lost Pagans with all their silly gods and the truth of Christianity with its one true God. This is a big schism, which actually has no basis in history it now seems to me.
“Psyche is just a series of atoms” says the most complex and integrated loci of unfolding Being in our known universe.
I would like to see Freke and Peterson together. He discounts Christianity in a sentence. JBP would not let him get away with this deconstructionism.
I don't discount Christianity at all - i rate it very highly. Like Jordan my views are easily misrepresented.
Conversations like this are much needed and much appreciated. Evolution has not stopped, materialist reductionism likes to think they are the pinnacle of the evolutionary process - its adherents throw a childish tantrum each time it is questioned.
It's a nice basic primer I suppose for the grounding ideas of Gnosticism and interesting for him to speak of the Y-H-V-H in the Kabbalistic/Qabalistic manner. It was interesting for me because I started with Manly P Hall, Paul Foster Case, Dion Fortune, read the bible several times through, and THEN Jordan Peterson came on the scene and it would be fascinating if in the next ten years it became a big public discourse thing to be talking about the Golden Dawn and all that.
I think the most important thing to know about the New Testament might be that the high and soaring stuff of John and Paul to some extent is Platonism/Neoplatonism. I am the true vine, if you've seen me you've seen the father, it points pretty strongly in that emanationist archetypal man direction.
John's still relatively a raving Platonist/Neoplatonist though. Anytime I hear a pastor really lifting the room and stirring people up it's that stuff, ie. the high pagan and Greek philosophic angles of the New Testament, that's achieving that affect. John is just where the impact of Platonism/Neoplatonism is most transparent.
As for Gnosticism I hear it several different ways. Some people use 'gnosticism' to refer to everything from the Christian gnostics to Hermeticists to Platonists. Other people, when they capitalize Gnostic, tend to be referring to one or all of the specifically Christian Gnostic sects. I'd agree there are a wide range of views, the premise seems to be their contact with apocryphal works around the life of Jesus.
If we could only bring the Great religions together under ONE roof and word...LOVE.....it shouldnt be Jesus, Muhammad or any other name that forces us to love....Although it is a good place to start.....but the road is much wider n longer than any religion....its an individual walk. I think all in all, religion has served us better than not. Millions of humans depend on it for life everyday....Some of us are no longer riding on the merry go round....We just had to let it go......We just had to let it go.....most need conformity and someone to lead them to the river. Some walk alone.....but Love is always present. Thank you ALL for this video and reaching out!....Adios for now Amigos.....have a kick ass day out there in the Free World...
not looking back at all..what about the golden age which was more advanced technologically as well as spiritually...Egypt Mesopotamia and their legacies reflected in the awe inspiring art and minds of the Greeks..leading to us quite clearly
If death isn't the end ? Then what is or is there no end to the human experience at all do we live for ever and ever but in a different form?
Study the KJ version of the Bible, with honesty and search for truth. Start with the words of Jesus Christ.
You don't experience time now let alone in the hereafter
I am suggesting that once existence has emerged onto the level of psyche or soul - the immaterial realm of imagination - there is no death. Just as before biology there was no life and death.
It's wrong to think of psyche or soul as a discrete plane, having emerged or evolved in a linear fashion from the rest of nature. It's rather an opening up of latencies within the bio-matter, thus representing a discontinuity of the entire process. To call it "immaterial" also is an immense and classic mistake of dualism.
Tim Freke .. I know this sounds crazy and many if not all will find it hard to believe about 3 days ago I was really tired after work and mentally I'm always tired so tried to have a quick 20 minutes nap had a dream I was in my living room at the time I could see and knew I was in the bedroom a sleep trying to get back into my own body I was doing I clearly saw myself laying on the bed I shit you not it was horrible had to jump back into my own body as if I wasn't ready to leave or something. How science explain that ? Illusion or what ? I believe we are way more than science explain,,,
The fact that pagan myths were essentially telling the same story of the Jesus myth doesn't rule out Jesus as having been a historical man. Often what happens in this manifest world is that ancient myths produce incarnations to demonstrate what the myth is pointing to. It is not always that the myth is told based on a real event. So the ancient pagans were speaking of an archetype and it was produced as various incarnations, one of them being Jesus. I get his point that in the end it doesn't really matter because "Jesus" is the part of each of us that represents the Divine but it is also not relevant to argue that Jesus didn't also exist as a guy that walked around like the rest of us humans during a certain point in time.
Agreed. The gospel story is either a history mythologised or a myth liberalised. Like most people I started with the former, but I have ended up with the latter. I have concluded from the evidence we studied that Jesus is mythic like Dionysus, Mithras, Adonis and all the rest. But I don't really think it actually makes that much difference.
The Rebel Wisdom have to interview Deepak Chopra !
The integration has to be the objective image of subjectivity. Glad to see you guys talking about this sort of thing, esp reincarnation. If anyone's interested I just started a long form sci-fi surreal poem on my channel called Mechanics of Reincarnation. Because Rebel Wisdom is correct in that now the conversation gas shifted fundementally to the religious layer. It's because the technology has entered perception itself, in a wayGaslight.
experience of christianity through knowing (or perhaps feeling) is reflected in the hindu tradition with formal and willingness to get closer to God through form and ritual as opposed to a spontaneous direct experience. Vaidhi and Ragannuga worship.. A bit like right versus left wing thinking. Finding the balance is a personal journey and requires personal inner work and inner record taking..like Petersons work on our future self etc
The "material universe" is implacable STUFF -- yet is also proven to be responsive to our conscious INTENT. What is intent ? Millions of level-headed people know that when we are passing through the birth of faith, the world gives us "objective" signs of guidance and confirmation. This does not fit in the mainstream matrix.
If consciousness is emergent from "chaos," it is not merely passive. What is Intent, and what is person ? Even out pets are little persons. What is the Person aspect of Creator/creation? What is the I-Thou relationship with God ? So many philosophical discussions are not grounded in these experienced realities..
Great comments. I address some of this in my book SOUL STORY
If he wants conversation he should learn to let the young lads talk about what they really think
I'd love to see an interview w/fouthwaysufischool.org
hi
If you smell what hes stepping in id suggest reading manly p hall as well as carl jung. Their ideas blend theology, mysticsm and psychology.
One thing Manly P Hall did which was really helpful for me was pointing out the astrotheology content. He also breathed a lot of life into the Greek philosophers and mysteries rather than the really horrific dusty museum placard version of western philosophy I got in college.
love jung and hall
No evidence of Jesus - really! What about the apostle Paul? He claims to have met and talked for days to two of Jesus' friends Peter and John, and his fleshly brother James.
Tacitus the Roman historian writes about him. Bart Ehrman a recognised critic of Christianity wrote a whole book on the evidence that 'Jesus of Nazereth' existed. By all means, question that the miricles actually happend, but the man himself existed.
he leaves it open for dis.cussion, but considers it insignificant on a deeper spiritual level.
Yeah... but for such a significant person in history that's really not enough evidence. It's reaching. However, the fact that the phenomena has had the impact it has is significant. Unless you're caught up on a particular theology that says he must have physically existed.
Yeah, I know. I'm disappointed to see people who are really into spiritual-esoteric research and they treat this stuff, the historical documents, so superficially, as if they've watched Zeitgeist one time and they've made up their mind (though there are other sources promoting the same idea)
Did Jesus exist as a historical person? To say yes with any certainty is an act of Faith
@@horatiuchituc2139 think about a conversation you had with someone last week and verbatim recall what was said, or do you think you will probably recall the basics and some particulars to simulate the whole experience of that conversation? And last of all is it reliable and now extend that 2 thousand years
I haven't fully watched this video, so my comments might be a little pre-mature, or mismatch with how the subjects are fully treated in the vidieo:
I particularly believe in the doctrine of Christ, wherefore I can glean much of the contents of this doctrine in the KJV Bible. My understanding is in stark contrast to many other views of self-identifying Christianity: the biggest problem is with how people interpret Scripture, which is pretty much lost to all those who don't already believe something similar to the doctrine already, or who aren't prepared to patiently piece it together- until it all comes to make sense, after all the doctrinal language has been decoded. The biggest modern problem faced, is that the Scriptures are not open to most people, God is not safe in hands of those who willfully delude themselves with vanity and the idolatry of conceit: until one is prepared to discern between the spirits, which requires purity,- from also hating all that which you may love, and even your own life, so that you have the liberty upon which to grow virtuous discipleship for the spirit of truth,- for there can be no salvation found within written words. The Kingdom of God comes not with observation, it is only within an active participation, and driven by its integral working, complete.
I will summarize the main beliefs of the doctrine, most of which can be extracted from John, it is important to understand John prior to any other books, because John explains the core of the faith; without a full understanding of which, you will only mislead yourself when it comes to Paul and the other records. Christ consciousness is the prime teaching, upon which the entire doctrine rests, this is very easy to overlook if you are not aware of the 1 John chapter 4 verses, and in the King James in particular, as their meaning is lost in modern translations which have obscured translations that are not direct, badly interpreting the definition of the Begotten Son, and the explanation of anti-Christ.
Christ has a very particular meaning in the doctrine itself, as does Jesus ...
Listening to the thesis of this video, I think its clear that this level of Gnostic explanation does not correlate to the Doctrine of Christ.. In general Gnostic schools, with their added mythos, make many glaring meta-physical errors, which divorce the concept of truth from the grounding and framework of philosophy... but more specifically, the Christian doctrine calls for incarnated existence, as a field upon which the flesh is continually overcome. I die daily, is the call of the Christian crucifixion, which Jesus beckons to his followers, for which there is no vicarious redemption, but for doing which John explains: believing on the name of Jesus Christ, even in his son, this is the true God and eternal life - the Son of God becomes the birth of understanding from the mind, the particular journey of this Birth is better described in the dream symbols of Revelations, where the false ego is fully elaborated into its component parts, as the machinations of the fall are unwound by knowledge of truth, elaborated in narrative, so that those who can discern the workings of spirits, might see the Kingdom and the coming day of Judgement, which has always readily been at hand, and merely lost between the clouds of mystery.
Esoteric Christianity:
Gnosis = Being aware of being aware
The Word of Truth (Logos) is ever faithful (loyal, true, isomorphic) to Reality/Life (That which is/That I am).
The danger of mythologising religions to create and inclusivity is it misses the crux of the mystery. Mystery or religion revelation is hard to attain and requires alot of determination. Just as the arc of the covenant cannot be touched; its a matter of being sufficiently on ones nerves to really pay attention and be present in all its scary implication, to find God. or God moments at least.
DMT, Pcilicibin, LSD etc etc has shown us- the Kingdom Heaven IS within!
He didnt buy them they where a present from others
“For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.”
2 Corinthians 11:4, 13-15 ESV
“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.”
Galatians 1:6-9 ESV
Novelty and adaptability
Josephus wrote of Jesua (see Crossan). Whether or not he was the son of God is another question. The problem with Gnosticism, like Roman Catholicism, is it's seduction toward elitism (see the temptation in the desert). Dostoevsky possessed an angle, as his disciple
Peterson, but angle non the less.
Near 6m30s: the common complaint is aired about - "this is the bible and nothing more needs to be added or understood; we have all we need in this book"..... please understand that this is not the only perspective of Christians or bible people or "believers". It is so easy for Sam Harris and any one else of the anti-Christian persuasion to harp on this, because it is true, but it is only true of a faction of Christianity...as it is true of a faction of any group. There are nimwits, troglodytes, and fascists in every group - in Christianity sometimes they are called fundamentalists - and they exist in all denominations. But that is not the whole or even the majority of Christianity.....
There is an incredibly rich tradition in the old testament and in the new of "prophecy". The prophetic tradition is the "update", if you will, to the code. It is especially appreciated in the new testament and democratized by Jesus teaching of the Holy Spirit. There are older lesser well known examples, but ones that every westerner will have heard of are Martin Luther, John Calvin, George Fox, John Wesley, etc... These guys, inspired by the Holy Spirit, spoke truth to power and identified problems with their current strain of Christianity and the prevailing interpretation of the Bible.
Soren Kierkegaard, Ivan Illich, and, NT Wright would be a more current examples of this. But most non-fundamentalists carry this torch as well.
True. I hear you. Too easy just to address Fundamentalists. I have great respect for thoughtful Christians. I might actually be one myself in some way. I nearly join a Franciscan order twice in my twenties.
This man needs to read the christian mystics - they are all about experiencing God. You don't have to separate belief from experience. Belief is the foundation of experience - the candle that makes the flame possible.
So the Gospel authors are the biggest liars in history and the 1000's of early martyrs who were fed to the lions for 100's of years and laid the foundations of western civilisation were all conned. Thankfully this bloke has come along to enlighten all of us.
Gnosticism was condemned by the church because it separated matter from spirit where as authentic Christianity was incarnational i.e. matter and spirit are united in the Person.
Evolution of “psyche” YES!
The person includes the body. Scientfically, philsophically, logically it is correct that the resurrection of Jesus must be physical. Matter is not fundamental but it's not evil or a second class citizen in this universe.
Spengalian energy
This is the only take on Christianity that doesn’t strike me as totally repulsive and diseased.
There IS a literal Krsna however it may or may not be propitious for your current incarnation to behold Him/Her..lol
the Bible is a book of wisdom ,, and even God said to question everything ,, and not believe just any spirit that comes along and gives you bad advice as to how to be ,, the Ten Commandments of God was given to help mankind to live in peace among each other ,, we need to look at the logic of everything that is put
before us ,, when people don't believe in dark spirits manipulating us then we may fall into not believing in God which is a greater good for us ,,
15:07 Did Jesus really exist?
Mi Sofia queen bee is in da blue kings of Orkney
It would be a good time for those with a voice to talk about there childhood. I wet the bed until I was 12
Why so obsessed with Jordan Peterson? He has sometimes some interesting things to say, but it's nothing special. If you want to expand your wisdom study Buddhism, Taoismus, the Vedas or just meditate and listen to the universe. Words and talking or mathematics leads use somewhere but its very limited, just a tiny fraction of reality. there is a much bigger world to discover beyond words and numbers
Something off here. I remember unity, I remember a fall, I remember suffering, and I am going back where I began. This excited talk is a distraction.
I also remember all of this Tom ... and my work is an attempt to explain how that fits with everything else i know.
Get your boi a new shirt
Paradoxically Complicated Simplicity...
:-)
Thankyou ☯
Sorry but you lost it ... :(
I still dont care either way about spirituality, religion, or any of that. Even if living your life by the things in the bible like being kind , doing unto others, give more than take, doesnt mean im spiritual in the least, its just a goid idea to live that way, it causes the least amount of problems. Im not going to believe or worshp anything that doesnt show itself, and if it did show itself i still wouldnt, its ridiculous to worship anything, i would just say goid luck with that and just go about my day like it never happend, it doesnt concern me,or interesit me in the slightest.but i dont go around saying this , just only when asked and here once, i keep to myself, i will say no more on it.😁👍
I disagree with his history - Gnosticism was available only to a select few while Roman, eastern and later Protestant Christianity were and are available to anyone
There were actually a huge number of Gnostics in the first 3 centuries.
Tim makes a big mistake by claiming that in Islam Jesus is a prophet but 'just not as good as Muhammed'. In Islam, we love Jesus and consider him to be one of the greatest prophets and we make no distinction in reverence between Muhammed and other prophets. We love all the prophets of God.
"Jesus never came in the flesh, he comes in you" - good choice of words...
The vigil birth lads Atlantis why not talk about the occult
No credible--emphasis on credible-- historian would make the claim that Jesus of Nazareth didn't exist. It's really hard to listen to someone who dismisses the historical Jesus with, " oh yeah, Josephus mentions him, but that's not really credible." Sorry Tim, you'll have to do better than that.
Please examine the evidence with an open mind and respond. You've made a dogmatic statement not a reasoned argument.
@@TimFreke1 thanks for your response. Pardon me if I came off apprehensive. I have attempted to examine the evidence, in fact, I spent most of my twenties investigating the historical Jesus phenomena. I am just not convinced that you can dismiss the actual historical Jesus the way you did. I would turn your attention to the New Testament scholar N.T. Wright. Wright's, Gifford Lectures are on UA-cam and I would encourage you to consider the evidence again.
Adam Apodaca I really haven't just dismissed it. I've written 2 long well-noted books backing up the argument, based on the scholarship of more than 200 people. This is a minority view of course, but has become much stronger over the last 20 years since we wrote our books.
@@TimFreke1 , thanks again for your time and comments. I'll read your book and follow the footnotes. I hope you'll reconsider the historical Jesus as well.
When the BBC approached N. T. Wright, asking him to debate Freke and concerning his thesis in The Jesus Mysteries, Wright replied that "this was like asking a professional astronomer to debate with the authors of a book claiming the moon was made of green cheese
It would be great interview with Bart Ehrman.
Bet you can't find an "other" who likes Jordan Peterson, That might be of interest...
My main problem with his line if thinking is that this man has alot of preconceived notions that hebeitjer does not specifically acknowledge or he is unaware of.
I really hate the quote that hydrogen given enough time will learn to sing opera. Any intelligent person who has looked into the state of knowledge in the field of astrophysics has got to cringe. The idea that hydrogen can form stars is based on the accretion theory. If one looks into this theory it is painfully obvious that it has major flaws. And so, the theory of how the sun and planets and the galaxies formed and evolve is based on a very flimsy premise.
Intellectual laziness like this is not helping anyone reach a greater understanding. And it makes the listener dubious about other conjectures made by the person speaking...