Open Panel: Are Gnosticism and Ancient Heresies on the Rise? with Fr. Dcn. Dr. Ananias

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
The hell.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
All right, Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.

Speaker 3 (00:19):
This is David Patrick Carey with Church of the Eternal
Logos and today I am joined by my friend lost
for Father Deacon, Doctor Annonias, and of course the always
erudite and insightful jose Mcwell.

Speaker 2 (00:31):
How you guys doing today? Well, so today we're hosting
an open panel both on Father Deacon and myself's channel.
So we're really hoping if you guys have a difference
of opinion please join. You are more than welcome. Today
we're going to be diving into our gnosticism and ancient

(00:52):
heresies on the rise. And this is something that Father
Deacons he's actually written an academic paper I actually read
in Cided regarding gnosticism and scientism, and so this is
something that he's very familiar with, done academic scholarship publications
on it, and a lot of these, you know, the
Billy Carson Wesley Huff type thing. The fallout is that

(01:15):
these new, repackaged, New Age or reinterpreted forms of Christianity
are really just ancient heresies with contemporary rhetoric behind them.
So that's what we're diving into. If you guys want
to join, feel free. The link is in the video
description on my channel, and I can send it to
Father Deacon if he wants to place it in the

(01:36):
description on his channel. So anyways, before we even get
into and start debating, hopefully with different people, what are
your guys' thoughts on the general topic of the rise
or maybe it's not a rise, it's just the transition
from the Enlightenment really the modern period. What are you

(01:56):
guys's thoughts on are gnosticism and ancient heresies on the right.

Speaker 4 (02:03):
I think what might be appealing to why it's on
the rise, I would agree, is something kind of the
reason why like Eastern religions are popular is because you
can do it yourself. There's kind of no hierarchical kind

(02:26):
of institution and you know, rules and different stuff like that.
So I imagine for various reasons that's appealing to people
that there's a kind of openness, you know, I can
do this myself and I don't have to go to
a church or an institution or be under somebody or

(02:46):
something like that. And I think also the notion that
feeds into people's ego to the the notion that one
becomes kind of the self becomes the profit through right right,
like you are the prophet you and your self discovery
and stuff like that. So I'm just thinking out loud

(03:08):
in terms psychologically what's kind of appealing. And we can
go into other things too, like I think you pointed
out just historically locating this in terms of enlightenment and
modern philosophy. Does it make it ripe to rise back
up again and stuff like that. Anyways, was there what
do you think?

Speaker 5 (03:29):
I was raised in Montanism? So yes, let's say it
is very much on the rise in the Americas as
a whole, North and South. The fastest growing religion in
in in the New World is Pentecostalism. And although I'd
say it's not purely Montanist. Is the more I look,

(03:49):
the more I look at it, and the more the
more that I've been in you know, been in the
Orthodox Church, the more the more it looks to me
like a cross of Montanism with Pundalini. So that's especially
when you look at the you know, I mean, I know,
like even your typical pentecostal will disavow like the Toronto Blessing.
But there's a lot of things that happened within Pentecostalism

(04:10):
that I've seen with my own eyes that I have
trouble telling the distinction between it and some of the
stuff that happens in Kunglini yoga, right, And.

Speaker 2 (04:21):
For those who aren't familiar with Montanism, for anybody listening,
that's the second century heresy that believes that they are
a sort of secession to the apostles, a superior revelation
and their participation in the Holy Spirit. And so it
is something that is very prevalent within Pentecostal these charismatic
movements is that they are sort of the leading edge

(04:42):
of apostle ship, even superseding in some instances the actual apostles.
So I totally agree with that. And you know, one
of the things that we were mentioned in backstage is
even in the secular forms of gnosticism, and one of
the things that you know, you bring this topic up
and so many people go to, like the very literal

(05:08):
and specific formation of ancient gnosticism, and it's like, that's
not what we're meaning. We're meaning more of the presuppositions
that undergird that spiritual formation. We're not talking that a
lot of people believe, you know, is the actual creator
of the universe, but something like transhumanism is sort of
imnetizing the est something that is very gnostic. And so

(05:31):
Vogelin in a book that actually I bought this book
because father teak And told me, Hey, you got to
buy that book. He talks about this and how both
within scientism scientism again, modernism is kind of built on
these five pillars of scientism, democracy, rationalism, technological advance, and

(05:54):
then utopianism, and that all these things are leading us
to the modern period of that we're going to liberate ourselves.
And so Vogeland highlights that, whether it be Marxism or
you know, fascism, any sort of modern political ideology, but
also scientism and its belief that it's acquiring knowledge to
build the world as it truly should be built. These

(06:15):
are really gnostic underpinnings that I think are rooted within
the rationalism of the Enlightenment period.

Speaker 4 (06:21):
You know, one thing I've been thinking, it's been on
my mind the last couple of weeks, just trying to
locate certain kind of themes in modernity. And it might
be part because you know, teachings we're going over epistemology
at the Faith Canvas courses and so we're going over

(06:44):
all these you know, modern epistemologists, you know, starting with Descartes,
and one thing that strikes me. And I'm not the
I'm not even the one that came up with this term.
It was revealed to me from the demarriage. No, it
was doctor Bruce Sarah from full who's a wonderful scholar

(07:07):
if you haven't, we were in a conversation at the
conference years back and talking about a lot of these
issues about science and scientism, and he used the word
abstractionism and I was like, that's a really nice phrase
and turn. And it was within that specific context, but

(07:29):
I'm starting to notice that that is a hallmark. A
theme within modernity is that the concrete tized eminent, the experience,
the this right here, becomes less real, and then what happens, Well,

(07:50):
it's the abstract proposition. So like if we're going through,
you know, in the philosophy of science, what is a
law of nature? And where do you find it? And
you go through, you go through this text right here,
and it's like, well, it doesn't actually exist, like you
can't find it anywhere in nature. It's it's not causal,

(08:12):
like it's it's beyond just causal. It's obviously not regularity
and stuff like that. What ends up becoming this kind
of abstract model. Well, basically this is really interesting. He
gets to the conclusion, Well, if the material world didn't exist,
this is how the material world would work in my mind,
in my platonic kind, and that's what a law of
nature is, right, And I'm like, well, the whole thing

(08:33):
is just abstractionism. And so you see this, I would
say it's even come into both Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.
Is that the immediate experience in front of you that
this is not real. It's the whole abstract system.

Speaker 2 (08:50):
Right.

Speaker 4 (08:51):
Protestants concerned with invisibility. It's an invisible church. They're iconoclass,
and it's this system of abstract but that it's less real,
that's right. I mean in some cases it's not real
at all. It's just a fantasy between your two ears.
And so that's definitely got a link with gnosticism, but

(09:13):
it's something that's putticular to modernity.

Speaker 6 (09:17):
Right.

Speaker 4 (09:17):
Everything becomes this kind of idealization and German idealization. And
you see that existentialism was kind of a reaction against
both rationalism and German idealism and all these things to
bring it back down to kind of you know, real experiences.
So I just it's a theme that I've been thinking
about the last couple of weeks and just seeing it everywhere.

Speaker 2 (09:38):
Well, when you mentioned abstractionism, the first thing that popped
in my mind based on what you were saying was
like people that are social justice warriors or you know,
they they spout their virtue in regards to a mission
concerning an abstract ideology, like they're going to save the planet.
Meanwhile they're stepping over the homeless guy in the Bay Area.

(09:59):
That's a drug addic, that's you know, pooping on the sidewalk.
And from an orthodox PERSPECTIVEF you want to be virtuous,
you got to help that guy, you gotta. It has
to be person to person. It's very particular in the
way in which virtues are actually enacted. And that part
of that modernist mentality as you're talking about with the abstractionism,
is that they are they succumb to having a gnostic understanding,

(10:21):
that they have the true understanding of ethics. Right, we
need to we need a quality for minorities. We have
we have to re understand the formation of society, and
now I have I can be a virtuous person, but
it's all unrelated to like this abstract ideology that they're
really participating in, and from the day to day into
the particular people they're engaging in, they're not very virtuous

(10:42):
at all, and they really don't have an objective standard.
And so it's this cultural construction of abstractionism that yeah,
go ahead.

Speaker 4 (10:51):
It's that's why we say it's fake and gray. I
mean it's like, I mean, it's obvious to anybody that
has a little bit of discernment are some virtues that
it's like they don't care. They don't care about. Like
these people they're in this abstract kind of idea locked

(11:12):
within their own head. And it was interesting. I had
a professor in grad school. He was actually a Roman
Catholic priest, doctor Brennan Purcell, and he was talking about virtues,
probably doing something about Garsol's virtue ethics, and like some
student got up and was like, oh, yeah, Like that's
that's what I want, you know, I want to I

(11:33):
want to be seen as like what charity should I
give to? You know, darfere like unisaff and like just
he's totally removed right from your world and getting your
hands dirty, and he says, well, do you have any
brothers and sisters? He says yes, he says love them.
He's like, I can't do that. See, that's the real,

(11:58):
the real encounter with the person, like actually getting your
hands dirty. So what do you do You construct a
fantasy between your two ears of this abstract Well, this
is the real world if I'm participating, And that's where
we say virtue signal. It's like these people care nothing
about the poor. Nietzsche said, had a funny thing, he says,

(12:20):
criticizing these kinds of people in his day, you know.

Speaker 6 (12:23):
People actually.

Speaker 4 (12:25):
Gave to the you know, food to the poor and
hungry out of you know, real genuine care for them.
They'd all be starving and dead.

Speaker 7 (12:40):
You know.

Speaker 2 (12:41):
Another thing that I think is Gnostic, especially within Protestantism,
that maybe they wouldn't fully recognize, is, you know, one
of the features of ancient Gnoscissism the rejection of the world.
And I think that plays itself out in Protestant Christianity
because of their rejection of sacraments and that physical material

(13:02):
objects can actually be filled with the Holy Spirit for
this inner transformation, right, this interiority of your relationship with God,
and that there really aren't real mysteries, physical mysteries in
the world. And I think that is a that is
a Gnostic mentality that if you probably brought it up
to them, they wouldn't see that connection. But that's why
sacraments are so important. And that's really why, as I

(13:25):
always say sacrament, I mean without sacraments, Protestants can't deal
with the occult, because that's what the occult is actually doing,
is imbuing physical objects with spiritual forces. Of course they're demonic,
but if you don't have a spirituality that is sacramental
in a sense, you've already rejected the world, the world
that God created for kind of your own secret internal

(13:46):
transformation through knowledge, through practices, you know. And they they
ironically talk about you know what faith over works. Well,
their whole thing is, you know, to identify their own spirituality,
is their interior, their intire your state.

Speaker 4 (14:02):
Yeah, and what is fait. It's interesting because Father Russell
gave a homily on Sunday yes yesterday, and you know,
he was saying faith is concrete action, it is a
work and so I mean this totally just destroys Protestantism

(14:23):
because they set it in contrast. And that's the other
thing too, is they have these dialects dualism.

Speaker 2 (14:27):
Yeah, it's very dualistic.

Speaker 4 (14:29):
Yeah, these dialectical oppositions. It's either faith or works, it's
either God or man, it's and so you have that
kind of element too. But you know, the story that
he always gives is that the guy Niagara walk into
tightrope and he walks across and backwards and people cheering
him on, and then he gets a wheelbarrow and he

(14:51):
goes across and he puts a pig in the wheelbarrow,
and like it's like moving around and people are cheering.
And he comes back and he says, do you believe
that I could put one of you in there? And
this is yes, we believe. And it says, okay, who's
going to volunteer to jump in the wheelbear? And nobody
did because in that faith, see, faith is an incarnational

(15:11):
action of an actual work process. Have no concept of
this whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (15:20):
Right now, that's a great point. I even what's that, brother,
Have you got anything to say on this topic?

Speaker 8 (15:26):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (15:27):
Actually, this is a topic that is very near and
dear to my heart because I used to be a Gnostic.
In fact, before I was an Orthodox Christian, I was
very into the esoterically occult, the al chemical, and I
traced back a lot of that spirituality even at some
point like had this like kind of new age in
that that christ was kind of like an archetype that

(15:47):
you would very you know, Petersonian, which is kind of
like the spirituality of like Solen Victors. I don't know
if you've known about that that ancient let's say, parallel
belief to Christianity, which is basically kind of like narcissism codified.
It's like basically believe that you will win, and it's
kind of a worship of victory. Right.

Speaker 1 (16:06):
And what I would say is I completely agree with
what was said.

Speaker 6 (16:11):
I would also add that I think that even though
the Enlightenment is very codified epistemologically in gnostic terms, because
all of it's nocology, all of its epistemology is fundamentally gnostic,
now we're becoming slightly self aware of it in the
sense that like now Hollywood is actually making movies that

(16:32):
are literally gnostic that you can put on a literal
gnostic frame and start to analyze like movies like I
don't know, the Green Knight, movies like Blake Runner twenty
forty nine, Doom too.

Speaker 2 (16:46):
Even so, well, the matrix was supposed to be gnostic,
even though unfortunately for them there's kind of there's multiple
like Christological archetypes in it, but their whole thing was
for him to be a gnostic savior.

Speaker 1 (16:59):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (17:00):
I would add to what you were saying in terms
of it being very dualistic. I mean, if you break
down the distinction between creation and creator, what you get
is this like very splintered set of groups because you
had gnostics which were like very aesthetical, and you had
gnostics which were like super hedonistic. And what we see

(17:20):
today in the consumerism, this hedonism everywhere, Like that is
gnosticism as well. And when you were talking about Protestants,
the very idea that you can simply recognize the Holy
Spirit because like you kind of vibe with it because
you yourself have the ability to recognize Christ wherever you are,
but the rest don't.

Speaker 1 (17:39):
It's like, bro, where did you get your knowledge of
Christ to be able to discern Christ everywhere? Right?

Speaker 6 (17:44):
And it's simply a statement of preferences, and I unfortunately
I see it as well, like I see it within
a lot of people, like for example, that make an
idol of the faith. For example, even Orthodox people who
want Christ to be a hippie or want to be
like a Church of Night Christians.

Speaker 1 (18:00):
And they're like no, no, no, this is like JADAIRI is
too mean, right, he's too mean?

Speaker 6 (18:05):
And it's like, bro, how do you know? Like did
did the Holy Spirit tell you this? Because for example,
I can read back into the tradition and see that
they were super based like Orthodox.

Speaker 1 (18:16):
Saints, who would think that you're just like a.

Speaker 6 (18:21):
Like a Satanist, an anti Christian Satanist, Like from what
authority are you speaking from? And for example, when you hear,
for example, I don't know sixteen year olds who read
everything about the faith and speak, it's like okay, but
haven't been catechised even and they're starting to speak, It's like, bro,
you're just a modernist.

Speaker 1 (18:39):
You're a gnostic.

Speaker 6 (18:40):
You think that reading a book will simply translate into
you being the right person to teach about something at
a certain point. It's like that is a gnostic as well.
It's the idea that we can simply let's say, grasp
by our own inner essence the esoteric mysteries of the world.
It's like no, no, no, Christ reveal himself to us. So
there's there's nothing, let's say, that is not contained within

(19:03):
the revelation of Christ to us, like that we can
humanly uh like receive from from elsewhere.

Speaker 1 (19:10):
So it's like, what.

Speaker 6 (19:11):
Are you talking about. You're not you're not you're you
haven't been in movement. And I think that we have
lost that distinction, especially now because like, for example, a
lot a lot of teachers they for example, they hate
to use the word alumni at least in Spanish we
use student and alumno and it means like not illumined.

(19:31):
And for example, a lot of teachers are like, oh,
that's me because it implies that the student doesn't know
and he needs to be like brought into that.

Speaker 1 (19:40):
Yeah, that's how it's supposed to be.

Speaker 6 (19:42):
Like when when you haven't been catechized, you haven't been
in movement yet, it's like it's a it's a common thing,
but but it's not like this esoteric thing that we're
keeping from you. But it's always like endless stairs of knowledge,
Like I'm going to keep this folder of like, oh,
you haven't done the research.

Speaker 1 (19:59):
It's like literally you're not out of the body. That's it.

Speaker 6 (20:02):
And what about that?

Speaker 2 (20:04):
I was going to pick up on something that Father
Deacon said regarding the dualism, which is real quick point,
and I would make the case, especially with my work
regarding transhumanism, which I would label transhumanism as a gnostic enterprise,
is that to Voglan's point regarding the immatization of the
escaton is this is their way to break down the
dualism that they themselves live in. And so because we

(20:27):
have our both and metaphysics, it's whether it's Marxis, you know,
the utopian existence of no longer having class warfare, the
end of history, or transhumanism, uh, blending with the machine
and therefore in a sense blending the the eternal with
the temporal. And and so these these millinery and utopian

(20:47):
enterprises are sort of their worldly attempt to actually find
a both and physical metaphysics. So it's always rooted into
sort of materialism.

Speaker 4 (20:59):
Yeah. I was also picking up on Ivan what you
said to because you know, there were people I went
to high school with that, you know, and I went
to obviously an evangelical non denominational high school. But there
are a lot of people that left Christianity completely and

(21:22):
went in and got all into the Gnostics and the
Gnostic Gospels and stuff like that. And I've seen this
theme before and it was for them, it was a
reaction against hierarchy and authority, even though obviously non denominational
has very little of that. Not exactly, yeah, but it's
it's really interesting because if you if you talk to

(21:45):
people who are in the Gnostic Gospels and stuff like that,
they and this will tie to vogueland too. It's always
the history of the Church is interpreted in terms of
like oppress or un oppressed. Oh, it's the church and
it was oppressing you know, these these terrible you know,
this disenfranchised group that just wanted to you know, know

(22:07):
the truth. And and you even see this in kind
of like the Da Vinci Code and stuff like this
and these different things. So do you think that there's
this and there's a reason why Vogelan actually says, you know,
once you abolish essentialism like real essences and nature, which

(22:28):
stand is kind of uh, how does Bruce start from faults?
Put it a grain that you can't really put like right,
it's nature, it's nature. It's you can't. Once you get
rid of that idea and this kind of mechanization of nature,
well then man is the uber mint. He's the over

(22:48):
man who manipulates and controls everything becomes libido dominandi, right, right,
So of course everything's gonna be interpreted. I mean, if
you even think about aerosols, wore causes or abolish and
what that's left only efficient causality, right, So it's just power.
Everything's interpret power. So it's all well, it's of course

(23:11):
they view with the lens look at these awful you know,
ecclesial authorities and the power, and they're just trying to suppress.
And I think also through the use of the language
and talks about this, they play word games, right, and
you you get like the epitome of this in the
kind of Frankfort School and stuff like this, where words

(23:33):
are no longer to convey information and truth in these
things because there really isn't anything like that. And that's
the illusion. So it's about power, right, It's an empowerment
and which you use words as weapons and you get
the upper hand on But I think it's all rooted
in a kind of satanic, egotistical, narcissist kind of I

(23:58):
hate God's created order. I hate hierarchy, both in nature
and politics and in the Church and authority, and so
I will make myself God. If I can do it,
if I can build it, then let it be true.
So it's it's like a it's man's ex nilo creation.

(24:22):
I will create it and it will be Do you
feel that that's a kind of a motivating factor.

Speaker 2 (24:28):
Yeah, I would argue to you that Mcavelli is really
the first iteration of the full collapse of Christian metaphysics
and like the ultimate rational conclusion. Then if truth and
virtue or ethics and morality are not objective, well then
you get the prince. And you know that's that's like
Italian Renaissance stuff, so that we're before we get to

(24:51):
Nietzsche's you know, nihilism and all this different stuff. But
he's already getting to the same conclusions. Ironically, his father
was a pope, yet he doesn't believe in God or
any any sort of But it comes back to what
you're talking about, the will to power, and he was
one I would say a little bit different from the
because I agree with you, the contemporary gnostic is very

(25:12):
skeptical of hierarchy, and maybe that's an American phenomenon more so.
But you know, Machiavelli was all about hierarchy. He just
wanted to be at the top of it. He was
all about authority and power. He just wanted to be
at the top of it. And so maybe there's a
taint of the democratic influence post Enlightenment of Reformation doing
away with monarchy that gnosticism even sort of took. You know,

(25:35):
the destruction of the metaphysics is that it almost takes
this new form in the will of power where it
just flattens everything.

Speaker 9 (25:41):
To your point, well, to piggyback on what you were saying,
I think that the issue is that we're taking people
like Machiavelli to and comparing them with people with postmodern people. Fundamentally,
because people like Machiavelli and people like Heygil, they're obsessed
about the idea of unity because they're their social context

(26:02):
is a Europe that is fundamentally disintegrating. So they're looking
for political figures that can enact as strong will like
they're they're fundamentally authoritarians. Who are intellectualizing their way into
let's justify a monarchical rule that is absolute right. And uh,
what what I would say is that to to FDA's
point is that the whole uh, like the whole woke

(26:26):
phenomenon is a political expression of postmodernism.

Speaker 4 (26:29):
Uh.

Speaker 6 (26:29):
If you if you take for example, thinkers like Umberto Rico, Uh,
he was like like he he he's kind of like
dark FDA because like he's a dissolution tomist that went
to way postmar and he went like, Okay, liberalism exists
to prove that truth is relative, that that ultimate truth
does not exist, and whoever believes in truth is ultimate

(26:52):
is a fascist and a totalitarian right. And uh, the
problem is that those people eventually have this semiotic structure
where they're like, Okay, we can never understand each other.

Speaker 1 (27:04):
So if you have different symbols from mine, you're fundamentally
my enemy.

Speaker 6 (27:08):
So practically that means that they have to enforce a
form of conformity that is like, unless you have the
brand of rokness that is exactly identical to mine, I
have to excise you because we cannot understand each other,
and you're potentially my enemy. So I think that this
is like you mentioned the matrix before, like this is
literally downstream from the matrix. So when we think about

(27:31):
people like Machiavelli, like Machiavelli is closer I think, to
a fascist in terms of like their spiritual mindset than they.

Speaker 1 (27:38):
Are to like a like a postmodern leftist.

Speaker 6 (27:42):
Because the post modern leftist is closer to an anarchist
or to an open Satanist than to an ancient classical
Greek idea of like let's be strong and protect our identity.

Speaker 2 (27:54):
I would say Mcavelli represents what you know Socrates and
Plato described as a tyrannical soul, and that really is
then what we would consider satanism. I mean, it's just
about total domination and will to power.

Speaker 5 (28:08):
I just wanted to defend Machiavelli for a second, because
he wrote the Prince is a job for essentially it
was a job application for the MEDICIESE. Yeah, so for
the Prince. He wrote it to tickle their ears and
wrote it for what they wanted to hear. If you
want to know Machiavelli's actual views, I strongly recommend his
Discourses on Livy, which was published after his death. Intentionally,

(28:29):
and he actually predicted more or less predicted the Protestant
Reformation that was to come. And he actually did lay
his finger on the fundamental one of the fundamental flaws
of the papacy in how it prevented Italy from uniting
as a proper kingdom the way that France did or
Spain was screaming at the time.

Speaker 2 (28:46):
But yeah, he was a genius.

Speaker 5 (28:49):
Yeah yeah, so like so I do strongly recommend his
History of Florence in particular, and the second work after
that would be sorry, not the History Florence would be
the second one. The first one would be the Discourses
on Livy, and after the second one after that I
would recommend would be his History of Florence.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
Would you agree that he is a sort of archetype
of the evil genius.

Speaker 5 (29:08):
No, it's I'd say. The thing is the Prince is
literally him catering a like everything in the Prince is
written for that job application.

Speaker 4 (29:18):
Like, it's not what he actually held himself.

Speaker 5 (29:20):
It was literally just for him to be able to,
you know, get paid, which is you know, yeah I
left Wather you get a nice.

Speaker 4 (29:28):
This is really good to daunted Jamuna's from Macavelly to Marx,
and yeah, mcavelly gets a really bad name, like, but
he's obviously quite misunderstood, and you know, it does mention.

(29:51):
I mean, there's probably he does mention in here that
and maybe this is a connection to some sort of gnocissism.
Although mcavelly's writing is often sober and even pessimistic, there's
no mistaking the cholastic strain of his thinking. So he
you do have to play some in terms of this

(30:13):
kind of you know, aematizing escatonom and diernity and stuff
like that. But you're absolutely right about the prince that
was a job a job application if I got Mark Machabell.
I mean, he's just a complicated character that's misunderstood. One

(30:33):
of the things. I mean, he's obviously a statesman par excellence, like, yes,
and one of his themes that you know is you know,
don't become so idealistic that you can't actually practically do stuff.
So it's it's a mischaracterization to be like to say that, oh,

(30:53):
the he's the man that that the ends justify the means.
It's like, well, he's actually just really politically savvy and
the fact that he was banished and what he had
to kind of go through and with the medicis and
all this different stuff just kind of shows you. I mean,
there's a lot of things to learn from him. Obviously
he does have an anti religious element to him, because,

(31:16):
like I said, he's but he's got valid critique for
the Roman Catholic Church as well. So it's hard for me.
He's a very complicated character. It's hard for me to
kind of place and know exactly what to say about
him other than he's usually mis characterized. But he is

(31:40):
like he is a modern like he's he represents a
kind of modern way of thinking that I think at
least that's important to pick on that pick up on that.

Speaker 2 (31:50):
So I have not read the discourses on Livy. I've
read The Prince, and I am aware of some of
the background. Would you guys, would you guys agree that
regards to him being the sort of first iteration of modernity,
that part of his worldview is a rejection of metaphysics.

Speaker 1 (32:10):
Yes, yes, yes, yes I would.

Speaker 6 (32:13):
I would also, like, I didn't mean to say that
he's a talented or negative sense on the contrary, Yeah,
I was just being kind of the neutral. But because
I'm more of a let's say I'm a monarchist, so
for me, let's say, vertical authority doesn't doesn't brob me
the wrong way. But I mean, I meant to say
it in the sense that I think Machiavelli represents intellectually,

(32:37):
not not merely the not just the ends justify the means,
but rather a critique of let's say, Christianity in terms
of its ability to wield power. Right, because his he
he's the founder of the school of thought which which
is closer to my thought and in some senses, which
is political realism, which is basically okay, nice ideas, but

(32:59):
let's impractic this.

Speaker 1 (33:00):
People worship power.

Speaker 6 (33:01):
What are you going to do, even if you're let's
say a saint, what are you going to do to
rule over all of these people who don't have the
same belief as you do? Right, And if we have
to be honest, we have to give credit where credit
is due, Like, for example, I don't know today John
Marsheimer is one of the best geopolitical analysts, and he's

(33:21):
downstroom from Machiavelli. So like, I don't think that we
have to condemn like the whole school of thought of
political realism. But at the same time we have to say, look,
this doesn't have a meta like you said, it doesn't
have a metaphysical.

Speaker 1 (33:36):
End goal that we can be aligned to, because.

Speaker 6 (33:39):
It's simply just a study of power for power's sake,
which is fundamentally not in the interest of Orthodoxy in itself,
because that would be like, Okay, let's let's get a
PhD in let's say in Satanism.

Speaker 1 (33:52):
It's like, why, what's the point. You already know that
it's the enemy.

Speaker 6 (33:56):
You already know that, Like, by studying it, you're not
going to be able to protect yourself against it.

Speaker 1 (34:02):
What you need is what you need is Christ to
fight against that.

Speaker 6 (34:06):
So I'm meant to say all of this about Machiavelli
in the sense of, like this idea that we can
somehow bolster ourselves by using.

Speaker 1 (34:14):
The weapons of the enemy, it has a limit.

Speaker 6 (34:17):
It has the limit, and we have to know that limit,
which is basically the whole problem that we're having even
within the Orthodox Church, in terms of like the tension
between mercy and rigor the tension between let's say, what
are the borders of the church, all of that, because
a lot of people are saying Hey, we're Orthodox Christians.

Speaker 1 (34:35):
We should act politically in the world. We should oppose
all of these forces.

Speaker 6 (34:40):
But then we have people telling us, hey, you're nobody
to say this, you don't have the authority to say this.
You're sounding like achilliast or whatever, and it's like no, no, no,
we have to find like the royal path and the
sense of like, yes, I want justice to be part
of the world and wanting to embody justice in the world.
Being the Church like implies the Kingdom of Heaven on earth,

(35:03):
like the Church is chatologic, not just the scatology, but
in a in metaphysical sense, in a metaphysical sense.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
The presence of Christ in the world. We have to
be the salt of the earth.

Speaker 6 (35:13):
So if the loosest insultant is like what's the point,
we would become exactly the kind of no fix that
we would be criticizing, just with our long flavor of like,
oh I'm so biased.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
Mhm.

Speaker 4 (35:29):
That's why you know when all this stuff came up
during the elections, right, and uh, hardly anybody's steered the
royal path. And so I actually told him, like, you
maybe should actually pick up Macavelli and just read some
stuff I'm not saying he's correct about everything, but you
can learn some stuff. But it's exactly he said, like

(35:50):
how many people, And I think it's just kind of
black billed and intellectual laziness that they were like, well,
the kingdom's not of this this world, like I don't
trust in princes, and I'm like, well, I don't either,
But that doesn't mean that you shouldn't be active in
you know, politically participating, you know, even if it was

(36:11):
all fake and great, right, What I said is, who
do you want to be seen as right? Even if
it's all ruled by the lads and all the different
stuff and voting doesn't matter at the end of the day.
Don't you want to be like, but I did something.
Here's a man that stand that acted right, and so
that you're not so ideological but you're also practical. But

(36:34):
on the other side, you know, politics is not your
first things first, that's a third fourth thing. But it
doesn't mean that you know you're a monk and be
like well, I just don't. I mean, that's the easy way, right,
it's kind of immature and cheap, and so it's like,
look this again, this kind of dialectics I'm like, can't
you guys just be nuanced and in using how like,

(36:58):
you know, be both not too I dealized, but be
a man of principle right at the end of the day,
and be like, Okay, it was all fake and gray
and I couldn't do anything, but I acted. I did
something in the face, and I had hope against hope, right,
and I wasn't so stupid to be like, yeah, I
put my trust in all these political leaders and have

(37:19):
this kind of messianic kind of politicalism and political messianism
or something like that. It's just it just seems to
be nuanced immatures. And I think that's something you could
learn from from Macabelli, although unfortunately he is. Dante Jimirio
says he does have a messianism. He believed that Italy

(37:43):
needed a messianic political leader. To you, and maybe that's
the kind of what you were saying. The link to
kind of fascism has this kind of element too, that
there will be a profit that will be sent. And
that's why Vogeland talks about fascism itself is kind of
a gnostic kind of system, right that the gnostic sense
of prophet. There's a prophet there's a many right who yeah,

(38:06):
is going to politically save the world and stuff like that,
So good, good points, just trying to connect it to
everything they're saying.

Speaker 1 (38:14):
Yeah, FDA, just a small little comment.

Speaker 6 (38:17):
I think I think that the there is a link
between let's say, the spirituality of for example, the Incas,
the spirituality of Catholicism, and the spirituality of fascism in
the sense of like they put all their eggs in
the in the in this great figurehead, and it's like
in the case of the Catholics, it is the pope.
The pope is the linchpin of the whole religion. Without
the Pope, everything falls apart. In the case of the Incas,

(38:39):
there was like the the inca leader who was like
a god emperor and in and in the case of
Fascism is the great leader, right, And like the the
idea there is that, Okay, we need one uniting principle,
so we make this idol of God under which we
can unite. And this idol of God has to necessarily

(38:59):
a destroy the enemy before it is destroyed, which is
fundamentally the philosophy of the Roman Empire, which is basically,
I have to invade you because if I don't invade you,
you're gonna invade me, right, Because if I don't impose
myself on you, then you're going to impose yourself on me.
And I think that's a problem. And that's the problem

(39:20):
also with the Church of NICs, because you see it
all the time. I'm sorry, please, Father, forgive me if
I if I say something out of line.

Speaker 1 (39:26):
But I get so many old ladies complaining about stuff
that I say, Like, for example, in a church WhatsApp
group that is just simply like me quoting the Saints.
The fact is that.

Speaker 6 (39:38):
They're aesthetically offended by the words of the saints because
they have a different idea of what the church should be.

Speaker 1 (39:45):
And it's like, Okay, I'm going to pick a fight
with an old lady.

Speaker 6 (39:47):
But it's like, at the same time, it's an importition
of it's an aesthetic world. It's like, either you will
get your you're curated. You're curated WhatsApp group where thing
is nice and and everything is very let's say unoffensive
and nothing ever, let's say it rubs against you or

(40:08):
challenges you spiritually to grow, or you get on the
other end, Let's imagine that I was a bloodthirsty uh
warrior that you you get, Okay, no mercy for anyone,
and like the moment you stray from the let's say
what we believe to be the core tenets of let's
say our community, then you are excised and that's that and.

Speaker 10 (40:31):
We have to we have to we have.

Speaker 6 (40:33):
To kill you because your very existence becomes a threat
to our community.

Speaker 4 (40:37):
Oh, ladies are the worst, man. I mean, we got
to do something about. It's not the Ortho bros Are
the biggest threat to the church. It's old ladies. We need.
We need to start building convalescent homes and be like,
all right, lady, you're going back.

Speaker 2 (40:54):
I actually had a Russian moment at my parish one time.
Ask me what my thoughts were about the Buddha because
she was watching a documentary and really liked his teachings.
I had to explain why it's not orthodox.

Speaker 4 (41:10):
Mercy.

Speaker 6 (41:11):
Oh.

Speaker 4 (41:11):
Also, Jay Dyer says he's right. Art of War is
another good.

Speaker 2 (41:18):
Yeah, I haven't read that one. I need to read. Uh.
Livy and Jose said the history of Florence. Then you
check those out and your mic maybe it is loud.
I've tried to turn it down on my side. I've
turned it down to like thirty percent. You're still coming

(41:39):
in kind of loud.

Speaker 4 (41:40):
It's very hot.

Speaker 5 (41:41):
The gain is super high.

Speaker 4 (41:46):
So let me read something real quick.

Speaker 2 (41:48):
Unless Jose has something he wants to add.

Speaker 4 (41:50):
Feel free yeah, Jose.

Speaker 5 (41:53):
Oh no, just yeah, his art of wars on the list. U.

Speaker 4 (41:56):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (41:57):
We're doing a for Kasali library. One of the next
books were doing is a collection of the various arts
of war health thrown together in a leather mountain home.

Speaker 2 (42:05):
So I'm looking forward to getting that.

Speaker 4 (42:07):
I love how organized your library is. I'm so deporganized.
If there's any organization back here, it's because my wife
like because you know, and of course, like I pull
a book out and I just shove it back like
into well there's supposed to be an order, but anyways,
I just it looks aesthetically pleasing. I just want to
give you a compliment on.

Speaker 6 (42:30):
Thank you, father Deacon.

Speaker 5 (42:31):
There are two things in my life that are organized.

Speaker 4 (42:34):
It's the library and my car.

Speaker 5 (42:36):
Everything else because I have small kids, it's a mess.

Speaker 4 (42:39):
So let me just read now. So there's an objection, Patrick,
you already brought this up. One of the objections that
people are going to bring up is that. Well, I mean,
it's just it's silly to say that these different political movements,

(43:01):
different modern philosophies are gnostic because they you know, these
people are materialists. They don't even believe in gods and
demiriages and different stuff like that. So and of course,
I mean, look, we're not saying as you'd pointed out.
I thought you put it with a one to one

(43:21):
isomorphic mapping on here they are, they're absolutely identical. But Vogelin,
I think, gives at least about six conditions that it's
like they're similar in this way. This is what I
mean by a gnostic. The other stuff could be, you know,
kind of decorative, but this is kind of the core.

(43:43):
And I'll read this real quick because I think it's good.
But it's just there are six characteristics of gnosissism. One,
it must first be pointed out that the gnostic is
dissatisfied with the situation. This in itself is not especially surprising.
We all have cause to be completely satisfied with one
aspect or another the situation in which we find ourselves two,

(44:05):
and not quite so understandable is the second aspect of
the gnostic attitude, the belief that the drawbacks of the
situation can be attribute to the fact that the world
is intrinsically poorly organized. Now this can be politically in
terms of the Church nature and you know itself what
It is likewise possible to assume that the order of

(44:28):
being as it is given to men, whatever its origin is,
to be sought, is good, and that it is we
human beings who are inadequate. And that's why I drove
it back to that there's a sort of kind of narcissism.
It's obviously not my fault. You've got to blame somebody.
But the gnostics are not so inclined to discover that

(44:49):
the human beings in general and they themselves in particular,
are inadequate. If in any given situation something's not as
it should be, then the fault is to be found
in the wickedness of the world.

Speaker 2 (45:00):
Three.

Speaker 4 (45:01):
The third characteristic is the belief that salvation from evil
the world is possible, or from this follows the belief
that the character that the order of being is vogel
and always puts it will have to be changed in
a historical process. From a wretched world a good one

(45:23):
must evolve Historically. This assumption is not altogether self evident,
because the Christian solution I love how he puts this
might be also considered, namely, the world throughout history remain
as it is, and that man's salvational fulfillment is brought
about through grace and death. How awesome is that.

Speaker 6 (45:43):
Five.

Speaker 4 (45:44):
With this fit point, we come to the Gnostic trait
in the narrow sense, the belief that the change and
the order of being lie in the realm of human action,
that the salvational act is possible through man's own effort.
And I would say individualists, you know, very individually in
a kind of narcissistic way. But six, if it all is,
if it is possible, however, so it's to work a

(46:06):
structural change in the given order of being that we
can be satisfied with it is a perfect one. Then
it becomes the task of the gnostic to seek out
the prescription for such change. Knowledge gnoses of the method
of altering being is the central concern of the gnostic
and the sixth feature of the Gnostic attitude. Therefore, we

(46:26):
recognize the construction of the formula for self and world salvation,
as well as the gnostic's readiness to come forward as
the prophet who claims knowledge about the salvation of mankind. Now, Patrick,
in light of that, think about the occult absolutely, like
it's a cultic, like it's it's magic.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
Absolutely And and you know, Vogelin then focuses on the
sort of materialistic bent post enlightenment regarding this stuff. And
that's where I think transhumanism perfectly fills this ethos, because
that is exactly they are the profits of knowledge. They
are the ones that are creating the new world, the order,
and they're the ones that are providing salvation and liberation

(47:11):
from the constraints of biological existence.

Speaker 11 (47:15):
Yeah, there's also the element of being rebellious against God
in the sense of like God, just like we, the
Father figure is completely an enemy that has to be
transcended because like he ordered the world incorrectly.

Speaker 6 (47:31):
It wasn't my fault, Like I have nothing to do
with the fall, Like I'm not simple. In fact, on
the contrary, inside me is the truth. And like it's
like a fantasy of like, Okay, my father coughed me,
I'm gonna cock my father. It's like I gotta I
gotta restore, restore inheritance that was inherently tainted by let's

(47:55):
say a bad creator, a bad like the demiurg Like
for example, if you take for example Blade Blade Runner
at twenty forty nine, like there's a scene where like
the evil guy is this blind God, this blind demierg
and like Harrison Ford says at some point like I
know what's real, Like he has to state his own

(48:17):
position constantly because he feels like assaulted by the world
and he has to. And I see a very very
gnostic strain of that in Americanism, in the sense of
I'm sorry if I offend you, but like the thing
of I'm gonna die, but I'm gonna do it my way,
like I did it my way the whole, like I'm
gonna die, but I'm gonna do it in a manner

(48:38):
to prove everyone else how right I am and how
wrong they are, which is kind of like an inverted martyrdom.
Instead of let's say, witnessing Christ because you love Christ
and you want others to be with Christ. It's like
I'm going to show you how you're all wrong and
I was right, and like I'm gonna I'm gonna go
to my own heaven and you you pass, you are

(49:01):
against yourself. You have a false puns chance, which is
like you haven't a put yourself in touch with your
divine spark, Like.

Speaker 4 (49:10):
I'm gonna read you some of this is really great.
Just maybe think about in terms of inversion. So the
Gnostics inverting the Christian message from God. It's so eloquent,
it's so the Gnostics saying, it's not my fault, I'm
actually the savior. It's the world's fault, it's your fault. Whatever.

(49:31):
A beautiful description of the opposite of that of the
Christian message. But that dos guess he gives and brothers
caramesof quote, there's only one salvation for you take yourself
up and make yourself responsible for all the sins of men.
For indeed, it is so, my friend, and that moment
you will make yourself sincerely responsible for everything and everyone.

(49:55):
You'll see it once. That is really so that it
is you who are guilty on behalf of all and
for all, which is a line from the liturgy. Whereas
by shifting your own laziness and powerlessness onto others, you
end by sharing in Satan's pride and murmuring against God.
Is that a great quote?

Speaker 2 (50:14):
It is Nicholas, welcome brother, are you from Are you
at the headquarters of Anonymous right now with those guy fox.

Speaker 10 (50:21):
Masks pretty much? Yeah, I'm a distributor of the masks,
so I'm kind of the headquarters of Anonymous.

Speaker 2 (50:28):
So what are your Are you pro gnosticism or are
you agree with the panel? What are your thoughts on
the topic.

Speaker 10 (50:35):
Well, you know, I I've been referred to as a gnostic,
you know, and it's not it's a title that I
would be willing to accept.

Speaker 6 (50:46):
You know.

Speaker 10 (50:47):
I believe that I've been endowed with certain revelation through
certain h ritual sacrament, which I would call the actual
body of Christ. Right by by actually eating the true
body of Christ, I've had the divine revelation and contact
with God and whatnot. That's that's what makes I mean,

(51:10):
it's again, it's not like some egotistical thing that's just
saying that. This is what makes me a gnostic, is
that I have this knowing. Gnosticism has nothing to do
with knowledge with a K, right, Narcissism is with a G.
It's it's not something that you can Well. The reason
I bring that up is because he's talked about knowledge,
but knowledge is actually not really narcissism.

Speaker 2 (51:30):
That in the strict it depends on how you view
what that knowledge does. So if it if it related
to sort of the liberation of oneself, you can then
frame that in different ways, whether it be taking psychedelics
and believing that you contact God and having spiritual nosis,
or the way that transhumanism believes that where technology is going,

(51:51):
that's a material substantiation of the same thing.

Speaker 10 (51:55):
Yeah. I mean you could say that that the the
the actual knowing can be trand into knowledge. But but again,
gnosticism is not something that you can obtain through reading right,
through obtaining knowledge in the in the traditional sense. That's
what makes gnosticism so much different. It's something that has

(52:16):
to be experienced that you and that's through that experience
that's how you know this thing.

Speaker 2 (52:24):
And that you truly know it.

Speaker 4 (52:27):
Yeah, you know that without begging the question. That's that's yeah.

Speaker 10 (52:35):
Well what i I'm trying to point to exactly is
that this is what makes the gnostic different is that
the gnostic cannot explain to you so that you can understand, right,
you have to experience, You have to have the revelation
revealed to you by God, right in order for you
to say, wow, that was a divine revelation, and I
know that because it was a divine revelation. Nobody can

(52:58):
tell me it wasn't. Only I know that, and I
can't tell anybody it was because only I know that.

Speaker 4 (53:03):
Right, Well, that experience we've experienced divine revelation, and the
divine revelation from God revealed that you're.

Speaker 2 (53:11):
Wrong about right, So that now.

Speaker 4 (53:16):
The Frank he's he's a liar, like.

Speaker 10 (53:19):
Well, when did you have this divine revelation? Please tell
me your experience.

Speaker 4 (53:22):
That's Sunday, Yeah, last Sunday, he was, Yes, I didn't
know about this.

Speaker 10 (53:27):
You guys act like I'm supposed to know about all
this and you're laughing like I'm I don't know.

Speaker 6 (53:32):
I'm not I'm not laughing at you, Nicholas. I'm laughing,
but not at you. I'm simply like we just we
just covered this when we mentioned, for example, a Protestant
that says like, I can recognize the spirit because I've
had this experience myself, right, Like, what what breaks you
out of your subjective experience? Because for example, in our case,
we know we've had the same experience because we can

(53:54):
speak about our experiences and they match up, like and when.

Speaker 4 (53:58):
There's an objective, there's an objective rubric by which we
can actually test right. When we have an individual you know,
we experience, we have an objective and a historical as
well as many other things too. Write an ecclesial, hierarchical,
sonodal right that is accessible to all. So although there's

(54:25):
a qualitative kind of feel the subjective in terms of
is it true? Am I deceived? We have an epistemic
standard for that otherwise, And we've come across us all
time with Mormons, which I would say we were talking
about different ancient kind of gnostic heresies and Montanism not Montanaism.

(54:47):
That is, I always got to tell people that because
I live in Montana, that this kind of subjective personal
public revelation new to like Mormons really buy into that,
whether they realize it or not. And one of the
things that we always argue with them is it ends

(55:08):
up becoming self like defeating that they can't actually qualify,
even within their own paradigm. What's a true prophet versus
not true? What's a true experiences versus? They have no
objective rubric because they've reduced it entirely to the subjective right,
and So that's what I'm saying, is that if you've
got competing, well, our experience that we experience in the

(55:29):
divine revelation, in the divine Liturgy and the history of
the Church reveals that these positions are incorrect.

Speaker 10 (55:40):
I mean, I get what you're saying, but I just
what I'm trying to get at is that I'm taking
that same stance, right, I'm saying that through my divine revelation,
the church and everything like that is actually a false teaching,
and that they're actually incorrect. That I'm actually claiming that
I do have a divine revelation through actually eating the
body of Christ, whereas this church they're not getting a
divine relation from eating the body of Christ. They're getting

(56:02):
their divine revelation from something else. I can tell you
that it's not from the body of Christ.

Speaker 2 (56:08):
Right, what are you eating that is the body of Christ? Exactly?

Speaker 10 (56:13):
Well, And I discovered this, you know, the Originally I
was at the University and Political Science and a speaker
came in and said that they had gone to Wahaca Valley, Mexico.
During a Catholic ceremony. There, the priestess was handing out
the sacred psilocybin mushroom cap. This is why they have
the little gold waffer caps or whatever at the church
instead of bread, right, because nobody's actually having a divine

(56:36):
revelation with bread. But uh, you know, just regular bread
unless it's got er got in it like it used
to h then you know, you might have some sort
of divine revelations. But the sterilized crackers that you're getting
at Catholic church, right, this is not the true sacrament.
So so it turns out that, yeah, the true sacrament
was the sacred psilocybin gold cap mushroom which is why

(56:57):
you see this, you know, symbolism throughout ancient Egypt, which
is where Moses brought the religion from, and it goes
it goes all the way back to before ancient Egypt.
You know, we could get into a Babylonian I mean
the Christian religion. It's it's basically through the beginning of time.
It was actually the catalyst that that that started agriculture,
that started animal husbandry and everything like that, that started

(57:19):
civilization was by eating the sacrament that we were finding
growing in the wild, and that that caused us.

Speaker 2 (57:25):
To John Mark right, the argument, Yeah, I'm very familiar
with all this stuff. I used to be a cycle
now and so did Father Deacon. So we're we were
all in that phase at one point. And and the
and the thing that we're bringing up is, you know,
if you just root knowledge or what you're claiming is
a spiritual nosis and revelation within subjective experiences through the

(57:47):
means of aebriation, there's no way.

Speaker 10 (57:51):
To a creation have a means of sacrament. Well, it's anebriation.

Speaker 2 (57:56):
And so that's whether you view it as a sacrament
or I'm still inebriating you and causing an altered state
of consciousness. There's no objective way to actually make truth
claims or universal claims. You've you've relegated you hold on a.

Speaker 10 (58:09):
Second again, Can we can we just claim I'll let
you to move on if we can just claim the
fact that you're trying to poison the well by calling
it inebriation, it is not you know, uh, I've done
a lot of that's not it's not it's not an abriation.
It's actually quite the opposite of anebriation. Eating from the
body of Christ is not.

Speaker 2 (58:30):
The body of Christ. You keep saying that but you're
just making a claim that's not I claimed it.

Speaker 10 (58:37):
We can get into the details of of how I
know that it is. But but the side note being
is that if you eat from the body of Christ,
are you going to say that you become inebriated.

Speaker 2 (58:46):
No, because we we actually have a bloodless ratue sacrifice.
But you are using inebriating.

Speaker 4 (58:52):
What's in question?

Speaker 10 (58:53):
No, your yours. He won't, he won't get all the
idea that it's.

Speaker 6 (59:00):
An Okay, let's let's let's move on from that. Like
I will tell you my personal experience. I sow Christ
after a psychedelictric. Okay, I took acid and I so Christ.
But my experience told me that I should go to
the Orthodox Church. Okay, my experience was Christ appeared to
me on the cross. He asked me, do you know

(59:22):
what I did for you. I had been reading a
lot of Orthodox material. I had been listening a lot
to an iconographer who I really respected, called Jonathan Pujol,
and I was I was already calling myself Christian because
I already believed in Christ. And then I had to
make a decision to take my life in Christ seriously.

(59:44):
Because what I was doing when I was taking all
of this LSD and stuff was actually not Christian. And
the people I hung around with, they were really demonically possessed,
and I could see the demus by the way they
were doing. They were doing a lot of a lot
of homosexual stuff. So like when I speak about let's

(01:00:06):
say objectiveness, I'm talking about not letting my own let's say, uh,
my own privileged perspective override, for example, stuff like the tradition,
stuff like the biblical texts, stuff like what people will
have way more knowledge than me on that. Say, So

(01:00:27):
who am I to say, for example, this is not
the true tradition, this is the true tradition? Like, where
where are you standing from to say that?

Speaker 10 (01:00:39):
Well, I mean, if you want to get into actually
breaking down to what you're saying, there's plenty, Like you mentioned,
there's plenty of scholars.

Speaker 2 (01:00:46):
Nobody, there is no there is no ancient linguist that's
still validating John Marco Alegro's research.

Speaker 10 (01:00:53):
Okay, let's let's let's break it down here real quick. Then,
to simplify, even without all the research, right, we already
know that the ancient mystery schools right around the time
of Christianity, that you know, the Greek mystery schools, the
Egyptian and whatnot.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
Carl A. P. Rock, I'm familiar with all that stuff.

Speaker 10 (01:01:11):
And I'm I'm and I'm touching on Ivan's question here
talking to him about what he's saying about this. He's saying, well,
who are we to say that Christianity isn't just based
on a true story of a guy that rose from
the dead and he rows other people from the dead
and he walked on water. Well, although that's clearly illogical
and we have zero actual logical evidence to believe that
that's true. In fact, everything from physics and science and

(01:01:34):
our brain tells us that that's not true, that nobody
rose from the dead and all stuff that if you
believe that, then you might as well just believe Harry Potter.
Oh but but you don't believe Hary Potter because people
said it's.

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
Fake, but believe that you're illuminated.

Speaker 10 (01:01:49):
So what I'm getting at now with Ivan, because this
is okay, let me explain Ivan here, is that it
goes into like mythology, right, so, and it goes into
these secret societies and these occult teachings, esoteric knowledge, which
is for you know, usually centered around a secret society
or a small group who uses an ent theogen. No
matter what religion you go through throughout time and space,

(01:02:10):
you'll find that they were centered around enttheogen, and Christianity
is is no different.

Speaker 1 (01:02:15):
Right.

Speaker 10 (01:02:15):
What happened was the n theogen is just kind of hidden,
and instead they replaced it with bread, and now they
give out bread every Sunday and say here's our religion.

Speaker 2 (01:02:23):
This is there's no historical evidence for that. I was.

Speaker 6 (01:02:26):
I wasn't, no, Nicholas, I wasn't not before this experience,
and what you're telling me, I've read about that, And
what I think is those same secret societies are still
operating nowadays, and they're they're tuning the kids, and they're
doing all sorts of like to me, like a depraved acts,
and they want everybody to be participating in those acts.

(01:02:48):
So my question is, why would I prefer one over
the other. You're telling me that I believe I will
I'm wrong because I believe in miracles that are predicated
all on ignoring science. But like science comes out of alchemy.

Speaker 10 (01:03:05):
So and I'm not even saying science, I'm saying your
own common sense. When I said, like, I don't like this,
I get scientific common common sense is if I told
you Harry Potter was a true story, you would laugh
at me and say I'm wrong. But if a hundred
of us told you the Bible is a true story,
you're gonna say, Okay, I guess you're right. Well, why

(01:03:26):
is that?

Speaker 4 (01:03:28):
Well, I don't think that's I mean, first of all,
I don't think that's what most people think. And number two,
it is common sense. The one who created and suspended
the universe right on, hung the moon and the stands,
and creates the laws of nature and sustains all of it.
It is common sense that that creator can walk on

(01:03:49):
water like it's nonsensical to actually think that he.

Speaker 10 (01:03:54):
But what I'm saying is a category what you're saying.
But now, no, no, because you now you're getting into this
whole thing that every person has gone in thro throughout
history where they believe the mythology of their society was true.
Why don't you believe that Norse mythology is true?

Speaker 4 (01:04:07):
For example, and epistemic mass.

Speaker 10 (01:04:14):
Thank you, That's what I was saying about the Bible.

Speaker 2 (01:04:17):
But we can make a logical case improve it.

Speaker 10 (01:04:23):
Hold on, guys, listen to what he just said he
doesn't believe in Norse mythology because it violates logic. But
he said that God can violate logic, So why don't
you believe in northology?

Speaker 2 (01:04:31):
Logic? Why would he be bound by logic? That's a category, right.

Speaker 10 (01:04:35):
Why don't you believe in I agree? So why don't
you believe in Norse mythology.

Speaker 6 (01:04:42):
Because I'm not Norse?

Speaker 10 (01:04:43):
And thank you? And that's my Point's can I let
me make my point? Now, let me so that you
can understand it. As a cultural anthropologist, we look at
different cultures and say, wow, this culture does because it's
part of their culture. They believe this because they were
born and raised in it. And he just made my point. Well,

(01:05:04):
I don't believe in Norse mythology because I wasn't raised
in it. I believe in Christianity because it is part
of my culture. That's my point. You've been culturally conditioned
to believe that.

Speaker 4 (01:05:11):
I couldn't. You couldn't find something farther culturally and religiously
amoved in America the twenty first century than Eastern Orthodoxy.

Speaker 10 (01:05:24):
Now stay right there with me for a second, then, deacon, Okay,
this person somebody just said that they don't believe in
it because it's not part of their culture. Now, you
just said Eastern orthodox is not part of the culture,
So why should we believe in it? According to that
person's logic.

Speaker 2 (01:05:36):
Because we can make logical arguments for it.

Speaker 10 (01:05:38):
Then, so you can believe in something that's not part
of your culture. So why don't you believe in Norse mythology?

Speaker 4 (01:05:47):
It's ability of knowledge, right, So that's why again, because
only Orthodoxy can provide a coherent account of how knowledge
is possible, give a descript right of the appearances that's coherent, right,
and all the pieces go together right, so that it

(01:06:10):
logically coheres. It gives an account for knowledge, how knowledge
is possible. And of course the bottom of the don't
what's that?

Speaker 10 (01:06:16):
Here's the problem. Let me address that you just said.
You're saying it gives an account for everything in a logical,
knowledgeable way.

Speaker 2 (01:06:22):
No part of that is an antient for epistemology, is
what he's saying. You cannot have objective truth claims without it.
That's what I'm seeing a specific argument, and that's saying
just everything he's thought, he's making a philosophical argument based
on the necessity of a transcendent creator for epistemology to
exist in the first place, and then regarding paradigmatic apologetics,

(01:06:44):
it's the most coherent model that it can actually self
account for all the things that we truly do believe it.

Speaker 10 (01:06:50):
So, so you're willing to basically say that Jesus walked
on water if.

Speaker 2 (01:06:55):
He's doing this because yeah, not a category.

Speaker 10 (01:06:58):
Yeah, but but but but Zoos can't live and throw
a lightning bolt down because he's not God.

Speaker 2 (01:07:02):
No, even based on even based on the secular academic academics,
Christ is a historical person. They may not believe he
was divine, that's fine, but everybody agrees as a historical person.
So you just compared a historical person to a total
mythological figure because you'd.

Speaker 4 (01:07:22):
And Plato already refuted the the pagan gods, right, So like,
I don't even know you need to go to Christianity,
Like any philosopher should realize just how contradictory and stupid
any of these pagan whether it be Norse or what
Plato was referring to. So I mean, like, if you

(01:07:42):
want to go back to like a caveman religion, that right,
that contradicts, right, some of the stuff was brought up
with the youth for a dilemma. All these things, there's
there's philosophical arguments. You don't even need to get into
Christianity that Plato himself was like easily able to refute
all these stupid religions.

Speaker 10 (01:08:00):
What are you thinking a Christian?

Speaker 6 (01:08:04):
Some Christians say that the question isn't whether Zeus is
real or not. The question is whether he is truly
the master of the universe. Like I'm not. I'm not
denying the spiritual reality that other narratives, because myth means
narrative that other narratives express. I'm just denying the power

(01:08:26):
of their gods.

Speaker 2 (01:08:27):
I don't.

Speaker 6 (01:08:28):
I'm not saying ball does not exist. I'm saying it's
a demon, it's a created being. It's inferior to my God,
and my God will destroy that. That mad, that destructive
spirit that believes itself to be equal to God. That's
what that's what we believe. We're not saying, oh no, no,

(01:08:49):
those myths are complete lies. No, there must be something
true about.

Speaker 2 (01:08:53):
That again, and and that meaning for it to be
objectively true is rooted within a transcendent metaph physic, which
we would argue is logos again coming back to christology
in the person of Christ. So the and that's where
I think this debate and it's kind of we're not
even hitting on the original point that was being brought up,
is that you're making universal truth claims from subjective experience

(01:09:17):
that I know you're offended if I say you're inebriated,
but even you know, even I'm actually.

Speaker 10 (01:09:27):
If you can.

Speaker 2 (01:09:30):
Let me, you can respond, let me finish, and you
can respond, we're letting you.

Speaker 10 (01:09:35):
Talk poison well, you know you poisoned well.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
Poison the well you're I mean, you'd have to literally
be retarded to say that LSD d M, t ayahuasca psilocybe.
I've done all those I didn't say that inebriates you.

Speaker 10 (01:09:50):
Absolutely okay this, and that is the point.

Speaker 2 (01:09:56):
Within your own opinion. You can't. You cannot make an
appollo a jetic using the laws of logic or any
any type of systematic structure to defend your opinion because
it's all rooted.

Speaker 10 (01:10:05):
You can't. You hold on. This is crazy, Look.

Speaker 2 (01:10:10):
You through it. What are you talking about?

Speaker 10 (01:10:12):
Here's why, here's why you cannot even begin to say
that because you've said, well, well, we don't have to
have logic because God is outside of logic. So God
did all these illogical things.

Speaker 1 (01:10:20):
Never whole is based on a.

Speaker 4 (01:10:22):
Logical illogical You know what it means to be water?

Speaker 10 (01:10:27):
Did you just walk on water and raise from from
the dead?

Speaker 4 (01:10:29):
All right, that's the law of non contradiction.

Speaker 2 (01:10:32):
Yeah, that vio contradiction is that logical will tell us
how it's not.

Speaker 10 (01:10:39):
What I'm saying is, what I'm saying is is that
common sense, law, physics, everything that we know, all of
our senses are.

Speaker 2 (01:10:48):
We don't You guys don't.

Speaker 6 (01:10:50):
Right, Science doesn't does science? What we call science modern
science is actually a misnomer. What we call science, which
surely means knowledge is actually the product of what of
a deductive method that only that only produces theories? Where
is the knowledge in a theory? Yeah?

Speaker 10 (01:11:12):
What I'm saying is is that your guys' premise is
based off of a FICTIOUSUS story and then you guys
are saying that story is true. What I'm saying is,
what I'm saying is there's no logic in that this
in the idea that this guy rose from the dead,
rolls other people from the dead and walk off.

Speaker 2 (01:11:30):
You have an objective morality in your spirituality is? How
do you condone homosexuality?

Speaker 10 (01:11:37):
I do? I think that's you know what I mean?

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
You do think it's a sin? Well, corporations and the Borberites,
those ancient Nazta groups, they participated in that, so it
didn't violate their.

Speaker 10 (01:11:49):
Many Christians that participate in all kinds of wicked rey
and evil, and and this this, this Christian religion is
actually a fake religion, that's actually a bunch of Satanists
pretending to be christ Like when they're not. That's my point.
So don't tell me that Gnostics are are are are
you know, esoteric or secret societies are evil? I get that,
but so are Christians. And I'm not talking I'm not

(01:12:11):
what aspectives.

Speaker 2 (01:12:12):
I want to hear. What your objective morality is? How
are Christians evil?

Speaker 10 (01:12:18):
Well? For one, because my sexicians I'm I mean mainstream Tricians,
because none of them are real Christians, right, none of
them would actually give the shirt off of their package.

Speaker 2 (01:12:28):
Are you talking about Protestantism? What are you talking about now?

Speaker 10 (01:12:31):
I'm talking about everyone I've ever met that has called
themselves a Christian has no idea what Christianity actually means.

Speaker 2 (01:12:36):
And what it means you do. But you you do
know what it means. Yes, you know that.

Speaker 10 (01:12:45):
This is why I'm different. I'm considered a gnostic. I
have the information that apparently don't have.

Speaker 6 (01:12:54):
I don't think you do. You think you do like
science as if it was a god.

Speaker 4 (01:13:00):
I wasn't revealed to you the truths of the universe science.

Speaker 6 (01:13:05):
Yeah, you were saying it like walking on water goes
against everything we know from physics and whatever else.

Speaker 10 (01:13:11):
I'm saying, you don't need science if you took out
all the science. I don't believe the science. You know
that the government to.

Speaker 2 (01:13:18):
So do you believe in miracles?

Speaker 10 (01:13:19):
Obviously you don't do.

Speaker 2 (01:13:21):
Do you believe in miracles? That mystery is going to
occur within the physical world?

Speaker 10 (01:13:26):
So yeah, I've there you go, so that you believe
in miracles.

Speaker 4 (01:13:31):
Do But there's what's hilarious to a psychedelic experience. I
mean to talk about like it's literally the opposite of
the common sense, right, Like it's not what like, well,
this is exactly right how everybody else sees it, And uh,
what is common sense mean? With the common right, it's
supposed to be the psychedelic is supposed to be a

(01:13:52):
revealing right, So, and we all know psychedelic experience like
the dissolution of boundaries and things that are like paradoxical
and contradictory and stuff like that. So I find it
interesting your epistemic standard is this experience. Then you use
to criticize that what you're being illogical and stuff like that.
When did the whole psychedelic experience is an illogical right, boundaries,

(01:14:19):
synesthesia and all this weird stuff that's but it actually
became warm and sense.

Speaker 10 (01:14:25):
I get what you're saying. You know it's not common sense, right,
We'll go with that. I feel like it's more logical
and more sobering than our everyday state. Right. So, like,
for example, like we can eat meat and all that stuff,
and we don't notice it because we have this veil
lift in front of our eyes. So we go about
our day and we can sin, We can live and sin.
We don't even know it, right, and that what's not

(01:14:48):
common sense to us. But then when the veil is
lifted through like what you would call a psychedelic experience
or through the eating of the body of Christ or something,
then we can see as as in the Garden of Eden.
Their eyes were opened, right, So once our eyes are opened,
we can see our wickedness. You know, we can see
that that it's not good to kill these animals. It's
not good to just.

Speaker 4 (01:15:06):
I need you to lay out it's not even clear
what you mean by what's logical. Yeah, like why don't
you give it not either, it's kind of standard definition
of what you think is logical.

Speaker 10 (01:15:16):
Well, I wanted to welcome Roscoe. And and also I'll
just say that it's gonna be hard to get on
that point when you think that walking on water is logical.

Speaker 2 (01:15:24):
Right, you don't need to appeal to our point. We're
asking for you to clarify yours. You're you're you're coming in.
You're trying to like say that we're illogical. For okay,
we know that that you're we're asking you now to
defend and present your worldview.

Speaker 10 (01:15:35):
Yeah. My My point is is that if if a
bunch of people you can have one or you can
have a million, come to me and say, Harry Potter
is a true story, this is what this is what
the author or what people say that.

Speaker 2 (01:15:45):
They're illiminated and that they know the secret truth. Same
same difference exactly.

Speaker 10 (01:15:49):
It doesn't mean it's true. Right, So when some when
when a million people come to you, this is what
Christianity is. It's a big MLM. It's a big pyramid
scheme where everyone tries to say this is true and
if you believe it, you're gonna be cool like us.
And the more you believe in this fantasy, the more
we're gonna support you and think you're cool. And whoever
believes the fantasy the most is like the most righteous.
And it's just a game of who can be the

(01:16:09):
most ridiculous.

Speaker 4 (01:16:11):
And anything I don't like the fantasy and a.

Speaker 10 (01:16:13):
Myth, know what it's called is is what is? You
are literally drowning a fish, drowning in water. You think
you're you're not even gonna come at me and say,
you know what, you're right? It is that it does
sound really crazy that this guy walked on water. It
does sound really crazy that he died from the dead.

Speaker 4 (01:16:34):
Sin's water and all the laws of nature can't walk
on water.

Speaker 2 (01:16:38):
Do you know what?

Speaker 4 (01:16:39):
Over and above nature by definition is over and above nature.
And you're saying that.

Speaker 10 (01:16:44):
That's how culturally brainwashed you are. That if you would
have been and I.

Speaker 6 (01:16:48):
Was born in an atheist family.

Speaker 10 (01:16:51):
If you were born in it, yeah, but you were
born in America. All I'm saying is, if you were
in an Indian temple. You guys want to be pitching
hindu is, I'm like, you'd be appended again whatever they.

Speaker 6 (01:17:00):
Preach it antic because you were brought up in a
gnostic environment post I wasn't.

Speaker 2 (01:17:08):
Well, then there you go. You just you just you
just defeated your own argument. How so, because you're talking
about cultural cultural formation to the environment that we grow
up in, and you just are yourself. Well, I didn't
grow up gnostic, but but I came to the truth
of gnosticism.

Speaker 10 (01:17:25):
Through the body of Christ through taking.

Speaker 2 (01:17:29):
Rating substances and psychedelics.

Speaker 10 (01:17:32):
No, through eating the body of Christ, which you call
substance because you wouldn't know Christ.

Speaker 2 (01:17:38):
Stuff. What are you talking about? But many? What are
you talking about?

Speaker 10 (01:17:43):
It will look okay, that's fine, but look in the
Bible it says there are many who will eat from
the body of Christ and not be able to discern
what it is, and they will reap judgment upon themselves.

Speaker 2 (01:17:50):
You have the right to say, that's exactly what you're
doing right now. We can make that same argument and
point to you you're the one that doesn't understand what
it really means. You see, like what you're doing is
it's all subjective stuff. We can just throw up.

Speaker 10 (01:18:04):
I'm saying, sorry to keep going, Roscoe, you better writ
interrup because we could go off. This isn't gonna end
anytime soon.

Speaker 7 (01:18:12):
Yeah, I got a question for you, Nicholas.

Speaker 6 (01:18:16):
Can you hear me?

Speaker 10 (01:18:18):
Oh yeah, sorry, sir, go ahead.

Speaker 7 (01:18:20):
Yeah, it's my audio.

Speaker 10 (01:18:21):
Good, Yeah, yeah, it's all good for sure. Yeah.

Speaker 7 (01:18:24):
So my question for you is why why are you
using the scientific method which is used to it it's
used to measure regular.

Speaker 4 (01:18:34):
Events.

Speaker 7 (01:18:34):
Why are you using that to measure irregular don't occur regularly?

Speaker 10 (01:18:40):
Yeah, let me explain that, because I tried to kind
of explain that it was kind of rough. But like,
I'm not like one for like science, right, Like I
don't believe in the government science preachers. You know that
I believe that government science it has basically become statism,
basically become satanism. You know, they lie all the time.
I'm not saying I'm like this science person who know
me a science center. What I'm saying is, why don't

(01:19:00):
you believe Harry Potter is real? Is that because of science?
Is because of common sense?

Speaker 6 (01:19:04):
Why written?

Speaker 2 (01:19:07):
Because she wrote it?

Speaker 6 (01:19:08):
Written like it's incoherent and.

Speaker 10 (01:19:15):
The okay, no, deacon's actually taught. Touching on the real
point here, he says, because the author said it's fiction. Right,
if the author told him it was real, or if
he had a group. See what I'm saying. He's bandwagoning
and he's appealing to authority. If somebody told him it
was real and he could hop on the bandwagon where
he believed it was real, he would.

Speaker 2 (01:19:37):
Wouldn't That doesn't make logical sense. That's not reason.

Speaker 4 (01:19:42):
Like a lot of body says, story right, and it
marks all the things that's that write that fictional stories.
What reason would you believe?

Speaker 10 (01:19:54):
Thank you, you're making my point exactly.

Speaker 4 (01:19:57):
The story there's no actual historical place that you can
empirically verify that there's actual place. None of it matches
anything that could objectively right. And then the person says,
because I wrote it and made it up in my
own mind, I would say, yeah, that's a pretty good
reason to assume that it's it's a made up story.

(01:20:19):
That's a like I don't think anybody in the right
mind would disagree with that. Now, the quality is, as
one of you pointed out, very very different with scripture
and the accounts of the Church and the things that
can be historically verified, empirically verified, logically verified. And also
it's not claiming to be revelatory, right, it's not like

(01:20:42):
this is God. What's the ladies name that wrote it?
What do you Why am I blaking on her name?

Speaker 6 (01:20:52):
Yeah? I am?

Speaker 4 (01:20:53):
I am God revealing divine revel like literally are you guys?

Speaker 10 (01:21:01):
Thank you? Okay? Now now can you pause there and
I will explain because for some reason, you guys aren't
seeing it like I am. He's saying, well, because that
is definitely true, and and and I don't know if
we can get on the same page or not, but
because it's so odd blatant to me, and it appears
like it's differently blatant to you guys. Right, So he's
sitting here saying, well, you know, jk Rowling didn't claim

(01:21:22):
that it was as you know, the spirit of God
or whatever, So that's why he doesn't believe what I'm
saying is exactly that. Jk Rowling said, this is a
true story, gave a real name, give a real city
and said this guy flew around on her broomstick, and
and and.

Speaker 2 (01:21:34):
Okay, but why does that mean that I don't believe that? Like,
just because that something is is ultimately real, that makes
no sense. It's a non sequit or to say that, Well,
then you guys, you would be social.

Speaker 10 (01:21:50):
Decon just said, but it does because Deacon just said
that because she didn't claim that it was real. That's
the reason that he doesn't believe it's really.

Speaker 4 (01:21:59):
A lot. Right, Just because that doesn't mean the converse
is true. Just because there's somebody that it's it's false, right,
that it's made up, doesn't mean that anybody therefore that
claims that something isn't false is true. Like that's just
a basic logic error right there.

Speaker 2 (01:22:17):
Right.

Speaker 10 (01:22:18):
But what I'm saying is if I wrote a book
then and I claimed it was true, and I used
a real place and based it off of the real
account of a real person, but I added mythological characteristics
to that person and said that they rose from the dead,
said that they walked on water. Why wouldn't you believe
that if I told you that this was a story
from God?

Speaker 2 (01:22:38):
Because I don't believe you.

Speaker 4 (01:22:40):
I don't think yourself.

Speaker 2 (01:22:47):
You don't one at a time, one at a time.

Speaker 6 (01:22:52):
You don't believe but yourself. What's your criteria to discern
what is true and what is false? And you're always
defaulting to yourself.

Speaker 10 (01:23:02):
Right, And I'm saying that that's what everyone should be doing.
We should be appealing to you. Oh, he said, you're
a freethinker.

Speaker 6 (01:23:09):
You can't look at can I can? I? Can I
say these things? Is the crux of the of the
of the issue. Modernity is gnostic because prethinking thinks that
it has access to every single idea and that ideas
have no entailments. So you're already presupposing a broken anthropology.
You think that you yourself have had this magical power

(01:23:30):
to be outside of biases. You have biases. Why why
should I believe that you, out of all of the
people in the world, have this special revelation given to
you that has has given you the power to see
without any biases, where the rest of us, we the plavs,
we have these biases that don't let us see the

(01:23:51):
truth as it really is because we believe in something.
You only believe in yourself. Why should I believe in you?
From the power of you saying I believe in myself.

Speaker 10 (01:24:03):
Mm okay, let me explain to you a little bit
more about that. Then when Jesus came, they would have
made the same argument to him, right, and they would
have said, look at what the law says, Look what
the Taurus.

Speaker 2 (01:24:16):
Says, Jesus is what you're claiming.

Speaker 10 (01:24:21):
And in a way, yes, that is what I'm claiming.
And then and then you know what they did. They
laughed at him, they pulled out his beard, and they
killed him because they thought, like you guys, yeah, yeah,
that's right.

Speaker 6 (01:24:36):
Okay, So so enlighten us, please, Nicholas, how can we
discern the truth?

Speaker 10 (01:24:43):
Well, I'm saying it is a personal thing that God's
relationship with us and the christ relationship with is a
personal thing that we aren't to.

Speaker 6 (01:24:49):
Go if I disagree with you. If I do the
same thing that you're doing, and I disagree with you,
should I go with your version or with my version?

Speaker 2 (01:24:57):
Right? How do you how do you adjudicate the two?

Speaker 10 (01:25:00):
Well? And that's what I say that if a person
has a divine revelation uh with God or from God
or through God, then there's no reason for them to
believe anybody else. But God, God did like look at Okay,
let's take Abraham for example, when he went to sacrifice
the son, right.

Speaker 2 (01:25:19):
No, no, no, no, no, let's just focus on you. We're trying
to get you to defend your world. We don't need
to so familiar with the Old City Testament.

Speaker 10 (01:25:27):
The reason that I'm referring to myself and him. Okay,
let me explain by myself, just as Abraham knew to
the point of killing his own son, that that was
God speaking to him, and he didn't care what anybody said.
I'm telling you I've had right, And this is what
a divine revelation is through God is when you know
that God speaking to you through you?

Speaker 2 (01:25:43):
Or how do you know it's God?

Speaker 10 (01:25:46):
Because when it happens, just the same way you could
say Abraham knew when when God, when it happens.

Speaker 2 (01:25:52):
I've taken DMT. You can contact entities different, a variety
of entities. I've contacted in psycho space. So how do
you know that who you contacted or who you felt
and inspired by was God? Well, because we already and
you agree that there's multiple entities right when you when
you're transcending and you know, move beyond the veil as
psychoonauts like to say, Right, multiple different entities in that realm,

(01:26:14):
how do you know they're God?

Speaker 10 (01:26:16):
Okay, well, well let's let's set a hold off on there.
Then let's talk about that.

Speaker 2 (01:26:20):
Come to a question, do you keep moving away? Like
people are asking answering your question?

Speaker 10 (01:26:24):
See, God says that they are. I'm trying to. But
you know, it tells a little nuance which the Bible
talks about how there are many gods but one true God.
And this is why God is a jealous God. And
these many gods include you know, aahuasca peote morning glory,
Like you're talking about these different the substances.

Speaker 2 (01:26:43):
So the different type of trip to mean substances are
gods in and of themselves.

Speaker 10 (01:26:51):
Yeah, I don't know if they're all trip to means,
but exactly all of the entheogens are considered deities or
not and even and that's why the Bible says there
are many gods. God is a jelous God. There's one
true God and his son is Christ. Uh. The body
of Christ must be eaten or you have no life
in you. This is what the Last Supper was about.
This is what the Garden of Eating was all about,

(01:27:12):
there's one true God and that is the psilocybin, gold
cap mushroom. This was what what what catalyst humans into agricolture.

Speaker 2 (01:27:20):
Was that the golden calf when when Moses came frown.

Speaker 10 (01:27:24):
So exactly, this is why you see the Hindus worshiping
the cow, the holy cow who produces the holy shit.
This is why Jesus was born in a manger. I
would love to see you find one Nativity scene without
a cow next to it. And why is that? Because
Jesus was actually born from a cow. They go off
cow dung, cow extrement.

Speaker 2 (01:27:41):
You just said, you challenge us to find one depiction
of the Nativity without cow excrement.

Speaker 10 (01:27:46):
Without a cow next to Jesus. Right, because Jesus was
born in the manger.

Speaker 2 (01:27:50):
Part of the I.

Speaker 4 (01:27:51):
Didn't have to say, good luck trying to convince people
who are not completely inebriated on psychedelics, the lies. You're
a pill battle on your hands there.

Speaker 10 (01:28:07):
See what?

Speaker 2 (01:28:07):
Well?

Speaker 10 (01:28:08):
But the good part about it, Deacon, is that I
don't have a battle, right, It's I'm just here as
a messenger, and people consider and kill Christ all they want.

Speaker 4 (01:28:15):
Chris, you're a I've heard that one million times.

Speaker 10 (01:28:20):
Oh, I'm here, I'm I'm preaching that the true gospel
of Prophet Christ. I'm preaching the true Gospel of Jesus
christy according.

Speaker 2 (01:28:30):
To the Gospel of Nicholas.

Speaker 10 (01:28:33):
No, according to the true gospel? Right?

Speaker 2 (01:28:35):
So what's true gospel? The Gospel of truth? What?

Speaker 6 (01:28:39):
Like? What?

Speaker 10 (01:28:40):
Exactly?

Speaker 2 (01:28:41):
Exactly? Let me get that's one of forty eight different
books in the Nagamadi, and within those are competing different
Gnostic schools that actually compete and this validate and also
contradict each other and competing for members. So how do
you know that the Gospel of truth?

Speaker 1 (01:28:56):
Then?

Speaker 2 (01:28:56):
Is the truth gospel?

Speaker 6 (01:28:58):
Is it?

Speaker 2 (01:28:58):
Are you just part of the Valentinian school?

Speaker 10 (01:29:01):
It's called revelation, divine revelation?

Speaker 2 (01:29:05):
Why why? Why is the Gospel of Mary not true revelation?
That was a totally different school.

Speaker 10 (01:29:12):
Well, yeah, I mean, I don't know what Mary's revelations were?
What whatnot? Maybe Mary or the Body? Maybe that I'm
not saying that I'm the only one who's had divine revelations.
Maybe there are either, and I'm sure there are so,
but that doesn't them true or mine? That's true?

Speaker 6 (01:29:27):
Let me get this straight. You're telling us that we
need to have faith. So we're called you're calling us
to faith, and when we call it faith, you're saying, no,
I don't believe in that because it's stupid.

Speaker 10 (01:29:37):
Yeah, here's why you think.

Speaker 6 (01:29:39):
You don't think that worshiping exactly a fun guy is stupid,
like worshiping a drug, like worshiping worshiping nation is stupid.

Speaker 10 (01:29:49):
It is crazy because Michaelisa, Yeah, yeah, that's what you're saying, right,
because you're not humble enough to humble yourself to worship
or understand that the body of Christ is See. You
want to talk about life. Mushrooms give life to all
chloral fill using plants. It's the King of Kings.

Speaker 2 (01:30:04):
I listened to Terrence McKenna two. I'm very familiar.

Speaker 10 (01:30:08):
Yeah, I don't know what he says about it, but yeah,
it gives. But I don't know if I even knows
about this, but it's it's the king of Kingdom. So
you have like the animal kingdom, plant kingdom, bacteria, fung guy. Right, Uh,
without the fung guy kingdom, you have no.

Speaker 6 (01:30:21):
Yeah, I should I should serve the fun guy instead
of instead of using my brain to worship the King
of all creation. Who created the fung guy?

Speaker 10 (01:30:31):
Well you can't, but it's like saying, uh, Jesus. Okay,
Jesus is the flesh of God, right, Jesus is the
fruit body of the fung guy. This is where you given.

Speaker 6 (01:30:42):
No, no, no, we didn't get the trinity from that.

Speaker 10 (01:30:45):
Okay, So okay, God is in the in the room
that you're in right now. Okay, Uh yeah, God is
uh the president.

Speaker 2 (01:30:54):
I think guy Fox is stupid and a Catholic heretic.
Nice masks, Well.

Speaker 10 (01:31:00):
Yeah, Jesus. Was Jesus a heretic? According to Jesus God, No,
so they didn't kill him for heresy?

Speaker 2 (01:31:09):
Okay, that's the Pharisees. You just asked us, So according
to who is he a heretic? Again, we're getting back
to hold on you. You just asked a question that
would then insinuate an objective rubric to delineate something being
heresy or non heresy, and then you say that he
is a heretic because we then, as Orthodox Christians, have
to believe the Pharisees Like that makes no sense, dude,

(01:31:32):
don't you see? You keep bringing up arguments.

Speaker 10 (01:31:38):
Was Jesus killed for.

Speaker 2 (01:31:38):
Heresy by the Pharisees. Yeah, yeah, the Jews. Yeah.

Speaker 10 (01:31:46):
So according to the religious leaders at his time, Jesus
was a heretic, right.

Speaker 2 (01:31:50):
Some of them, Yeah, not all of them. Some of
them converted, some of them became Christians.

Speaker 6 (01:31:56):
Ju for example, he baptized Christ.

Speaker 1 (01:31:59):
So he didn't think he was a heretic.

Speaker 10 (01:32:01):
Well, John the Baptist wasn't exactly considered a Pharisee or
a Sadducees. You know he was.

Speaker 5 (01:32:06):
He was the son of a priest, He was a Gnostic,
he was a priest, he was part of the he
was my position.

Speaker 10 (01:32:17):
I'm saying he was out in the wilderness, right. Was
he working in a temple?

Speaker 5 (01:32:23):
In the temple?

Speaker 4 (01:32:24):
Father? I heard you that.

Speaker 10 (01:32:25):
But what I'm saying was, get what I get what
his father was. But I'm talking about John the Baptist.
Was John the Baptist working in temple? Was John the
Baptist preaching Judaism or was he preaching something else? Was
he considered a heretic just for preaching something else? Probably?

Speaker 2 (01:32:39):
Are you claiming John the Baptist wasn't Jewish?

Speaker 10 (01:32:44):
Well, what do you think Jesus was Jewish?

Speaker 2 (01:32:46):
Obviously obviously not.

Speaker 10 (01:32:48):
That's your problem. See what I'm saying. You think Jesus
was a Jewish?

Speaker 2 (01:32:51):
He wasn't Jewish. Christ didn't fulfill.

Speaker 6 (01:32:54):
Just gets worse every nothing.

Speaker 4 (01:33:04):
Did I say something?

Speaker 7 (01:33:05):
Yeah, yeah, Nicholas, Why does the Samaritan woman say to
Jesus you are a Jew?

Speaker 10 (01:33:14):
Well, let's see here, I'll have to pull up this,
uh context of this here, I'm not sure about that one.

Speaker 4 (01:33:22):
Don't do it. It's from the science. It's the diabolical science.

Speaker 2 (01:33:26):
From the Harry Potter book. Don't do it.

Speaker 4 (01:33:28):
Yeah, don't she.

Speaker 7 (01:33:30):
Says you are a Jew? Why do you talk to
me a Samaritan?

Speaker 10 (01:33:36):
Oh, that's exactly my point, that's exactly point.

Speaker 2 (01:33:41):
Exactly.

Speaker 10 (01:33:42):
No, Actually, bring my point there. Wait, isn't it wasn't
she saying. Wasn't she saying if you were Jewish, you
wouldn't be talking to me? Yeah, making that he's not.

Speaker 2 (01:33:51):
Jewish, transcending the delineation between Jew and gentile. That's what
we're seeing the beginning Salvation comes from the.

Speaker 7 (01:34:00):
Jews in that passage.

Speaker 10 (01:34:02):
Yeah, let's see here he says that.

Speaker 7 (01:34:05):
He says salvation is of the Jews, and then he
says salvation comes from me, Yeah, meaning he is a child.

Speaker 10 (01:34:14):
I would love. I'm looking for this line where he
says salvation comes from the Jews. Hold on a second,
it's a.

Speaker 7 (01:34:22):
Pretty well known.

Speaker 10 (01:34:24):
No, uh, not not apparently well known enough. Does anyone
know that verses talking about. Yeah, I'm trying to find
it as fast as I can. I've never heard the
Jesus thing this year. I mean, I'm sure it could
be true. It's just, uh, I'm not familiar with it.
You know, it's it's in the context or whatever.

Speaker 6 (01:34:44):
I'd have to John, God's way of salvation is made
available through the Jews.

Speaker 4 (01:34:50):
Yeah, I find it.

Speaker 10 (01:34:57):
You're sorry, I'm just trying to I'm kind of reading
it right now.

Speaker 4 (01:35:00):
Go ahead, Let follow take psychedelics. They can't stay on track,
like of the just take a purview of the last
twenty minutes, like all the different kind of red herrings
and points like I like psychedelics. Does that to you? Yeah, Patrick.

Speaker 2 (01:35:22):
Experience, Let let him finish, Nicholas, We let you talk, dude.

Speaker 10 (01:35:25):
We're just.

Speaker 2 (01:35:28):
Stop interrupting everybody, get out of here.

Speaker 10 (01:35:32):
It's still cool.

Speaker 4 (01:35:33):
Well, that's that's the personal expect First of all, we
dial this all back.

Speaker 2 (01:35:38):
To he left Heed.

Speaker 4 (01:35:40):
Go ahead, I criticized his God himself himself in the mushroom.

Speaker 6 (01:35:52):
The was fantastic. Come on.

Speaker 4 (01:35:56):
The thing is is that it's like, it's true, they
can't stay on point. So I've worked enough with people
who have like and so let's say it's not psychedelics
or something like that, who have mental issues, right, it's
hard to keep them on a train of thought. Right.
That means there's something cognitively that's distorted, that's going on. Right,

(01:36:18):
So the point of the like, we've dialed it back,
it's really easy. Okay, what's your epistemic standard to judge
something true or false? Even within your own experience? Right,
all of that's going to be reduced to what he said,
whether not whether he's called a gnostic or not. It's subjectivism.
So what has subjectives me it means the individual person

(01:36:41):
is the standard. Now, what's really terrible about that is
in self defeating is well, if you're always and this comes.

Speaker 12 (01:36:51):
Up in ethics by the way, as well as epistemology,
if you are the standard, which is what he said,
and I couldn't keep them on point with this, then
you never advance in truth.

Speaker 4 (01:37:06):
Why you don't get game knowledge because you're always the standard?
Means you can never be wrong, and it means you
never progress either morally or intellectually, because you are the standard. Furthermore,
if the individual is the standard, by that same standard,
they have to admit. So let's say you're person A

(01:37:26):
and you have position A. I'm not A and my
position is actually the opposite of that, that you're wrong. Well,
it's self defeating because by subjectivism, you have to say
that that's both correct, that I'm wrong and I'm right,
which is a contradiction.

Speaker 2 (01:37:48):
Well, that's the irony that he a few times he
tried to avoid. He'd mentioned, you know, the ego and
stuff like that, But the irony is with psychedelic spirituality
is the d you go into those realms, the stronger
the ego actually becomes. You know, the general mantras that
you dissolve the ego and you become a selfless person.
But the whole point and what he presented is that

(01:38:10):
we aren't on his level because we haven't done X,
Y Z and have this subjective experience that then we'd
push him to validate, course he can't, and it just
reinforces this egotistical disposition that, as you said, you're always right.
You can't be discredited. And the irony is is that
you become more and more rooted in this egotistical position

(01:38:33):
that you're elevated amongst everybody else.

Speaker 4 (01:38:35):
And psychedelics actually does that.

Speaker 2 (01:38:38):
Yes, I.

Speaker 4 (01:38:40):
Remember, you know, having experiences where it was like that.
You know, you start to get God complex. You're like,
you know, you can see why people jump off the
riff because they thought they were Jesus and could fly right,
Which is also funny that psychedelics, Like he's going to

(01:39:01):
criticize us for being like it's illogical and mythological. It's like,
that's literally what a psychedelic experience is.

Speaker 2 (01:39:07):
Right now, I was poisoning created and created that wasn't
literally by definition, they neeborate. You could say you're in
favor of inebriation because the transcendent of ordinary consciousness opens
you up to a new realm. Like, but he was
so butt hurt because I said inebriated. Well, that's the
point you're getting into an altered state.

Speaker 4 (01:39:29):
And just to talk or argue with somebody like that,
because they're all over the place, right, so try to
keep them on a logical point. Then it's Jesus walking
on water mythology.

Speaker 2 (01:39:42):
It's you're just products of culture. But he's not, like
he's not we even.

Speaker 4 (01:39:49):
Talking about now it's the Jews and.

Speaker 5 (01:39:55):
Brother well even like going back to the Latin of
you know, that's he said, being under the influence of
a substance's uniform outside your body. So like even even
like in terms of a neutral stance, there's nothing inherent
in the word that that will be well poisoning in
any sense of the word. And it's not necessarily used
in a manner that is negative. So it's I mean, technically,
you know, us using a drug for medicinal purpose would

(01:40:18):
be a form of inebriation using the old Latin understanding
of the word. Yeah, but what I was going to
say is I want to add to you this to
bring it back to uh, you know, the Christianity part
or American style Christianity. I've had plenty of conversations with Pentecostals,
you know something that you know, I grew up with,
et cetera, where the conversations turned into a similar pattern

(01:40:40):
like that, except instead of I'm the Christ, it's the
Holy Spirit told me this, And I say, okay, the
Holy Spirit told me, you know, so the Holy Spirit
told you A.

Speaker 4 (01:40:47):
The Holy Spirit told me that A is demonic.

Speaker 2 (01:40:50):
So one of us doesn't have the Holy Spirit and.

Speaker 4 (01:40:54):
You get the same results. God for God, forgive me,
but for making this joke. But you know Jay Dyer
talks about Pastor Randy Balls. Yeah, well we literally had
Pastor Randy Trippenballs come on.

Speaker 2 (01:41:14):
Oh man, oh jeez. I mean again, even like believed
himself to be some sort of spiritual prophet.

Speaker 6 (01:41:22):
And that's what I told you.

Speaker 2 (01:41:23):
I know, they always go there, they always go there.
And really that was great. I mean, I'm actually thankful
that Nicholas came because he we were hoping that somebody
would come on that as a gnostic and they totally
demonstrated so much of what we talked for an hour
before he hopped on about this sort of delusional world.
We should have got. We should have asked him about
his escaton and how he viewed his eschatology. That would

(01:41:45):
have been interesting.

Speaker 4 (01:41:47):
God bless you guys for your patient. Like that's hard,
like it is. That's probably the hardest sort of person too.
I could deal with Matt Slick for years compared to
that level of just he was respectful, like he was respect, frustrating,
there's nothing to latch on, like it's just so fluid,

(01:42:08):
you know what I mean, Like it's all over the place.
You can't yeah, really difficult to have a conversation, let alone.
And by the way, this is what happens when people actually,
if you've ever experienced somebody who's having psychological breaks or
uh uh a schizode effective disorder and stuff like that,

(01:42:29):
that's what it's like. And it's like you can't get
through to like there's nothing to hold onto to kind
of they're literally losing reality.

Speaker 2 (01:42:37):
Well, and that's what the MK ultra I mean, that's
the whole thing is. They believe that LSD fractured the
mind actually and it began to silo different aspects. And
that's where they were, you know, interested in trauma based
experiments and how they could create multiple personalities and how
it could lead to like a useful schizophrenia like the
Mancherian candidate and stuff like that. So, I mean, even

(01:43:00):
based on the way that it was used by the government,
they already understood that it begins to like fracture and
silo parts of your awareness and your consciousness.

Speaker 6 (01:43:09):
Yeah, well, I wanted to make a small comment this
is partly based in my personal experience, but also like
if you listen to this guy, you can realize that
he's kind of grasping for something constantly, Like there's this
dopamine hit that he gets when he's like trying to
piece together like a narrative in his head. Like he's
having this model of like knowledge as experience that you gain,

(01:43:29):
so he's like scavenging for let's say, more information as
like he's he's using a nosteology that's inherently like broken,
which is basically even if I wanted to grant him
like Okay, you're not so arrogant, Like he was super
arrogant because he was saying like basically I'm the Christ. No,
but like let's let's take it and say like he

(01:43:50):
thought himself that he didn't know everything, he still thought
that he was able to gather into himself all of knowledge.
So he was like basically going from like this in
this trip of like Okay, I'm gonna get this new nugget,
and so I need to incorporate. It's kind of like
dataism in the sense of like okay, no, I already
have the prism through which I can see everything. I

(01:44:13):
just need to accumulate more knowledge, which is basically the
same fundamental epistemology of science, which is basically I already
have the perfect method. I just need to like chug
in some data and like I will, I will spit
out the truth. And it's like, bro, knowledge is not
that way, Like knowledge is performative. Knowledge is incarnational, Like

(01:44:34):
he didn't have that. That's the that's the break, that's
the cleavage between Christianity and gnoscissism. Narcissism is like grabbing
and grabbing. Grabbing.

Speaker 2 (01:44:44):
One of the things that we haven't mentioned, I think
is very appropriate when talking about the rise or potential
rise of Nassism in ancient heresies, in particular for gnosticism.
I think that was a perfect example. Is that the
meaning crisis that the modernist period has caused amongst Western
peoples and the lack of a historically a historical continuity

(01:45:08):
regards the ancestors and identity means that everybody has to
construct their own identity and find their own meaning, and
that it really is so when we joke and call
these people special boys, I mean really, there is something
there though that it appeals that revalidates your own understanding.
You can kind of then situate yourself as some type
of historical person because you're participating these ancient mysteries. And

(01:45:29):
I think there's a real appeal to that due to
the Meaning crisis. And even Peterson, you know, his presentation
of Christiane is very gnostic in some sense, and that's
how he's dealing with the meaning crisis. When you deal
with the meaning crisis through a personal relationship with christ
that's how you deal with the meaning crisis.

Speaker 1 (01:45:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:45:48):
Yeah, I wanted to add on that a so like
Jung was an ostin, so it's only logical to Peterson
being a student of Jume like would become an ostic.
And it gets them into this rabbit holes, like eternal
rabbit holes, where they're they think they're finding some esoteric
knowledge over there, and it's like, bro', you're just tripping,
like the drug has destroyed your brain and you think,

(01:46:11):
you think that you're getting somewhere, but it's just your
brain firing and telling you, oh, I'm finding gold in
this esoteric nonsense. It's like poor guy, like, Lord.

Speaker 1 (01:46:21):
Have mercy.

Speaker 5 (01:46:23):
Ironically, that's how an AI functions on the back end.
It's not actually analyzing data points and understanding like what
is the actual hard points in data? It's merely looking
for at the relationships between various points and finding a pattern,
whether or not that pattern has anything to do with
actual concrete reality.

Speaker 4 (01:46:41):
Really good, Just why that's AI is creating like fake
like legal precedence and stuff like right, yep.

Speaker 5 (01:46:47):
It's a fundamental flaw of how it works with when
you do when you do, at least with the current
fuzzy logic implementation at scale, it's only looking at relations
it's not looking at hard data points. And this is
why when you spin up an AI in since it
will decay over time when it when it comes to
doing mathematical problems, even when you give it this is
the actual solution to this set or this set of

(01:47:08):
problems because it's you know, essentially you know, it's rolling
a D one hundred at every single point and it's
you know, and it's a logical web for like a
better term or relational web. So the the there's no
no way for it to store like okay, this is
the solution like the pythagor in theorem, is this you know,
one of the time all the time, because that's not

(01:47:28):
how it functions, and well, you.

Speaker 4 (01:47:30):
Know what's interesting with that. And again I didn't even
think about this until this are you guys probably saw
this article that people are being involuntary committed through uh
over usage of chat, GPT and some of these AI stuff,
that they're literally having breaks from reality. They're thinking they're God.

(01:47:53):
It's very similar to this experience, and all of it's
what Gnostic like, yes it And that's one thing that
I've noticed about all the Gnostic total break from reality.
They can't so even if like it wasn't they had
a break from reality, but they could be logically consistent

(01:48:15):
and they could hold a train of thought. That would
be one thing. But they their mind's all over the place,
so internally it's just it's completely disordered. It's all over
the place, and it's a literal removing from reality. And
I think it's no happy coincidence that people engaged with
this chat GBT are actually having psychological breaks.

Speaker 2 (01:48:36):
Well, there's a study that recently came out regarding hippocampus
size and that people that engage with chat GBT more
and more and used it for more of its daily thinking.
The actual size and activity of the hippocampus began to shrink,
demonstrating like an atrophying of.

Speaker 7 (01:48:54):
I think they just off TikTok brain they have. It's
like they have to swipe through argument argument argument. It's like,
you know, I remember arguing with like some you know,
Hebrew roots Israelites or even some people who believe in
like the whole area and Israelitism thing, and you know,

(01:49:15):
you bring up like, oh, why does why does Philip
baptize an Ethiopian? And then they'll go into, well, Herodotus
said that there's white Ethiopians. It's like, but then you
do the research on that and it's like, okay, those
are likely Arabs that came in because of the Empire
of Axiom. And then you bring that to them and

(01:49:36):
they're like, oh, well you didn't know what this is initially,
so you can't use that. Let's go into the next argument.

Speaker 4 (01:49:40):
That's what ironically happening.

Speaker 13 (01:49:41):
So it's like they they're just like swiping through these
arguments constantly because they have a short attention span and
they get it, like you said, doping me in head
every single time they connect the dot to another point.

Speaker 4 (01:49:53):
Right, that's a great point that's really reminiscent of this
kind of short attention span. And I've thought about that
for a while, that that you have a generation that
so you know, I'm gonna date myself, but you know,
I'm Gen X, so you know, the Internet came out when,

(01:50:15):
you know, and was available kind of publicly when I
was in you know, junior high high school, so I
wasn't actually raised on let alone. Now, this kind of
the very very young generation I forgot what they call
them now below the Z generation? Alpha is it Alpha generation.

Speaker 2 (01:50:35):
I think that.

Speaker 4 (01:50:38):
The way that technology worked, like a kind of TikTok
and this fast swipe and uh snapchat and all this
kind of is I've always wondered what is that going
to do to like neurophysiologically and like how they learn
and process information. I've been thinking about that for a while,
and like you get like, I think that's exactly it.

(01:51:00):
You can't hold your tent, it's all over the place.

Speaker 2 (01:51:03):
Yeah, well, control they've done studies with like these iPad parents,
and you look at these kids that go from like
four years old to eight years old, and they're just
incredibly impulsive. They can't like follow directions for long periods.
All this different stuff. So everything that you're highlighting and
these you know, for so many kids, they're just they're

(01:51:24):
being raised with a pad in their hand that they
just have no shot.

Speaker 4 (01:51:28):
I can't believe that when I see that where I
forget the last time I saw something like that young
kid right and the mom and dad are doing something
and they're just sitting there and you look at it
and it's a spell. Yeah, like they're literally there's no
thinking actually go, they're completely memorized and mesmerized. And then

(01:51:51):
I even saw we went to a concert with some
prishioners and it was cool music and everybody's on the
it was great not to see any of the kids.
They're all running around dancing, all the kids and stuff,
and there was one kid off to the back and
he was sitting there like he was obviously playing a
game on the front, and I'm like totally zoned out,

(01:52:13):
and I'm just like, I can't believe that we've done
this to the youth. But the one that's most sad
is like seeing the little like toddlers on the screen
just and it's just like, what is the matter with
these parents?

Speaker 6 (01:52:27):
Right? Yeah, Well, I have to say that one of
the saddest things of the interaction that we had with
this guy. Uh, Like if you're listening, like no will,
no ill will against you, but like it's they have
no idea of their own humanity, Like they have no
idea of the news. And because they have no idea
of the news, they're always conflating the rational capabilities like

(01:52:48):
with their with their soul, so they don't see that
they have biases. They don't they don't understand that they
themselves are interpreting a situation through the through the prism
of their own humanity, so they don't notice their own brokenness.
So for example, when when you were talking about the
whole social media thing, it's like when I when I

(01:53:10):
scroll through social media, like it's too much information because
every frame you get, you're interpreting a situation, and you're
interpretating through the prism of your soul. And if you
if you're slightly, if you're even slightly trying to be
a good person, it will throw you into this wild
it will throw you into his sadness, into into anger,
into into all sorts of things. And these people think

(01:53:32):
it's normal. Like the guy we just spoke to, he
doesn't even register that he himself has a subjectivity, Like
he thinks like he's the only subjectivity in the world.
Like he doesn't notice that that he has a soul.
He thinks he thinks that his rationality is his soul
because he can see better than everybody else. It's like, bro,
you're you're you're like completely destroyed that he has no weapons,

(01:53:55):
he has no defense system, like he kind of notices.

Speaker 4 (01:54:00):
It's just like just like Mormonism too. I remember even thinking,
you know, when I was younger doing psychedelics, knowing about
self deception, yeah, and be like how do I know
when I'm deceived? And thinking I'm right when I versus
actually right? And I didn't have an epistemic criteria for that,

(01:54:21):
and I realized that it was always qualitative. So it's
like when the person has a psychedelic experience, like why
do they believe that like what's revealed like the other
side is actually more real and this is like the
kind of shadows and the illusion and stuff like that.

(01:54:43):
It's because it feels more real. And I remember thinking
that I'm, you know, a young age, I'm like that
is not a great epistemic criteria, Like, so I know
it's more real because it feels more real, and I
have no means I mean something. God knows how he'd
answer this. How do you determine that? Because self deception

(01:55:07):
is very powerful. What's your criteria? If it's all revelatory
and subjective the experience you have to see it, then
you have no criteria. You're always right. You have no
way of saying I messed up here. Otherwise you have
to go to an objective criteria, which he denies.

Speaker 2 (01:55:26):
I would assume he would respond by, well, that one
time I took the golden capped God mushroom, I felt
really bad about something I did, and I knew I
wasn't going to do that again. And that's how I
know you know like this. So it's based on his
again subjective emotional response to the ecstasy of the experience,
because sometimes it'll be really blissful, maybe you feel confronted

(01:55:48):
or convicted about something you did, And so that emotional
rollercoaster he goes on is then revalidating his life and
his morality and what he's supposed to do. But he
can't make universal claims just by trying to.

Speaker 4 (01:56:01):
And you could have the next experience actually revealed to
you that you misinterpret it actually that was correct, right,
that I was wrong in my previous interpretation. So it's
absolute schizophrenia right now when your experience can replace the
other experience and what you were judging that you were
right is wrong. So that's why you're groundless. And if

(01:56:24):
you're groundless, you're very being in personhood begins to come unraveled.
And I talked about this when I did the talk
with Father Trubeau at the conference. Do you know what
this is? It's excommunication to X, right, So when you
go through something like whether it's a moral trauma or

(01:56:46):
horror something like this, or an error. Notice what happens
is that he's isolated by himself figuring out truth. It's
literally the definition of excommunication or even excommunication.

Speaker 2 (01:57:01):
He made a point that he cannot literally communicate the
truth of his revelation, right, So it's incommunicable because you're
transcendent for him. So it's like he literally is siloing
himself where he cannot even communicate what's being revealed to
him to other people exactly.

Speaker 4 (01:57:19):
And if you're made in the image of the trinity, right,
you're trinity, like you're triatic, you're like you're a communal
being in the notion of personhood itself even you know,
there's been a philosopher and the di elosion that's talk
about existaire to stand out from right, means that personhood
itself derives and refers to a being to another person, right,

(01:57:43):
So all of these kind of clues that were communal beings.
So what happens is he's losing himself. He's literally unraveling
into non being and he's losing his person which is
exactly what an mk ultra experiment. But even prior to that,
in the concentration camps of the Potestromania, do you know

(01:58:05):
what they were doing? You know what made those why
the documentaries called beyond torture because it was beyond torture.
They were doing something and experimenting scientifically with how to
deconstruct personality. Right, we've never seen that before. And then
I pulled it out into the mk ultra, which they're
using psychedelics. It's deconstructing your personhood is which is communal

(01:58:31):
and getting you to unravel your being into nothingness. It's
absolutely demod just terrifying if you think about like what
that actually means.

Speaker 8 (01:58:41):
Right, Yeah, which is which is why I wanted to
comment on on the whole, like freethinking aspect of gnosticism,
Like gnosticism isn't by itself a freethinking but like after
like the Enlightenment and.

Speaker 6 (01:58:55):
Freethinking, like you get the liberalism and the breakdown of
like social cohesion, and like the individualism can only come
from free thinking. It's like, the problem is that, like
what this guy was doing, he was trying to appeal
to common sense in the sense of being skeptical, in
the sense of being, let's say, a freethinker that is
not burdened by interpersonal relationship, by social structures, by institutions.

(01:59:20):
And it's like, bro, but like you're alienating yourself from everything.
Like I have you say that that we Christians are arrogant?
Why because we recognize that we need each other, because
we recognize that we cannot cut it by like alone,
that we that we are saved in community. Like that's
why we're so arrogant. No, I think it's arrogant to

(01:59:40):
think that you can do it by yourself.

Speaker 1 (01:59:42):
Bro.

Speaker 4 (01:59:43):
Right, have you guys seen I was gonna pulled up
the other night. I thought it was going to be
a free movie and they tried to charge. I've seen
it several times, but under the Silver Lake, I've know,
oh you got to Yeah, it's really interesting. Anyways, there's
a scene where he finds this guy, this psych elite

(02:00:05):
gut like in this mansion and stuff like this, and
I think he's I forget exactly how the scene goes,
but he's playing like you know, Nirvana and Jimmy Hattle
like and basically he's telling them that and he's this
devil character and he's like, I created all these remember

(02:00:30):
this song, right, And he plays and he's the kids
find it disgusting, right, because his worldview is coming cross.
He was like, you're rocking out right thinking you're you know,
against the establishment. I am the establishment. I created your
rock music, right. And it's really kind of like funny scene,
but it's reminiscent of this, oh you're so anti authoritarian?

(02:00:58):
What's the uh rage with the machine? We are the machine,
we designed you and created. We are the establishment and
here you are. It's the same thing with the stupid
boomer hippies right where Oh man, we we we got
a whole l steam. We we just realized, you know, we.

Speaker 14 (02:01:18):
Had a revolutionary, evolutionary consciousness. Man, you can't even fathom
what I'm saying. Man, it's like you even understood that.
Like we're against the system. It's like sponsored by the
c I A congratulated.

Speaker 6 (02:01:32):
Literally, Yeah, it's like the punks who think that they
could buy their the consumer items, like their T shirts
and whatever in a village. It's like, bro, you need
you need the system to even get your your silly costume.

Speaker 4 (02:01:46):
I was trying to channel the I shouldn't say channel.
I was trying to tap into Dennis Hopper. Man, if
you could even man, he's even well, man, he's there's
my Dennis Hopper for you.

Speaker 2 (02:01:59):
That's an Oscar performance. Father Deacon, Well, I promised Jose
and Father Deacon about a two hour stream, so we
have a few super chats, and Father Deacon, if you
have any super chats or any anybody said anything, we
can address those. And if you guys have any final
comments or things you want to mention before wrapping up

(02:02:20):
the stream, feel free. Thank you to Blaze Master B
for becoming a Cotal crew member, Bortacle for throwing in
five Canadian Well, Emmanuel, I did show this when Nicholas
was here, and he he didn't seem to like it
too much. But well, Emaniel said, a demon told me
he was a demon and not God revealing things to me.

(02:02:41):
No one ever exactly. They always think they're talking to God.
And well Emmaniel says, no one can tell me I
wasn't hit by a rock by God. I experienced it myself,
and we all know only God can throw rocks in
a way it happened to me. Justin Henley throws in
five says the first Nativity icon I searched on Google

(02:03:02):
has no cows Challenge level too easy. Quantum Yakub says
Terrence mckinna garbage it was. It was all repackaged McKenna stuff.
Justin Hinley said, tell Nicholas, I think yeah. I said
that guy Fox is stupid and a Catholic heretic nice mask,

(02:03:22):
and Quantum Yakub said I had these same beliefs in
middle school and shout out to Jason Castle, member of
the Logos Academy. He throws Inten says, this guy is
really trying to be the next Joseph Smith, and Garrett
throws Inten says he doesn't believe in history, nor science,

(02:03:44):
nor logic, complete subjectivism, and Sir Heck throws in five,
and says, on one hand, he claims the Christian narrative
is a fiction like Harry Potter. Then on the other
hand he appeals to it citing scriptures. Yeah exactly. Well
he's just like Abraham. Guys, you didn't know that, Yeah exactly.

(02:04:06):
The Israelites got the they worshiped the Golden mushroom because
of what was going on in Egypt. You guys didn't
know that.

Speaker 1 (02:04:13):
Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 6 (02:04:13):
He appealed to science, and then he said he's anti
establishment science. And then he said he appealed to common
sense and said, like gnacticism is basically uncommon sense.

Speaker 1 (02:04:23):
It's like I have like this yestheteretic knowledge is like
which one is it?

Speaker 10 (02:04:26):
Bro?

Speaker 2 (02:04:28):
And I have one last super chat and this one's
actually for Jose. Romano's throws in poor box, says, can
I please get suggested reading on shi Jing Ping slash
China from Jose? His takes are fascinating but hard to
find unbiased sources.

Speaker 5 (02:04:46):
So you can actually read Shijing paning himself. He's actually
there's actually a couple of collected works of his that exist.
But if you want something that's a little more accessible
than you know, directly to him, although I do recommend
him directly. I think his stuff was still sold on Amazon,
but I'll find that. But I know, for example, the
guy you want to read if you really want to
understand China as it exists now, is a fellow named

(02:05:07):
Wang Hunan or Wanghuning. But yeah, he was Shu Jingping's
mentor growing up, so he wrote a book. The book
to start with him would be America against America, so
that that's the one to start with. Then you literally
after that one just read anything else by by Wanghooning,
and yeah, that's where i'd recommend starting. Americ against America

(02:05:29):
is a fantastic book and it gets we ever.

Speaker 4 (02:05:31):
Read him on the mushroom, so it's most success.

Speaker 5 (02:05:38):
Just be aware that once you read Wanghoning and you
understand what the ideology of the of the Communist Party
of China actually is, you'll realize that literally everything you
hear everyone say about China is utterly retarded. And you'll
also as you read Wanhuning, you'll understand why under sujing Ping,
the Orthodox Church of China was legalized back in twenty

(02:05:58):
eighteen or nineteen, one of the two years they repealed
the mouse band on Chinaman becoming Orthodox clergy. And so
twenty twenty two was the first year that I think
was twenty twenty two where they what do you call it,
ordained their first Chinese Seacon. And there have been, you know,
slowly rebuilding what was what existed prior to Mao Zedong.

Speaker 2 (02:06:21):
Interesting, I have not read Wong hu Ning. I just
pulled him up. I'll have to get some of that,
father Deacon, did you have anything you needed to share
or also promote your your philosophy course or anything like that.

(02:06:45):
Feel free to shill and also read super Jats.

Speaker 4 (02:06:49):
We got Slow Boys, cz Dants five bucks, Narcissism, How
to mess up your family hard in record short time,
Delluminati board, Thank you, JV rex Z three hundred. Oh,
let's a subscribe. Exoxis gards these five bucks. If orthodoxy,

(02:07:14):
oh this is a quote at least making fun of.
If orthoxy is true, why don't you just disprove current
academic paradigms on eg geology, microevolution, quantum free supposition, P
equals not P noble prizes, await you? How do you
navigate such conversations? Academy of Reeks a gnocissism. Thanks for
all Yeah, I just well, first of all, I don't

(02:07:41):
know if I had anybody ever say that before. I
don't think those things in themselves are like contradict orthodoxy.
But I always just tend to dethrone science by just
going through the history and philosophy of science. That's like
it can't even get the knowledge. And that also science

(02:08:08):
has the problem of subjectivity that it's all it can't
actually get to. Not only can it not get observable
facts because there's no brute facts you can't observe, right,
you have these kind of just Saltian stuff. It's always
is a lot of us pointed out here, interpreted through
subjective lenses. There's a problem of experiments, right, that nobody

(02:08:31):
can get a perfect experiment because you're not omniscient, like
you could always be missing something. And also the quin
Dowheim thesis, the indeterminency of data means that we could
create another geology, another evolution, another quantum mechanics that's contradictory
to all that, and it would all work and fit like.

(02:08:54):
So it just there's that's to tend to. What I
tend to do is just kind of dethrown it. And
then also I'm going into the corruption of science. You
think I actually, if I disproved it's that you think
they published me? Do you think that they would let

(02:09:15):
that happen? The kind of the socio You know what
I was joking with the I have a prishoner. This
is funny.

Speaker 6 (02:09:22):
This is what my.

Speaker 4 (02:09:26):
HM answer is gonna be now from now on. Well,
it's socio economic. That's why there's everything so secondomic. Well
I could, but it's socio economic. I can't. They're not
gonna anyways, Thank you for the super chats. Yes, we
do have if you go on to Partucia face store,
we have my courses tonight and forty five minutes. We

(02:09:50):
have every Monday night. We have live off for hours
and tutoring. You're always prom just an hour, but we
go off to three hours into some pretty awesome topics.
And but you know, if you're interested in getting a
university course with educational software, graded quizzes, exams, papers, and also,

(02:10:15):
as Patrick and I were talking about to some colleges
are actually now taking that for credits, so you can
transfer those. You just have to basically get the approval
from your dean or chair or something like that. But
thanks for leta Michelle. Also, My Anemnesis is the new
podcast series where I'm gonna have different philosophers and I

(02:10:37):
think we're having a Heidigerian scholar PhD from Oxford come
in on this Friday. So that is all let me
see me, let me maybe make sure I didn't meet anybody
else on the super chats.

Speaker 2 (02:10:52):
And for Jose Ramanos through in another four and says
thank you, Jose, I've been trying to ask this question
regard e Chigi peing for months but always missed the
streams live and I have boomer Tech moments with super Chats.

Speaker 5 (02:11:05):
And just so you know, for him. Yeah, So all
four volumes of Choojing Pings The Governance of China are
still available on Amazon at this time, so if you
want to grab yourself a set before they get censored,
Like it's it's not common. It's not a common thing
where you're actually able to read, you know, a world
leader like that while he's still in power. Like I

(02:11:27):
know there is some books that Labmyrn Putin for example,
has or is writing, but none of that will be
published until after he's dead. So it's yeah, so yeah,
it's so you can definitely read Choosing and Pang himself directly.
You can look at the you know, recent rule of
China and you know how much of that coincides. But

(02:11:48):
we'll say if you read one who name in particular,
it's it's better to start with him because then you'll
understand choosing Pang when you read him, and it'll give
you much better grasp in terms of what China is
trying to do in the twenty first century and what
the future is going to look like, because the fact is,
for lack of a better term, the center of civilization
or of the world, it's moving away from the West

(02:12:10):
and it's going to go back to the east, the
far East, where it was for most of human history.

Speaker 2 (02:12:16):
Disgruntold Docks through and five and says, when are you
going to do a rebuttal on the Harry Potter argument
against God? That'll be in the next Apologetic series. Disgrunteld
Docks And just to do my own quick shilling, guys,
we just launched the Logos Academy and we were having
tons of fun over there. It's educational community, a bunch

(02:12:38):
of guys from around the world, and we've just been
kind of diving into some intro philosophy, some pre Socratic
stuff regarding logos and metaphysics. And so if you guys
would be interested in being inside of an educational community,
you still have one week left to get the founding
member price, which is twenty five dollars a month. So

(02:12:58):
would love to have anybody over there. And we're going
to be doing a history of logos. We'll be starting
that this weekend. So I'll be doing a history of
Christian Zionism. The part two of that will be over
in the school community. So that's all my shielding as well.
Oh and also if you do want some nicotine, even
though father Deacon refuses to be part of the alp

(02:13:21):
brigrade and he's on the Nicknack nicotine kick, use my
promo code and the affiliate link in the video description
to get some out.

Speaker 4 (02:13:35):
That makes sense, now, I got it.

Speaker 2 (02:13:39):
It is the best, though, I challenge I will get
some Nickknack nicotine. I've not tried nick Knack, but I
do promise out, at least in my experience so far,
is the best.

Speaker 4 (02:13:52):
Well people are saying, and you know what, since we
learned everything is subjective tonight objective standard for some people
in their experience don't like the the salts that they
put in that have that burning sensation of the pouches.

(02:14:12):
So the knick knacks are like more like a mint
and you can also snap them in half and like
you don't have to have a full one, and they
don't get that weird slimy Yeah, and there's no uh,
there's no alchemical ingredients. And you will not transition into

(02:14:34):
gold or pasco pass. You will not pass gold.

Speaker 2 (02:14:43):
Uh and axio says father Deacon. Please rebuke dph on
his nicotine use.

Speaker 4 (02:14:49):
I won't do it, dude. We've got there's science behind, right,
we we're gonna go for science, man, are you. I
can't believe these anti science people. Man, science behind artificial
nicotine is a neuotropic.

Speaker 2 (02:15:04):
Like so.

Speaker 4 (02:15:06):
Or thank you?

Speaker 2 (02:15:08):
But yeah no, I got some people actually, I had
like three people in a stream in the live chat,
like I can't believe you're an Orthodox Christian and you're
promoting nicotine us. It's like, guys, yeah, I'm you're trying
to make money from addiction. That was one of the comments.

Speaker 4 (02:15:27):
Oh yeah, it's not addictive, Like it's.

Speaker 2 (02:15:30):
Same as caffeine. So if you drink energy drinks or coffee,
and that caffeine is addictive, and the studies that I
saw it's equivalent addictive level. Anyways, hey, you guys, final
comments regarding today's stream, anything that happened, anything we missed.
If you guys have anything to shield, feel free, any

(02:15:52):
last comments, Yeah, go.

Speaker 1 (02:15:56):
Ahead, go ahead.

Speaker 5 (02:15:57):
I was just gonna say the same way that that
gnostic fellow is effectively excommunicated himself from everyone else, and
he has a internal belief system which is not communicable
to anyone else. It's the same pattern with nonconformist Protestant
Christianity of the United States. That is the end state me,
my Bible, my own interpretation, my own guide, where I am,
my own hope, my own authority. It is wholly adamizing.

Speaker 2 (02:16:23):
Yeah, I think we literally witnessed that. It's actually kind
of providential. We were able to have that conversation because
it really was emblematic of a lot of things we
were mentioning, Oh.

Speaker 4 (02:16:36):
You have a student five bucks, awesome stream. I'm wanted
to make sure I got everybody forget what we got,
thank you.

Speaker 10 (02:16:43):
Yeah.

Speaker 15 (02:16:43):
Now, I wanted to pray a little bit for Nicholas
just man, I hope you I hope you find Christ.
And I wanted to show a little video that I
made just an hour ago called the Church is the
Antidote on my channel, which is Christ is King Philosophy.

Speaker 6 (02:17:00):
Basically, uh, it's I try to briefly like explain that,
like the Church is in thischatological image and it's the
solution to the world. Basically, it's it's going to be
the world versus the Church, and only the Church will prevail.
Like in terms of the eschatological vision. We will lose
in this in this world, but that Christ promised us

(02:17:20):
the resurrection. And like I mean, Nicholas, don't take it.
Don't take it poorly. Man, if you're if you're still watching, like,
we don't hate you, bro, Like we just think you're dangerous.
We just think that your ideas are dangerous for for
political society and for yourself, like I think it it.
We think that it hurts you to be like this,
and like we've been there, some of us have been there.

Speaker 2 (02:17:41):
And like Nicholas is in the chat so he has
l O L. Christ is a sacred mushroom. The Church
is the Synaco Satan. Never heard that one before. God
Bless God, Bless you.

Speaker 4 (02:17:57):
Nicholas, but we'll be praying. We'll be praying for you,
much loved.

Speaker 2 (02:18:02):
Uh, some divine light is uh shed in your heart.
And and you kind of see the actual arguments we
were trying to make and just be you know, do
an actual internal critique when you're trying to to uh,
you know, claim what we believe or what we think
it would be helpful. But you know, and it ended

(02:18:23):
he he uh, he said, blessings all. So hey, God,
bless you Nicholas. We pray that you know you come
to our side of the train tracks, but you know
we don't. We don't wish you ill in any way,
Father Deacon. Any final comments, Yeah.

Speaker 4 (02:18:43):
I mean, you know, this could just comes back full
circle to what all of you were saying to you about,
uh seeing these elements in a variety of different areas Protestantism, science,
the different political kind of theories and stuff that we

(02:19:04):
see too. So I definitely I think it's it's on
the right and we also technocracy as well, these kind
of underlying elements. So it was kind of good to
kind of pull all that together and see that. And again,
you know, we really are philanthrops, like we do love mankind.

(02:19:27):
We want the best for all of you, you know,
and for you know, nations and individuals as well, and
so we're all praying for you, and you know, I
hope that you can see by you know, going over
some of the stuff the errors of different kind of
idol ologies as I'll say, yeah, but God bless you guys,

(02:19:49):
and thank you, and these are That's one of the
great things about I always say studying the history of
philosophy rather than just jumping into some type of philosophy,
is that you're able to see, you can connect the dots.
You'll be like, this is exactly where this is coming from.
This is why it's dangerous, and that's how we got here.

Speaker 2 (02:20:10):
And in regards to you know, intellectual history, that's obviously
I'm a little bit biased. That was my methodology for
my research and my approach to scholarship. But whether it
be Jose talking about politics or histories of various people,
I mean, that's what Father Deacon's work as a philosopher.
It really is an incredible muscle to build to be

(02:20:30):
able to see how things progress through history, as opposed
to just knowing a handful of isolated events and trying
to graft some type of larger picture from that. Being
able to trajectories and how things evolve into each other.
This is really what gives you insight and gives you
a full paradigm of perspective on the contemporary period. So Jose,

(02:20:52):
Father Deacon Ivan, we all have maybe different specialties or focuses,
but I would say being able to grock intellectual history
is a huge, huge thing that it gives you a
leg up on others. So anyways, everybody, thank you for
supporting myself. Thank you for supporting father Deacon Major. Thank
you to Jose for taking the time to join us today.

(02:21:14):
Love everything your comments, man, they're always insightful. And Ivan
as well. God bless you brother. Good to see you.
Thanks for joining us again today. Thank you, and I
will I got to get a hold of Jay. We're
supposed to do a stream sometime this week, so I
don't know what day that is, but I may do
my history of Christian Zionism stream tomorrow or Thursday, So

(02:21:36):
I will see you guys either tomorrow or Thursday. And
Wednesday we have a think tank meeting for everybody in
the school community, so I will see you guys then.
As always, until next time, God bless,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Open Panel: Are Gnosticism and Ancient Heresies on the Rise? with Fr. Dcn. Dr. Ananias

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

All Episodes

Open Panel: Are Gnosticism and Ancient Heresies on the Rise? with Fr. Dcn. Dr. Ananias

Stuff You Should Know