https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=TX78CipFi-A
So the video you’re about to see is a discussion I had with JP Marceau. JP, you might have seen him on my channel. I’ve had a few clips where we’re in a discussion. JP is part of a group of discussion that I have every month, a kind of private symbolism seminar for patrons. And JP is graduated, just finished his degree in philosophy. He’s very keen, very smart. He has had some discussions with Paul VanderKlay, with also John Vervecky. And so it was a high time that I had him on my channel. You will see in the discussion that we refer to some a video that I put up as a patron-only video. And because of that I kind of hesitated to put up our discussion because I thought some people will be confused. This patron video that I put up, which is kind of like a dive into the laboratory of symbolism, I now considered making it public because it has, it has more views than I have patrons, if you can imagine that. But it’s such a wild video and there’s so much going on that I don’t necessarily want out in the public sphere that I don’t think I’m going to make it public, at least not for a while. But nonetheless, even though there is some moments in the video where we refer to that, I think that in general you’ll get a good sense of some of the deeper discussions that are happening in the realm of symbolism. How this relates to consciousness, how it relates to the way in which nature reveals itself, you know, just naturally. So we talk about the book of Ephesians, St. Paul, these ontological levels. There’s a lot of good stuff in there and I hope that, I hope that it’ll be useful for everybody to follow this discussion. This is Jonathan Pajot, welcome to the symbolic world. So he has a lot of insight to give and I thought it would be a great idea to have him on the channel. He also has his own YouTube channel now where he’s looking especially at trying to use panpsychism as a bridge between Christianity and science. Some of you might have seen him on my channel. I have posted a few clips with him as well. So JP, maybe you can start. Maybe I want to start right away and dive into the subject because this morning I tweeted something about the book of Ephesians because yesterday at church there was the reading in the liturgy was the epistle and the liturgy was from the book of Ephesians and it really struck me. I mean I knew the book, I’d read it several times, but sitting, you know, being in church sometimes it hits you even more because you’re surrounded by everything and so it really hit me that the book of Ephesians was a very profound description of reality and especially the way that we’ve been looking at reality in terms of symbolism and you know this hierarchy of beings and how bodies and minds fit together. And so I tweeted something about it and then JP right away answered with a video that he had put up like yesterday was it? Last Friday. Or last Friday. Just a few days ago. And so I watched the video and yeah in the video he talked about Ephesians and how it’s the best, it’s one of the best books in the Bible that talks about this structure. So maybe you can dive right in there and tell us what you kind of came up with and then we can start the discussion that way. Yeah sure. Especially I added, in that video I was especially talking about, I was leveraging some ideas from René Girard to figure out especially the relationship in Ephesians where Saint Paul says that for instance, wives be submissive to your husbands so you have the idea that the body is supposed to submit to the head, to the higher mind, but on the other end he also says that the husband is supposed to lay his life down for his family so that the head is supposed to sacrifice itself. And this really ties in well with ideas from René Girard who claims that if you look at any history before Christianity, any society before Christianity, the only way for people to really come together was to unite themselves against someone. They had to sacrifice, escape gold basically and that was the recurring theme because it’s not a stable situation. And then when there are precursors to this in the Old Testament but when Christ himself came, when God became incarnate, what he did, what Christ did was to imitate the Father, to submit himself to the will of the Father and to lay down his life for the Church. And this, I mean I’m going through this very quickly, lots of people have heard about René Girard by now, but the basic idea is that Christ showed that from the beginning of history when people were uniting themselves against the escape gold, they were really uniting themselves against someone who was innocent, that was not clear before Christianity. People generally thought generally in religions before Christianity, before Judeo-Christianity I should say, that when the people were uniting against the escape gold, the gods were really on the side of the community because indeed after the community gathered together in one mind against the escape gold because they did really work the situation. Yeah, they actually did call the situation, it would create unity amongst the people. Yeah. Yeah, so what afterwards people really did think that well that person must have been some sort of demon or some sort of bad god for having had all that power really to really cause that problem and to resolve it once we kill that person. But when Christ died and then resurrected, he showed that God was not on the side of the perpetrators, of those who crucified him, but was actually on the side of the victim of the escape gold. So this really forced people to, yeah, so this showed, this opened the eyes of people that for all of history people had been aligning themselves behind fundamentally the mind of Satan. Yeah, they had been uniting themselves in the body of Satan under the mind of Satan. But what Christ does is he reveals that mechanism that this was an evil mechanism. And also he shows the way out of it. And the way out of it is to imitate Christ, is to, as I said, submit to the Father. So you imitate the Father. And what we are supposed to do is imitate Christ instead of trying to lower our aim and to imitate or model our desires after something earthly. We are supposed to model our desires after Christ who models themselves, models his desires after the Father. And we’re also supposed to sacrifice ourselves for our bodies in the same way that Christ did for the church. And I forgot one thing in the video and ties in with what we discussed in our last Patreon discussion a few weeks ago. Yeah, so just to say, so some people did, I guess some people, I put it up as a Patreon only video where it’s a crazy video where JP is there with me and we’re talking about like all this symbolism. Anyways, we don’t want to go too much into that. It lasts like an hour. But try to be concise if you’re going to go into that. I’ll do my best. The part I missed in my video I realized was the charity. So when, so Christ came from the Father, came from heaven. So he lowered himself, sacrificed himself, became man, became a sacrifice and then was raised up. But he also united people in charity. So when he was human, what he did was to unite people. When he was resurrected, he united people. When he was alive, he was frangmenting people in many ways, setting the brother against brother, against son, yeah, and so on. But when after his resurrection, people started to come together, especially in the church. And St. Paul really stresses charity for this. And I think this ties in really well with a deep metaphysical fact. I think that, okay, so it seems the way this seems to work is for something to hold together. Well, let’s say the church to hold together, for the earth really to hold together. You need, okay, you need to moderate yourselves after the desires of the Father. So after God, you need to imitate. You need to follow the higher mind. Yeah. So you need to follow that. And then you sacrifice yourself for the people you’re responsible for, for your body. But in that body, that body works in charity. Yeah. And so there’s also, so there’s a vertical relationship. And those who follow the videos will have heard me say that quite a while. Like there’s submission coming from below and love coming from above. Or sacrifice is a good way to understand it as well. Since that you give yourself and you kind of empty yourself for that which is below. But then across, let’s say amongst the body, in the body itself, there’s also, it’s through this conjoining in love that St. Paul talks about in Ephesians. The fitting of the parts of the body together and this working in love. And that is also, it’s also an aspect of that very process of the vertical relationship. Yeah, it’s all coming together, sir. And this is what is happening in eating. And that’s the link I want to make to your video, to our discussion rather. When, let’s say I am one, I am the higher being when I’m, let’s say I’m eating an apple. I am the higher being and then there’s an apple. Okay, for me to eat the apple, all of my cells have to work in one, they have to work in charity pretty much. They have to, you know, some cells give some chemicals, the other receive them. There’s a whole harmony in my body which is working in harmony. Okay. And then when I eat the apple, I will fragment it. I start by chewing on it. I keep the, it goes into my stomach and it keeps fragmenting. And crucially, there’s a point where, yeah, I didn’t want to go too much into the right hand left hand, but I think it’s worth talking much bigger in mercy. Yeah. Just this, when I’m, okay, when I’m fragmenting the apple, I’m applying rigor on it. I’m not accepting it. I’m just keep breaking it down. Yeah, keep breaking it down. You’re in for me. Yeah. And I’m just on myself. I keep mercy. I just keep, keep together working as one unit. But there was a point where in order for me to digest the apple, I actually have to do some work or some sacrifice. There’s a third or parts of my cells, which are going to give away some molecules. They’re going to give away some parts of them, maybe even full cells that I don’t know, will go and finish dissolving the apple to keep breaking it down. So there’s a flip occurs. So in the beginning, I was just applying rigor on the apple versus myself. There’s a point where in order for me to digest the apple, I have to start applying rigor on myself as well, where I separate part of myself. And after this, this keeps fermenting the apple. And then the flip continues where then know that the apple is dissolved enough and will absorb the some parts of it. I will apply mercy on that part of the apple. And then my body will come, will keep working in harmony in order to spread that energy. Myself will keep working in charity to spread all that energy, all that good stuff. And I will ultimately excrete the remainders of the apple with what I’ve sacrificed, the molecules that I’ve sacrificed. So there’s a flip that happens in levels. Where initially I was just, it was just rigor on the side of the apple and mercy on myself. At some point, I have to apply rigor on myself. And then I’m able to apply mercy on on the apple in order to absorb it. Yeah. So there’s there’s the idea, I think that no nerd for for a unity to to enter into communion with another unity, or you you have to dissolve one into multiplicity. And then at some point to yourself, the unity has to give something away to become multiple, so that it can keep fermenting the other one and then the and then the multiplicity can be integrated into the first unit. And I think that there’s something similar going on with I think this works at many levels. So we can see this in Genesis, I think. When Okay, so initially, there’s God creates the given in the earth. And ultimately, the the link will be, I think, the same way that let’s say I am eating the apple, you want Evan to eat the earth. You want you want the event to inform? Yeah, that’s really important. It’s important to understand that that’s also what a sacrifice is a sacrifice, when you burn the meat and it goes up like the smoke goes up into the heavens. It’s an image of heaven eating the earth like they are smelling it. They usually use the word smelling, but it’s in it’s integrating is bringing into itself. Yeah. And so I think this is what was going on before the fall where okay, so so God separated, he created the earth. And in the beginning, the earth is one is just one one ball of chaos. And then God keeps separating it. Yeah. So the earth keeps separating. And then he will put man in such a place that there can be an harmony and charity between all of the species, all of what exists on the earth. And crucially, there’s a point where man will will will work will do a sort of sacrifice, or he has to tend to the garden. He has to actually, he has to give away some some some of himself some energy, so that you can then take the fruits of the garden, the fruits of creation really, and unite them and turn them to the father to the iron mind. So you have the same pattern as we did with eating, where what Adam does is he models himself after all of creation is like ourselves, it’s working all together. And it’s all following the higher mind, it’s all following Evan. And crucially, there’s a point of it. There’s a point in all of that, that creation working in charity, there’s a point of it, which will have to sacrifice. That’s what Adam and Eve do when they tend to the garden and then the and then they get to eat of it. So they sacrifice themselves. And then the there’s a sort of resurrection where they get to read the words of their work, turn that towards God. So there’s sort of harmony there. You think it makes sense so far? Because well, I think I think I understand. I think there’s something makes sense. I think that we have to account for the fact that work comes after the fall. Like it’s not clear the difference between tending in the in Genesis narrative, and then that in the fall is when God says that you’ll have to work in order to receive. But I think that I think that the main, let’s say that the main, I think that if we see it in a cosmic vision, like if we if we see it in a cosmic vision, and that’s sometimes hard to see, but if we see it in the whole story, it seems like that’s what happened. That in fact, although the fall is a scandal, the fall participates in the whole process of bringing all into God, you know, ultimately, that’s like so so man falls down and starts to give have to give of himself, let’s say as he’s as he’s falling down, all the way to Christ, which who gives themselves completely, and then everything gets gathered back and goes in. And so, so there is there is sometimes a even in St. Irenaeus, you do get a bit of a sense that the fall is a kind of pedagogical thing, that although we won’t say that God wanted us to fall, that he knew it was going to happen, that it was it was part of a larger story that we don’t totally understand. Or even maybe, maybe it turned out, you know, especially after the fall that the sacrifices had to get larger and larger, ultimately in Christ, but even before the fall, when let’s say, Adam is created, there’s some work there. It’s light, but God does, yes, gathered here. And there’s for sure there’s work because then it says God rested. So for sure, there’s an analogy to work in creation itself. That is that is for certain. And so there is it, but you could maybe just we could just call it a different of levels, probably between before the fall and after the fall. And I think it’s also because in after the fall, the way it’s presented is that it’s like it’s a it’s an upside down process where man becomes a slave to work, like he becomes a slave to to the lower things, rather than, you know, kind of voluntarily engaging, let’s say with creation. So maybe that’s the best way to understand it. Yeah. Now that makes sense. I think that I think that I think it makes a lot of sense for people who who are kind of are kind of not maybe totally following the discussion. The idea that I’ve been presenting, if you follow my videos, you’ve heard me say something similar for a while. The idea is that this image of Christ and the Last Judgment and Christ bringing things towards himself and pushing things away from himself, what I’ve been trying to kind of propose is that that is an actually an image of how reality works. It’s not just an image of the Last Judgment. It’s an image of the totality of being. And so everything has everything that exists has an outside and an inside has a margin and a center. And therefore, there is a process by which it integrates things and it rejects things. And that that that that bringing in and pulling out seems to be the manner in which the world works. And so we see Christ talk about it. So when you start to understand that, when you understand that, let’s say eating is an analogy to the incarnation, then you can understand things like when Christ says that that we that St. Peter is going to be a fisherman, a fisher of men, that he’s going to fish for men. Right. And so and so you can imagine so so Peter is in the boat and he goes and he tosses in his net and he pulls up human beings out of the water in order for God to eat them. You know, that’s what it is in order for them to become God’s body. And so, you know, all the imagery of the fish in Christianity seems to relate to that. The idea that we are I mean, you can use it. The Bible mostly uses sexual imagery in terms of being united with God. But you can also use the imagery of eating. And I think that for sure, fish has to do with that. When he says that that Peter is going to be fishing for men, it’s like bringing them out of the chaos, lifting them up in order that for them to become an aspect of the body of God. Yeah. Yeah. And I think there’s something that can help with the Trinity there as well. You have the you have the one which you have the iron mind and then you have part at some end in the body. Then some part of it will have to sacrifice. Then as it’s reborn, there will be charity across that body. That body will actually work. Yeah. So you have really like the father, the son and then the spirit. Yeah. And in Ephesians, St. Paul traces it. He says he actually traces this like three dimensional cross in his description. He says the height, the width and the breadth of the love of God. And so if you can imagine it as like as an actual as an as a spatial system with an axis and two two two horizontals. It’s like, yeah, he seems to really be talking about the shape of reality in Ephesians. Everybody has to read Ephesians when they’re done with this video. Yes, especially since it’s so short and it can help with. I mean, I just watched your video with John Verbeke today. And of course, I watched parts of it. I rewatched several times parts of it. But this can help with relevance realization as well. I think you have the one which has to. Yeah, you have the one. It’s still easy in my mind, but I think there’s something there. No, you have the one you have the father who creates something who sees all the possibilities in it, all the multiplicity and who has to send his son to bring it all together in love towards the father. It seems to be our reality works. It worked with eating. It worked with Genesis. And I mean, we could give tons of examples. It seems to be how everything works. No, I think so. I totally agree. I think that I think that I really do think that the Book of Ephesians really describes how how how reality works and how because this has been the problem. The big problem that we’ve been having that not just you, but a lot of people have been having is to understand how reality moves up the levels, how how it is possible for things to exist at different levels of reality. Now, you know, and so and so it seems like this type of thinking, this notion of sacrifice from above, the idea of submission from below and also the gathering and the joining in love seems to be the one of the best ways to understand how things jump or move up levels in the in the ontological hierarchy. Yeah. So how so how you have a person that is joined, you know, that is made out of all these parts, all these different thoughts, all these different feelings, all of this and or then and then how people come together in order to in order to join join to form larger groups and to form bodies in terms of communities and stuff. Yeah. Of course, this ties in with psychism, especially when you start talking about how people come together as all where and you’ve talked about passions a bunch of times on your channel. But ideally in a person, just just for you to exist correctly as one, you need to have all your passions oriented in charity. They all have to work together correctly. Your pressures aren’t necessarily bad. It’s not fault of them, but they’re good if they’re organized in charity. Yeah. And for but for this to happen for for all of your passions to be subordinate to your to your mind, to the art principle, you will have to sacrifice some parts of yourself. For sure. Yeah. No, exactly. And that that is exactly the the you know, when we talked about rigor and mercy, this is where it all it all falls in, is that those the pulling in and the pushing out is always happening simultaneously. So like when you talked about eating the apple, it’s like in order to integrate the apple, the apple has to lose some of its idiosyncrasies or else it won’t be integrated, you know. And that’s the same with any anything like a friendship is the same, you know, if you want to be friends with someone as you kind of come closer to that other person, you have to give up some of your idiosyncrasies in order for the common space to appear. And if you just and you can see it like people who are who are stubborn and just hold on to their thing, then they struggle to be in teams or they struggle to be to be in in a relationship. And so, you know, it’s like you have to find that sweet spot between having a kind of integrity, you know, like this kind of integrity that you want to have about yourself, but then also being in a relationship with and giving up some things in order to enter it in communion with someone else. And that’s that seems that play, that interplay between with between, you know, bringing in pushing away seems to be like you said, on the horizontal sphere, that seems to be the way that we interact with friends and with family and everything. And that’s how we kind of conjoin together. And then it’s it also ends up being the same and how we form something higher, like how we form the body of Christ, for example, is that that very process is the manner in which we also are sacrificing our idiosyncrasies as a group in order to manifest this higher purpose, this higher thing. And one way maybe one thing maybe is it’s that us being united in charity together, we can make space for this, our principle for God to. Yeah, to sacrifice himself for us. This is what happens at every mass or the literature to sacrifice himself for us. So that we can better come together under him. So there’s really work done by the higher principle there. There can’t just be sort of charity across for the unity to work. Even I mean, you can take more examples like myself. Myself, scant just exists as a no as a bunch of so they have to be united under under me. And I have to work. It’s not a cell porridge. If you put if we take care of yourself, put them in a blender. They’re not good. It’s not going to be the same. It’s not going to be the same. Yes, sir. There’s really a place for the our principle for the iron mind. And so we make space for that every time we go to church or divine liturgy. Really? Yeah. And I think that that’s I think that that’s the most important thing that comes out of this. And this is also something that I talked about in the with John Breveke today is is the idea that we have to be careful not to see it only one direction. Right. So the let’s say the modernists right now, when they talk about this and talk about complex systems, they only want to talk about emergence. They only want to talk about this, the lower process. And for me, it’s funny, because I’m I’m actually now discovering the other part, because I was all top down from before. Like I was all a Platonist, you know, just a Christian Platonist. And so and so now it’s like I now I’m I’m I’m happy actually to have discovered this, because now I can kind of see the importance of the of the conjoining in love. But you can’t it can’t just be that, like you said, that there also has to be and I think the idea of the sacrifice is a great idea. There’s also something which has to come down from below and be willing to come down and manifest itself in in a body, you know. And so and that’s the same. Like if you think about if you think about a team, let’s say, let’s say you’re you have a purpose, it could be anything. Let’s say you’re you’re you’re you’re going to you’re managing a project and you have a logos. You have a you have a telos, you know, you have a purpose, you have a reason why you’re together. And so it’s the same. It’s like that reason it it also can’t be completely pure. Like it can never be. It can’t it can’t remain completely sharp. It has to mitigate like it has to kind of fall into the specifics of the people who are and it has to be pliable enough in order to accept the differences that the you know, the fact that this is like if it was made by another team in the end of the final result. Might look different than than this team, you know. And so the purpose has to have enough give enough back in order for it to be able to to reach its goal. You know, if the if the goal is so tight, then it’s then it won’t. The let’s say that the joining of heaven and earth won’t happen. You know, the goal will remain aloft and will never reach it because it’s too it’s just too tight. I don’t know if that makes sense. Don’t I don’t know that I totally got that. There’s definitely one part that one thing that came to mind was that for the abstract idea, let’s say for the plan of the coach to manifest itself in the players. It’s to take the players into account. Yeah, it has to somehow enter into that multiplicity. It has to reach down to a point where I mean, the coach will have to say it as an individual. He has to say to the plan to all the players. So the plan can become sort of incarnate through and through some sort of work by the other principal to the coach. He has to think about the idea. I was going to say I was going to put it as one and then not just that he has to understand like I have this player, I have this player, this player. And and so if I like this is how I can do it, considering the fact that I I have this body like this is the body that I have. If I design a play that cannot be held by this body, then it’s going to fail, even if it’s the best play in the world. But if I don’t have what I need in the body to accomplish it, it’s not going to it’s going to play. So there has to be, like you said, work coming from down from above and from below. Yeah. So those two things together, that seems like that seems to be what. And so the identities in the world, let’s say like any identity like a like a maple, you know, it has enough pliability so that the maple can exist in different places like it. But there’s a limit, right? There’s a limit. There’s a there’s a there’s a scale. And so the maple can exist in certain types of soil, but there’s enough multiplicity for it to exist. But then at some point, at some point it stops. Like you can’t if you plant a maple in the tundra, it’s not going to grow. Right. It’s just not going to grow. But there is there is there is the identity of maple isn’t so so tight that you can only plant a maple, you know, in on on 10 square feet of the world. And if you if it’s not in that exact precise thing, then it’s going to be a great it’s going to be the greatest tree ever. Like the most powerful tree ever. It has to be planted in this 10 foot zone on the entire earth and or else it’s not going to grow. Like that’s not that doesn’t work. It’s not going to happen. There has to be this this this play. I don’t know if that makes sense that I’m bringing it down to maples, but I’m just trying to see how it how this works on the different levels of reality. Yeah. And I don’t know if we would be ready to talk about the flip, but I’d like to try at least. All right, we could try it just that I think we have to lay down some ground a little bit in terms of of what what what the concept is. So you want you what you should try to help me see if you understood what I talked about. This is just for my symbolism webinar. But I think this is sort of what occurred in the giant digest and I mentioned. OK, you have to explain it first. Like you have to explain what the idea is of the inversion. Yeah. Like for people who are watching. Yeah. Well, I’ll explain it in the digest and first. All right. OK, then I’ll try to talk about the angels. All right. OK. But that sentence can exist anywhere besides in our conversation. I mean, so digestion, then I’m going to say how it works with the angels. That’s awesome. All right. All right. Go for it. Well, you know, at the at the level of full objects like human or apple. You know, I’m just applying rigor at the initial level before I start eating. I’m just applying rigor and it’s only at the lower level. Once once I reach the level of maybe not even cells, but molecules, when I give away some of my molecules, this is the point where the mercy and the rigor flip, where I will apply rigor to myself instead of applying rigor to the apple to keep the apple away. I mean, I chew on it, but it’s still it’s still a weight. It’s not it’s not in me really until I flip at the level of my cells and my molecules and I give some of me away. I separate myself and then this will keep fermenting the apple. It’s still rigor on it. And then it flips also on the side of the apple where I start to apply mercy on on the apple and I will bring it into myself. Integrated. Yeah. So the so the so the flip occurs once I reach a low enough level. So this may be why in the icon you showed, that’s in the iconostasis. Or nobody knows what you’re talking about. You have to you have to listen. Let me just let me just lay it down for me. So my my my contention is that. One of the reasons why we don’t understand the move of different ontological levels is because we only want to understand it as like a coherent relationship between the two levels. But my contention is that it seems like there’s actually a flip that happens where what is above actually turns for what is below, like a mirror, something like that. And so and so and it’s related to the idea of it’s like a change of perspective where if I’m standing in front of you, if I if like when we shake hands, we cross over. So my right hand goes across and your right hand comes and meets me. And so it seems like that which is pushing away from me and pulling towards me on above ends up flipping upside down below. And so that’s what Jean-Philippe is talking about when he says, it’s like, if I’m eating the apple at first, I’m breaking it down. I’m fragmenting it. Right. And and but then at some point, there’s a change where I have to I have to now gather it into myself. Right. So there’s this flip that happens at some point. So so now go ahead from there because. Yeah. And and it happened as we went down the hierarchy of being. Yeah. At some point, what what for me to have ultimately mercy on the apple and eat it, there has to be a flip at the level of the of the cells where this is this is the level where finally I can. Yeah. I have to have rigor on myself in order to be able to have mercy on on the apple. This happened at the level of the cell. Could happen. Couldn’t have happened just my my level of me, JP. So you have the other principle for the other principle to ultimately eat the apple. You need to ultimately for the principle to ultimately really assimilate the other unity. You will you will need to have mercy on it at some point. But this doesn’t occur at the scale of the whole human. It occurred at a lower scale. And. This may be what happened because. In in some some icons, you will have, for instance, Saint Michael on one side, who is on the side of rigor. Yeah, there’s a weapon generally. And then on the other side, you have Saint Gabriel, who has a some sort of flower. Who is on the side of of mercy. And then there’ll be icons where so you should have the Saint Michael, Saint Gabriel, then you have Christ in the middle. And then Christ will be judging the goat and the sheep. And so you would expect if Saint Michael, the rigor is here, you would expect him to be over the the goats, the goats, who get thrown away. You would expect rigor to cast away the goats. People have to be familiar with which revelation to understand this, no, it’s not revelation. No, it’s a Christ. It’s when a Christ saying, yeah, I think. Yeah. OK. Yeah. So you would expect the angel of rigor to be over the sheep. And you would expect conversely. Yeah, sorry. The goat and conversely, you would expect the angel of mercy, namely Gabriel, to be over the sheep, but it’s actually flipped in in the images. Yeah. And this may be because at the level of angels in heaven. This is the higher level. And then the flip occurs through Christ, through the in the analogy with the body, it would be like the rigor and mercy would be the angels at the level of the old human. Then the flip occurs at the level of my cell. And then you would have the molecules in verse. So you would have, let’s say that you see what I’m getting at. Yeah, no, I see what you’re saying. I don’t know what your ultimate advocating is, is for some kind of apple purgatory, I think is what you’re advocating for. The purgatory of apples. He’s like, oh, man, where did you go with that? He’s like, I didn’t take that one to go. All right. But I’m hoping people can follow. I’m going to show I will I’ll show the icon so people can kind of see this this flip. But but yeah. So I think you wanted to try to apply to something to would I get is that where you wanted to apply to angels? That’s the that’s the point. Yeah, yeah. That was my point where I think that’s the reason why the angels are flipped in the face. I can’t it’s not always as you know. But it’s one of the first image we have of the light judgment. That’s what is there in Ravenna. You see you see the red angel on the side of the sheep and then the blue angel on the side of the goats. And I was always been very annoyed about that. But then I think I finally understood that there’s this there’s this cross. And there are many places in scripture where you see this crossing over. You see it in the blessing of the blessing of Joseph of Jacob, who blesses Joseph’s children. And he crosses his hands like this when he does a blessing. And even, you know, Joseph, like uncrosses his hands, but then he crosses them again. He’s like, no, this is how it has to go. Like I have to cross over. So there’s this this this this sense of this this flip that happens at the different levels of being. Yeah. And maybe we can see if it is see the pattern works also in the incarnation. See with. OK, so let’s say we take still still heaven and earth as before the fall. And we try to see how Christ will come to take the place which Adam had. So I guess the idea would be that in order to restore the. Yeah, in order for Evan to eat the earth was in rebellion was not aligned with not working in charity. Yeah, you needed God to become. Oh, it probably works with the we have we have to talk about Israel somehow. Israel has to fit somewhere in there. So let’s say you have in creation, maybe instead of talking about species, we should talk about different groups of humans, different cities or different tribes, and among them you have Israel. So Israel has been good as good as been merciful towards Israel and has separated it from the others. So God has been sort of applying rigor on the others separating it and having mercy on Israel, but it will flip with Christ. That’s what Paul says, at least this fall seems to say that’s what happens. Yeah, I mean, God will have rigor on Israel. It will sacrifice part of Israel. It will sacrifice Christ in order to have mercy ultimately on everybody else. Yeah. So the the the yeah. So the Jews will sacrifice Christ will sacrifice with Israel and the whole world will sacrifice Christ. Then he will he will die because the way and then as he as he comes back to life. This is sort of like when a city in the body, when the the molecule which was given away or the cell which was given away is created back again. Maybe there’s probably an analogy to do there, but yeah, I don’t want to stress it too much. But then when when Christ comes back, he will unite ultimately the whole world. Yeah. Well, there’s a text in St. Paul, I think I think it’s in Romans where he talks about he tells the Romans who are the pagans and who will ultimately become the image of the church itself. Like even all churches model themselves on Rome. He says that, you know, Christ is the tree. You are the branches. You have been added. So the Jews have been cut off. You have been added in. So you’ve been brought in and they have been pushed away. And he says, but don’t boast of that. Like, don’t don’t don’t think it’s it’s to you because who’s to say that one day God will not cut you off and then bring back the Jews. And and then he says, so that no one so that no one can boast and so that all can be saved. That’s it. That’s where he says that all can be saved. And it’s like, oh, OK, OK, man, that’s like I’ve been thinking about this text for so long, trying to understand this relationship between this bringing in, pushing out and this inversion that happened. Because to me, this was this was I mentioned this in the patron video. To me, this is also about understanding the story of Christianity, because there are some very strange things that happen in the story of Christianity. One is exactly that one is. You know, the Romans are the bad guys in the in the story, especially in the in the gospel, the Romans are the bad guys. They’re the they’re persecuting Israel. They’re putting false gods in the temple. They’re, you know, they’re trying to to take over. And then it flips into Rome becomes Christian. Rome follows Christ. And then it’s like this. So it’s like this weird inversion. And in Romans, in the story of Christianity itself, there’s also this inversion in the sense that you get Christianity enters into the Roman into the Roman world through the lower cast, like through the slaves, through women, through people who have nothing. And so those are the ones who are Christians for like three centuries. And then finally, suddenly, like all of a sudden, it flips and then it becomes the emperor who converts. So it’s like it’s so it moves from being like a not only it was the only religion in I think I think I think Manichaeism and Christianity were the only religions that were outlawed in in Rome. And so you have so you have the many the Manichae’s and you have the Christians who have the Manichae’s also were kind of weird Christians like they they were they were heretic, but they they kind of saw themselves as following Christ somewhat, whatever. I don’t want to argue that we’re here, but but so so they go from being the complete outside to then becoming the religion of the empire. I mean, that flip is crazy. Like that’s a crazy flip. And I think that it’s once we start to understand how these flips occur, there are so many keys that that that so many ways that people see the world, which is wrong, like they they sometimes you hear people argue in terms of history. They’ll argue something, for example, in terms of Israel. They’ll say things like for sure, Israel was influenced by Mesopotamia. Mesopotamia could not have been influenced by Israel because Mesopotamia is the empire and Israel was this little thing that had no power. It’s like, you know what? Actually, I don’t think it works that way. I actually you know what? I don’t think it works that way because we have an example and it’s our example. And it’s Christianity where this marginal foreign religion suddenly flipped and then became the religion of the empire. Why don’t you think that could have happened before? Like, why is it the only time in all the history of humanity where that happened? I don’t think so. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, this. I don’t know if I’m really onto something with my Apple thing, but yes, seems to be what happened there where what was just the Apple was ultimately what was what kept what just kept getting fragmented and multiplied was ultimately integrated and became, you know, your body part of me. Really, it really became part of me. It became you like it became your your incarnation, like everything that you are had went through that process. Yeah, it’s like your whole body is was at some point food. Like it had to go through that process in order for you to exist. Yeah. And I really had to sacrifice part of myself to actually digest that. So Israel, which had been chosen. So Israel was chosen to automatically integrate the whole world back into into heaven. So it’s surprising that, you know, initially got that mercy on Israel. It sort of kept it separate. In the same way that maybe I kept I keep some I mean, some of my let’s say digestive cells, I keep themselves I keep them apart from from the Apple. I keep them actually. Actually, I think we we do some we probably do some special things in order to keep them to probably fresher somehow, but. I had to isolate them. And then at some point I give them away so that the whole thing can actually be the reward that the whole organism can be united, so it really feels there what what looked like mercy. But, you know, me really being careful with myself actually turned out to be at some point to turn into rigor so that I could assimilate the whole thing back. The Apple itself, right? Yeah. Yeah, no, I mean, I think I think that I definitely think that this is that I’m hoping other people are going to start to think about this because it’s hard to think about, but I do think that this could really be that could help people, not just in terms of religious thinking. We we’re using a lot of religious imagery because that’s what we care about. But I think that in terms just in terms of understanding the the jump between the different levels of reality, I think that understanding that exchange can can be useful. And we see it. I mean, that’s your talks about it in his book to a certain extent. And I just feel like I’ve intuitively understood it very recently. And so I’m I’m pretty excited about about about that discussion. So, yeah. So, I mean, I think people should definitely in the comments section go wild and and we’ll try to be involved in the conversation. What’s great about these videos is that all the all the all the trolls, they don’t watch these videos like they watch the they watch movies, you know, the Joker video, that’s when they watch her. But this video would be only people that actually care about this stuff that watch it. So we I expect a really great discussion in the comments section. And it seems really to fit, I think, with again, come back with and just keep coming back also with your conversation with John Ravichy today, because you have on some point you have. You need the OK, so there’s two extremes in creation. There’s there’s heaven and then there’s the earth. You’re sort of just bare potential initially. And it has to be separated, has to be multiplied to be taken up into into heaven. And. Fitzwell, I think, with revansparization, that what is invisible, the higher, the one has to. Sacrifice yet has to do some work as to sacrifice as it becomes part of the multiplicity, as it reaches all the way down to the most fundamental ground of possibility so that it can then take it back up. Yeah, but the taking back up, I think, is really the Christian version, because if you look at at most most systems, not all, but most systems, they tend to see that process of the higher coming into the lower as in itself a fall, like in itself, a kind of degrading of the higher principle. And so, you know, Gnosticism, even in Hinduism. And and so you see this idea that it’s like the the lower beings are less. Like they they’re they’re less. But I think what Christianity brings and what Christ shows is actually this process is the manner by which the entirety is brought back up into the one. Like that’s the actual process of of how things are brought into are brought into God. And so it ends up giving value to the to the littlest one. It ends up giving value to the smallest, you know, to the extent that it’s able to to join together and love and participate in this process. So I think I think that that’s one of the things that Christianity really does offer to to this to this question, because we do run the problem every time I see it, because people are afraid when I talk about hierarchy and I understand why they’re afraid. They they they have a certain reason to be afraid because hierarchy can be a dangerous thing and it can it can be a reality, which which is sees the only the idea of the lower as serving the higher. And I think or then or then or then if you if you don’t accept that, then you end up having this constant revolutionary thinking where you’re always trying to break up the higher, break it up, break it up, break it up. You reach the end of that. I think we’ve reached the end of that pretty much in terms of thinking where, like, OK, like now we’re in this chaotic mush of things we don’t have. We don’t we’re losing the qualities. We’re losing the identities. We’re losing the things that brings together. And so we need to find them again, but we need to do it in a way that won’t that won’t that won’t be just a sword coming down from heaven, you know, because because I know that’s what some people actually want. That’s not what we want. It’s not what I want. Yeah, we have to keep in mind that also the sacrifice wasn’t arbitrary. There are times when Christ angers a bunch of people and then he runs away and he gets away. He chose the moment where he had to sacrifice himself. Like when I let’s say I am I meeting I don’t sacrifice just everything to dissolve the apple. I sacrifice the right thing so that I can actually come back together. It’s not trivial for what allows people to actually come together. Well, there and there seems to only be as what as Girol would say there, there seems to be only one way for people to actually come together for for good in a way that won’t just fragment again. And it has to be towards the highest. It has to come with the help of the highest showed us that way. Otherwise, it just keeps fragmenting again towards that. Otherwise, that we don’t get the yet the right point to. Yes, we don’t. The path towards the good sacrifice seems very, very narrow. That’s what Christ says anyways. Yeah, right. He tells us that the path is narrow. All right, Jeff, I think we’ve given people quite enough to think about. And and so that wasn’t too crazy. Yeah, I think it probably was too crazy, but that’s OK. That’s OK. We can handle a little bit of crazy. And so and so I will tell people that you need to go check out JP’s channel. I will put the link in the description where you’ll find his discussions, his own discussions and then his discussions with other people as well. It’s well worth your time and and we’ll probably end up doing this again. I’m pretty sure. Pretty sure. Thank you, Jonathan. All right. Thank you for your time, Jeff. There’s a lot of great stuff going on in the past few months. There are a few new songs by tumor V’s, some duets with Jordan Peterson that you can check out. I’ll put a link to that in the description. There’s also I’ve been having a lot of fun designing some new T-shirts and merchandise, trying to use symbolic imagery and some symbolic thinking in a way that I find interesting. I’m basically designing the T-shirts that I wish I could have had when I was in my 20s. And so check that out. I’ll put a link to that as well. And thanks to everybody for your support. And I will talk to you soon.