In this episode of JaysAnalysis we cover Fr. Seraphim Rose’s prophetic 1975 work, Orthodoxy & The Religion of the Future, with its updated additions from Hieromonk Damascene. Rose’s book is an apologetic against the New Age, Far Eastern Thought, the U.N., Illuminism and globalism – before hardly anyone was discussing it. Covering the Rockefeller ecumenical project and the “alien” slash UFO PsyOp we review and analyze this work with minor criticisms here and there.This is the first free half – for full talks and analyses, subscribe to JaysAnalysis.com at the PayPal Links below.
Stream or download free half here.
Subscribe to JaysAnalysis in the Purchase Membership section to access the archives of videos and interviews and lectures or purchase my books in the Shop!
Wondering if Jay has seen the movie ” Deterrence “, directed by Rod Lurie. It was released in 1999 or 2000. Kevin Polluck and Timonthy Hutton are in the movie. A political thriller. What’s interesting about this movie is that if you reverse several of the main characters and events that occur in the film, and compare them with the main figures and events that happened in real life as Bush Jr. and the US attack Iraq for the 2nd time, you can get a clearer account of what really happened in the Middle East. I suppose what I’m saying is the movie can be sort of prophetic if you relate to it in the manner I’m attempting to describe.
It’s my hope that someone will response to this notion of mine, and give me some positive feedback.
i haven’t
Hey Jay,
I really enjoyed this podcast, as indeed all of your work. I just purchased your book and left a positive review on Amazon. Like yours, my journey has been a long one, leading me ultimately to a respect for tradition that is missing in our dominant culture. I’ve been looking for a writer and speaker such as yourself, who translates traditions of philosophy in modern terms. I kind of feel, to modify the old saw, if there wasn’t a Jay, it would be necessary to invent him. I myself was lucky enough to attend a Norwegian Lutheran college in the Upper Midwest that still had the vestiges of Martin Luther’s classical education (although I fear that the old guard of professors retired to be replaced by young specialists in women’s studies and such. There are many socialists in that part of the country).
Anyway, this episode really got me thinking about the “operating systems” that are downloaded into all of us. One of the most pernicious operating systems is that of Objective Materialism. I have a friend who is a computer systems guy. He is smart, but too smart by half. He is all about the numbers. He thinks that my job as and English and acting teacher is worthless. He thinks that students should be concentrating strictly on STEM jobs. Even though he ultimately lives in a Platonic realm of theoretical numbers, he does not believe in god, a fore life or after life, etc. He knows he’s right, even though he can’t prove it, yet he can’t accept other people’s subjective reality.
My question is, how do you counter such people philosophically? Do you even engage? I always start with Descartes’ “Cogito ergo sum” and go from there.
I hope you don’t mind me asking you this. Next month I’m going to become a subscriber. Peace.
“Mind of God” by Paul Davies (experimental physicist) is a good book for refuting rank materialism. Jay has referenced the book many times in articles and podcasts. Also, watch Jay’s talk on the transcendental argument for God:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4kg2auHKKU
Thanks Matt!
Great lecture. Although I couldn’t find the link to the second half in your subscriber page.
It would be nice to have an article about your philosophical argument against Darwinism. Personally I think reality is rather mysterious and it does have its own rules. Darwinism has a part in it. But whatever objectivity there was in the idea, it was immediately taken over by social engineering.
It’s not up yet. I’ve been critiquing Darwinism in countless articles and essays.
It seems to me that Christianity’s arguments for being the one true faith are self referential. I guess it’s a matter of faith and maybe it’s internally logical but that doesn’t mean it’s reality. The Bagavad Gita is a more elegant religious text than the Bible for instance. The Bible seems to be a compilation of middle eastern oral tradition from derived sources, it’s not especially internally consistent.
Not at all. The OT alone presented a personal God and guaranteed rights in a pagan world. Radically different from all others – creation ex nihilo, history has meaning (not Fate), etc
Ok I can agree with that but that doesn’t make it true just more emotionally appealing.
My reply to these questions is here
https://youtu.be/F4kg2auHKKU
When you understand biblical prophecies and typology, Christ fulfills these predictions, such as the book of Daniel in chpts 2 and 7
I don’t understand Biblical Prophecy and Typology. That being said those can be chalked up to priestcraft. “We made the phrophacy and our order will make it fulfilled.” Like in the book Dune where the Bene Jesseret seeded phropacy through the galaxy for their own ends.
Except that the Jewish state rejected the fulfillment of those prophecies. The character of Jesus was not the political leader they desired.
“Except that the Jewish state rejected the fulfillment of those prophecies. The character of Jesus was not the political leader they desired.”
The Jewish state at the time was dominated by two orders of priests, they where others out of power.
It says in the NT that Jesus was of the order of Malkezadek. He himself seemed to be aware of the prophecies for instance he chose to enter into Jerusalem on a mule or donkey, he specifically asked for one to be provided.
That’s not the meaning of order of Melchizedek. He was a type of Christ. It wasn’t some gnostic, hidden underground sect. Jesus’ predicted the destruction of the temple as a covenant curse in 70 AD in Luke 21.
You have jumped the shark. Look down. See him there. Soon you will feel his pearly whites.
What does this mean? I’ll go to hell because I did a talk on Serphim Rose? You have mental issues
I hope you were wearing your Fonzi jacket when you made that jump.
I know your film articles are popular, but I think the strength of your site comes from the philosophical and theological articles/podcasts.
Agreed, though I genuinely appreciate all facets of Jay’s Analysis.
Yes I agree. I have a BA in film and art history so I enjoy Jay’s film analysis very much. He has a unique way of looking at films and their meaning.
Just downloaded it. Thanks, Jay.