Jake Brancatella, The Muslim Metaphysician - Can Islam participate in Liberalism? 

Thank for doing this Sam. These conversations are crucial

This was much better than expected, considering the titles of Jake's videos. Really helpful breakdown of Liberalism into 1, 2, and 3 - lots to think about regarding whether 1 necessarily evolves into 2 and 3. Regarding tolerance of non-Muslim minorities under Islam, I thought that specifically includes Christians and Jews (and maybe Zoroastrians/'Sabians') but excludes polytheists? Did Jake elide this distinction, or am I misunderstanding the Islamic position?

A flagrant rhetorical inversion of the actual question: is Islam capable of accepting secularism?

1:03:00 I don't understand his argument. He can think the Western nation states have failed but what Muslim countries are comparatively more successful or not failing themselve?

I had no idea you were so passionate about politics, Sam. I've always viewed politics as a sort of substitute for religion. Personally, I believe that Christians should steer clear of politics, although I doubt that will change. I find it surprising that you think liberal democracy helps in promoting truth, especially since Unitarians, I think, would mostly agree that Christianity lost its "soul" after Constantine. Back then, Christians had not only immense religious fervor but also a deep and sincere passion for Christ, even to the point of martyrdom, which is rare to see today. Pre-Edict of Milan, the spread of biblical Christianity was driven primarily by religious persecution, something that goes against the principles of a democratic society. So with that, what are your thoughts on the idea that liberal democracy actually contributes to atrophy rather than the nurturing of true biblical Christianity? Isn't it interesting how trinitarianism gained momentum once religious persecution ceased in Rome? I'm not exactly eager to martyr myself for my beliefs, but perhaps persecution is required for Unitarian Christianity to thrive. It seems like the strategy is to bring cultural (trinitarian) Christianity back into political dominance by using the progressive boogeyman, so Unitarians can become proper targets once again and illuminate the lawn of Mar-a-Lago. Is that your plan, Sam? Just kidding, but not really. Also, I think you are conflating the deism of the founding fathers with Unitarianism. Perhaps you can make a case for John Adams, but even then, it's not clear. I understand that he preferred Unitarian sermons, but did that make him properly Unitarian? I don't know...

For the algo, will be watching in full later

The end result of "liberalism" will be to permit everything. Sam, quite noticeably, deferred to saying things are "complicated" and it is "hard to know where to draw the line" when asked to define a boundary. Liberalism will continue to struggle to maintain any boundaries as various interest groups push for more things to be permitted. And since "liberalism" never actually existed these new found boundaries and beliefs will then be imposed back on Sam.

Another relevant detail: When talking about church-state relations pre-Protestantism, it's important to note that it ain't clear that anything like the modern state existed back then.

Yes! Present.

@min 53: I just want to correct Brother Jake regarding Christianity having fixed daily prayer times. I believe the term is “canonical hours” and there were originally 7 fixed times of prayer for early Christians. Sadly this practice has fallen to the waist side and is no longer talked about or even known by lay Christians…

51:54 I think that characterization of liberalism being built for Protestantism was brilliant - showing where the limits get pushed. I do think here its worth differentiating Judaism (even orthodox) from Islam re:how they relate to governments and perhaps why Judaism pushed liberalism the way it did, especially in the 50s-70s in court cases (often with seventh day Adventists) which were toward more liberality (less control of Protestantism of the secular space) and contrast how Islam might push it in a different way. The current set up of both sharia and Jewish courts within the US is almost closer to how Christianity dealt with non-christian autonomy in the pre-enlightenment period, though those religious courts powers are highly curtailed under liberalism. It is interesting to see how the US courts have worked against and with these subsidiary systems and negotiated around them while pushing the limits of their own liberal accomodationism vs imposition

Sadly I don’t think Brother Jake understands the New Testament reasoning for why “Jesus died for the sins of the world.” Unfortunately many Christians also don’t know even though they use such a statement as a testimony of faith

37:00 it might appear that the seculum becomes even more limited over time. As society becomes more individualisyic, the secular isn't just of their age instead of the age to come but limited to the life of an individual and maybe one generation down the line and eventually just to the cycle of an individual life...

1:13:17 the final answer on where to draw the line is Noahide law. It is the bare minimum of laws that guarantee larger society it compatible with the Tanakh

At 37:30: 1) Liberalism of Grotius, Pufendorf, Hume, Constant, and Smith 2) Liberalism of Rousseau, Locke (I'm being unfair here) , Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson

1:09:00 Jake misses that the covenant of the Torah doesn't bind non-Jews....

No current country operates by Liberalism. Just so we are clear. Also, do not confuse political secularism and cultural secularism.

Sam what’s your opinion on Freemasonry and/or satanic connections of some of the “Founding Fathers?”

This tension in Liberalism is btw in Marx's "On The Jewish Question" Sorry I'm comment spamming I should wait until the end.

Interesting verses from the Quran and New Testament worth pondering over: (3/3) *Q83:4* "Do such people not think that they will be *RESURRECTED.”* *Q22:7* "And certainly the Hour is coming, there is no doubt about it. And Allah will surely *RESURRECT* those in the graves." *Q64:7* "The disbelievers claim they will not be resurrected. Say, ˹O Prophet,˺ “Yes, by my Lord, you will surely be *RESURRECTED,* then you will certainly be informed of what you have done. And that is easy for Allah.” *Q**7:25* (clear) “He added, “There you will live, there you will die, and from there you will be *RESURRECTED.”* *Q72:7* (clear) “And those ˹humans˺ thought, just like you ˹jinn˺, that Allah would not *RESURRECT* anyone ˹for judgment˺" *Q**36:12* (clear) “It is certainly We Who *RESURRECT* the dead, and write what they send forth and what they leave behind. Everything is listed by Us in a perfect Record." *Q**56:47* (clear) “They used to ask ˹mockingly˺, “When we are dead and reduced to dust and bones, will we really be *RESURRECTED?"* *Q50:2* "˹All will be *RESURRECTED,* yet the deniers are astonished that a warner has come to them from among themselves ˹warning of *RESURRECTION.* So the disbelievers say, “This is an astonishing thing!" *Acts 24:14-16* (LEB) [14] But I do confess this to you, that according to the Way (which they call a sect), so I worship the God of our fathers, believing all things that are in accordance with the law and that are written in the prophets, [15] having a hope in God which these men also themselves await: that *THERE IS GOING TO BE A RESURRECTION OF BOTH THE RIGHTEOUS AND UNRIGHTEOUS.* [16] For this reason also I myself always do my best to have a clear conscience toward God and people.

1:28:49 do we actually know liberalism #1 had to lead to #2? We have basically a sample size of 1 it seems and are assuming that's the only way history can play out. But that took centuries as we saw. Could we be happy with systems that last 2-3 centuries? Or do we need to think at an even longer time scale?

Ok very interesting. 1. I think his final point about free speech was a bit confused / contradictory. Reminded me of the 1990s when PC culture was criticised as censorious and liberals/lefties would say, well, it's not imposing anything it's just about being polite and having good discourse, oh, and if course it your discourse was racist we'd cancel/criminalise it, but that's just because we're good civilised people. So his answer to my ears was that islamic law in his view doesn't allow free speech. Esp when he said no street preachers etc. I'm in the UK and I've seen muslins have stalls set up on street corners etc, spreading the good news of islam. I agree with you, Sam - actual free speech is necessary. And yes, it makes the religious institutions more honest, less corrupt etc. But then I agree with him that I think an islamic society would restrict speech, so, he's kinda right and wrong (if that makes sense!!🤣) 2. Yes absolutely the antibodies against liberalism number 2 will be strongest in the west. We (my partner and I) are not even that religious, and we're very concerned to ensure our kids have immunity - setting up new systems as a family that are not part of either my or my partner's family traditions, with the explicit aim of getting that immunity sorted. Also trying to seek out similar 'cells' locally, with the aim of building stronger resilience. I think the west is a watch this space kinda place on that front. 3. I don't know how much exposure he and his wife have to Morocco, or islamic law/norms proper. They obviously vary widely and it's interesting he's chosen Morocco - I would say that's a society that's closer to ours than would be the case in Saudi or Pakistan etc. I mean - I've not travelled widely at all, but enough to know home is much more than religious practice/compatibility. From the Pakistani communities in the UK, there's diversity but generally still quite clannish and you can tell/feel the difference meeting certain people - hard to describe. I guess the test for him - and all of us - will be our children and grandchildren. Societies are going to be tested. Thanks for this! Enjoyed it 👍

1:41:25 but it doesn't give these rights unless you are an abrahamic monotheists. So Hindus and Buddhists and atheists would be expected to do what exactly?

@1:54:ish…. The Quran informs Muslims that Christians also have a place in Heaven. God is there Judge and will adjudicate which of them is deserving of Heaven or Hell (theological mistakes and all). *Q2:62* (clear) Indeed, the believers, Jews, Christians, and Sabians -whoever ˹truly˺ believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good will have their reward with their Lord. And there will be no fear for them, nor will they grieve.

1:54:43 true Islam has yet to be preached? Also what does salvation have to do with politics?

Morocco is not a bad choice. Nice place.

Gay marriage is not a religious issue. It is a secular issue, and clearly should not be allowed. It makes no sense in purely secular terms.

1:21:00 he is making a good argument for me to move to Israel...

I think a $audi $hill might not be the best representative of Islam in the world...

Look, I am a perennialist. I believe that there is some divine truth in Islam. I personally focus my reverence and trust towards the more esoteric form of Islam “Sufism”. Some great thinkers in that field. I am a Christian BTW, but this guy… this guy ain’t it. This guy is every terrible thing about dials personified. He is a fundamentalist in the worst way possibly. Please don’t give him credit as some voice for Islam. And if he is considered a voice for Islam then let me be removed from shy respect I have for that tradition….

No. Real Islam is justifiably anti-liberal.

2:07:59 😬 idk man, don't like that. subtly wild.

☦️I only heard it now, I mean what??? Take this lie that we didn't allowed the *shema* for Jews back. This is so outrageous & offensive, how dare you claim such a thing?? "Not Trinitarian"? I mean, what? All Church fathers cherished the Shema & says it is refers to the Father, and we Orthodox say they are infallible! And as I already pointed to you, the term "trinitarian" is a modern one & never existed in our faith. Being a Christian entails a belief in the Trinity by definition, that is all. You claimed that simply for your unitarian confirmation, that is so dishonest. And Muslims, Christians & Jews always had debates with one another, Jake is correct - this is not a trait of Liberalism, only it had certain rules of decency!

☦️The Church fathers non of them were unitarians - that is the heresy of Arianism, nor were they oneness persons like most modern western Catholics & Protestants today - that is the heresy of Sabellianism, so you don't know what you are talking about, so let me please educate you with a few points: 1. The early fathers, were perfectly Orthodox, like the Blessed Tertullianus whom I studied all his works, who *coined the terms Trinity & 3 in 1* taught that the Trinity is the Monarchy of the Father, who is the One God, Christ is His Logos, hence eternal & divine, and the Holy Spirit is His Life Giver - 2 different beings & persons, who are subordinate to the Father YHVH the Creator (subordination does not equal unitarianism/Arianism, never condemned in itself as heresy - this is a modern invention by Modalists). That is the Orthodox view FYI taught by *all* Church fathers & explicitly in the Nicene Creed which you misinterpret like they do. The Trinity is the divine relationship which acts as 3 in 1 according to the will of the Father, who is the 'whole' (not some 4th entity the Modalists identify as the divine essence, which is by definition the Father's, which the 2 of course share). 2. Just like we reject those to heretical extremes, Scripture & tradition reject & despise the abomination of Liberalism, enlightment, Modernism etc, so I don't understand how you can say you are biblical & not see the Trinity in the Gospels & Scriptures, then go on to support this evil ideology. Jake is correct, Protestantism is the mother of Liberalism. 3. I am fluent in the Hebrew, and unless you go to the original text, you will never be able to understand it deeply & engage in apologetics with Muslims regarding the OT, hence you come to false conclusions when it comes to Christian doctrines. So I suggest you leave the imaginary invisible Church, convert & come to the true Apostolic Church of Christ, like we have here in Jerusalem, Palestine - like we eastern Orthodox have here, with the Churches of the Greek Patriarchate founded by St. James, and the Holy Sepulchre & Nativity, founded by St. Helena mother of St. Constantinus by his orders. Also we are not "Trinitarians" that is a false modern term - it is like saying Muslims are "Tahweedians", that is a joke, since being a Christian simply entails the belief in the Trinity & the Nicene Creed.