Peter Rollins

In recent years Progressivism has developed into one of the most powerful political and religious forces in the contemporary world. Even within more traditionally conservative communities, Progressivism has made significant inroads. One of the common phrases heard within Progressivism is that there is a ‘right side of history’. This idea captures the belief that there is a correct position to take on many contentious issues within contemporary society. Depending on where you locate yourself in relation to that position, defines whether you are a relic of the past or a citizen of the future. In this way, the Progressive appears to posses a type of clairvoyant ability to know the future, or at least, how the future should turn out if we heed their sagely advice. But what if the future is radically undecided and all our visions of how things should be are in actual fact adaptations of our present worldview… much like animated sitcom The Jetsons offered a fantastical future that really just represented the ide

In this final seminar exploring Nietzsche's parable of the Madman, I look at what it might mean to be part of a community that helps people move through the experience of the 'Death of God'. As part of this, I look at the way an oppressive superstition remains effective today at an unconscious level and what a 'Cruciform' collective can do to overcome it. Get full seminars, book studies and courses by joining up at https://pyrotheology.com

This continues developing the themes from part 1. In this seminar I look at how we might understand what Nietzsche is referring to by entering into a higher stage of history. Along the way, we touch on Hegel's notion of contradiction, the meaning of Absolute Knowledge and Feuerbach's relationship to Humanism.

Here I explore Nietzsche's parable of the madman. I look primiarily at how the proclamation of the death of God is from the mouth of a religious figure, directed at a secular audience. For over 100 hours of lectures and courses, visit https://pyrotheology.com

Here I look at the critique of religion expressed in Feuerbach and Marx, before looking at a possible critique from Hegel. Get full seminars, book studies and courses by joining up at https://pyrotheology.com

In this talk I outline Anselm's Ontological argument, and connect it with the tradition of theological atheism. For over 100 hours of lectures and seminars, check out pyrotheology.com

For over 100 hours of seminars and courses, visit pyrotheology.com

Whether it is in the realm of the personal, the political or the religious, we are saturated with promises that we can overcome the seeming contradictions that we face. That there is a way for us to overcome the obstacles that are preventing peace, prosperity and fulfillment. Nowhere is this more clearly seen than in the revival of non-dogmatic spirituality. In an age of anxiety, the promises of “Perennial Philosophy” are alive and well in the claims of various self-appointed gurus. Gurus who, with the air of humility and reticence, offer their help in penetrating the veils of illusion, so that we might (re)discover our oneness with the One. However, the Perennial Philosophy is neither limited to the world of contemporary mysticism, nor is it at its strongest there. Beyond the territory of The Secret, Progressive Spirituality, the Enneagram, Psychedelic Enlightenment and the New Age, we find the same structures at work in the political economy and various self-help techniques. This is the first lecture in

This is an introduction to a seminar on the nature of freedom.

This is a short introduction to the nature of Decentering Practices and Atheism for Lent. We look at what it means to embrace a type of dis-course that sends you off course, and the positive power of negative thinking.

In this third look at guilt I explore what it might mean to have a desire that isn't the desire of the Other. This leads us into an understanding of what freedom might look like. If you're interested in deeper explorations of these ideas, jump on over to my Patreon.

This is a second short reflection on the idea of guilt that I did in response to some questions I received. Here I talk about the nature of Law, the desire for transgression, and the possibility of moving beyond this dyad.

In this short reflection I give an introduction to Lacan's famous aphorism "The only thing of which one can be guilty is of having given ground relative to one's desire". If you'd like more in-depth seminars, please visit my patreon.

I'm joined by Sean McDonald, who is a Lacanian psychoanalytic psychotherapist with a private practice in Los Angeles. In this conversation we talk about Christmas and the oppressive injunction 'Enjoy!', what psychoanalysis offers as an alternative to this, and the relationship between clinical psychoanalysis and Pyrotheology.

The Quantum Level of Reason | C.S. Lewis and Ezekiel Bulver by Peter Rollins

This is the second seminar in my Dialectics of God course. Here I explore the Radical Theologian in William Hamilton's categories of Detective, Assassin and Artist. We look at what it might mean for God to die in a cosmic sense, and touch on the connection between Altizer's work and pyrotheology.

Here is part three of The Dialectics of God. In this seminar I look at an essay by Altizer that argues for a theological vocation that fully embraces the profane without limit. An embrace that affirms life. And one that will give birth to a new epoch in faith.

Desire, Happiness and Hoping Against Hope by Peter Rollins

The Zizek/Peterson debate is one of the most controversial and talked about events in the intellectual world since Foucault sat down with Chomsky. Whether it's outrage, anticipation or confusion, this event has caught the attention of millions. While both engage in the same trinity of issues: Christianity, Politics and Subjectivity, their perspectives are profoundly different. On one side we have Peterson's Clinical Psychology reading - influenced by Jung - while Zizek represents a Dialectic approach that brings together Hegel, Freud and Marx. This is the second part of the pyroseminar on that debate. In this talk I offer a commentary.

This is an introduction to the Zizek/Peterson debate that I did live on the night. I should point out that I tried not to engage in any personal reflections on how I rate the intellectual status of the thinkers. But that could lead people to think that I place them on the same level. I should say that this is not the case. Zizek is a first rate, multilingual philosopher who has written over 50 books in various languages, many of which have contributed significantly to the fields of philosophy, political theory, theology and psychoanalysis. In contrast Peterson is a college professor with two books (one academic, the other self-help), who came to prominence because of his stance on Identity Politics. They both have significant platforms, but they should not be seen as comparable regarding their contributions to the academic world.