Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Christianity and anthroposophy-Re: [anthroposophy] Re: Chart of Jesus

Expand Messages
  • elaine upton
    Hello CJ and all, CJ, you reply to my asking if there was anthroposophy apart from ... CJ, I am hardly talking about religion when i ask about
    Message 1 of 7 , Aug 29, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello CJ and all,

      CJ, you reply to my asking if there was anthroposophy apart from
      christianity. I wrote:

      > > Are there any other anthroposophists than "Christian"?
      > >
      > > Steiner always said that the Mystery of Golgotha is the pivotal
      >event in
      > > history. How can one follow this and not be "Christian"
      >(esoterically
      > > speaking, at least...)?


      You replied:
      > >
      >Certainly one can view it as an objective event, without being
      >devoted to the religion built up around it.
      >
      >The function of religions appear to me to be to give
      >emotional stimulation as compensation for those who can't
      >fully comprehend the original revelation. For me this
      >"emotional stimulation"/devotion is undesirable however.


      CJ, I am hardly talking about "religion" when i ask about anthropsophists
      being Christian.

      As far as this matter of "emotional stimulation as compensation for those
      who can't fully comprehend..."--who are you or I to say who fully
      comprehends? Is there a note of arrogance here? Do you fully comprehend? Do
      I? Do anthroposophists comprehend more than others who go to conventional
      churches?--Frankly, I think there might be anthroposophists who comprehend
      no more than, say, Martin Luther King (who was a christian, but did not call
      himself an anthroposophist), or Father Daniel Berrigan or many others i
      could name.

      >
      >I believe the "Christ impulse" Steiner mentions is something
      >different. It's something you can draw on when you fight your
      >inner demons.

      Do you think there are none among conventional "religous" people who
      understand this? I see lots of conventional christians who are noble people,
      fighting their inner demons, and doing a fine job of it and helping the
      world. We each do as we are called. You and i may be called to the
      anthroposophic path (and for me that includes esoteric christianity), and
      others may be called to the exoteric form of christianity, but all will find
      the way. Steiner says as much, but even if he did not, i would suspect that
      all will make it HOME, eventually.

      Pace e Bene,
      your humble servant,
      elaine
      >
      >
      >Regards,
      >CJ
      >

      _________________________________________________________________________
      Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

      Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
      http://profiles.msn.com
    • Carl Johansson
      ... those ... comprehend? Do ... conventional ... Resurrection at judgement day is still dogma at least where I live. Also no explicit recognition of even a
      Message 2 of 7 , Aug 29, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        >
        > As far as this matter of "emotional stimulation as compensation for
        those
        > who can't fully comprehend..."--who are you or I to say who fully
        > comprehends? Is there a note of arrogance here? Do you fully
        comprehend? Do
        > I? Do anthroposophists comprehend more than others who go to
        conventional
        > churches?

        Resurrection at judgement day is still dogma at least where
        I live. Also no explicit recognition of even a spirit world
        (the only spiritual being God).


        Regards,
        CJ
      • elaine upton
        Dear CJ, In response to my question of who are we to judge others religion, you ... So, is one dogma cured by asserting another? What you say sounds to me as
        Message 3 of 7 , Aug 31, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear CJ,
          In response to my question of who are we to judge others' religion, you
          write:


          >Resurrection at judgement day is still dogma at least where
          >I live. Also no explicit recognition of even a spirit world
          >(the only spiritual being God).
          >
          >
          >Regards,
          >CJ


          So, is one dogma cured by asserting another? What you say sounds to me as
          dogmatic as anything I've heard from these "emotionally stimulated" ones you
          referred to in your earlier post.

          ARe you here to criticize others or to view them with compassion?

          And am I criticizing you? I trust not. I hope I am observing what is
          happening, one dogma pitted against another.

          Pace e bene,
          elaine



          _________________________________________________________________________
          Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

          Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
          http://profiles.msn.com
        • Carl Johansson
          ... me as ... ones you ... The same phenomenon can also be seen in Hinduism, the Puranas which Hinduism builds on were written at a later stage than the Vedas.
          Message 4 of 7 , Sep 3, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > So, is one dogma cured by asserting another? What you say sounds to
            me as
            > dogmatic as anything I've heard from these "emotionally stimulated"
            ones you
            > referred to in your earlier post.
            >
            The same phenomenon can also be seen in Hinduism, the Puranas which
            Hinduism builds on were written at a later stage than the Vedas. In
            the latter gods are hardly mentioned, while the former seems to be
            for the masses who need something to worship.


            > ARe you here to criticize others or to view them with compassion?
            >
            Since I have an objective view about spirituality, I do feel entitled
            to be ciritical towards anything which does not correspond to the
            facts (as far as I know them through experience). As for criticizing,
            I have only been stating my opinion and some reasoning behind it. It
            was you who asked for the reasoning, to me it seems you are the one
            criticizing.

            Regarding what Steiner says about exoteric Christianity, according to
            him most calling themselves Christian nowadays are actually
            worshipping Jehovah, and he is critical of this.

            http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/TwoAnn_index.html

            Regards,
            CJ
          • Carl Johansson
            I should perhaps for completeness add that I suspect the division between exoteric/esoteric is dependant on soul experience ( age ), and that those who are
            Message 5 of 7 , Sep 4, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              I should perhaps for completeness add that
              I suspect the division between exoteric/esoteric
              is dependant on soul experience ("age"), and that
              those who are exoteric in one lifetime might
              become esoteric in a future one. Although I suspect
              that notion would not be any more appealing
              (despite it being part of Steiner's teachings).

              If you want to debate it however, emotional
              judgments are not the way.


              Regards,
              CJ

              > >
              > > So, is one dogma cured by asserting another? What you say sounds
              to
              > me as
              > > dogmatic as anything I've heard from these "emotionally
              stimulated"
              > ones you
              > > referred to in your earlier post.
              > >
              > The same phenomenon can also be seen in Hinduism, the Puranas which
              > Hinduism builds on were written at a later stage than the Vedas. In
              > the latter gods are hardly mentioned, while the former seems to be
              > for the masses who need something to worship.
              >
            • elaine upton
              Dear CJ, To whom are you writing the following? To me on the christianity and anthroposophy thread ? ... Frankly, CJ, I have no interest whatsoever in
              Message 6 of 7 , Sep 5, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear CJ,
                To whom are you writing the following? To me on the "christianity and
                anthroposophy thread"?


                >I should perhaps for completeness add that
                >I suspect the division between exoteric/esoteric
                >is dependant on soul experience ("age"), and that
                >those who are exoteric in one lifetime might
                >become esoteric in a future one. Although I suspect
                >that notion would not be any more appealing
                >(despite it being part of Steiner's teachings).
                >
                >If you want to debate it however, emotional
                >judgments are not the way.
                >
                >
                >Regards,
                >CJ


                Frankly, CJ, I have no interest whatsoever in debating or even in discussing
                anything with you, for the way I sense your tone leads me to find no opening
                to relate to you here. And if you consider that a judgement, so be it. But I
                simply speak of my experience in the best light I can.

                Peace,
                elaine
                _________________________________________________________________________
                Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

                Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
                http://profiles.msn.com
              • Carl Johansson
                You have standards for people regarding who is good , better , bad based on Christian values. I have from the start not been talking about this, but about
                Message 7 of 7 , Sep 5, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  You have standards for people regarding who is "good",
                  "better", "bad" based on Christian values. I have from
                  the start not been talking about this, but about consciousness
                  and awareness.

                  In eastern esotericism, as the soul incarnates through
                  the Earth it becomes more in control with each experience.
                  How does it experience? Pain and suffering are strong
                  experiences. Why does it suffer? Because it has "sinned"
                  (acted against the laws of karma) in the past. So increased
                  control (and with it awareness, since it can more easily
                  make a stand against the lower nature) in certain ways
                  seems to run opposite to the Christian concept of
                  "goodness". (Of course the incarnating soul is forced
                  to repent through karma in subsequent lives.)

                  Steiner calls the above process "aging". On a related note,
                  he says that the soul can gain skills in one life
                  which are transferred to subsequent lives and builds
                  on previous skills.

                  To me this seems explain the phenomenon of difference in
                  awareness, at least to some degree. If everyone was born
                  equally aware, there would be no room for someone like
                  Steiner for instance. I am myself ready to accept the
                  concept that there are people who are more aware spiritually
                  than I am, and also some who are less. Regarding "betterness",
                  Steiner says that the only criterion for that should be one's
                  actions.


                  Regards,
                  CJ




                  >
                  > Frankly, CJ, I have no interest whatsoever in debating or even in
                  discussing
                  > anything with you, for the way I sense your tone leads me to find
                  no opening
                  > to relate to you here. And if you consider that a judgement, so be
                  it. But I
                  > simply speak of my experience in the best light I can.
                  >
                  > Peace,
                  > elaine
                  >
                  ______________________________________________________________________
                  ___
                  > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
                  http://www.hotmail.com
                  >
                  > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
                  > http://profiles.msn.com
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.