Re: The difference between Ahriman thinking and Luciferic thinking
- Steve wrote:"It is quite remarkable indeed that in the short span of five years
time, Rudolf Steiner had to revise his earliest calculations of the
earth epochs to those that more accurately depict the facts of an
earth evolution numbered in thousands of years vs. millions of
years. Thus, if you compare GA53 and GA93a with GA123, the
difference based on a more exact clairvoyance is clearly in evidence.
And the span of time for recognizing this difference is 1905 to 1910.<snip>It is all scientific supposition, based on arrogance and pride, and theextreme desire to control public opinion and the future of the world."-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's a shame that GA 123 [The Gospel of Matthew] is not online yet...Please jump to lecture eight [September 8, 1910] of your copy of GA 123!I'm translating from the German:"On the other hand, consider how Man is blissfully unaware of the mysteriesof the human physical body! In order to bring it to its present state, Divinespiritual beings have been at work on the physical body --- not only formillions of years, but for millions of millions of years [...nicht nurdurch Jahrmillionen, sondern Jahrmillionen mal Millionen...]."That means thousands of billions of years...[1 billion = 1,000,000,000]As you can see, in GA 123 precisely, in that very year 1910, Rudolf Steinerwas saying that the cosmic history of the human physical body stretched overa period of time much greater than the mere 4.6 billion years of our Solarsystem or even the age of the entire universe according to the estimates ofmodern science--- no less!And here's another example. Sorry, I don't have time to go into details.In the wonderful improvised lectures he held for the people working at theGoetheanum, Rudolf Steiner once talked about *the elephant* and the forcesof reproduction. As far as the Lunar forces of reproduction are concerned[the maternal forces or feminine aspect of reproduction], Rudolf Steiner veryclearly stated that they were passed down through generations and inheritedfrom a time prior to the Moon's separation from the Earth --- and he expresslyspecified [twice over] that *millions of years* [Jahrmillionen] were involved!Isn't it interesting to note that Steiner gave this lecture in the year 1922?[September 27, 1922 - GA 347. It's not online...]Never mind the miscalculations, the arrogance and pride, the vanity,and the extreme desire to control public opinion, of modern science now...With all due respect - how about minding *your own* for a change?Jean-Marc
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Stephen Hale" <sardisian01@...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, "jmn36210" jmnguyen@ wrote:
> > Steve wrote: "Mercury and Venus were born out of the Sun when It
> > enabled to
> > turn Its gaze back toward the Earth about fifty thousand years ago.
> > This means that these two inner planets can hardly be a part of what
> > is said to be a universe that is four billion years old. This, of
> > course, is modern astronomy and astrophysics talking. Astrophysics!
> > Is that an oxymoron? <snip>
> > Now, when this occurred, in terms of the Moon's separation after
> > passing over the mineral element to the earth, it allowed the Sun to
> > return toward earth evolution, bearing the forces of the other Six
> > Elohim. And at this point, Venus and Mercury popped out of the Sun;
> > the two sacred inner planets."
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ---------------- "Mercury and Venus were born... about fifty
> > thousand years ago"? This, of course, is modern spiritual scientist
> > Steve speaking. Steve! I'm translating from the German [GA 53 -
> > March 9, 1905] --- Rudolf Steiner is talking about the Moon's
> > separation: "The complete separation did not happen all at once
> > All proceeded slowly and gradually, during millions and millions of
> > years." Next, I'm quoting from the RS Archive: "The force
> > into the form with ever increasing density and hence life in the
> > Lemurian Age had to receive a new impulse, which was brought about
> > the turning around of the Earth Globe. The axis of the Earth was
> > gradually turned. Previously there was a tropical climate at the
> > Pole; later through the turning around of the Earth axis the
> > climate came into the middle region. This change proceeded with
> > comparative rapidity but lasted nevertheless for perhaps four
> > years. [Rudolf Steiner later revised his time scale of earthly
> > to much shorter periods. Ed.] ***The Lemurian Age was twenty-two
> > years ago.*** Four million years were needed by the Moon Pitris in
> > to turn the axis of the Earth." [GA 93a - October 25, 1905] 1. The
> > sentence in blue does *not* appear in the original German text.
> 2. The
> > sentence ***in red*** was surreptitiously deleted from the English
> > translation... Jean-Marc
> It is quite remarkable indeed that in the short span of five years
> time, Rudolf Steiner had to revise his earliest calculations of the
> earth epochs to those that more accurately depict the facts of an
> earth evolution numbered in thousands of years vs. millions of
> years. Thus, if you compare GA53 and GA93a with GA123, the
> difference based on a more exact clairvoyance is clearly in evidence.
> And the span of time for recognizing this difference is 1905 to 1910.
> "The Godhead was departed around 11,547 BC., when the downward
> tending phase began from Atlantis to the earth as we know it today.
> The Eighth Sphere was formed when the Moon passed over the mineral
> kingdom to the earth about fifty thousand years ago. The earth as we
> know it is only 50,000 years old. All the so-called scientific
> calculations relative to an earth that is two billion years old,
> geologically, and 4.6 billions years old, from an astronomical
> standpoint, is a miscalculation of modern science designed to promote
> the materialistic view of the world and man. Our Moon became a super-
> hardened rock, a vulcanized sphere, when the mineral kingdom passed
> over to the earth. This was done in order to enable the moon-earth
> configuration to become the earth-moon configration, wherein the moon
> separated in order to revolve around the earth as its natural
> satellite. This was needed in order to create the lunar year of 12
> months, and the cycle of the seasons. Otherwise, mankind would have
> had to endure evolving on an earth still tied to the Moon; an
> insurmountable experience of mass and gravity of the absolute kind.
> It seems that all professional astronomers, whether academic or
> practicing, all adhere to the same absolute conviction that the
> universe is completely spatial and moving, and can be perfectly
> calculated according to our terrestrial reference points. In other
> words, a mechanical-mathematical universe based entirely on earth's
> parameters. And here is where you have an excellent example of flat-
> landers trying to discern the substance of the great cosmos from the
> Carbon-dating is only accurate based on instrumentation capable of
> measuring a relatively solid, mineral-based sphere. Therefore, in
> order for the world to be as old as the geologists, paleontologists,
> and anthropologists say it is, then a fundamental theory must exist
> for the origination of the earth. And it is known as the Kant-
> Laplace, or nebular hypothesis, theory. The only truly accurate
> measurement of age, based on carbon dating methods, concerns the
> findings of archaeological research. And this is because archaeology
> is concerned with uncovering the artifacts that pertain to early
> mankind, and its efforts to exist on a solid mineral plane of being.
> These findings are accurate based on the methods and instruments
> capable of measuring the essential carbonic nature of an earth that
> has become mineralized. It is based on this initial hypothesis (Kant-
> Laplace) that geology, paleontology, anthropology, and most certainly
> of all, Astronomy, fall victim to the mainfold errors that have been
> foisted on a learned mankind that seeks truth from its science and
> The findings of science are accurate relative to what the observer
> can observe and then measure with his instruments for relative carbon
> dating; the basis for dating events based on time assuming a solid
> crust condition of the earth. Now, geological science says the earth
> is 1.8 billion years old, encompassing the protozoic (primordial) age
> to the present post-cenozoic age, that began ten thousand years ago
> with the recession of the great ice age. Prior to that recession,
> which coincides with the great flood, or deluge, nothing is known
> from any natural scientifc standpoint. It is all scientific
> supposition, based on arrogance and pride, and the extreme desire to
> control public opinion and the future of the world.
> Why would the earth need to be older than 50,000 years when it is the
> goal of self-remembering that is important? Does subscription to the
> vanity of science need to occur first in order to achieve this goal?
> It is science that is vainly seeking to remember itself, and it is
> today's science that has most forgotten itself. Why should we accept
> carbon dating? Doesn't it all come down to an initial belief; the so-
> called "Big Bang" of primordial origination? And herein, it is said
> that Einstein jumped for joy when he heard this proclaimed at a
> lecture he attended in 1936. He is quoted as saying: "That's
> it"! "Now my path of realizing quantitative physics is assured of
> So, this extract from "Quaternium Organum" has been patiently waiting
> for you, Jean-Marc; with all due respect.
- edit: each of our individual studies or our respective studies (what
results out of 'our' study.)
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "carol" <organicethics@...> wrote:
> Hi Steve, good to hear from you.
> You asked: " What is the solution ?"
> Well, the fact of the matter is that both your question and it's
> traverse multiple planes to human existence. Anthroposophy is really
> being implemented on a mass scale, make no mistake about it.
> You Steve, have the good fortune of representing it's truths on the
> outermost conscious plane. Please, stick firmly to your good work.
> « Bring Michael INTEL, via Rudolf Steiner, to the masses. A 98
> percent ignorant vs. a 2 percent cognizant does not suffice for
> an ignorant world. »
> Ah, but Steve, remember the 'magic' element? And connnected with this,
> you seem to recognize that a dark brotherhood advances it's agenda
> through a real connection to the human, magical (mystical) sphere.
> concept might you come up with to describe the complexities of
> work within his followers.
> « Both you and Bradford are being meaningless and reactive.
> science exists to solve these problems, not be involved in them, as if
> there is no solution to the past and present situation. »
> Your 'meaningless and reactive' vision which you've come to assign to
> the ideas poured forth from our 'communiqués' may very well reflect
> your individual absense from such a particular approach in Spiritual
> Scientific study.
> In stating this, I'm not affirming that your own study does not 'feed'
> into what results out of 'our' study. Steve, Anthroposophy is really
> what Steiner described, in that it is genuine human life. Everyone's
> vision is contained within Anthroposophy's truths - because
> Anthroposophy really is the newly formed 'spoken' language of the
> --- In email@example.com, "Stephen Hale" sardisian01@
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "carol" organicethics@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Bradford brought: «Tell Me! You Tell me that this isn't the
> > of
> > > the Avignon French, Materialism of the Popes of Religion that is
> > > surfacing again now, and was used in Germany and in 1332 for
> > > years or more in the Babylonian Captivity of the Popes.... Three
> > > nonsense, utterly crazy, stupid Popes who were supposed to be the
> > great
> > > errorless crowned choices of the Christ Being? Are we stupid, or
> > we
> > > see just how clearly such a drama before us awakens our Michaelic
> > > ire?»
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Our Michaelic ire, on this day, seems to be humble, somewhat
> > discreet
> > > Survival intuition as each and every respective defender of
> > > humankind deciphers for themselves and for others, the necessary
> > data
> > > for better assessing the dangers.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The inquisition of our day has Economists at it's helm.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The most threatening method employed to satiate their sadistic
> > > satisfaction is through technologicaly perfected germ and chemical
> > daily
> > > 'fare' as well as electro magnetic submission.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Other technological means are kid toys, to be employed by
> > the 'lesser'
> > > economists/medical practicioners, torturers, corporates etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The Religion ? Abstract thought along with it's multi leveled
> > > heightened features = which can come to furnish an exclusive
> > bounty
> > > for adepts (initiates) who's inner yearning proves the strongest -
> > > for aquiring , that is, THE ultimate sterile ego.
> > >
> > > Alot of followers to boast it's benefits, it seems.
> > Both you and Bradford are being meaningless and reactive. Spiritual
> > science exists to solve these problems, not be involved in them, as
> > if there is no solution to the past and present situation.
> > What is the solution? Bring Michael INTEL, via Rudolf Steiner, to
> > the masses. A 98 percent ignorant vs. a 2 percent cognizant does not
> > suffice for healing an ignorant world.
> > And by the way, Steiner had the prescience to call for a world
> > fellowship of free schools for spiritual science exactly three
> > two months, and one week before the CC of 1923. Now, how's that for
> > timing?
> > Well, it never took place, and that is why we have the larger part
> > the problems that exist today. Ignorance prevails rather than
> > gnosis. As a former systems analyst, I assessed this problem a
> > number of years ago and developed a plan. It still holds good if we
> > can get the schools going.
> > Steve