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

Berdyaev correct ? - Please Discuss !

Expand Messages
  • Bradford Riley
    From: DRStarman2001@aol.com ... Bradford comments; Yes this is interesting Dr. Starman! Duty to do the good, and the amazing stiff christian ethics that places
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 24, 2003
      From: DRStarman2001@...
      >Subject: [anthroposophy] Re: Berdyaev correct ? - Please Discuss !
      >Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 14:55:10 EST
      >*******I think that's an old misunderstanding, that modern occultism,
      >Theosophy and Anthroposophy know the universe but leave out God. It arises
      >because only an external God is meant, one whose image you place before you
      >and then worship, a "divine dictator" whose "will" you must seek out. It's
      >certainly true that we acknowledge no so-called God in THAT sense. I would
      >say that's because that's not what God is really like at all. Because the
      >divine which is known directly is very different from the traditional
      >anthropomorphic God of the uninitiated, they regard anyone speaking of its
      >true nature as impious, just as they did with Jesus, Socrates etc. The
      >Buddhists were regarded as atheists because they tried to say that God
      >as people picture him/her/it. and so too anthroposophists are regarded as
      >iconoclasts for saying it's not either.
      > But in addition, this fellow clearly knows very little about
      >Anthroposophy, to say that it does not lead people to Christ. Perhaps he
      >means he doesn't feel it leads him back to the old naive belief in God and
      >Christ. Thank heavens it doesn't!

      Bradford comments;

      Yes this is interesting Dr. Starman! Duty to do the good, and the amazing
      stiff christian ethics that places the dogma of helping the poor, service,
      doing the good, visiting prisons... Also appears to my observation to
      reflect an abstract experience of a Stern, suffering, Cross Riding Jesus,
      Instead of the high Solar Logos with a human sense of humor that Christ was.
      Such an attitude also considers every thing we investigate and discover on
      our own, for ourseleves, the joy of our own holy path, means no separation
      from god. But I had a very strong Norwegian - Lutheran grandmother, a real
      saint from Wheaton Illinois no less.

      Now it so happens that Wheaton, where I went every summer as kid to stay
      with my grandmother, was not only missionary central, but my grandmother, a
      gem of a woman, was just a joy to be with and the highest example of good
      Christian fellowship I ever encountered. However her relation to the Lord
      was still cloudy, abstract and external through the medium of the Bible and
      Sunday services with ministers who said nothing relevant from the pulpit.
      Also in Wheaton were the pals my cousin and I hung around with, the Belushi
      boys. Also in Wheaton was the center of the Theosophical Society; also in
      Wheaton was the core collection of notes from the infamous Inklings.

      This brings me to C.S.Lewis and Owen Barfield. This is truly as Starman has
      said, really a matter of perception. The conflict that I detect, where one
      is trying to dutifully do Steiner meditations, when bored is certainly not
      the same as the fire of living intuition and spiritualized thinking that
      Steiner used to research the world. C.S. Lewis had all the richness and
      flaws of a 'normal' Christian ethical individual. Barfield nor that ARCH
      pagan, Tolkien could every convince Lewis that his understanding of
      Christianity, god, and goodness was tainted and wooden. Instead, because
      thinking attains the joy of high intuition, those who have to beat
      themselves with a guilty, knotted cord, so that they should kill out there
      normal drives and impulses as sins - have failed to grasp why the Native
      American was more connected to god than those Puritans who rolled in to
      Plymouth. That does not mean that C.S.Lewis was not a wonderful creative
      Spirit. He was, they all were and what a mix they made. They didn't agree,
      but they were all alive.

      The same basic argument is here being foisted and flopped around and what is
      sad is that the introspection and inner observations allow one to let this
      sneaky egregorial elemental twist around in the will and thinking of the
      soul.It is the constant think that goes on in oneself that remains
      unobserved. This is why subtle self observations pays dividends in Spiritual
      Science and Oscar Wilde was ten times more a Christian than Lewis thought he
      was. We need to look into ourselves, our upbringing and our motives much
      more carefully and that is part of the inward observation needed in any path
      of development. Nice work Starman!


      Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.