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

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Reading and whatnot [was: Technizismen]

Expand Messages
  • Jean-Marc Nguyen
    McCann, you wrote: Well Jean-Marc, I ve read a great deal...perhaps too much. In and of myself I am no authority on what Steiner alluded to when he spoke of
    Message 1 of 90 , Jun 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      McCann, you wrote:
      Well Jean-Marc, I've read a great deal...perhaps too much. In and
      of myself I am no authority on what Steiner alluded to when he spoke
      of the "Second Coming". My assumption is that it was experiential
      for him. I've read enough times from many spiritual teachers (and I
      can't even verify their authenticity) that the spiritual path is
      fraught with illusions and chimeras. My conclusion is simply that
      one doesn't become knowledgeable by reading...the one exception to
      that that comes to mind is Steiner's epistomological books...I say,
      that's true:)

      Without trying to put you on the spot...without trying to be a pain-
      in-the-ass.. .if someone were to ask you, "Hey Jean-Marc, what is
      this business about the reappearance of the Christ in the
      etheric?"... do you think you could do it justice from your own
      Well, McCann, I hate to be a pain in the ass myself :-)
      but it very much seems as if - without really trying! - you managed *to put
      yourself * on the spot...
      Why the hell did you utter such a misleading statement: " I know of no one
      who has insight into that..." ?
      You see, McCann, it was - my fondest hope! - that you would substantiate
      your claim with concrete evidence, that you would quote specific books,
      articles, messages, from specific authors, that you would quote specific
      passages and that you would argue your point [I know of no one who has
      insight into that...] in concrete terms.
      This would have been a real opportunity to tackle the point at issue, a real
      opportunity to get down to concrete *business*...
      How about a much more truthful statement: " I'm in no position to know
      whether anyone has insight into that..." ?
      Are you aware that Rudolf Steiner declared over and over again that
      all the results of his spiritual research were *intelligible* to anyone who
      had the necessary *will* ?
      On the other hand, he suggested that people *should refrain from* reading
      his books - if / when they read them in the same manner they read [kitchen]
      *recipe books*  :-)
      Reading [and chattering] about spirits, ether bodies, angels, the Christ and
      whatnot --- does *not* turn anyone into an anthroposophist!
      The specificity, the absolute uniqueness of anthroposophical spiritual science
      is the conscious determination, the will to look at concrete facts [spiritual
      and material] in concrete terms - and the will to think in concrete terms...
      As for your question, McCann, I'm terribly sorry --- but I'm really not
      very fond of devilish [read: Luciferic] *soul / spiritual exhibitionism* :-)
      If the above sounds too esoteric, here's a Hollywood version:
      In the wild, wild West, you're not supposed to ask the bad guy: "Hey, bad
      guy, no offense intended! --- but I'm wondering if you really are one
      of the fastest guns in town?"
      You just draw your gun on the bad guy and see what happens...
      [i.e., if you ever get a chance to live long enough]. :-)
      Come on, sheriff McCann, please live up to true American standards! :-)
    • Frank Smith
      ... When one speaks of the Christ-Being as spiritually descended, and then finds the Christ-being worshiped in the same ritual form as the pagan gods were
      Message 90 of 90 , Jun 30, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- kmlightseeker <kmlightseeker@...> wrote:
        > " The proof for our contention, that the Bible is a
        > remnant and
        > rescripting of solar theocracy, is hidden in plain
        > sight..... etc."

        "When one speaks of the Christ-Being as spiritually
        descended, and then finds the Christ-being worshiped
        in the same ritual form as the pagan gods were
        worshiped, and when that is used to deny the
        Christ-Being, which is the case, it is using the
        following logic: Someone stays at an inn and leaves
        his clothes there. It is obvious from the clothes that
        they belong to him. Afterwards a person such as
        Schiller or Goethe due to some circumstance puts the
        clothes on and comes out with the clothes belonging to
        the other person. Then someone goes around saying
        asking what kind of special person is that. I have
        examined the clothes, they belong to so-an-do, and he
        is not at all special. Because the Christ-Being to
        some extent uses the clothes of the old rituals, the
        clever people come and fail to realize that the
        Christ-Being only puts them on as a garment and what
        is now in the old rituals is the Christ-Being.
        And take the sum of scientific monistic
        considerations, libraries full – they are evidence of
        the Christ-Being’s clothes, and they are even true!
        The hounds of cultural evolution are held in high
        regard and their science is accepted. We must paint
        this picture in our minds if we want to absorb what is
        meant with this Fifth Gospel, not only in
        understanding but also in feeling. What is meant is
        that we must assert our truth correctly in these new
        times as a new annunciation, and realize how
        impossible it is to make it comprehensible to the old
        Rudolf Steiner, "The Fifth Gospel"


        Frank Thomas Smith

        Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.