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

Back a bit

Expand Messages
  • gaelman58
    Dottie the Good-Hearted and Jean-Marc the Also Good-Hearted are currently having a wee bit of a go at each other...and I m not exactly sure why... although it
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 14, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dottie the Good-Hearted and Jean-Marc the Also Good-Hearted are
      currently having a wee bit of a go at each other...and I'm not
      exactly sure why... although it does make for good reading :)

      Is a good thread going to get lost?...something the
      Famous/Infamous/Whatever Baymace has alluded to in a couple of
      posts...I can well understand how a topic like the Reappearance of
      the Christ would be a difficult thing to talk about...but I'd like
      to try to give it some consideration anyway before we go off on
      another toot.

      To that end: Would anyone like to try to characterize what a human
      being experiences undergoing such an event...not the outcome of such
      an event...just what happened to them at the time...I remember some
      time ago S. Hale tried to do that as he recalled an event in his
      childhood.

      I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot and I would certainly
      understand if a person chose not to talk about it...yet it's
      possible that someone might say something that resonates...we all
      know here that the finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.

      regards, McCann
    • dottie zold
      ... Okay, hold up here, just a minute. Why is anyone saying I am having a go at Jean Marc? What have I said that can show anything to do about a go at Jean
      Message 2 of 12 , Jun 14, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Sir Gaelman:
        > Dottie the Good-Hearted and Jean-Marc the Also
        > Good-Hearted are
        > currently having a wee bit of a go at each
        > other...and I'm not
        > exactly sure why... although it does make for good
        > reading :)

        Okay, hold up here, just a minute. Why is anyone
        saying I am having a go at Jean Marc? What have I said
        that can show anything to do about a 'go at Jean
        Marc'?

        I'm aware of his feelings/thoughts about what I've
        shared about my experiences of Christ. I got what he
        was alluding to the last time this came up. And I'm
        all good with that. I stayed away for the most part
        until I checked back in three weeks later and y'all
        were still talking about the Christ experience under
        some strange title that I thought to put something
        that I thought was a little closer to the
        conversation.

        He's getting a little smug. I'm good with that too.
        It's all good. Maybe I'll wait until tomorrow to check
        out his words. Maybe not:))

        Gaelman, the experience is outworldly but in our
        world. I remember my heart beat being so strong that
        it pulsed through my fingers over my heart. Each time
        there was an aura around the Christ in a way. Although
        the one picture from the Akashic was of the past but
        in today's time. It was Jesus turning around on the
        Mount where James and the Johns were sleeping.
        Pictures right out of a movie, getting ready to point
        a finger to them.

        Twice when it was the recognizable Jesus there was a
        light, somewhat dimmed as if it was breaking through
        space, or that was the affect of what occurs when one
        breaks through into the physical world. Or it was of
        another world showing itself here and therefore
        creating a space of its own in our own space.

        There was a whole series of events in my early
        thirties that also occurred in the clouds: Jesus
        carrying the cross during a procession, Mary with the
        Baby, the Lion laying down with the Lamb, the moment
        when Jesus was taking up to what we would call Father
        God by the Angels and birds so to speak, how the
        Father received Him.

        The one that relates to a change of my person occurred
        in my bed where a spirit being floated above me and
        under me in a circular fashion, long body wise. I had
        the experience that the 'ego' was separate from the
        body or the brain, maybe is a good way to say it.

        The first time it was a Body of Lights, in the form of
        the Tree of Life, in my bedroom doorway. I was
        awakened, it was about the time I began studying
        Rudolf Steiner's ArchAngel Michael His Mission and
        Ours, my first book. From there a path of Christian
        initations took place, although I have to say I was
        unaware of what they were just that they were and that
        I was deepening my life in a committment of that which
        I had given myself up to consciously when I was seven
        years old. (Well, as conscious as a seven year old can
        be whose a little more quieter with different
        interests then others her age and older.)

        But where I really consider my self lucky is that I
        had not read of these experiences first and then came
        to experience them: I experienced them and then years
        later came to read about them. And only years after
        that came to understand them. Rudolf Steiner says its
        backwards here in relations to how we meet the
        spiritual beings: first we experience them and then we
        get to know them, whereas in the physical world first
        we get to know one another and then get to have
        experiences of them.

        The same thing with the Being Anthroposophia. I came
        to her through study and contemplation. I did not come
        to her through Sergei Prokofieff's book The Heavenly
        Sophia and the Being Anthroposophia, no, I came to her
        via the Gospel of John and the Fifth Gospel and the
        Bible. It's my way to study and then experience and
        then understand. I am the same way with the Philosophy
        of Freedom. I couldn't read that book for many years.
        Now I can. And I can only after I have swolled the
        inner structure of that book through study of How to
        Know Higher Worlds and also my committment to the
        exercises and working relationships with others.

        I remember a time when Jesus bowed before me, about
        four or five years ago maybe. And it was in the same
        'light space' as that as I had seen years earlier.
        There is a glow of sorts, but a dimned glow, all
        around Him. I imagine that's the most human beings can
        take maybe, or at least so say the Jews.

        There was a whole process and I have to say mostly it
        comes from my past biographical work in the world. Or
        at least so I understand it. But I did come in with
        the imprint of loving the Christ with all my heart
        mind and soul even if I questioned Him incestantly. I
        mean I never let Him rest.

        I am not sure if that is what you were looking for but
        that's what I am thinking you were saying.

        All good things,
        Dottie



        ____________________________________________________________________________________
        Don't pick lemons.
        See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
        http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
      • baymace
        Could I suggest that individuals taking part in a variety of spiritual, religious and mystical paths experience the Christ, regardless of the terminology they
        Message 3 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Could I suggest that individuals taking part in a variety of
          spiritual, religious and mystical paths experience the Christ,
          regardless of the terminology they use to describe those
          experiences? Anyone who studies occult science – Anthroposophy,
          Theosophy, Hermeticism, etc. – understands that Christ Consciousness
          is not defined, contained or restricted by something as
          inconsequential as any one particular belief system.

          To suggest that Anthroposophy is the one current time-appropriate
          Christ path, is on par with the mainstream Christian belief that one
          must be saved in order to gain eternal life, or the Muslim belief in
          a God who is not anthropomorphized in the way Christians envision
          God. All of the above are examples of spiritual/religious
          conceptualizing and intellectualism. They are tenets particular to a
          specific faith so to speak – different than authentic knowledge
          gained via experiential wisdom.

          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58"
          <gaelman58@...> wrote:
          >
          > Is a good thread going to get lost?...something the
          > Famous/Infamous/Whatever Baymace has alluded to in a couple of
          > posts...I can well understand how a topic like the Reappearance of
          > the Christ would be a difficult thing to talk about...but I'd like
          > to try to give it some consideration anyway before we go off on
          > another toot.
        • baymace
          If one interprets and understands occult Christology from a particular perspective, all life experience is Christ-inspired or imbued. Is it coincidence human
          Message 4 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            If one interprets and understands occult Christology from a
            particular perspective, all life experience is Christ-inspired or
            imbued. Is it coincidence human beings awaken with the sun each
            morning?

            With regards to the question raised, and other conversations and
            discussions taking place on the subject of Experiencing the Christ:
            In the book `Meditations on the Tarot', Valentin Tomberg speaks of
            the gift or mystery of tears. He writes: "The gift of tears was
            always considered by the masters of Christian spirituality as a
            grace from the Holy Spirit, for it is thanks to this gift that the
            soul surpasses itself and ascends to a degree of intensity of life
            which is certainly above that to which it is accustomed."

            This is something I have experienced many times. The specific life
            circumstances are not important. What is important is the experience
            each time of an elevated feeling and intensity of the soul, the
            outcome of which includes the shedding of tears and, at times,
            intense weeping.

            It may or may not be that individual traits such as temperament or
            astrological considerations affect, not necessarily the intensity of
            the experience, but the depth of the emotional reaction and response
            of the individual. Regardless, I would suggest that possibility
            could be why it is one individual would form a more intensely
            personal relationship to and with the subject of their spiritual
            striving, than might someone else.

            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58"
            <gaelman58@...> wrote:
            >
            > To that end: Would anyone like to try to characterize what a
            human
            > being experiences undergoing such an event...not the outcome of
            such
            > an event...just what happened to them at the time...I remember
            some
            > time ago S. Hale tried to do that as he recalled an event in his
            > childhood.
          • dottie zold
            You remind me of Walden, but without the whine. So, it s not about one path its about a deed. The deed of Christ was unique. It s not about being saved in the
            Message 5 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              You remind me of Walden, but without the whine.

              So, it's not about one path its about a deed. The deed
              of Christ was unique. It's not about being saved in
              the Anthroposophical understanding so you can't relate
              that to the fundy Christian belief.

              Anthroposophy is a cognitive path to the spiritual
              worlds. What makes Anthroposophy, or the teachings of
              Rudolf Steiner unique, is that you must do your own
              work. You must rise yourself through getting a hold of
              your self and 'taking up your bed and walking' as said
              by Christ in the Gospel. It's about mastery over ones
              unconscious thinkings feelings and deedings. And its a
              path of ascendancy in the sense that thinking is
              understood or experienced as a spiritual activity.

              It's not enough that one thinks and tries to do good.
              It's not enough that there is a theory without
              practice. It's an ongoing path of development that
              requires one to be clearly awake to their antipathies
              and their sympathies to any given thing.

              If one considers a path of ongoing consciousness than
              it does matter. It seems by your writings that you may
              not be considering there to be an ongoing path of
              conscoiusness. In this ongoing path there is also a
              cosmology. It's not just a cosmology where we are
              passive rather we are required to be responsible for
              our portion of what we add to the whole.

              Anthroposophy is unique in its work to wake up the
              Will, the Father forces. My experience of the other
              paths are that they are mystical and or passive. Not
              an issue as one day we shall all be working together
              on the things more or less, however for those of us
              that hold that what we do today creates our tomorrow
              in the future epoch, it is clear that we must work to
              build organs of perception that lay latent in man
              today.

              You may not find that important and that is all good.
              Again you seem to come from the aethist for Buddha and
              aetheist for Christ concept of 'just do good and it's
              all good, you don't have to worry about all that other
              stuff, we'll get there anyway.' Okay. But that doesn't
              mean that what Anthroposophy speaks on is not relevant
              or true. In fact if you spent as much time thinking
              about the possibility that thinking is a spiritual
              activity, and breaking through your already made up
              mind, you might be able to pierce through to something
              new and surprise yourself.

              Let me ask you what do you mean by 'authentic
              knowledge gained by experiential wisdom'? How does one
              gain by 'experiential wisdom'? What is experiential
              wisdom'?

              d


              > Could I suggest that individuals taking part in a
              > variety of
              > spiritual, religious and mystical paths experience
              > the Christ,
              > regardless of the terminology they use to describe
              > those
              > experiences? Anyone who studies occult science –
              > Anthroposophy,
              > Theosophy, Hermeticism, etc. – understands that
              > Christ Consciousness
              > is not defined, contained or restricted by something
              > as
              > inconsequential as any one particular belief system.
              >
              > To suggest that Anthroposophy is the one current
              > time-appropriate
              > Christ path, is on par with the mainstream Christian
              > belief that one
              > must be saved in order to gain eternal life, or the
              > Muslim belief in
              > a God who is not anthropomorphized in the way
              > Christians envision
              > God. All of the above are examples of
              > spiritual/religious
              > conceptualizing and intellectualism. They are tenets
              > particular to a
              > specific faith so to speak – different than
              > authentic knowledge
              > gained via experiential wisdom.
              >
              > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
              > "gaelman58"
              > <gaelman58@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > Is a good thread going to get lost?...something
              > the
              > > Famous/Infamous/Whatever Baymace has alluded to in
              > a couple of
              > > posts...I can well understand how a topic like the
              > Reappearance of
              > > the Christ would be a difficult thing to talk
              > about...but I'd like
              > > to try to give it some consideration anyway before
              > we go off on
              > > another toot.
              >
              >




              ____________________________________________________________________________________
              Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
              http://farechase.yahoo.com/
            • dottie zold
              Ah, when you speak of experiential wisdom you are talking about the Tomberg thinking of receiving. Okay. Not my way nor Anthroposophys way for today. Maybe
              Message 6 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Ah, when you speak of 'experiential wisdom' you are
                talking about the Tomberg thinking of receiving. Okay.
                Not my way nor Anthroposophys way for today. Maybe in
                an earlier time but the Tomberg stream is definitely
                not of todays time in the sense of the Conscoiusness
                Soul freedom era. At least not in my understanding and
                work.

                In my experienced Mr. Tomberg, due to his rejection
                from the Society to take the helm, found himself faced
                with a being of olden times. And in this his followers
                seem to be staking a claim of another kind of
                knowledge. It's not really another kind of knowledge
                rather it seems to be an olden way of attaining the
                knowledge. Not for todays time nor anything to do with
                freedom in the sense I understand from Rudolf
                Steiner's teachings.

                Dottie
                --- baymace <baymace@...> wrote:

                > If one interprets and understands occult Christology
                > from a
                > particular perspective, all life experience is
                > Christ-inspired or
                > imbued. Is it coincidence human beings awaken with
                > the sun each
                > morning?
                >
                > With regards to the question raised, and other
                > conversations and
                > discussions taking place on the subject of
                > Experiencing the Christ:
                > In the book `Meditations on the Tarot', Valentin
                > Tomberg speaks of
                > the gift or mystery of tears. He writes: "The gift
                > of tears was
                > always considered by the masters of Christian
                > spirituality as a
                > grace from the Holy Spirit, for it is thanks to this
                > gift that the
                > soul surpasses itself and ascends to a degree of
                > intensity of life
                > which is certainly above that to which it is
                > accustomed."
                >
                > This is something I have experienced many times. The
                > specific life
                > circumstances are not important. What is important
                > is the experience
                > each time of an elevated feeling and intensity of
                > the soul, the
                > outcome of which includes the shedding of tears and,
                > at times,
                > intense weeping.
                >
                > It may or may not be that individual traits such as
                > temperament or
                > astrological considerations affect, not necessarily
                > the intensity of
                > the experience, but the depth of the emotional
                > reaction and response
                > of the individual. Regardless, I would suggest that
                > possibility
                > could be why it is one individual would form a more
                > intensely
                > personal relationship to and with the subject of
                > their spiritual
                > striving, than might someone else.
                >
                > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com,
                > "gaelman58"
                > <gaelman58@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > To that end: Would anyone like to try to
                > characterize what a
                > human
                > > being experiences undergoing such an event...not
                > the outcome of
                > such
                > > an event...just what happened to them at the
                > time...I remember
                > some
                > > time ago S. Hale tried to do that as he recalled
                > an event in his
                > > childhood.
                >
                >




                ____________________________________________________________________________________
                It's here! Your new message!
                Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
                http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
              • baymace
                This idea you repeatedly mention – one path to Christ (Anthroposophy) – is identical to beliefs held by many other spiritual and religious organizations.
                Message 7 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  This idea you repeatedly mention – one path to Christ
                  (Anthroposophy) – is identical to beliefs held by many other
                  spiritual and religious organizations. The Catholic Church considers
                  any religion other than Christianity to be inferior and a dangerous
                  obstacle to one's salvation. Baptists believe salvation obtained
                  though Jesus Christ is the one and only path to God. Mormons speak
                  of one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and question who the `true
                  Christians' are. I have to say I see no difference between these
                  four examples. All are variations of an aloof brand of
                  fundamentalism or `fundy Christian belief' as you described it.

                  I place no particular significance on Tomberg's writings, nor do I
                  have any particular interest in his Anthroposophical or Catholic
                  affiliations. Like all spiritual writers, a number of his
                  contributions come across as relevant and have a ring of truth to
                  them. And in response to your first comment below: No, that is not
                  the case and not what I am talking about.

                  --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, dottie zold
                  <dottie_z@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Ah, when you speak of 'experiential wisdom' you are
                  > talking about the Tomberg thinking of receiving. Okay.
                  > Not my way nor Anthroposophys way for today. Maybe in
                  > an earlier time but the Tomberg stream is definitely
                  > not of todays time in the sense of the Conscoiusness
                  > Soul freedom era. At least not in my understanding and
                  > work.
                  >
                  > In my experienced Mr. Tomberg, due to his rejection
                  > from the Society to take the helm, found himself faced
                  > with a being of olden times. And in this his followers
                  > seem to be staking a claim of another kind of
                  > knowledge. It's not really another kind of knowledge
                  > rather it seems to be an olden way of attaining the
                  > knowledge. Not for todays time nor anything to do with
                  > freedom in the sense I understand from Rudolf
                  > Steiner's teachings.
                • kmlightseeker
                  Hi Baymace, ... I agree. But what if Christ was the cosmic Logos ? Then in a way these sects would be correct in their zeal. A key problem as far as I can
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Baymace,


                    --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "baymace" <baymace@...>
                    wrote:
                    >
                    > This idea you repeatedly mention – one path to Christ
                    > (Anthroposophy) – is identical to beliefs held by many other
                    > spiritual and religious organizations. The Catholic Church considers
                    > any religion other than Christianity to be inferior and a dangerous
                    > obstacle to one's salvation. Baptists believe salvation obtained
                    > though Jesus Christ is the one and only path to God. Mormons speak
                    > of one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and question who the `true
                    > Christians' are. I have to say I see no difference between these
                    > four examples. All are variations of an aloof brand of
                    > fundamentalism or `fundy Christian belief' as you described it.


                    I agree. But what if Christ was the cosmic "Logos"? Then in a way
                    these sects would be correct in their zeal. A key problem as far as I
                    can determine it is that they don't realize how much or even if their
                    doctrines have been manipulated and/or based on faulty or skewed
                    information.


                    >
                    > I place no particular significance on Tomberg's writings, nor do I
                    > have any particular interest in his Anthroposophical or Catholic
                    > affiliations. Like all spiritual writers, a number of his
                    > contributions come across as relevant and have a ring of truth to
                    > them. And in response to your first comment below: No, that is not
                    > the case and not what I am talking about.


                    I'm wondering - have you read "The Occult Christ" by Ted Andrews? <G>


                    Regards,

                    Keith


                    >
                    > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, dottie zold
                    > <dottie_z@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Ah, when you speak of 'experiential wisdom' you are
                    > > talking about the Tomberg thinking of receiving. Okay.
                    > > Not my way nor Anthroposophys way for today. Maybe in
                    > > an earlier time but the Tomberg stream is definitely
                    > > not of todays time in the sense of the Conscoiusness
                    > > Soul freedom era. At least not in my understanding and
                    > > work.
                    > >
                    > > In my experienced Mr. Tomberg, due to his rejection
                    > > from the Society to take the helm, found himself faced
                    > > with a being of olden times. And in this his followers
                    > > seem to be staking a claim of another kind of
                    > > knowledge. It's not really another kind of knowledge
                    > > rather it seems to be an olden way of attaining the
                    > > knowledge. Not for todays time nor anything to do with
                    > > freedom in the sense I understand from Rudolf
                    > > Steiner's teachings.
                    >
                  • baymace
                    You raise a relevant point. Just to be clear though: that is not the same point I was making. I was attempting to show how often it is one comes across a
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jun 15, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      You raise a relevant point. Just to be clear though: that is not the
                      same point I was making. I was attempting to show how often it is one
                      comes across a spiritual or religious organization, or individuals
                      representing an organization, who believe their religion and spiritual
                      beliefs are the one correct set of beliefs, or the one true path to
                      salvation, enlightenment or what have you. I would suggest this has
                      much more to do with human nature and personal need, than it does with
                      any particular group's actual stranglehold on possessing the spiritual
                      facts and truth.

                      --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "kmlightseeker"
                      <kmlightseeker@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Hi Baymace,
                      >
                      > I agree. But what if Christ was the cosmic "Logos"? Then in a way
                      > these sects would be correct in their zeal.
                    • write3chairs
                      ... Hi there, McCann. Me again. :) What kind of event are you talking about here? I m not sure I understand. The reappearance of the Christ is something
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jun 18, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58" wrote:
                        >
                        > Dottie the Good-Hearted and Jean-Marc the Also Good-Hearted are
                        > currently having a wee bit of a go at each other...and I'm not
                        > exactly sure why... although it does make for good reading :)
                        >
                        > Is a good thread going to get lost?...something the
                        > Famous/Infamous/Whatever Baymace has alluded to in a couple of
                        > posts...I can well understand how a topic like the Reappearance of
                        > the Christ would be a difficult thing to talk about...but I'd like
                        > to try to give it some consideration anyway before we go off on
                        > another toot.
                        >
                        > To that end: Would anyone like to try to characterize what
                        > a human being experiences undergoing such an event...not the
                        > outcome of such an event...just what happened to them at the
                        > time...I remember some time ago S. Hale tried to do that as
                        > he recalled an event in his childhood.

                        Hi there, McCann. Me again. :) What kind of event are you talking
                        about here? I'm not sure I understand. The reappearance of the Christ
                        is something waaayyyy outside my scope of experience and knowledge. I
                        think I blinked and missed it. ;) But seriously, are you talking
                        about your basic How I Experience(d) Christ story, or something else?

                        Regards back,
                        Jennifer

                        > I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot and I would certainly
                        > understand if a person chose not to talk about it...yet it's
                        > possible that someone might say something that resonates...we all
                        > know here that the finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.
                        >
                        > regards, McCann
                      • gaelman58
                        ... of ... like ... Jinnyfar me gal, I don t think it s being talked about...it s being alluded to...I m interested in trying to talk about it with folks
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jun 19, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "write3chairs"
                          <write3chairs@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58" wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Dottie the Good-Hearted and Jean-Marc the Also Good-Hearted are
                          > > currently having a wee bit of a go at each other...and I'm not
                          > > exactly sure why... although it does make for good reading :)
                          > >
                          > > Is a good thread going to get lost?...something the
                          > > Famous/Infamous/Whatever Baymace has alluded to in a couple of
                          > > posts...I can well understand how a topic like the Reappearance
                          of
                          > > the Christ would be a difficult thing to talk about...but I'd
                          like
                          > > to try to give it some consideration anyway before we go off on
                          > > another toot.
                          > >
                          > > To that end: Would anyone like to try to characterize what
                          > > a human being experiences undergoing such an event...not the
                          > > outcome of such an event...just what happened to them at the
                          > > time...I remember some time ago S. Hale tried to do that as
                          > > he recalled an event in his childhood.
                          >
                          > Hi there, McCann. Me again. :) What kind of event are you talking
                          > about here? I'm not sure I understand.

                          Jinnyfar me gal, I don't think it's being talked about...it's being
                          alluded to...I'm interested in trying to talk about it with folks
                          because I have a recurrent idea and don't really know if it has any
                          substance. Years ago at a Steiner Institute I tried to recount to
                          the class an experience I had. The teacher, Betty Staley (nice
                          person), referred to it as a "Christ Experience"...I didn't think so
                          at the time...I was for a short bit and for want of better words,
                          the perceived, the perceiver, and the process of perception
                          itself...other spiritual paths speak of that.




                          The reappearance of the Christ
                          > is something waaayyyy outside my scope of experience and
                          knowledge.

                          Mebbe...and maybe that puts you in the same boat as everybody else.

                          I
                          > think I blinked and missed it. ;) But seriously, are you talking
                          > about your basic How I Experience(d) Christ story, or something
                          else?

                          No, not the general Jesus Christ, my personal Savior thing...though
                          I'm not casting aspersions on religious folks...many of them are
                          decent people and despite the comments directed toward them
                          repeatedly on this list, my repeated observation of that decency is
                          the fuckin' end ot that.

                          My recurrent idea is something that occurs to me as a result of
                          thinking about what Steiner has to say about the Event...so, I'm
                          like Dottie, thinking about it and wondering what's to be learned
                          from other people...the assumption being that it'd be spoken of in a
                          spiritual scientific context...with, perhaps, the commonality
                          arising out of the scientic/experiential.

                          Kids? I had six...God help them. You have the one?

                          Yes'm, McCann


                          >
                          > Regards back,
                          > Jennifer
                          >
                          > > I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot and I would certainly
                          > > understand if a person chose not to talk about it...yet it's
                          > > possible that someone might say something that resonates...we
                          all
                          > > know here that the finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.
                          > >
                          > > regards, McCann
                          >
                        • write3chairs
                          ... Yes, the one. I will return to the other stuff later. Gotta take care of some things first, ncluding going to pick up the one from rehearsal. Six kids?
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jun 21, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "gaelman58" wrote:

                            > Kids? I had six...God help them. You have the one?

                            Yes, the one. I will return to the other stuff
                            later. Gotta take care of some things first,
                            ncluding going to pick up "the one" from rehearsal.

                            Six kids? My, MY sir. :)

                            Jennifer

                            > Yes'm, McCann
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.