Re: Theos-World Jerry- Fundamentalist misrepresentations of the Bible
Apr 05, 2006 03:33 PM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Good to hear. But do you still consider yourself to be a
Theosophist if you are attending a Unitarian Church? You seem a bit
at odds with Theosophy to me. Or maybe I'm mistaken.
You need to understand that Theosophy is not a religion. The only
requirement for membership in the TS is a commitment to the concept of
universal brotherhood. There are no teachings nor articles of faith one
must ascribe to. As far as the Theosophical Organizations are
concerned, one may be a member of any religion and still be a member of
a Theosophical Organization. Blavatsky's definition of a "Theosophist"
is one who lives a life in pure altruism. She once remarked that in her
lifetime, she had met a half dozen people she considered a Theosophist.
She did not mention whether or not they were members of the Theosophical
Society. So, frankly, I never thought of myself as meeting the very
high standards she had held for that designation. So, I do not call
myself a "Theosophist." When asked, I call myself a "student of Theosophy."
On the other hand, there are a lot of members of the TS who treat
Theosophy as if it were a religion. No doubt, the majority of people
you have met at Olcott fit this profile. But, that is an individual
choice, and not what the founders had ever intended.
As for the Unitarian church, they only ask that members respect the
beliefs of other members. When we went to the meetings where they are
supposed to go through the history of the Church etc. the minister asked
how many of us believed in some kind of an after life. Out of the 27
present, my wife and I were the only two who raised their hands. The
Unitarian Church is probably the most liberal of the Christian
churches. Our church has a pagan sub-group for women only. One of our
students belongs to this. She says that they meet together, make
magical implements, burn colored candles, invoke the goddess for favors,
get naked, dance, and swim. All very nice, I guess.
Twice a year, our organization, Alexandria West, jointly sponsors public
seminars with them. We are currently planning an all day seminar on
religious rights, the constitution and public policies. There will be
professors and ministers from several view points who will be
presenting. However, we make a conscious decision not to invite a
representative from the ultra-religious right for fear of organized
disruptions. So, our representatives are from the moderate left,
centrist, and moderate right.
You seem a bit
at odds with Theosophy to me. Or maybe I'm mistaken.
Over all, I am very supportive of Theosophy. I am at odds with about
three individuals in the Adyar TS over their policies. These three
people are in leadership positions and wield a great amount of
influence. I do not agree with their policies and have spoken up at
every opportunity over the last 40 years. However, the issues are
complicated and require a good understanding of the history of the
movement which is not published in their approved books. So, it goes
without saying that my protests go largely unheard and, by most of the
membership, not understood. Still, I persevere, though have become
weary of the effort as of late.
I will inquire about Vonda Urban at the Wheaton facility. I'm sure
that they've heard of her. Thank you so much.
She is known there, but not a member of that Organization. I must warn
you that her classes are very serious, she is a no nonsense person, and
expects a real commitment from her students. She would have no patience
with a lot of side discussion about the merits of Christian theology
versus the merits of Theosophical teachings. She is looking for serious
students who are willing to commit to study and to living the life.
Interesting website. I've bookmarked it. I tend to use the
term 'universal truth'. I'm not sure if that's perhaps consistent
with 'perennialism'.
Perennialism is a notion that there is a body of ancient and timeless
knowledge which is found in common in all the major religions and
spiritualities. One of the best known living expounders of perennialism
today is Huston Smith, who promotes a type of Christian perennialism.
This is also a group which promotes an Islamic perennialism. Blavatsky
promoted still another, more universal perennialism. Thus, Theosophy is
a type of perennialism. There are several names which have the same
approximate meaning: The perennial wisdom; the Tradition, the ancient
Tradition, the Ancient Wisdom; the perennial philosophy etc.
We have different philosophies it seems, but that's okay. More
power to ya.
Well, we tried to have a Board which is committed to service over making
money. My wife worked in Public service before becoming a professor.
So, she also understands the practical application. Also, one member of
our Board was the budget director of a major city in California. She
also sit on Boards for several other non-profit organizations. Her
husband, who we consult with, was the city manager for that same city.
So, I feel that we have the realities of what happens to non-profits
pretty well understood. Of course, after we are all dead, things can
change. We understand that.
Exactly. If not much sooner. In fact, my personal belief is that
the public corruption begins immediately upon the desire and/or
acquisition of positional authority.
I would go along with that.
So you perform your discussions on a text by text basis then?
Sometimes around specific sacred texts, and sometimes around other
texts, such as modern studies etc.
I would say that the authors literally believed what they wrote,
even if I do not always agree with them. The early Jews (and even
Jesus himself) believed in a literal Adam and Eve. Whether I do or
not is another matter entirely.
I think that research into what the early Jews actually believed is just
beginning. Of course, we have long understood the positions of the
Yahweh cult priesthood in Jerusalem and their Pharisee opposition. Now,
with the Dead Sea scrolls, we are for the first time beginning to
understand the Essenes, which were very different from the Yahweh cult.
There were also numerous other groups such as the Therapeutes, which we
probably never will understand. There was also the very Hellenized Jews
of Alexandria who had their own Temple and priesthood. A new field is
beginning which is revealing the beliefs of the general population,
which we are beginning to discover, was often very different from the
Jerusalem center. There is also the beliefs of the pre-bronze age Jews,
which we are now just beginning to understand. So, a whole new world of
understanding is opening up to us since the days of depending upon the
Bible and Josephus as the primary sources.
[Vince]
Have you actually found counter-evidence to the biblical records, or have the biblical records simply not been affirmatively validated to you?
[JJHE]
How do you define and what would you accept as "counter-evidence"?
[Vince]
I am defining counter-evidence as any factual proof that would stand
up in a court case.
Court cases work from the testimony of eye witnesses and physical
evidence. Obviously we cannot call forth eyewitnesses. For the Gospel
accounts, only the most conservative of Theologians still believe that
the Gospels were actually written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. At
this point, I can't imagine an objective Judge who would admit these
gospels as eyewitness testimony without solid evidence of their
authorship. So, unless they can somehow be proven that these Gospels
were first hand eyewitness accounts, they would not be permitted. As for
physical evidence: almost every Catholic church in the world has a
"piece of the true cross" in their treasury. My wife once remarked that
it must have been a huge cross. The locations in Israel for Jesus'
birth, Baptism, crucifixion, burial etc. were designated by
Constantine's mother in the 4th century--obviously based more upon faith
than any archaeological or historical knowledge. Obviously, the
question of Adam and Eve would be even more problematical. So, I would
say that we do not have a case which can be tried in a court of law.
Best
Jerry
Vincent wrote:
Jerry-
You wrote:
You need to understand that I live in California, 2,000 miles away
from
Olcott. So, I am in no position to attend their classes etc. I,
of
course, know many of the presenters personally and/or through
their
publications, and I have varying opinions, depending upon who you
have
in mind. If I lived in the area, I would probably attend some
presentations and not others. Also, it might help you to know
that I
have been a TS member for forty-three years, studied, led
classes,
presented lectures, organized conferences, attended conventions
etc. for
more years than many of the presenters you have heard at Olcott.
What I
am saying is; much of what you are hearing and seeing at Olcott
for the
first time is old hat for me.
Good to hear. But do you still consider yourself to be a
Theosophist if you are attending a Unitarian Church? You seem a bit
at odds with Theosophy to me. Or maybe I'm mistaken.
Your use of "they" makes this a pretty general question, asking
for a
blanket evaluation. In fairness I cannot do that. Instead, I will
answer this way: Each of those presenters have their own
understanding
and perspective of the Secret Doctrine and of ethics. Olcott has
certain favorites who they ask to speak on the Secret Doctrine, so
I
have a general idea of who you have heard. Of those who I know,
or have
read their writings, some are very good. Others, in my opinion,
frankly
don't know what they are talking about. As for "ethics" that is a
subject close to my heart, as well as my wife's. If you want a
recommendation, the most knowledgeable person I know of in terms
of
Theosophy, Blavatsky, Secret Doctrine etc. who teaches and lives
Theosophical ethics, is a woman named Vonda Urban. I don't know if
she
has ever been invited to speak at Olcott, but she does (or did)
speak at
various Lodges in the Chicago area. You might check her out and
let me
know what you think. If you cannot locate her, then email me
privately
and I will give you the particulars on how to contact her, and a
letter
of introduction. She lives in the central Chicago area and and
has been
teaching Theosophy continuously for 30 years that I know of. My
wife
studied with her for a couple of years before moving to
California.
Since my wife's doctoral dissertation was about teaching ethics in
public institutions, teaches the subject at our California State
University, and has been a student of Theosophy for over 25 years,
I
think she is a good judge of who really understands and practices
Theosophical ethics. She gives Vonda an A+. As for Vonda's
understanding of Theosophical teachings, I also give her an A+.
I will inquire about Vonda Urban at the Wheaton facility. I'm sure
that they've heard of her. Thank you so much.
Good background. Perhaps you have some advice for us?
I'm not sure what your organizational needs are. What specific
needs do you have, if any?
We promote perennialism. Perennialism is the notion that all the
wold's
major religions and spiritual traditions have a common resource of
ideas--call it a primordial tradition, or a wisdom tradition, or
an
ancient wisdom. We explore the world's literature and traditions,
hold
classes, seminars, field trips, meditation retreats, and publish a
quarterly journal. We have a web site, but it is in desperate
need of
up-dating. But you can get some basic information about us at:
www.alexandriawest.org
Interesting website. I've bookmarked it. I tend to use the
term 'universal truth'. I'm not sure if that's perhaps consistent
with 'perennialism'.
Yes. I have seen this and have from the beginning been cognizant
of the
possibility of this fate for Alexandria West after I am dead.
This may
be a natural down hill course for organizations, does not have to
be the
case. I have seen non profits in Los Angeles which are over 50
years
old which did not fall into this trap. It is not fated. Much
depends
upon how the successive Board members hold to the original values
of the
organization. I do agree that such a fall is related to size. As
an
organization get wealthier, opportunities open for those greedy
for a
piece of the pie or for personal power. But, once again, this too
does
not have to be. I could go into particulars about one or two
organizations, but then this would become a very long post.
We have different philosophies it seems, but that's okay. More
power to ya.
Yes, we are aware of these issues. My wife teaches Public
Administration.
Sounds tuff.
You sound like you have taken one of my wife's courses :-)
Lolol. It is more experiential for me.
And there begins the public corruption.
Exactly. If not much sooner. In fact, my personal belief is that
the public corruption begins immediately upon the desire and/or
acquisition of positional authority.
Our approach is to engage each text individually from a cultural
and
historical context. Comparisons then come up in discussions.
So you perform your discussions on a text by text basis then?
perhaps in your retirement...
If it will do me any good then, lolol. I'm not currently relaxed.
Interesting exegesis. Then, as an historical work, you would say
that
there was literally a first couple name Adam and Eve who lived in
a
garden and conversed with a serpent....?
I would say that the authors literally believed what they wrote,
even if I do not always agree with them. The early Jews (and even
Jesus himself) believed in a literal Adam and Eve. Whether I do or
not is another matter entirely.
How do you define and what would you accept as "counter-evidence"?
I am defining counter-evidence as any factual proof that would stand
up in a court case.
Blessings
Vince
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@...>
wrote:
Dear Vincent,
Okay, that's very nice. Then how do you feel about the various
class sessions with their respective speakers?
You need to understand that I live in California, 2,000 miles away
from
Olcott. So, I am in no position to attend their classes etc. I,
of
course, know many of the presenters personally and/or through
their
publications, and I have varying opinions, depending upon who you
have
in mind. If I lived in the area, I would probably attend some
presentations and not others. Also, it might help you to know
that I
have been a TS member for forty-three years, studied, led
classes,
presented lectures, organized conferences, attended conventions
etc. for
more years than many of the presenters you have heard at Olcott.
What I
am saying is; much of what you are hearing and seeing at Olcott
for the
first time is old hat for me.
Do they stay true to the original spirit of the organization?
For example, I am
attending a number of the directors' classes (Ethics of the
Secret
Doctrine; The Law of Cycles, etc.) at the Wheaton Headquarters,
coupled with sporadic attendance when a new guest speaker is
invited
each week.
Your use of "they" makes this a pretty general question, asking
for a
blanket evaluation. In fairness I cannot do that. Instead, I will
answer this way: Each of those presenters have their own
understanding
and perspective of the Secret Doctrine and of ethics. Olcott has
certain favorites who they ask to speak on the Secret Doctrine, so
I
have a general idea of who you have heard. Of those who I know,
or have
read their writings, some are very good. Others, in my opinion,
frankly
don't know what they are talking about. As for "ethics" that is a
subject close to my heart, as well as my wife's. If you want a
recommendation, the most knowledgeable person I know of in terms
of
Theosophy, Blavatsky, Secret Doctrine etc. who teaches and lives
Theosophical ethics, is a woman named Vonda Urban. I don't know if
she
has ever been invited to speak at Olcott, but she does (or did)
speak at
various Lodges in the Chicago area. You might check her out and
let me
know what you think. If you cannot locate her, then email me
privately
and I will give you the particulars on how to contact her, and a
letter
of introduction. She lives in the central Chicago area and and
has been
teaching Theosophy continuously for 30 years that I know of. My
wife
studied with her for a couple of years before moving to
California.
Since my wife's doctoral dissertation was about teaching ethics in
public institutions, teaches the subject at our California State
University, and has been a student of Theosophy for over 25 years,
I
think she is a good judge of who really understands and practices
Theosophical ethics. She gives Vonda an A+. As for Vonda's
understanding of Theosophical teachings, I also give her an A+.
Wow, that sounds pretty industrious. I'm glad that you have such
a
positive focus. I was a corporate instructor myself for many
years,
although that was all strictly business, working for millionaires
that I had never personally met. I taught a couple hundred
employees between two different companies, both on-site and in-
classroom, hiring half of the ones that I taught. I taught
package
handlers at UPS, and inventory specialists at RGIS. Two
different
companies.
Good background. Perhaps you have some advice for us?
What things do you teach for your non-profit educational
organization that you run?
We promote perennialism. Perennialism is the notion that all the
wold's
major religions and spiritual traditions have a common resource of
ideas--call it a primordial tradition, or a wisdom tradition, or
an
ancient wisdom. We explore the world's literature and traditions,
hold
classes, seminars, field trips, meditation retreats, and publish a
quarterly journal. We have a web site, but it is in desperate
need of
up-dating. But you can get some basic information about us at:
www.alexandriawest.org
That's very nice. And I do believe that this is how most non-
profits start out in the beginning. And some, like yours, can
even
extend this positive focus for several decades. However, I
suggest
that size and time inevitably come into play with growing
organizations. As organizations grow larger over many extended
decades, they become increasingly more rigid in their policies.
I
call it the 'cycle of governments' for lack of a better term.
This
is mostly size and time related.
Yes. I have seen this and have from the beginning been cognizant
of the
possibility of this fate for Alexandria West after I am dead.
This may
be a natural down hill course for organizations, does not have to
be the
case. I have seen non profits in Los Angeles which are over 50
years
old which did not fall into this trap. It is not fated. Much
depends
upon how the successive Board members hold to the original values
of the
organization. I do agree that such a fall is related to size. As
an
organization get wealthier, opportunities open for those greedy
for a
piece of the pie or for personal power. But, once again, this too
does
not have to be. I could go into particulars about one or two
organizations, but then this would become a very long post.
For example, let's say that your organization grows in the next
few
years, to the point where you begin to require paid staffing.
Hypothetically, you may even boost up to 100-1000 volunteers,
whom
you won't be able to directly manage without hiring 5-10 paid
staff. As you do this, you'll invariably need to extend a rigid
ruleset concerning safety procedures, legal procedures and the
like. The reason that you'll begin enforcing a few strict rules
here and there (even though remaining flexible on many, if not
most)
is because some volunteer(s) will eventually do something
flagrant
that counters the best interests of the organizational agenda.
Yes, we are aware of these issues. My wife teaches Public
Administration.
What I'm really trying to communicate is the concept that every
national government, corporate business, educational system or
religious church begins as somewhat of a rebel faction (whether
bloody or polite) seeking independence from a cruel 'overlord'
organization. All organizations fall into this category, albeit
intensity and degree vary.
You sound like you have taken one of my wife's courses :-)
Every independent entrepreneur is a dissatisfied rebel at heart
(some bloody and some polite), who detests the way that things
were
done by the previous 'overlord'. Therefore a new and better
government system is built, due to failures of the previous.
Until,
of course, with size and time, it too becomes increasingly
political. Some moreso and some less so. Size and time are
responsible for this, requiring more rigid rulesets. The
rulesets
create red tape, and thus we have politics. You must resist the
windy elements themselves, for times always change. The 'cycle
of
governments'.
And there begins the public corruption.
I have a number of religious books outside of Christianity. In
fact, one quite extraordinary work is "World Scripture: A
Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts" authored by the
International
Religious Foundation and published by Paragon House. This 900
page
volume topically categorizes excerpts from all prominent ancient
religious texts from religions across the world, with no
commentary
attached. It is a bible of bibles, so to speak. Comprised of
all
primary world religions. You may wish to glance at it, if you
haven't encountered this treasure already.
Our approach is to engage each text individually from a cultural
and
historical context. Comparisons then come up in discussions.
Now do I actually have time and energy to read entire ancient
texts
beyond the bible? No, I don't. Does a corporate manager have
time
to become a doctor and a lawyer and a psychiatrist and an
accountant
simultaneously? Does such constitute wisdom? What I am
relegated
to do is specialize in one or two areas (the Bible in this case),
and turn to outside teachers for the rest.
perhaps in your retirement...
I have many precious books in my library, but I haven't actually
read them all thoroughly. So I acquire teachers along the road,
here and there, to fill me in on what I've missed. These
teachers
illumine me to small excerpts of their own fields of specialty.
The
corporate manager hires the doctor, the lawyer, the psychiatrist
and
the accountant, thereby gaining additional, albeit miniscule,
fragments of knowledge here and there.
As we all must do.
Hhmm, I come to different conclusions, but we've obviously used
different sources.
No doubt.
Here is the most basic breakdown, with minor deviations contained
therein:
1. Genesis to Esther (Historical Old Testament)
2. Job to Malachi (Metaphorical Old Testament)
3. Matthew to Acts (Historical New Testament)
4. Romans to Revelation (Metaphorical New Testament)
Interesting exegesis. Then, as an historical work, you would say
that
there was literally a first couple name Adam and Eve who lived in
a
garden and conversed with a serpent....?
Have you actually found counter-evidence to the biblical records,
or
have the biblical records simply not been affirmatively validated
to
you?
How do you define and what would you accept as "counter-evidence"?
Hence spiritual clairvoyace is superior to the mere visions and
dreams. The dreamer is asleep and masked, operating via
subconsciously-derived symbols. But the spiritual clairvoyant is
fully aware and awake, with all dream imageries having fully
dissipated. Dreams are merely a veil which serve to temporarily
protect the ego consciousness from it's own disintegration
incurred
by spiritual enlightenment.
Numbers 12
6 He said, "Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you,
I,
the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall
speak
with him in a dream.
7 "Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My
household;
8 With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark
sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you
not
afraid To speak against My servant, against Moses?"
(NAS95)
Here we see a differentiation between slumbering dreamers and
spiritually conscious revelators.
Yes. Well said, and a good quote.
The subconscious
psyche has many dark things contained within, which often go
unattended and uncleansed. The most severe instances of the
subconscious psyche opening up too quickly result in mass murder
cases and severe mental derangements. However, the wise sages of
antiquity take the slow road.
Yes.
Best,
Jerry
Vincent wrote:
Jerry-
You wrote:
"Actually I attribute the failures of the Theosophical Society to
the leadership. The Theosophical Society and its members were the
victims. IMO, its greatest success today has been their efforts
to
publish and keep in print the collected writings of Blavatsky.
They
have an outstanding library at the National Headquarters. They
publish some important classics. I like many of its members."
Okay, that's very nice. Then how do you feel about the various
class sessions with their respective speakers? Do they stay true
to
the original spirit of the organization? For example, I am
attending a number of the directors' classes (Ethics of the
Secret
Doctrine; The Law of Cycles, etc.) at the Wheaton Headquarters,
coupled with sporadic attendance when a new guest speaker is
invited
each week.
"Yes, non profits organizations, like any other effort requires
money to operate. And, I suspect that certain non profit
organizations, like United Way, is primarily oriented to
collecting
and distributing money. With its highly paid officers including
its
CEO which collects a multi-million dollar salary, I'm sure that
there is a lot of politics."
Indeed.
"On the other hand, such places as the United Way have move far
away
from the original concept of non-profits, and are not necessarily
representative. I am president-founder of a non-profit
educational
organization. The Board meetings typically last for 3 to 4
hours.
The treasurer's report takes 5 to 10 minutes. The rest of the
time
we talk about planning programs, classes, our journal etc.
Rather
than talking about how to get more money, we talk about and plan
services."
Wow, that sounds pretty industrious. I'm glad that you have such
a
positive focus. I was a corporate instructor myself for many
years,
although that was all strictly business, working for millionaires
that I had never personally met. I taught a couple hundred
employees between two different companies, both on-site and in-
classroom, hiring half of the ones that I taught. I taught
package
handlers at UPS, and inventory specialists at RGIS. Two
different
companies. What things do you teach for your non-profit
educational
organization that you run?
"No one on the Board, or connected in any way with the
organization
receives a salary. In fact, Board members are required to donate
a
predetermined amount of their own money to the organization.
However, volunteers are reimbursed for out of pocket expenses--
but
not for their time. What I am saying is that is is quite
possible
for non profit organizations to be primarily focused on service--
not
getting money. They do not have to be "money centered". We have
proved that. Ours are on a donation bases. Some people pay and
some don't"
That's very nice. And I do believe that this is how most non-
profits start out in the beginning. And some, like yours, can
even
extend this positive focus for several decades. However, I
suggest
that size and time inevitably come into play with growing
organizations. As organizations grow larger over many extended
decades, they become increasingly more rigid in their policies.
I
call it the 'cycle of governments' for lack of a better term.
This
is mostly size and time related.
For example, let's say that your organization grows in the next
few
years, to the point where you begin to require paid staffing.
Hypothetically, you may even boost up to 100-1000 volunteers,
whom
you won't be able to directly manage without hiring 5-10 paid
staff. As you do this, you'll invariably need to extend a rigid
ruleset concerning safety procedures, legal procedures and the
like. The reason that you'll begin enforcing a few strict rules
here and there (even though remaining flexible on many, if not
most)
is because some volunteer(s) will eventually do something
flagrant
that counters the best interests of the organizational agenda.
What I'm really trying to communicate is the concept that every
national government, corporate business, educational system or
religious church begins as somewhat of a rebel faction (whether
bloody or polite) seeking independence from a cruel 'overlord'
organization. All organizations fall into this category, albeit
intensity and degree vary.
Every independent entrepreneur is a dissatisfied rebel at heart
(some bloody and some polite), who detests the way that things
were
done by the previous 'overlord'. Therefore a new and better
government system is built, due to failures of the previous.
Until,
of course, with size and time, it too becomes increasingly
political. Some moreso and some less so. Size and time are
responsible for this, requiring more rigid rulesets. The
rulesets
create red tape, and thus we have politics. You must resist the
windy elements themselves, for times always change. The 'cycle
of
governments'.
"Have you studied scriptures of other religions and
spiritualities?"
I have a number of religious books outside of Christianity. In
fact, one quite extraordinary work is "World Scripture: A
Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts" authored by the
International
Religious Foundation and published by Paragon House. This 900
page
volume topically categorizes excerpts from all prominent ancient
religious texts from religions across the world, with no
commentary
attached. It is a bible of bibles, so to speak. Comprised of
all
primary world religions. You may wish to glance at it, if you
haven't encountered this treasure already.
Now do I actually have time and energy to read entire ancient
texts
beyond the bible? No, I don't. Does a corporate manager have
time
to become a doctor and a lawyer and a psychiatrist and an
accountant
simultaneously? Does such constitute wisdom? What I am
relegated
to do is specialize in one or two areas (the Bible in this case),
and turn to outside teachers for the rest.
I have many precious books in my library, but I haven't actually
read them all thoroughly. So I acquire teachers along the road,
here and there, to fill me in on what I've missed. These
teachers
illumine me to small excerpts of their own fields of specialty.
The
corporate manager hires the doctor, the lawyer, the psychiatrist
and
the accountant, thereby gaining additional, albeit miniscule,
fragments of knowledge here and there.
"I got the idea from a lifetime of reading the scriptures,
reading
the works of theologians and of secular Biblical scholars, and
doing
my own research on the subject."
Hhmm, I come to different conclusions, but we've obviously used
different sources.
"What parts do you find historical? What parts do you
find "mythical"? What parts do you find evangelical?"
Here is the most basic breakdown, with minor deviations contained
therein:
1. Genesis to Esther (Historical Old Testament)
2. Job to Malachi (Metaphorical Old Testament)
3. Matthew to Acts (Historical New Testament)
4. Romans to Revelation (Metaphorical New Testament)
The Bible is subdivided into these four basic classifications by
the
original canonizers, with minor exceptions contained in the
subsections of each.
I would even assert that the book arrangements could be reordered
as
follows:
Book One: Historical (Genesis to Esther; Matthew to Acts)
containing
a chronology of historical events. Often used for historical
teaching formats. Good for visual learners with emphasis on
application versus interpretation.
Book Two: Metaphorical (Job to Malachi; Romans to Revelation)
containing a series of prophecies, poems, teachings and
metaphors.
Often used for topical teaching formats. Good for auditory
learners
with emphasis on interpretation versus application.
If we utterly eliminated the differentiation between the Old and
New
Testaments, we would instead have this format of a historical
volume
(Genesis to Esther and Matthew to Acts) and a metaphorical volume
(Job to Malachi and Romans to Revelation). The books were
concisely
arranged in this fashion by the canonizers of scripture. The
historical books are arranged according to strict sequential
timelines, whereas the metaphorical books are arranged morese by
size and prominency of author.
"By historical difficulties, I mean that they most probably never
occurred."
Have you actually found counter-evidence to the biblical records,
or
have the biblical records simply not been affirmatively validated
to
you?
""Spiritual clairvoyance" is direct spiritual perception that
bypasses the mind and visionary images. It come through a center
of
perception that does not involve the mind."
Hence spiritual clairvoyace is superior to the mere visions and
dreams. The dreamer is asleep and masked, operating via
subconsciously-derived symbols. But the spiritual clairvoyant is
fully aware and awake, with all dream imageries having fully
dissipated. Dreams are merely a veil which serve to temporarily
protect the ego consciousness from it's own disintegration
incurred
by spiritual enlightenment.
Numbers 12
6 He said, "Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you,
I,
the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall
speak
with him in a dream.
7 "Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My
household;
8 With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark
sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you
not
afraid To speak against My servant, against Moses?"
(NAS95)
Here we see a differentiation between slumbering dreamers and
spiritually conscious revelators.
"Interesting idea. The traditions I follow warn about the snares
of
psychism. But I also know the dangers from experience. I used
to
work in an open setting psychiatric hospital where I had the
chance
to observe and interact with lots of very psychic people. Some
were
telepathic, some had visions, some had conversations with God
etc.
Since I also have some natural abilities, I could see a lot of
things that were going on that the psychiatrists had no idea
about."
I suggest that many people (perhaps 1 out of 10 in our US
population
as a very wild guess) have their psychic centers opened up either
prematurely or too quickly, either through drug usage or
traumatic
life events, thereby rendering them mentally ill. The
subconscious
psyche has many dark things contained within, which often go
unattended and uncleansed. The most severe instances of the
subconscious psyche opening up too quickly result in mass murder
cases and severe mental derangements. However, the wise sages of
antiquity take the slow road.
"Is this story, for you, historical, allegorical, metaphorical
or...?"
All of the above.
"What do you mean by "materialistic pseudo-spirituality"
and "lower
psychic centers of our unconscious"?"
1. Materialistic pseudo-spirituality: a psuedo-spiritually which
centers moreso around what the material five senses percieve,
while
operating in ignorance of the supernatural realms of spirits and
ghosts. Namely, the realm of classical psychology, which is
often
basely mistaken for spirituality.
2. Lower psychic centers of our subconscious: the approximated
90%
of our brain which does not operate with conscious thought,
emotion,
volition and conscience. We sleep eight hours per night and
awake
to a sixteen hour day. But when we wake up in the morning, only
10%
of our brain actually is conscious, and we remain in a 90%
slumber.
We walk about as mere sleepwalkers day to day throughout our
daily
routines. Full brain consciousness enables the full gamut of
psychic abilities.
Blessings
Vince
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
