Comments on: Form I & Form II http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/ public domain playground. friendly entities welcome. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:22:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Occult Investigator http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4239 Occult Investigator Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:35:08 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4239 I thought of something else that should be made more explicit about the Gnosticism part of this conversation.... The fact that Jesus is infused with the Holy Spirit at his Baptism could be seen as the two Forms uniting, since he's both Jesus and the Christos. So the counter-argument could and should be made that gnosticism isn't necessarily a strict favoring of the Platonic over the Aristotelian, but a bridge between the two, as I suggested in another post. I thought of something else that should be made more explicit about the Gnosticism part of this conversation…. The fact that Jesus is infused with the Holy Spirit at his Baptism could be seen as the two Forms uniting, since he’s both Jesus and the Christos. So the counter-argument could and should be made that gnosticism isn’t necessarily a strict favoring of the Platonic over the Aristotelian, but a bridge between the two, as I suggested in another post.

]]> By: Occult Investigator http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4238 Occult Investigator Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:22:12 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4238 Yeah, well I think the Process used a quaternity, also including Satan in it... but I couldn't find a ton of useful stuff on their theology Yeah, well I think the Process used a quaternity, also including Satan in it… but I couldn’t find a ton of useful stuff on their theology

]]> By: zacharius http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4232 zacharius Sun, 31 Jul 2005 04:53:12 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4232 I'm thinking any resemblance is largely superficial. Steiner's ideas didn't move outside of his circle all that much. on the other hand, he was a split off of theosophy which had earlier inspired the golden dawn and aliester crowley, which then went through parsons to hubbard, so who knows.... theosophy certainly champions the idea of lucifer as benevolent so it's not much farther to treat him as part of some balanced trinity. If i'm remembering correctly the processians split from scientolgy before L-Ron dressed it up with too much crazy shit. I’m thinking any resemblance is largely superficial. Steiner’s ideas didn’t move outside of his circle all that much.

on the other hand, he was a split off of theosophy which had earlier inspired the golden dawn and aliester crowley, which then went through parsons to hubbard, so who knows…. theosophy certainly champions the idea of lucifer as benevolent so it’s not much farther to treat him as part of some balanced trinity. If i’m remembering correctly the processians split from scientolgy before L-Ron dressed it up with too much crazy shit.

]]> By: Occult Investigator http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4231 Occult Investigator Sun, 31 Jul 2005 04:25:36 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4231 Oh, well I haven't read Steiner directly Zac, so I was interpreting it as negative simply based on language and normal cultural associations. Question: have you looked at the how Steiner's ideas relate to the Process Church at all... cause it seems rather similar? Eric, I think the point is that they are both as right as they are wrong, and that you've got to embrace and move beyond both. Or that's my reading of it anyway, I could be wrong. Oh, well I haven’t read Steiner directly Zac, so I was interpreting it as negative simply based on language and normal cultural associations. Question: have you looked at the how Steiner’s ideas relate to the Process Church at all… cause it seems rather similar?

Eric, I think the point is that they are both as right as they are wrong, and that you’ve got to embrace and move beyond both. Or that’s my reading of it anyway, I could be wrong.

]]> By: Eric http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4230 Eric Sun, 31 Jul 2005 02:28:57 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4230 So, the "christ consciousness" is all about having your cake and eating it too? Or just being able to recognize which is "right"? So, the “christ consciousness” is all about having your cake and eating it too? Or just being able to recognize which is “right”?

]]> By: zacharius http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/form-i-form-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-4229 zacharius Sun, 31 Jul 2005 02:13:22 +0000 http://www.timboucher.com/journal/2005/07/30/the-gnostic-path/#comment-4229 regarding your earlier question: even steiner was explicit that Lucifer and Ahriman were both postive, insofar as they provided the counterweight to drive human evolution. so there really is no need to classify them as negative at all. neither were they irreconcilable to each other, as they always try to synthesise into some kind of balance, but not always a healthy one. steiner's ideal for human development was what he called the new jupiter, which seems to be a manifestation of a healthy human christ consciousness on earth. whereas lucifer would like everyone to go live in his delusional world of light and false transcendance, and Ahriman wants everyone to be barely conscious amoral creatures living on a world of wasted 'cosmic slag' regarding your earlier question: even steiner was explicit that Lucifer and Ahriman were both postive, insofar as they provided the counterweight to drive human evolution. so there really is no need to classify them as negative at all. neither were they irreconcilable to each other, as they always try to synthesise into some kind of balance, but not always a healthy one.

steiner’s ideal for human development was what he called the new jupiter, which seems to be a manifestation of a healthy human christ consciousness on earth. whereas lucifer would like everyone to go live in his delusional world of light and false transcendance, and Ahriman wants everyone to be barely conscious amoral creatures living on a world of wasted ‘cosmic slag’

]]>