Greetings Beth,
Thank you so much for your excellent opening posts and welcome to the forums![:)] You are certainly providing everyone with plenty of metaphoric "food for thought".
I need time to read through all of the information you have kindly provided us with so far, but I just wanted to say that the mystical, and symbolic or if you prefer metaphoric content is something I am very interested in. It fascinates me how everything has been interpreted by the religions in such material terms!
My favourite studies for interpretation are St. John's Gospel and Genesis I.
Regarding St. John, I just wanted to note one example for now and that is the well known "wine into water" story, ref. John 2:1
This is my interpretation. I believe this describes the purification of the Soul to yield the wine of pure enobled Spirit. The Astral body, the Soul is represented by the Universal element of Water. Over many incarnations and Spiritual development the Astral body, the Soul is gradually purified by the water of the Soul until it can transcend the cycle of incarnation emerging as the wine of the Spirit, the Mental body represented by the Universal element of Fire. This is also the same as Alchemy, the transmutation of base metal analogous to the unpurified Soul to the Gold of the enobled Spirit. John 2:1 is an alchemical metaphor.
John's Gospel contains profound Spiritual truths when interpreted in the way it was intended, many of which the modern bible still contains because the church simply sees it in material terms. One of the most profound quotes from John is: And on that day, you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you ---John 14:20. This teaches the truth that everyone and everything in the Universe is an integral aspect of both everyone and everything else, and of "God".
I look forward to this discussion progressing!
With best regards,
Adrian.
Adrian,
That is the beauty of scripture--and of approaching it outside of a literal interpretation. Scripture has the power to speak to many people on many different levels. My research has shown only the ancient model of scriptural creation and interpretation. Later alchemy--well, actually, alchemy was started very early on--and by a Jewish woman--did you know that??[;)]!!--but anyway, later medieval alchemy did depend heavily upon metaphor to describe the spiritual "refining" process. I think that was another instance where too much emphasis was placed on the "literal" interpretation of "silver" and "gold!" [:)]
On your last paragraph (which sounds good to me!) there is also another interpretation that could be considered: Within the tradition of which I refer, FATHER was the metaphor for KNOWLEDGE. And all worthwhile pursuits were pursuits for knowledge of God. So, regarding the verse that you refer to
quote:
And on that day, you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you ---John 14:20.
If we go the route that Jesus is the speaker, and his name means "salvation" the verse could read like this: Salvation is in Knowledge, and you are saved in knowledge, and salvific knowledge is in you. If we take the route of "I AM" instead of Jesus, "I AM" is one of the names of God which also means "to live or to exist." SO then the verse could also read something like this--To Exist is to Know, and you are in existence, ergo knowledge is in you. Or something to that affect! (Straight translations from one language to another oftentimes sound awkward! A lot of the nuances of languages are lost in translation!)[:)] But, I liken this verse to the adage: KNOW THYSELF.
Another interesting addition to this is that SON became the metaphor for "discernment." (In Hebrew the word for son [bn=ben] and the word for discernment [byn=bin] only differs by the letter yod inserted between the two consonants b and n.) So, being the SON of GOD meant "discernment of God" and being the SON of the FATHER meant "discernment of Knowledge."
According to Jewish tradition--there are no "wrong" interpretations of scripture! Like I said, your interpretation sounds good to me too! The ancient Hebrew/Jewish attitude toward their scripture and their Hebrew language as a whole was that it was God's language and therefore God's scripture. BUT, their concept of God was very different from what we have in the western religions of today--they recognized that the totality of God was way beyond human comprehension, so they approached the ideas and the power of God as "limitless." Therefore, the power of God's language was also limitless, as were the possible translations of God's scripture.
Yes, they did write their stories in terms that were understandable to human comprehension, i.e., anthropromorphic metaphors...that was the hellenistic culture at the time (Zeus and Hera, etc.) Later Jewish midrash shows where they tried to "undo" the damage of a literal interpretation of these metaphors...but the idea had already taken a hold and most people just prefered to see deity that way. In other words, the western conceptions of deity have really not progressed in over 2,000 years!
Okay...enough out of me for tonight!![:)]
and p.s....I am not sure how much longer I am going to continue with this thread. With the exception of 2-3 people, it does not appear that very many people are interested in what I have to say.[:(]
[portions of this post were extracted from
Fire on the Water: Biblical Proper Name Exegesis and Language Based Mysticism, Beth B. Phillips, Copyright 2003.]
Beth, that post was incredibly enlightening. With that, Jewish scripture begins to sound less like a book of history and more like a philosophical doctrine similar to other mystical books of antiquity.
Considering those 'keys', the bible doesn't seem as anthropomorphically confused as it does with the wide scale interpretations of our day.
Dear Tab:
That's right! [;)]
[:)][:)][:)][:)][:)][:D]
Peace,
Beth
beth, don't be discouraged! i find this all fascinating, but i have not been making any comments, just reading & letting it sink in. and i'm not sure what to say at this time, i don't have any real questions yet. i'll have questions the more in depth this goes, if it goes any further... i hope others will soon make their own statements about all this. i've never really read the bible or anything, so i don't really have much i can comment on... i'm a total ignoramus! but to see that maybe the bible has much more deeper meanings and messages is totally intriguing, because so far my opinion of the book was that it causes nothing but trouble. [;)] [}:)]
if you have other things you'd like to share, don't hesitate!!! [:)]
Curiousgirl,
Since your appeal is so sincere, I will be glad to oblige. Thank you for your interest. First, to let you know a little bit about me, I left the church in my early teens. I instinctively knew that something was very wrong about their teachings. And--it upset me during many a Sunday school lesson and Sunday sermon. But in my adolescent mind—I just couldn't put my finger on what it was that was wrong. Later, as a young woman I knew I believed in God—but I also had an epiphany that Jesus was not that much different than me. This of course caused an even wider breach between me and the church. But—that did not stop my being drawn to the scriptures and pondering the problem. I just knew there was more to it. At age 35, I was very blessed to have the opportunity to enter college. As an adult undergraduate, I studied many subjects, two of which were religion and philosophy. That was when I began my educated journey into the scriptures. I then went on to graduate school to continue those studies. Seven years later—after years of intense study and having learned the ancient languages of Hebrew and Greek, I finally found this interpretive method. I have known about it for two years now, and I feel as though I have finally been liberated from a lifetime of deep-in-my-heart suspicion and sadness. I also finally had my earlier epiphany confirmed, that the person in the NT named Jesus was not—is not—that much different from me!
As a woman, one of the most painful things that the church has maintained for centuries is that women are evil perpetuators of original sin and the ultimate cause of the fall of humanity. Now I KNOW that this is NOT the case. I will offer here a very different approach to understanding what the writers of scripture were talking about regarding the masculine and feminine.
The Gospel of Philip holds that "Truth is the mother," and "Knowledge is the father." (Gnostic Gospel of Phillip, 77.20) Thus, for that gnostic writer, mother and father are symbols of truth and knowledge. A similar idea is echoed in later kabbalistic thought, where mother and father are associated with two of the three supernal sefirot in the Kabbalistic Tree of Life, where mother is Binah, or understanding, and father is wisdom, or Chokhmah. Application of these symbols is found in the sacred marriage between a husband as wisdom and a wife as understanding in bridal mystical union. (The sacred marriage is most often connected with the marriage between the bride and the bridegroom as found in the Song of Songs.)The symbolic significance of a man and woman coming together in this union are for the sole purpose of giving birth to a son, which kabbalists find in the invisible sefirah of da'at, or knowledge. Interpretation of these symbols in this way could also render woman as the Rational Soul, man as the Intellect and the son—or Knowledge, as the offspring of that union. The son is related to the Divine Intellect in that it was begotten of both understanding and wisdom. Another important interpretation in this context is the Hebrew word for "son" that I explained in my earlier post. In this interpretation, Son as arising from mystical union, can therefore be taken as an esoteric symbol for discernment attained through wisdom and understanding.
Philo of Alexandria, a 1st century Jewish scholar wrote of the masculine and feminine as well. (He is a much better source than any historian because he actually wrote about scripture, not just about the people who did.) For example, man and woman represented mind and sensory perceptions, respectively, as well as thought and virtue in other contexts. Allegorically expressed, the mind in clarity of thought (masculine) is necessary before any approach to deity can be experienced, but, by the same token, through our sensory perceptions a purity of heart (feminine) is also required. In the same way, the mind should always rule over the passions as derived from sensory perceptions--hence the husband should rule over the wife thing. Just like the above case of mother and father, all ideas of the masculine and feminine are translated out of anthropomorphic stereotypes and transformed into incorporeal philosophical archetypes. These particular interpretations create very different readings of scripture than has traditionally been the case, e.g., the fall of humankind is now due to our "passions" calling the shots, rather than our "intellect", and the connotations related to the biblical phrase "being born of a woman" can now be liberated from meaning "born of evil or original sin" to mean "born of passion" in the generic sense of the term, or born of virtue and/or of spiritual passion.
The misunderstanding of masculine and feminine propagated by the Church has had an enormous rippling effect throughout the centuries in the subjugation of women. Once again, taking scripture literally—where allegory was intended, deeply disturbing misunderstandings and societal norms have been created that need not have been the case. Now, two millennia later, perhaps this can finally be remedied. It is for people like you Curiousgirl, and the others who have shown interest in this that I will continue to work on this book—as well as do everything I can to see that it gets published. Thank you for wanting to know more.
In peace and love,
Beth
[large portions of this post were extracted from Fire on the Water: Biblical Proper Name Exegesis and Language Based Mysticism, Beth B. Phillips, copyright 2003.]
Dear Beth
Very interesting stuf. I would say that for my part the issue about male and female has been a big problem for a while. I am married to a wonderful women who loves me dearly. For some time we have had some problems as marriges do and I have often been very torn in what to do. In one way I would like to simplify things and say "listen just do it cause I say so" the old religious or churchanity way that women should submit, but my intuition tells me that this would crush her and is not the way God would have me cunduct my self. The scripture touches briefly on this saying :"there is no male or female in Christ", and instinctivly I believe this should be the base for my behaviour and attitude. We (male and female)must find common ground. Seeing we are different both must agree together if anything has to get accomplished. I have studied the text mostly in English but has also meddled a bit in the greek, and I seem to find that the teachings of Paul are very different in parts to the teachings of Jesus. Most of the legalism and judgemental stuf comes from his episteles and he is qouted as saying "this say I not the Lord" indicating that he was putting forth his opinion. I also feel that it is unfair to the male as well, as women in Churches who have been used to adhere to this standard, often have the tendency to sit back and come along for the ride when they are at times in many ways more suited to lead teach and guide their family and the church for that matter. Many men myself included are married to very very smart and spiritual women , who are in many areas our superiors. I would like to come along for the ride too[;)]sometimes. I guess all that to say the shoe fits so I will wear it.
On another note, I find that these allegories and how they all fit together like a russian tea egg , like onions with layers, [;)] ( I somehow dont think you have seen the movie Shreck ) the words, language and all seems to me to be a witness of divinity and not really a cunningly divised secret text. It seems entirely plausible and likely that the creration of such a ducument is in every way inspired by God. What do you think!!!I apologise if I seem simplistic in my application of your very theoretical findings but I seem to be the kind of person who have to have it all the way down on "the bottom shelf" before I can understand it.
Regards Mustardseed
Mustardseed:
I have no doubt that scripture was divinely inspired--in every way. But--perhaps it WAS inspired with "cunning" to hide and protect the depth of its messages from those who would see them destroyed. Politically, during this time, the Romans were really truly persecuting those who refused to worship Caesar and the Roman Gods. That is the nature of "hostile takeovers." History is full of them. Whenever a hostile culture infiltrated another culture with the intention of taking over their territories and way of life, it was the norm to force people to adhere to their new customs and follow their new rule of government . One of the most powerful customs throughout history has been religion. So, I think it is plausible that scripture was divinely inspired "with cunning" to protect one religion from becoming extinct at the hands of another.
Finally, I have found that the divine inspires us all in many different ways. And, I also hold that we are no less inspired today than were the writers of scripture. The divine was alive and in touch with them then--and the divine is alive and in touch with us now.
Peace,
Beth
PLEASE NOTE: Some of the following posts were in response to an inappropriate post by another user. Due to its content, it was deleted by the administrator of this board.
*SIGH* allanon, uh, narrow path, for a while it seemed you had improved and were starting to sound more like a human being again, and were trying to understand our thinking... but now it seems you're going right back to your robotic bible quoting again and ramming stuff down our throats. we're right back at, "resistance is futile; you will be assimilated."
if you'll notice, beth has not been saying that god has been trying to deceive or hide his truths in a code. she has been saying that the human beings who believed in it were trying to protect their religion from being destroyed, and thus encoded the messages from god themselves by using allegory and metaphor(i am understanding this correctly, right?). why is it so hard to think of the bible as containing god's word, but written by humans? did the bible just simply fall down from the sky, all written up by various authors? why is it not just all one continuous piece, with the signature, "sincerely, your ever-loving GOD" at the end of the book? why would god act like all these people wrote these various versions of the same stories, if supposedly he wrote it? beth is not saying that god's word is not in there, it is simply just protected from harm, and that it is really even more amazing than what you are getting at surface value from the stories. if it was a case of simply looking too deeply for something that really isn't there, like trying to come up with a deep meaning for the rhyme, "jack and jill went up the hill" then i would think there would be a lot of "misses" along with the "hits"; things that just don't seem to fit or make sense. but what she seems to be finding so far is that there's a lot of "coincidences" in meanings and symbolism, a lot of things fitting so nicely together, that it can't be merely just coincidence. perhaps there really is something deeper going on there. hope this makes any kind of sense. [:I]
Allanon, I hope you take it as a compliment when I say that you're the kind of person who makes me never want to look at another disgusting piece of christian dogma ever again. Such ignorance is completely abominal. But your god teaches ignorance, dosen't he? I echo Beth's message when I say go be 'like a child' where you're not surrounded by adults please.
Curiousgirl,
The "resistance is futile" line is just brilliant!!![^]
The Borg, in seeking a state of perfection as they see it, aggressively and ruthelessly assimilate beings into their own culture, as there can be no other way - "your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own".
This has to be one of the best comparisons to N.P.'s style of preaching I've seen.[;)]
James.
One simple question Narrow Path:
You proclaim that the Bible is the only defense against descending into the depths of depravity and sin and ultimately being controlled by the forces of darkness?
If this is true, why do I and others "sin" much LESS since leaving the church and the Bible behind than I/we did when we were doing our best to allow Jesus to live through us? I mean I was not a "terrible person" as a Christian or anything, but I was more selfish and much more judgemental than I am now. I did not express love as freely as I do now. If you had known me as a person then and known me now, and then done an honest comparison between which time in my life I was actually living my life with more Christlike actions and love, you would see beyond any shadow of a doubt that I am much closer now than I was then. Even the Bible sais you will be able to judge the tree from its fruits.
Note that I don't think any of this trouble I experienced with Christianity had anything to do with Jesus, but more with the church and its inaccurate teachings about the Bible.
I can't help but notice the discrepancy here between my experience and your proclamation. I would seem to be living proof that your "ultimate truth" is not as ultimate or absolute as you believe...at least not necessarily for other people than yourself?
--Soulfire
G'day Folks!
This is a reminder to all posters in this thread to 'please' keep posts on topic.
Reread the title of this thread and please keep to this subject.
If you would like to discuss something else, please go to another topic, or to Astral Chat for general discussion.
We fully intend to keep this and other related threads clear of unrelated material, so please be understanding when some posts are moved or deleted.
As for the matter of Allanon annoying Beth with lots of PEM's and off topic posts containing personal snipes and etc (most of which are quickly deleted), shame on him! This kind of behaviour will 'not' be tolerated. Allanon has been warned a number of times about this kind of thing and his forum membership is currently under review.
Take care, Robert
Beth, Please don't give up so quickly on this. The subject is interesting. I've been studying in my own way the language of the subconscious. I'm not much of a critical thinker in the commonly way of thought. I don't think I have to be a traditional student or thinker on the subjects of my interests, religion, spirituality, dreams, and the like. In fact, thinking methods are part of the mysteries in my opinion.
I believe the bible contains many hidden messages on many levels of communication. Adrian's explanation of the water turned into wine is an example of how these messages unfold to a person.
I've been studying christianity since an early age. The last few years I've been exploring other faith sytems. There is a common thread among the various religions.
I've also been studying dreams. I've found there is such a close connection between dreams and bible content. For instance, the things you have written on eating is similiar (if not the same) as a dream is interpreted.
Any thoughts on this?
An added note on this. Not only is this important for gaining knowledge, but I also think it opens one up to understanding others.
Hey there wisp!
Thanks for wanting to be involved in this discussion. It is good to have you. You make several very good points.
quote:
I've been studying in my own way the language of the subconscious
It might make you happy to know, that "a language of the subconscious" was a very big part of this ancient tradition. As a matter of fact, the ancient Hebrews (and the whole Jewish tradition for that matter) believed that HEBREW WAS/IS that language! They believed that Hebrew was the language that God chose to create the world with, and THAT was why they were God's "chosen people." I can't of course verify that Hebrew is the language of God (or the divine realm) BUT I will say that I have certainly dreamed in Hebrew, even before I had ever studied it! I "recognized it" when I saw it for the "first time!" This echoes a post that Robert made on one of these threads that he too had had a dream of Hebrew written on the wall. Hebrew has a very distinctive look to it, and unless you have seen it before, it can look like some rather strange characters! But since both Robert and I have had a similar experience (and we live on opposite sides of the globe) then it would not surprise me if it were at least ONE of the languages of the subconcious. Have you ever had a similar experience?
quote:
In fact, thinking methods are part of the mysteries in my opinion.
I could not agree more! And--once again, the ancients would also agree with you. They actually had a lot to say about the whole "process of thought" and this was actually the basis of the whole philosophical endeavor! (Actually, this is one of the meanings of the Greek word "LOGOS" which, when it was translated into English became "The Word" as we find it in the opening verses of the Gospel of John!!![:D]) "Critical thinking" and "rational thought" was considered a premium quality thing back then, and as a matter of fact, it was held that this was a special gift bestowed by God (Think Solomon here.) . While I can certainly be very logical and anal[8D]ytical I am also a very abstract thinker. This has caused me problems on more than one occasion when I am trying to explain something to someone who isn't!![B)]] But, bottom line, in the ancient mysteries, both
abstract and analytical thinking was a necessity!! I would really like to hear more about your theories on this
quote:
I've also been studying dreams. I've found there is such a close connection between dreams and bible content. For instance, the things you have written on eating is similiar (if not the same) as a dream is interpreted.
YEP! Dreams were also a VERY important aspect of this mystery tradition. I would even surmise that the ancients would have considered that dreams were also an
actual aspect of the language of the subconsious! (I can't go into why I make this claim here, but I will leave it here as my own conjecture!) The bible, of course, speaks quite a bit of dreams but so did the ancient scholars who studied the scriptures, and their personal dreams were a very important tool to their scholarship (as a connection to the divine realm.) (Ditto for me as well!![;)]) And--as humans we depend a great deal on metaphors and such to interrelate and communicate with each other, so why wouldn't the divine realm use them as well??!! Using metaphors solves the "language barrier" that exists between speakers of different languages. Again, there is that "A rose is still a rose...thing!
quote:
Not only is this important for gaining knowledge, but I also think it opens one up to understanding others.
In my opinion, a life without this--is probably not a life worth living!!![:)]
I do hope you come back and engage with us here! Once again welcome. I hope to read your thoughts again soon!
(And yes--you are a critical thinker!! To be such does not denote being a traditional student!! Heck, I was in class with a few people that you probably could have "thought" circles around!![;)])
Thank you Beth. I would love to contribute to more to this!
I'm in the process of reading what you have written here and at the other places. I'm not a slow reader, however I am slow at taking in information in so as to understand it fully, or at least the best I can at the time. You write some very interesting things. And the subject material is right down my alley. [:)].
I will have to think more on responses to some of your questions.
Yes, I know about the writing on the wall thing. Dream-wise the closest thing so far has been the one and only what I would call a classic out of body experience. The word on the wall was a glowing red neon-like sign. The word was there but I couldn't make out the letters. I was distracted too by the fact I was floating in the air.I was having to think about two things at once. [:)] This being too, along the lines of language and other things we are talking about. The only other thing I can think of right now (without looking through my dream journal) was a dream of symbols on the forehead of these children. The symbols being on the skin has a special symbolic meaning, just as symbols on the wall do.
I will read more, think more, and get back with you. I'm enjoying reading your material. I will have more to write soon.
Blavatsky calls sanscrit (in pretty big bold letters I believe) the language of the gods.
Of course, she also calls hebrew phallacised egyptian writing.
Don't ask me which is which. Just a recurring theme in ancient writing :|
Tab:
LOL...yes... Blavatsky had a "personality" that was all her own!!![;)]
15Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
quote:
His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Wow, thanks for proving what Beth has been saying this whole time about esoteric meaning which you have been refuting.
quote:
15Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Okay Narrowpath....you are not going to like this...but......It Is Time.Read Galatians 4:21-26
quote:
21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
These people were not real people. All early Christians knew this.
And Paul knew this and tried to teach it. An allegorical vs. a literal interpretation of scripture is what early Christianity was all about. A division was created between the literalist Jews and the Allegorical Jews. As Tab just pointed out,
you have just offered a scriptural passage that supports the position that a literal interpretation of scripture was not intended. Figuratively=Allegorically
Sarah=the heavenly Jerusalem
Hagar=the earthly Jerusalem
Don't believe me? In Acts 18:12-16 we read:
quote:
12While Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him into court. 13"This man," they charged, "is persuading the people to worship God in ways contrary to the law." 14Just as Paul was about to speak Gallio said to the Jews, "If you Jews were making a complaint about some misdemeanor or serious crime, it would be reasonable for me to listen to you. 15But since it involves questions about words and names and your own law--settle the matter yourselves. I will not be a judge of such things." 16So he had them ejected from the court.
The whole split involved the issue of "historical literal history" versus "allegorical interpretation." The literalists remained Judaism, and
the allegorists became Christians.
quote:
Originally posted by Beth
The literalists remained Judaism, and the allegorists became Christians.
Shame it didn't stay that way save maybe for the Rosicrucians :|
Beth,
It's interesting about ancient tradition. I have always felt that the Jewish were the chosen people. Not just because of popular opinion, but because I have my own feelings aout this. I'm not sure how the words Jewish and Hebrew are separated, but that's another issue.I know less on this subject than even the bible. I use to read the bible. I read it more for inspiration,confirmation, and connection with God. Most my connection with religion,spirituality, and information has been through prayer and generally talking to God. The bible is great though. There is something mystical about it. I have found that people who can really get into the bible are also able to express themselves about it, and can really write a lot on it. God has been my source, the bible backs up much of what I've learned. I don't have the same ability to express with scriptures. I get lost on this concept and ability. I also get lost in messages obtained this way. Your ability, and what you express in your writing has caught my attention. You strike me as a realiable and a good resource for information. Apparently you seem quite dedicated too. I liked what you said somewhere about your hope to be a good christian. I too believe it is a work in progress too, if that's what you meant.
I have not had a dream I'm aware of that involved Hebrew.I do have an idea of how the letters are shaped. I know the distinctive look your talking about. The shapes remind me off hand, a little like the stones at stonehenge. If they don't, I better find my little bible dictionary, and refresh myself.[:)]
An interesting discovery I made about the Kabbalah, or I should say, about the tree of life. I grew up with very few people around. And my family are/were people of few words. As a young person I observed a lot. There was this old dead tree on the farm I lived. I was always curious about the history of this tree. It had been struck by lightening. Under the tree sat an old model T (or close to that) Ford. When I began deam studies, I connected with that old car I was so fascinated with. When I read about the tree of life, I thought immediately of this old tree. I realized many of the things I observed as a child, is what led me to my interest in God. From here, I then realized I can use the same principle in my life now. It's been great learning from the Earth standpoint.
I've never been led to the Gospel of John, but that's interesting about the history of critical thinking. I believe I do rationally think. I've always thought of rational as being subjective. I never connected with the critical thinking concept that much, though I like it. I hope I do utilize it!
With "Logical", it gets worse for me. That could be when my source of trouble comes. And then with anal[[;)]ytical, I'm never that formal or dedicated. I think that's why people lose me with long threads of scriptures and explanations.
I understand abstract thinking very well.
If I think of some ideas and make use of one thing or another, I'll be glad to share some of my thinking ways and/or theories. Sounds fun.
When it comes to language and communication, I have observed that the fewer the words the better to make a point. Sometimes words, or too many of them can obscure a message. Less words suggests more in shared thoughts. I recently met someone who for some reason or another, we can say very few words and understand each other. Sometimes just a simple phrase and the message is received by the other.
The only thing less than this is "thought". This is so interesting.
Wisp,
I am working on a response! I am sorry, but I am a little bit behind...I will get back to you soon![:)]
That's okay Beth. No rush. [:)]
This has to do with perception and communication I found interesting:
I just heard of this study done on the English Language.
It was discovered the English lnuagage can be raed as lnog as the first letters and the last letters are kept in correct order.
Has anyone heard this? I've tried it, it does work!
If I had more time I would write out a sample to show this. Unfortunately, I just have enough time for the sampling in the above sentence.An entire message can be written out in this altered manner, and still be read!
I'm wondering how this can impact dream interpretations?
And other things too. It's sure something to think about.
Hey Wsip!
Waht you say abuot the Egnlsih lngaugae is vrey true!
It has to do with the way our eyes scan the words and then our brains process the info! I don't know a lot about it but it is dfientaely true![:D] As to the astral and dream world? I think it is something that we should all definately take into consideration! I know I will from now on! Thanks for that contribution[:)]
Back to your other post. I finally got it answered!
quote:
I have not had a dream I'm aware of that involved Hebrew.I do have an idea of how the letters are shaped. I know the distinctive look your talking about. The shapes remind me off hand, a little like the stones at stonehenge. If they don't, I better find my little bible dictionary, and refresh myself.
That is a very interesting observation. It resonates with me from somewhere—but Stonehenge always has, and yet I still know so little about it! If I had a Hebrew font, I would offer the alphabet here, but I tried in one of my earliest posts, and the system could not read it. I will check with Adrian to see if this is possible. Anyway...
The Bible is most definitely, layers upon layers of meaning. The surface layer has a great wealth of wisdom in it. And what I have seen of some of the deeper layers—this is most certainly the case as well. It some senses, it is more of the same put into different words. Other cases offer different things. I will post some of these when I have them ready. (It may be a while...so be patient with me please!!)
quote:
An interesting discovery I made about the Kabbalah, or I should say, about the tree of life
That's the beauty of symbols! The majority of symbols used throughout the eons and throughout the world have oftentimes come from things in our day to day lives. Like the Tree—the symbols can be universal and found in many cultures. Simply put, "the tree of life" is a "model" used for understanding the physical and metaphysical assumptions of Kabbalah. Other symbols, such as the circle, star, cross, etc., come from geometry and numbers are of course also universal too. Semiotics, or the study of symbols and signs is a very rich and fertile field for explorers and writers of the Astral to tap into. It would interesting to read a comparative study between what semiotics has to offer today, and what could be contributed to by knowledge of the Astral.
quote:
I understand abstract thinking very well.
If I think of some ideas and make use of one thing or another, I'll be glad to share some of my thinking ways and/or theories. Sounds fun
Please do!
quote:
When it comes to language and communication, I have observed that the fewer the words the better to make a point. Sometimes words, or too many of them can obscure a message. Less words suggests more in shared thoughts.
Yes I agree! Short simple words or phrases can oftentimes be used to get a point across. "I love you" for example, is a very short phrase, but a phrase that, as we have all found out, can be "very complex in its simplicity!" It is a "feeling" but it is also
much more(or less?lol) There is a lot to be said of "Love."[:X] But some simple phrases are very obscure and not at all obvious.
I remember when, years ago, I first read the phrases: "REALITY IS ONLY WHAT YOU PERCEIVE IT TO BE" and "YOU CREATE YOUR OWN REALITY"... Well...I swear! I didn't have a CLUE what that meant!!![:O] It literally took me years to figure it out and to begin to understand the principles behind these statements. AND, I might add—I still struggle with remembering it everyday! So, I eventually found what those simple words meant—but I had to do a lot of studying, a lot of meditating/self reflection and a lot of experimenting to fully understand their principles! Theories and wisdom can be very simple—it is the practice that is the challenge!
quote:
The only thing less than this is "thought". This is so interesting.
So, what do you "think" about the
simple phrase that "thought is really all that there is?"[8D]
Beth,
This sounds interesting about the multilayers of the bible. I'll look forward to this from you.
Well, you made me do a little work Beth (just kidding). I looked and couldn't find my bible dictionary. I did however search out and find this other book I had which contain Hebrew letters, "Hebrew Honey". This is a book I bought years ago when I was going through an interest in Hebrew.It's a collection of 500 old testament Hebrew word meanings of the old testament.
It surely would be easy enough to search for the Hebrew alphabet somewhere on the net. I will when I get a chance.I'll then post a link.
I could also take interest in what you mention about comparative study of symbols and signs of today, and how it can contribute to knowing more of the astral. Beth, you must study dreams quite seriously? This interest sounds like a real dreamer. [:)]
Do you have any examples of what you think may be new emerging symbols or signs of today? That will be an interesting thing to look at dreams now, since you mentioned it.
Tree of life fascinates me. The triangle is interesting too. Triangle suggests hierarchy to me. I think a lot of people reject things or groups that uses a hierarchy system. It's a great way to learn for me. It's too bad this system is so easily misunderstood and abused.
I'm dealing with the down fall of this system in my life right now. I'm riding out the storm to see where it takes me.
Ideas are great only if their functional and practical.So far what I've seen in the fallout is disappointing.I see christianity as a hierarchy system (just the structure-leaving the religion part aside temporarily). Now I'm trying to see and understand where the parts fit back together. Times have changed, and maybe there is a reason. The reason may be a spiritual and/or religious one.Another era perhaps.
This could be a reason I have to agree with you about signs on the astral level and/or dream levels. On a humorous note, I even noticed the pyramid food groups of daily requirements bashed on tv. What is going on? [:)]
Without getting into it, absurity plays a part as a way to look at things. I've been emailing the same person for about 4 years. For the longest time I thought he was some kind of prophet. It was because of his often used style of absurdity. At the time I was also picking up on the absurdities of so many things myself. I believe there is a lot of humor in the astral and spirit realms.
I have to say, I pretty much think we do create our own reality. This is much of what I've been observing in other people as well, those that recognize this, and those that don't.
Oh yes, "thought" IS. All there is? No, unless you know something I don't know. I believe we can know so much! But yet, we can only know as much as we are safe with knowing. The realm of God is a higher realm. We can tap into it with an invitation. God comes to us, not the other way around. But within our own limits and boundaries, we can gain great things. A person's desire to reach out to God's realm is a personal choice. There is something in both worlds. My belief is toward God's realm. Those who don't choose that realm may very well have their own, who knows, but them.
quote:
Theories and wisdom can be very simple—it is the practice that is the challenge!
I like what you say Beth. For some, I bet that statement can be turned around. I'm glad to meet you Beth.
Wisp,
Hey there!
You wrote:
quote:
I could also take interest in what you mention about comparative study of symbols and signs of today, and how it can contribute to knowing more of the astral. Beth, you must study dreams quite seriously? This interest sounds like a real dreamer.
tee-hee... yes...I guess you could very easily say that![:D]
quote:
Do you have any examples of what you think may be new emerging symbols or signs of today? That will be an interesting thing to look at dreams now, since you mentioned it.
Yes I do as a matter fact!! I am going to make a new post soon in the thread "Encountering Religious Symbols in the Astral"
quote:
Oh yes, "thought" IS. All there is? No, unless you know something I don't know. I believe we can know so much! But yet, we can only know as much as we are safe with knowing. The realm of God is a higher realm. We can tap into it with an invitation.
But what if "we" and "everything else" are "thoughts in the Mind of God?"
quote:
I'm glad to meet you Beth.
And I am glad to meet you as well wisp...thanks for all your contirbutions. Keep 'em coming!
Peace,
Beth
G'day Folks!
Here's a good example of the 1st and last letter thing. I have often wondered about this.
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is
taht the frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
You will also find a similar rule applies to sentences, in that you can often delete many words and still understand completely. This is because some words and phrases logically follow others, eg, they are necessary and easy to predict. So if deleted and blanks are left, you'll still get the picture.
Take care, Robert.
Hi Robert & Beth,
I'm enjoying this religion section. Beth, your explanations and understanding are wonderful. I usually don't zero in on details, but sometimes details matter.Your enthusiasum shines through. [:)]
Thanks Robert for the added info about letters. Within the word whole(all) is the word hole(nothing). That seems significant.
Here is a link to Hebrew letters in case anyone is interested.
http://www.jewfaq.org/alephbet.htm
Here is another link for a quick way to mix letters up.
http://wordsmith.org/anagram/index.html
I plan to play around with words and separate the first and last letters. It's also interesting to discover about the same principle applies to words within a sentence. This reminds me of a speed reading class I was in. The course instruction was to not read all the words in a sentence.
I often scan large text and just pick out words or subjects that catch my attention. I imagine this is the same principle. In dreams I can see how scanning can take place too. Subconsciously it gets registered.All that remains is to bring this to the conscious level. What can be the inner mechanism that brings this to the mind? Once I felt it through the aura coming back to me. More often though, it seems to come from within. I may try to find one of those scanner machines on the net.
Anyway, back to the subject. This is my take on God's mind and our mind(s). I don't think the same way as the christ consciousness concept (not a denial, just a different belief about where he is,cause I don't really know [?]). I believe God's intentions are for a free thinking, independent, and worthy being. Not worthy in the way we think. Worthy in the sense of who we are personally. God knows beyond what the human mind can perceive. This same perceiving ability is within our ability too. Our thinking is different than God's thinking. Human thinking can get very high, and can easily become confused for being God's thoughts. Knowing the difference is part of the commication with God and learning. What is left unsaid by God may be manifested in other ways. This may be what synchronicity is possibly. It may manifest in other ways too. The superconscious mind comes in here somewhere but I haven't gotten that far in what I know. Dreams certainly has helped me discover what intuition means and is. I'm also discovering what empowerment means from dreaming. The distinction between who God is and who I am is very clear to me. I think I'm on the right road.[:I]
I had a recent revelation. I have a great love for God. I learned recently that this is not necessarily the case for everyone, and may not even be a factor in the faith system (the love part being what it means to some). Someone connected to the a church ( a priest I think) said something along these lines and it really struck a true cord for me.
This is my belief in a nutshell (pun?...perhaps [;)])
I think as long as I continue to empower myself and God continues to light the way, everything will go well. He knows how I think.And when all is said and done, God is there. We are in God's care.
I'm looking forward to the "Encountering Religious Symbols in the Astral".
Wisp,
Hello to you![:)] I am so glad you are enjoying this section, and I am sure that Robert is very glad too!
quote:
Within the word whole(all) is the word hole(nothing). That seems significant.
This is a great observation--and yes, it is
very significant especially when we approach scripture from the original writers' perspective. This is how:
The ancient tradition of Jewish Mysticism that I have been working with was actually used to write scripture, (both Hebrew [OT] and Christian NT.) This is called "Merkabah Mysticism." In Hebrew "merkabah" as a noun, means "chariot" (or vehicle) and metaphorically speaking, was believed to be the throne of God. As a verb it means, "to ride" as in a chariot. But for ancient mystics this also had another meaning (in both its noun and verb form): Torah was the "throne of God" and a vehicle "to ride along the scriptures" and find all the possible meanings within.
There were at least 3 different methods that mystics used when working with scripture and their alphabet, but the one that fits best with what you are saying is "Temurah." Hebrew does not have letters that act solely as vowels the way we have in the English language, but rather all letters function as consonants. Now, when you take a group of consonants and find its meaning, you can then "mix up" those same consonants to make other words (like the cryptograms in the newspaper.) What makes this significant is that they believed that all words created from the same group of letters were "related" and could help explain each other. For instance, MSH are the primary consonants in the name "Moses" (Moshe in Hebrew.) Moshe means "to draw out" (like the bible story tells us in a very mundane sense when the Egyptian princess "drew him out" of the water.) Mix these consonants up and MSH becomes HSM. HSM means "the name." Ancient mystics knew that you should "draw out of the name" the meaning OF the name." They used the combination and mixing of consonants in an absolutely amazing way as they wrote scripture. And, my research shows that this same thing was done in the NT, e.g., Jesus means "salvation or to save/deliver" and an entire story was written around this concept.
Bible stories were all written through the "explanation of the characters names" and further, these bible stories were all preserved
within the names. Names were like "key motifs" of a story. If you knew the meaning of a name, then you could write any story that used its meaning. This does NOT however, dilute the "meanings of the stories." It does remove them from their "literal sense" but these stories all tell of very important spiritual and metaphysical concepts (many of which are already familiar to members on this board.) This is language based mysticism--Hebrew style--and this is how they "communicated" these things during ancient times.
Another example of this type of language mysticism is by adding one (or more) consonants to come up with yet another group of words. My best example of this is given in another post: BN means "son." With the addition of one letter, BYN it becomes "discernment, or comprehension." Hence, the Son of God is really saying "comprehension of God." Add yet another letter, say an H to form BYNH and the meaning is "insight" as in "spiritual insight." See how these words are related, or could be related in the same story?
There are thousands upon thousands of possibilities using biblical names in cryptogrammic and anagrammic "language mysticism." All you have to do is work with the "consonants" first in a straight form, then mix them up and add other letters to them. If you came up with an "opposite meaning" like the one you illustrate above, you would just use both meanings in your story! The Hebrew alphabet and vocabulary is an absolutely amazing creation. No other language works like this (that I am aware of anyway.) Here is one more example: KWS means "cup" and SWK means "to pour, to anoint."
There is another method of this that is a bit more challenging to work with and that is Gematria. Ancient writers believed that the identical thing applied with the "same numerical value" of different words, in that they could all help to explain each other. These are often times found within the same verses or stories. (I will post something more detailed on this soon, okay?) But, I will give a brief example here. Every letter in the Hebrew alphabet has a numerical value: a=1 b=2...t=400. Taking the word just given "SWK=to anoint" holds a numerical value of 86 (s=60, w=6, k=20.) This same numerical value is also found in the name "Elohim," one of the names of God (alhym=1+30+5+10+40=86) See? So, ancient mystics would have viewed these as being very related in their overall application in story, e.g., Elohim will anoint... This new method adds even more correspondences to biblical scripture. There truly is an "infinity of meanings" found within scripture.
Okay, enough said for now!! More to come later...
And.....Sorry if I overloaded anyone![:I]
Peace,[:)]
Beth
Wisp,
And one more thing!
quote:
). I believe God's intentions are for a free thinking, independent, and worthy being. Not worthy in the way we think. Worthy in the sense of who we are personally. God knows beyond what the human mind can perceive. This same perceiving ability is within our ability too.
For the earliest Christians, this WAS being a "Christian" so this WAS the "Christ Consciousness." To think for yourself, and allow God to lead and guide you WAS your
only salvation. Jesus said (or, from now on read: Salvation says) "These things ye can do also, and much, much more." For the earliest Christians, to do so was indeed "The Light of the World" and this was the "good news" that they all wanted to share!
Whenever feel the urge, go to the NT Gospels and wherever you see "Jesus says" read instead, "Salvation says" or "For your Salvation..." Try this simple reading and you will be VERY surprised the new meanings that are brought forth from the verses!
Peace,[:)]
Beth
Beth,
This info isn't an overload at all. I'm intrigued. Please continue. Are you saying the bible is made up of stories?
If so, what parts are not stories? By stories, you mean not based on actual events?
I tested out the replacing Jesus with salvation. I didn't notice any change in the meaning at all. When I get some time, I will try it on some more verses. I don't think I had ever paid attention to the "Jesus said" before. I have the red letter edition of the King James bible. It's about the only version to hold my attention. Plus, it has a concordance which I use a lot. I've gotten a bit rusty on the bible since I haven't been reading much the last 4-5 years. Looking at the red letters I do think of salvation.
The impression I've always had comparing the old testament with the new testament is of course, the birth/life of Jesus, as savour/salvation. My impression is that before Jesus, people had to get in touch with God without the presence of the holy ghost. This is seemingly a more difficult task. Also, without the holy spirit present, there was a darker cast of the environment. This being normal for those days (I imagined), but noticable, in contrast with today's. I had experimented with it a little in the past, and this was what I came up with anyway. This is why my latest spiritual journey without the "spirit's" presence has been more difficult for me.
There's a better word to use than the word environment above, but I can't find the word I'm looking for in the dictionary (or the bible,since it was handy). This word has to do with how the light can brighten the appearance of the person (making a person glow brighter). I think the bible uses the word, I just can't find it, contenance is the word.
I had a dream a while back. This old man in a white robe lying in a bed. He had white hair and electric(vivid) blue eyes. Beside the bed was another man in a white robe (I was standing next to this one in spirit-like form). The old man in the bed said to the other man, "I want a new name".
Any thoughts on this dream Beth?
While writing this out I had to correct a typo. I wonder if we shouldn't leave the typing errors in to see how it reads out.Just a thought.
Looking forward to more on this subject when you get a chance. It sounds like your busy with a lot of things right now.
Christ's consciousness vision-wise is like having something plugging up the channels in my head. The word is good and all, but it blocks my flow a bit there.
Beth,
I try not to debate the bible.Your obvious talent to search out meanings and explore is wonderful.However, the literal interpretation of the bible is as valid as the other layers (my belief). You have also mentioned the many layers.You may lose a part of the audience by cutting off a major component of the bible(sorry[:I]). It would seem easy to explore many of the levels without sacrificing something valuable to another, for it may not be given to you to see or understand.
I liked what you said earlier about how scriptures may have been written in such a way as to be hidden to others. That is a something worth pondering. However, it's your point of view, it's not in the bible. What the bible has to offer continues to draw readers.It's contents stands on it's own.This is tremendous staying power.
I'll throw this out there to you. If God is the creator of all there is, why would God use/need/want stories worthy or weak enough for mankind to debunk?
If we are a thought from God, who is to say what is real?If we do indeed create our own reality, who is to say what is factual? I accept the bible in it's entirety. I can only perceive or receive parts of it. It is a source of many things, to many people, in many ways.
The symbols and dreams were what I thought this section is to be about. Dreams can be literal and/or metaphorical.
Allegories are a matter of interptetation. There are dreams already interpreted within the bible text.
I'm interested in what you have to offer from your point of view. It becomes more challenging naturally when one has his/her "beliefs". In time and patience, the truth will manifest. I hope you understand where I'm coming from. I have to listen before I can get an idea about things.Maybe it would help to know more of what you believe, if you want to say. Thanks.[:)]
Personally I am familiar with only the "Red sea/sea of reeds" allegory in the scriptures, though I have not taken much effort to learn more. The see of reeds is not really a sea at all but merely a large lake with, of course, reeds sticking out of it. Through further research it has been established that this would probably have been a much more likely route for Moses. Keep one thing in mind also that I have learned. The sea of reeds is MUCH more shallow then the Red sea. At the time of Moses leading his people out of Egypt a volcano on a nearby island had erupted.... which is likely to have caused most of the plagues as well (sulfur would have contaminated the water and turned it red, the frogs would not have been able to live in it and therefor left for other waters, anything that drank the water would have died, such as cattle, etc.) you get the point. Anyways, by the erupting of this volcano it would have changed the tides of the surrounding oceans and the sea of reeds and caused it's waters to receed, thereby opening up a large area to walk through, but once the volcano had finished erupting the waters would again flood the sea of reeds (and drown the egyptian army). Never forget, the lord works in mysterious ways and all things succumb to His will. This would have been a matter that the Lord could have controlled on a time perfectly coinciding with all of his miracles and the parting of the sea of reeds, for after all... nothing is beyond His will. Just food for thought. Interesting that you would bring up such a topic, it should pose for good debate!
SEA OF REEDS
On an even deeper level: Like papyrus "reeds" were often mashed, pressed and dried, then used to make scrolls.
A "Sea" of anything, is "a lot" so,
A "Sea of Reeds" could very easily be "a lot of scrolls." When Moses "parted" them, it could also mean that "he opened them up" and "taught from them." Further, the name Moses means, "drawn out" so perhaps "we should seek/find our freedom through opening up the sacred scrolls."
Peace,
Beth
I think quite often people misinterpret the true meaning of scriptures. Christ speaks often of "the plainness of His words" and that he teaches so that all can understand. In the dark ages mankind corrupted much of the bible. During that time only the priests were allowed to read and preach about the bible. Women were thought of as inferior, and therefor many passages that showed the power and influence of women were taken out of the bible and the priests (believing they were superior because of manhood) never taught the masses about the scriptures concerning most of the women. My point is, mankind has influenced much of Gods teachings in order to become more influential and eventually powerful in the eyes and hearts of men. God however has always taught in plainnes so that we can understand, and therefor I believe that for the most part the scriptures are meant to be taken literal, not figuratively. For instance, mankind has probabably found a more "suitable" explanation concerning the reeds, such as interpreting them as scrolls. But it's difficult to envision why the most powerful of Pharaoh's army was consumed and killed by, well, scrolls of paper. It doesn't seem a logical translation unless the translator was trying to "logically" explain the acts of God because he/she simply couldn't grasp the consept of a Divine Creator parting the seas to save his righteous followers. HM?
I can see why people take the bible in a non literal way. I can see why people take the bible in the literal & metaphoric way.
I've always been interested in words in the bible (scriptures).This interest was before I learned to read. In fact, one of the motivating factors for learning to read was so I could read the bible. As a child my grandmother had a couple of things on her wall, one was the simple verse of Psalms 23, another The Lord's Prayer I had someone read it to me. I memorized the verses, but I wanted to know more. There was another thing on her wall with scripture underneath the picture of the last supper. It would be read to me,but I didn't understand it's meaning. I learned to read and tried to read the bible, the letters were jumbled. Even after I was much older I could read anything I chose, still, when I tried to read the bible,jumbled letters. After a while, I thought there must be a reason. I thought it was my own evil (not what anyone said, but my own thoughts), so, I decided to search for God through prayer. It was the only way I had for most of my younger years. Eventually the words read like normal appearing letters. I still had some trouble, but by then, prayer was my main way of contact.
Through the years I've sometimes wondered why the jumbled letters? Well, I've been able to see auras for sometime now. When I think of the jumbled letters now, I think it was aura vision. The letters were jumbled because of the way aura reading is done. The letters during my early years for some reason caused my vision to transform to a different way of seeing. At least that's the only explanation I could come up with.
I'm definitely not an expert on the bible. I just hold the faith by following the faith (not word for word, for my own obvious reasons), but sometimes, others know things that I must draw from. This is easily another "message", and it fits in to the thread.
Listening, a subject along the same lines, but another topic.
There is a right hand and a left hand (Neither good or bad)of the faith to me. I know what to take, and what not to take at a particular time. This is difficult for me to explain (at this time). This is when I sometimes need more information,such as my questons to Beth.
I'm currently reading a book called "The Kingdom Within" by John Sanford who is an episcopal priest as well as a Jungian psychologist. He asserts that the Bible can be read on many levels, but that the hidden message is that salvation, per se which is following the spiritual path of Christ, is equivalent to allowing the Holy Spirit to reintegrate our unconscious (our "Shadow self" as Jung would term it) with our conscious.
So for example he asserts that in the story of the Prodigal son, the "good" son represents our conscious self and the prodigal son represents our shadow self. The lesson in the story then is that the "good" son in us (our conscious) must accept back the prodigal "our unconscious" before harmony can be restored with the father (God). (In the story of course, the good son is at first offended at the prospect of the prodigal returning and is admonished by the father that it is a good thing and should be celebrated).
When the disciples are in the boat (Christ sleeping) and the waves and wind pick up, Sanford would say the hidden meaning here is that our small conscious mind (us on the boat) is floating on the much more vast unconscious (the sea) and that when we embark on a spiritual journey we become frightened by the things in the unconscious getting stirred up (the storm) and that in order to save ourselves the "Christ" in us (Holy Spirit or Christ consciousness) must awaken and calm the storm (reconcile the unconscious with the conscious).
Anyway, I'm only part way through the book, but it's an interesting way of looking at the Bible. Despite the sound of it he's not reducing spirituality to a psychological process but rather he is asserting that the spiritual process of the Holy Spirit transforming us is in fact accomplishing this reconciliation between our unconscious and conscious minds and that this is the inner-transformation that Christ talked about.
RJA,
[:D][:D][:D] Oh yes!!!! [:D]
Peace,
Beth
I'm sure there are a gazillion books that have similar angles, but a couple that I've read are "Putting on the Mind of Christ" by Jim Marion (which I've mentioned out here before) and "The Road Less Travelled" by M. Scott Peck.
The latter is a 70's era self-help type book that essentially equates spiritual growth with pscyhological wholeness. The author however, pretty much describes wholeness through the myopic lens of a psycholtherapist, so his commentary tends to marginalize spirituality as if it were just another way of describing the psyche. So while I found it interesting I thought the author was in over his head when he attempted to address the spiritual side of the human psyche.
Marion essentially starts with Ken Wilber's (well-known philosopher/mystic/integral psychologist) model of consciousness and uses it to describe the specific case of the Christian's path to spiritual enlightenment.
I tried a couple years ago to read some of Wilber's stuff but it was over my head. Since then I've read a bit more widely and might go back and attempt the Wilber material again. But in a nutshell what he asserts is that individuals, societies and humanity are all in the process of spiritual transformation and that each of those entities is somewhere in the process of being perfected and that the various stages in this process (his levels of consciousness) begin with the Magical and end with total enlightenment which I think he calls the "non-dual" consciousness.
Marion would assert that the Bible and other Christian-related spiritual writings, being inspired by the Holy Spirit are imbued with multiple meanings pertaining to each of these levels of consciousness (understanding of spiritual things). A primitive culture (Magical level of consciousness) has only a superstitious understanding of spiritual truth and would see Jesus' death on the cross as a human sacrifice to hopefully appease an angry God (like throwing someone in a volcano). Mythic level believers (most fundamental Christians who take the Bible more or less literally) will see Christ's death as a blood sacrifice that takes the place of animals sacrifices to purchase atonement for all of our sins. At some higher level (I'm not sure which one) we come to see Christ's death as symbolically representing the sacrificial laying down of the ego in order to usher in the "Christ consciousness" in ourselves.
So essentially the Holy Spirit is working to move all people, cultures and ultimately humanity closer to completion (spiritual truth) in a step-by-step manner and this process is just part of God's plan and has been in motion for as long as humans have walked the Earth. And as part of this plan the scriptures have been endowed with the ability to speak to us at whatever level we're at to nudge us toward the next higher level of consciousness.
I'm not sure how much of that Jung would agree with, but he would assert that the deep and hidden meanings in all spiritual writings are a manifestation of the collective unconscious bubbling up with the express purpose of driving humanity toward enlightenment, which I guess he would describe as the colletive acknowledgement and integration of the collective unconscious with the conscious so that like an individual, when the process is compelte humanity will no longer have a "mask" and a "shadow" in opposition to each other but rather an integrated soul without conflict. Jung would suggest that the archetypes (shadow self, suffering messiah, etc.), dreams, synchronicities, mandelas and the like that show up in our art, literature and culture are then, signposts and symbols from the unconscious (individual and collective) pointing us toward higher consciousness (individually and corporately).
Jung, being born into a family of preachers (unlike Freud who was more or less an atheist and had to describe the human condition without the benefit of spiritual explanations) described himself as being on the radical left wing of Protestantism, and more or less describes spirituality and psychology as two sides of the same coin. His body of work in addition to the theories of Maslow more or less gave birth to today's transpersonal psychology which is the merging of spirituality and psychology.
[:)]
Torso dead said.
"For instance, mankind has probabably found a more "suitable" explanation concerning the reeds, such as interpreting them as scrolls. But it's difficult to envision why the most powerful of Pharaoh's army was consumed and killed by, well, scrolls of paper. It doesn't seem a logical translation unless the translator was trying to "logically" explain the acts of God because he/she simply couldn't grasp the consept of a Divine Creator parting the seas to save his righteous followers. HM?"
*Torso dead, please let it be known if I'm mispresenting you in this, in any way.
The literal as Torsodead speaks of is why literal IS valid.
Maybe it's a right brain/left brain thing, but both are important for the other. Torsodead has obviously gotten the message. That's the point! As long as it all (stick a one in here somewhere [:)]) can be kept "real", one has a point of reference. The amazing things that God can do, and what one man can do to bring about a change. Torso dead has made himself real by placing himself (or me, for instance), in the picture.
Thankyou Torso dead. It's nice to know I'm not alone on my thinking, although you may not be seeing it exactly the same way I'm seeing, I know what YOU mean.
Now that IT IS real, what else? Moving on....a continuum
RJA,
What a great thing you have written about. It was Jung who gave me a boost into the study of dreams. Thanks for the info about this book. You explain it so well too. I've always been interested in psychology. It wasn't until I began having my own dreams that it really hit home for me. If I had it to do again, psychology is where I would have gone. Valuable stuff! And yeah, [:)], there are many books with the same concepts.
I've gotta spit it out, all this talk of water is making me thirsty.
Thinking of all that water, emotions, base chakra (and it's purpose and meaning), collective consciousness. But yet, gotta stay grounded someway, it's all so interesting.
RJA,your added information is interesting too. That's provided a lot to think about. Thanks. It surprises me anything could be over your head, you sound pretty knowledgable.
This reminds me. Beth, when are you going to move forward on your religious symbolism idea? I'm beginning to think you don't have any. [:)] ...kidding with ya
Wisp,
quote:
Beth, when are you going to move forward on your religious symbolism idea? I'm beginning to think you don't have any. ...kidding with ya
I haven't had time wisp. I am sorry if I have let you down. I had so much I wanted to share with everyone. But, I have been kept
very busy being moderator, or as it really feels "cyber-cop" or worse perhaps "religion cop."[:(]
RJA knows what he is talking about though, so by all means follow his lead. I have also studied Jung (notice my favorite quote) and to be honest, I wish he were here today!!
The only other thing I can add at the moment regards Freud. He is NOT one of my favorite scholars, but, RJA there is a rather small book titled
Moses and Monothesim written by Freud that zeros in on an anthropological approach to the how's and why's of male monothesism, and that all human personages are only personifications that build upon the age-old traditions of the dying and rebirth of a god(s). He may have indeed eventually claimed to be an atheist, but he was still Jewish by birth, and was probably coming from that perspective later in life. Anyway, this is certainly not an apology for Freud! I think that to even say that his approach is "narrowminded" is an
understatement, and for him to have been as much of a success as he was is a total shock to me! In my opinion, Jung is
by far "light years ahead" of him! Like I said, I wish Jung were still here...
I have also read
Putting on the Mind of Christ by Marion, and it is a very good read. I highly recommend it. I have also read a few of Ken Wilbur's books--and yes some of it needs extra re-reading!! I hope to get back to his work as soon as I get a chance! My "to do reading list" is VERY long!!
Anyway, welcome RJA! Thank you very much for your input--it is really helping me out here!![:)]
Peace,
Beth
That's okay Beth, I understand.
Yeah, I did notice the quote by Jung. You have to read it very carefully to "get it". I agree with the quote (after I figured it out). [:)]
Let's use this thread to specifically discuss the use of allegory and metaphor in the scriptures.
If we do this as we go along--it will be easier to keep a coherent organization.
I will re-post in part, from my other more lengthy one:
The term "allegory" from the Greek allegoria, means most simply "to say something other than what one seems to say." In general, however, allegory must have a narrative dimension which serves to distinguish it from metaphor, simile, and allusion, all of which are actually tools of allegory.
First let's look at a few examples of metaphorical meaning. In Sefer ha-Bahir for instance, "sea" is a metaphor for Torah.1 On the level of remez when Moses parted the Sea of Reeds (The Red Sea) what he really did was "part" or "open-up" the Torah. At the opening up of the Torah, the Israelites were able to "pass through"—perhaps in understanding—and thus escape the ensuing Egyptians. When Moses then closed the waters on Pharaoh's army, they were subsequently drowned—perhaps you could say—they were way "over their heads." So, from the metaphorical meaning of "sea" as Torah, an allegory arises that only the Israelites, under the leadership of Moses, could truly understand the Torah. This seems rather simplistic doesn't it?—well perhaps it is—but that is one of the esoteric meanings that has been safely preserved within the surface story of Moses and the Israelites sojourn into the wilderness.
Another example is found with the "food" and "eating" metaphors that abound throughout scripture. "Food" was considered the metaphor for knowledge in general, and specially prepared foods or sacred foods were "higher knowledge." The word "eat" appears over 500 times in scripture. Many instances of "eating" and the ability to digest certain foods are clearly obscure references when read on the surface level of scripture alone. For example. there is the ever-popular example in Genesis about eating the fruit from the tree of good and evil. Many misconceptions have arisen from a literal interpretation of this one!! There is also the even more obscure references in Ezekiel. In just the first three chapters you can read of "eating scrolls" some of which were sweet and some of which bitter. And finally, from the NT, just in the Epistles of Paul, the subject of eating is referred to on many occasions. For example in Hebrews 5:11-6:3:
5:11We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. 12In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. 61Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. 3And God permitting, we will do so.
With some reflection, this eating metaphor would also extend to Jesus and the Eucharist (The Lord's Supper.)
So, "allegory" and one of its tools "metaphor" is a very important "key" that communicates a myriad of esoteric messages. There are no doubt, hundreds if not thousands of these metaphors scattered throughout scripture. This "key" alone could keep us busy for longer than any of us probably have!!
But, at this point you can go to the scriptures and find the many instances of "food" and "eating" and see what stirs within you as to a deeper meaning. Remember: Take your time, chew throughly, and make sure that you don't eat too much in one sitting! [;)]
Footnotes:
1-Kaplan, Aryeh. The Bahir Illumination, pg.2. York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1979.
[portions of this post were extracted from Fire on the Water: Biblical Proper Name Exegesis and Language Based Mysticism, Beth B. Phillips, Copyright 2003.]