Forum sans frontières-without boundary Index du Forum

Forum sans frontières-without boundary


 FAQFAQ   RechercherRechercher   MembresMembres   GroupesGroupes   S’enregistrerS’enregistrer 
 ProfilProfil   Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés   ConnexionConnexion 



 Notice board-Panneau d'affichage 
Invité
Notre forum a une autre adresse http://connaitre-le-monde.xooit.com/index.php où nous vous attendons
Ce site n'est maintenant que les ARCHIVES de " Connaître le Monde Forum sans frontières "

Our forum has a new address http://connaitre-le-monde.xooit.com/index.php where we are waiting for you
This site is only the archives of " Connaître le Monde Forum sans frontières "
Pour Raphael
Aller à la page: 1, 2  >
 
Ce forum est verrouillé; vous ne pouvez pas poster, ni répondre, ni éditer les sujets.   Ce sujet est verrouillé; vous ne pouvez pas éditer les messages ou faire de réponses.    Forum sans frontières-without boundary Index du Forum -> Esotérisme/Esoterism.Groupe/group -> Archives 2007-2009
Sujet précédent :: Sujet suivant  
Auteur Message
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:35:48    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Ce qui suit est tout d'abord pour Raphael ,mais pour tous bien entendu
Sauf que la matière du sujet étant pressante , je n'ai pas le temps de traduire.

Auteur Edward Smith,

Introduction
by Will Marsh

To read the biblical accounts of the birth of Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke is to enter the realm of mystery. A human being was born, into whom a spiritual being of the highest order, the Son of God, would later descend and indwell for three and a half years. How are we to go about understanding this event, so beyond our normal understanding? What human vehicle could be adequate to undertake the indwelling of the Son of God? What sort of human being was the babe born in Bethlehem?

The place to begin is with the Gospels themselves. We are told that the Jesus child was conceived by a virgin when the Holy Spirit came upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowed her. In Matthew the nature of the conception is made known only after the fact; Mary is "found to be with child of the Holy Spirit," and when Joseph, her betrothed, is troubled by this, an Angel appears in a dream to tell him the nature of the conception. In Luke, the Archangel Gabriel appears directly to Mary beforehand to tell her what will happen, and this event has been foreshadowed by Gabriel's appearance to Zechariah telling him that his wife Elizabeth, a kinswoman of Mary, will bear him a son, who is to be named John. Elizabeth was previously barren and is well past childbearing age, so we are presented with two pregnancies normally outside the range of human possibility. And when the pregnant Mary, arriving for a visit, greets the pregnant Elizabeth, the babe in Elizabeth's womb leaps in recognition, so Jesus and John the Baptist are connected even before they are born. We are told that Mary stayed with Elizabeth for about three months, which means she would have been there until just before John birth. In both accounts, Angels and an Archangel appear to humans, acting as messengers from God, and in Luke an Angel is joined by a multitude of the Heavenly Host to announce Jesus' birth to the shepherds, so we see that many levels of the Spiritual Hierarchies are involved in the birth. Cosmic events are also involved, for a special star appears in the heavens. In Matthew the child is first visited by three kingly wise men from the East who have special knowledge that has enabled them to recognize and follow the star, and who bring special gifts, while in Luke the child is born in a humble stable and the first visitors we are told of are humble shepherds.

There are many things about the Gospel accounts that cause us to pause. It seems easier for us to understand that the Son of God could somehow appear to us in human form than it is for us to understand that a being could be both fully human in every sense and the Son of God. Given the unique spiritual mission that awaited him, we want to know more about the baby Jesus himself, how he acted, how he grew, what sort of child he became and what his childhood was like, how he interacted with the children and adults in his village and with the natural world,, how he was trained, and what he was like as an adolescent and a young man—but here the Gospels present us with almost a total blank. Luke is the only Evangelist who tells us anything about the childhood, and he relates only one event, the teaching by the twelve-year-old Jesus in the Temple; the next, event in Luke's narrative is the Baptism, when Jesus is about thirty years old. Matthew mentions only the flight of the holy family into Egypt immediately after Jesus' birth to avoid Herod's slaughter of the innocents, and their eventual return to live in Nazareth, then skips to the Baptism. Mark and John (after the Prologue) both begin with the descent of the Spirit at the Baptism. We are left with much to ponder.

Although we tend to conflate the Nativity narratives in Matthew and in Luke into one picture, we note immediately upon comparing them that many of the events, which all seem so important, appear only in Matthew or only in Luke. Mary is barely mentioned in Matthew, which, after the opening genealogy, focuses on the Angel's appearance to Joseph, the visit of the wise men, and the reactions of Herod. In Luke's account, Mary is the most prominent figure, recognized as "favored one" and "blessed among women" by Archangel and human alike; she is also shown to have had a deep awareness of what was going on, for she knew that her soul "magnifies the Lord," and she "kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart." How can the two Nativity accounts be so dissimilar? Even the genealogy of Jesus, which would seem to be straightforward, is not the same in the two accounts and is completely different for the generations between David and Joseph. Surely both Evangelists would be aware of most of the key elements of this central event in their message, equalled in importance only by the events surrounding the Mystery of Golgotha? The descriptions of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection are nearly identical in the synoptic Gospels and are very similar in John; the same is true for the Baptism. Many other events of the ministry of Jesus Christ are described in similar terms in the synoptic Gospels. Why is that not the case for the Nativity?

The differences between the Matthew and Luke accounts are so great that they almost seem to be describing the births of two different children. And, as hard to comprehend as it may be, that is precisely what Edward Smith tells us is the case—there were two Jesus babies, the one in Matthew born of the kingly lineage of David's son Solomon, and the one in Luke born of the priestly lineage of David's son Nathan. How this can be, how it came about, what became of the two children so that there was only one, why this has been generally unknown until this century, what it means for a true understanding of the nature of Jesus Christ, of Christianity, and of human and world evolution—all are discussed in The Incredible Births of Jesus. It is an amazing story.

Edward Smith, now "retired" after a successful career as a lawyer and businessman, has been a lifelong student of the Scriptures and of theology, and has long pondered them in his mind and in his heart. While still a young man, he was given a near-death experience on a hospital operating table, during which he was enveloped in what he describes as a tangible light and love that he felt as the immediate presence of the Christ. This experience strengthened his faith and gave him spiritual assurance as he continued to struggle with the issues raised by his continuing study of the Bible, which he taught as the leader of an adult Sunday School class for over twenty-five years. Growing increasingly unsatisfied with mainstream theological interpretations, he was led in the mid-1980s to reconsider reincarnation as a possible key to understanding the many dilemmas the Bible presents to the serious seeker, and began to study the subject with his usual intensity. In the course of this study, he came across the anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner, and finding in it many of the answers he sought, he devoted six years to investigating Steiner's "spiritual science." He now sees it as his main task to present the anthroposophical understanding of the Bible to mainstream Christianity; The Incredible Births of Jesus and his longer, recently published The Burning Bush are the first steps in that direction





The Nathan Jesus Child of Luke's Gospel

Even more mysterious than the birth of the Solomon Jesus child is the birth of the tender infant in Luke’s Gospel, called the “Nathan Jesus” because his earthly ancestry is traced to Joseph through David’s son Nathan.

Steiner held that the Incarnation of Christ represented the fulfillment of all true religions. The three main streams he identifies as having come to a point in the Incarnation are those of Zarathustra, Abraham and Buddha. Previously only Abraham was recognized, but Steiner shows us that these other streams were involved, and subsequent discoveries in this century of ancient documents providentially hidden for millennia have confirmed it. We have seen the Zarathustra stream in the Solomon Jesus child. Let us now look at the Buddha stream in the Nathan Jesus child.

Before incarnating the Christ Spirit had to descend from the highest ramparts of the all-encompassing heaven. We can best think of this pervasive Spirit, before its long descent, as having encompassed the vast reaches of our universe to the very edge of nothingness. We are speaking of no tangible body that would have descended in a linear fashion such as we ourselves might do in a spaceship. Rather we must conceive of the vast Christ Spirit as having been spherical, so that its “descent” was brought about by a painful contraction into and through ever smaller spheres.

As is shown in The Burning Bush, our own solar system came into being in a somewhat similar manner. In Romans Paul describes the spiritual pain involved in such a contraction, saying “that the whole creation has been groaning in travail until now.” For as Steiner has shown us our entire solar system came into its earliest existence as a mere fireball. But nothing had condensed so far as to yet constitute molecular heat as we know it. Rather it was spiritual heat, of the same nature as what Moses called the Spirit of God moving over the face of the waters. It is related to what causes our physical body to maintain its internal temperature independent of its surroundings. Genesis thus opens its account with three non-tangible formless elements, water, air and fire. These, in their etheric nature, or in “their kind” as Genesis says, were the products of the three conditions of consciousness from which we name our Saturday, Sunday and Monday. The Genesis account of creation thus does not go back so far as does the Prologue of St. John’s Gospel. The Christ-enabled vision of John saw further in both directions, backward and forward, than the more limited vision of Moses.

This vast fireball was brought into existence by the activity of the highest hierarchy, composed of the Seraphim, Cherubim and Thrones, as agents of the Christ, the Word of God. Two lower threefold hierarchies were also involved in the further condensations that brought about our present existence. Esoteric Christian terminology used by Paul names these, and was reduced to writing in the sixth century by Pseudo-Dionysius, who wrote in the name and tradition of Paul’s Athenian convert, Dionysius the Areopagite. Thus Paul speaks of Dominions, Powers, Authorities, and Principalities, as well as Archangels and Angels, and of Christ as being above all these “names.” These are among the “heavenly host,” and are all involved in the creative process. A remnant of this knowledge existed within Christendom until the sixteenth century when our dedication to the physical world squeezed it out of our acceptable worldly thinking.

The order in which the seven visible bodies of our solar system separated out, along with the Earth, from this condensing original fireball of our solar system is given in The Burning Bush as Steiner gave them to us. The seven bodies have long been called the “seven stars” while those in the outer firmament have been called “fixed stars.” It is important to understand what all these heavenly bodies represent. Each one is the tangible visible body of spiritual beings. Just as our mineral/physical body is only the tangible manifestation of our soul and spirit, so also is every tangible thing, both on Earth and in the heavens, merely the tangible manifestation or evidence of some spiritual being or group of beings.

Those spiritual beings, for instance, who have our Sun for their home, actually occupy what we call the Sun sphere, that spherical volume defined by the orbit of the Sun as though it revolved around the Earth—at least this is the sphere’s definition since the Earth became the spiritual Sun when Christ descended from the Sun to the Earth.

The spiritual beings who have the Sun sphere for their home are the ones whom the Bible calls the Elohim. This is the Hebrew term for the seven spiritual beings called God in the first Chapter of Genesis. Their plurality has befuddled later Christianity which tends to think of God as one. But it was not so in Genesis one. The Greek word for these beings is Exusiai, and it is translated into English as the “Authorities.” An inspection of the Greek New Testament will disclose this.

The original fireball actually was the manifestation of a large number of active spiritual beings at multiple stages of development. What was needed for the further development of a given level of beings was different from that needed by all the other levels, so that there were successive separations in the evolution of our solar system. The first to separate out was Saturn, then Jupiter, for beings too retarded to condense further with the rest. Next came the Sun for those more advanced, and they took with them all except what were to become Earth and Moon. Mars then separated from the Sun, passing through the Earth into its outer orbit, and depositing in Earth what later developed into iron, a necessary component of human blood. Obviously, for this latter to have happened, the vast rarefied and fluid spherical condition of each of them had to be far different than their present materialized form—as it was. Recent discoveries, however, thought to evidence primeval cellular existence on Mars as well as the planet’s former fluid condition and thicker atmosphere, may well be explained by this event put forward long ago by Steiner.

At this point it was necessary for further human development that the lower spiritual beings in the Earth-Moon mass be separated out. This happened in the separation of the Moon from the Earth, leaving the Earth as it now is. Still later, Archangels who were less advanced than the Elohim, separated out from the Sun-Venus-Mercury mass into Venus and Mercury, leaving only the Elohim as the Sun Beings

However, when the Moon separated from the Earth, the most exalted one of the Elohim sacrificed its higher state and went to the Moon (the Moon sphere, compressed more closely to Earth than any other) in order from that vantage point to work more closely with human development on the Earth. Though it occupied the Moon sphere along with beings lower than earthly humans, it was itself too high to descend into the Earth sphere itself, nor could it have carried out its mission by doing so. This particular Eloha is the one called Yahweh. Yahweh became the “one God” of the Hebrew people, the source of its Shema. In the sixth chapter of Deuteronomy we thus read, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” And the Hebrew people thus took for themselves a calendar based upon the Moon rather than the Sun.

But from the Moon, Yahweh truly reflected the light of Christ who had by now descended (condensed) into the Sun sphere. Christ could now speak to human souls through Yahweh, and so he did.

All evolution within our solar system takes place in a sevenfold manner. The sage tells us, “Wisdom [Sophia] has built her house, she has set up her seven pillars” (Prov 9,1). All is fractal in nature so that the largest sevenfold existence is divided and subdivided again and again in sevenfold units. Earth evolution is the fourth condition of consciousness, following ancient Saturn, Sun and Moon (the earlier-mentioned ancient conditions from which our Saturday, i.e., Saturn’s day, Sunday and Monday were named). Earth evolution itself is divided by the part before Christ and the part after. Two more conditions of consciousness will follow Earth evolution. Then is creation in the kingdom of heaven—all three loaves (the three bodies) are then fully leavened, as the parables in Matthew and Luke suggest. All seven of these conditions of consciousness are reflected in the names of the days of our week, as shown in The Burning Bush.

The first three verses of Genesis reflect the third epoch of Earth evolution, called Lemuria, when the etheric (formless and non-tangible) elements of water, air and fire already existed as a result of the recapitulation, in the Earth’s first three epochs, of the spiritual developments in the first three conditions of consciousness. The fourth such epoch is called Atlantis, the ancient continent that sank into what became the Atlantic Ocean during the late ice ages. The biblical account of Noah tells of those who came over into our fifth epoch, called the post-Atlantean. The first two cultural eras of our post-Atlantean epoch, those of ancient India and ancient Persia, are prehistoric. Writing and recorded history begins in the third cultural era, called the Chaldo-Egyptian.

In his descent from the highest heaven, the Christ Spirit became the leader of those spiritual beings on the Sun who previously had caused the Sun to separate from the Earth in the second epoch of Earth evolution. John, in the prologue of his Gospel, speaks of “the fullness” of Christ. Steiner tells us that by this “fullness” he means the light of all seven Elohim, not just of Yahweh alone.

In the second cultural era Zarathustra, as we have seen, saw Christ in the Sun’s aura, calling him the Great Aura, or Ahura Mazdao, or Ormuzd. And humanity worshiped the Sun in that era and the next. As time went on and he approached ever nearer the Earth, Moses saw him in the burning bush and called him Yahweh-Eloha. Even later the Christ Spirit brought one Siddhartha Gautama to enlightenment under the bodhi tree as the great Buddha.

Here Steiner says, “This question brings us to the threshold of one of the greatest mysteries of Earth evolution,” one difficult for people today to have any inkling of.

The mission of the one who became Buddha was to incorporate into humanity the principle of compassion and love, for nowhere prior to this did it exist in humanity. Love prior to that time was related to the blood. Even later on, Christ had to illustrate that the Levitical commandment to “love one’s neighbor as oneself” included persons of mixed Jewish blood, leaving aside for then those wholly Gentile. Conscience sprang from this very Buddhistic insight. Buddha’s Eightfold Path endowed humanity with something completely new in human relationships—but it was totally Christ inspired. Until then, morality was introduced through revelations given from without, as in the Ten Commandments. Such inwardness as the Buddha revealed had to be withheld from the Hebrew people until the right time. Until then, the external “law” had to prevail. Paul speaks of this comparative phenomenon in the second chapter of Romans.

We have sketched above something of the evolution of our Earth in order now to look at the parallel evolution of the human being. The seeds of the three bodies of the human being, the physical, etheric and astral, trace their origins respectively to the three ancient conditions of consciousness. These three were then recapitulated in the first three Epochs of the Earth condition of consciousness, so that they alone composed the human condition at the time when, in Genesis Two, Yahweh appears on the separated Moon. As yet the human Ego (its “I Am”) had not penetrated into any of these bodies. Nor had the androgynous human being yet separated into male and female. As the Bible tells us, this took place in the developments leading up to and included in the account of the Fall.

It is at this point that an event took place in the spiritual world of such importance that the Nativity account in Luke’s Gospel simply cannot be understood without it.

The account of the Fall of humanity from the Garden is the story of the infection of the human astral body, the sense body of appetite and desire, the one that deals with all animalistic consciousness. As yet the “I Am” had not entered. It only enters after the astral body has been infected by the fruit of the “Tree of Knowledge.” Only then do Adam and Eve speak in the first person as “I.” This came about because of the ungodly desire to descend into mineral existence. Over time the creating gods could see that the infection of the astral body would lead to the consequential infection of the etheric and physical bodies, and to their earthly pain, toil and death. As Paul said, all of his “members” were pervaded by this infection (“For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members”). So prior to, or contemporaneous with, the separation of the human into male and female, these powers held back from it a portion of its etheric nature or body. The etheric body is also known as the “life” body. It is this retention that Moses calls the separation of the “Tree of Life.” It is seen also in the second chapter of Job, before God permits Satan access to Job; this reflects the account of Cain (who could not die) immediately following the separation of the “Tree of Life.” These accounts are so important because they speak of every human being.

What I have just explained is the basis for understanding what Paul calls “the first and second Adam.” The etheric (life) body that went into Adam and Eve is what Paul calls “the first Adam.” The etheric body held back from Adam by the creating powers is what Paul calls “the second Adam.” The sexual nature of the human being’s etheric body is opposite that of its physical. Thus the male has a female etheric body, and conversely the female a male etheric body. Perhaps this helps explain why one yearns for the other. Their “desire” is for each other, as is said of Adam and Eve.

The unspoiled female etheric body withheld from Adam entered into the Nathan Jesus child of Luke’s Gospel, and the unspoiled male etheric body withheld from Eve entered into the Mary of that Gospel. Thus both the fetus and the madonna in that Gospel are called “blessed” by Elizabeth. And this phenomenon also explains why the six-month old fetus in Elizabeth’s womb leaped for joy at the approach of Mary. For the soul of Adam had reincarnated in Elijah and then, as Luke says, in John the Baptist. And the etheric body of the infant in Mary’s womb was the unspoiled mate of the infected etheric body in Elizabeth’s womb. So powerful was the divinely pure etheric body in the Nathan Jesus child that it could also serve as a provisional Ego for that child until it was twelve years old, for it was to be a vehicle for the Christ and the Christ “I Am” had never yet dwelt within a human body.

Only two of the New Testament writers, or of the Apostles, were fully initiated by the Christ. One of these was the Evangelist John, clearly identified in The Burning Bush. The other was Paul who was initiated into the highest mysteries in his Damascus Road experience. Evangelist John’s writings were the deeper, for Paul’s mission was different, though in Hebrews he was able to set forth deeper spiritual truths more systematically, which accounts for its much different nature. Still in Paul’s other letters there flash forth, from time to time, things that have not yet been understood but that show clearly the depth of his insight when understood in anthroposophical light.

And one of these insights is his expressed knowledge of the first and second Adam. Paul’s tutorship of Luke is well known, and we may take it that the latter was himself initiated by Paul, an “eyewitness” in the spiritual world and servant of the Word, so that he could write such a magnificent Gospel of insight.

So the Nathan Jesus child can be seen to have the unspoiled etheric body withheld before the Fall as both his etheric body and provisional Ego. And Luke shows us that the physical body of this child descended, according to the flesh, through Joseph. We shall deal with this and its relationship to Mary’s virginity after looking at the source of the child’s astral body.

This is where the Buddha enters. The Buddha, though no longer required to incarnate, continued to work with humanity from the spiritual world. He continued to work down as far as the astral and etheric worlds. Steiner tells us that it was the image of the glorified astral body of Buddha, he who had first brought into humanity’s evolution the principle of peace and goodwill, that appeared, along with the angel, as the heavenly host, to the shepherds; likewise in the radiance that surrounded the Nathan Jesus child before the shepherds in the manger. But the Buddha played a far larger role in the Nativity of this child.

Only reverently can we now approach the event of the birth of the Nathan Jesus child to the very young Mary, barely into childbearing age. The soul of the Nathan Mary, which received the portion of Eve’s etheric body held back by the divine powers and not affected by the Fall, had not gone through prior incarnations, and was thus unspoiled, virginal. It had not built up any instinctive consciousness or even awareness of the normal human procreative function. Metaphorically she was an Eve who never ate of the apple, hence could not perceive her nakedness.

So Nathan Mary could not have perceived the occurrence of the procreative act in the same manner as a normal person whose etheric and physical bodies bear the full effect of the Fall, and her soul would have remained virginal thereafter. She knew not any relationship with her husband in the normal sense—whether or not any had occurred. Therefore, her etheric body could not carry the impress of such knowledge and so, the etheric body being what molds the physical, her physical body remained (or resumed its status as) virginal also. She remained pure after conception of the Nathan Jesus child to the time of her death. The six siblings of Jesus (four brothers and two sisters as Mark tells us) were born to the Solomon Mary. Steiner could thus properly refer to the Nathan Mary as the true virgin of the two Marys, though the physical blood of her Son was of the line of David through Joseph.

While these deeper insights have long been lost to Roman Catholic theologians, they nevertheless explain why there is validity to their doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and Perpetual Virginity of Mary. Nathan Mary’s etheric body, not having gone through the Fall, was immaculate at the very time it was itself conceived and it remained immaculate through her conception of the equally immaculate “Second Adam,” the Nathan Jesus child, and thereafter until her early death.

Luke reflects the ages of the souls of the “two Adams” through the ages of their parents, it being necessary that the “old soul” of the “first Adam” should be born of the old parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth, and that the “young soul” of the “second Adam” should be born of the youngest possible parents at the bare threshold of reproductive maturity. The Greek word parthenon, translated “virgin,” or “Virgo,” also means “young woman.”

Luke reveals the presence of the purified astral body of Buddha as the astral body of the Nathan Jesus child in the account of Simeon. In one of his lectures, Steiner reveals the nature of this account as follows:

At the birth of the Nazareth Jesus-Boy there descended into his astral body what we might call the later embodiment of Buddha. Buddha, in his etheric body, was now in this re-embodiment united at birth with the Nazareth Jesus-Boy, so that in the aura of this boy we see Buddha in the astral body. This is very profoundly hinted at in St. Luke’s Gospel. The Indian legend related that at the time when Prince Gautama was born, who was to become the Buddha, there lived a wonderful Wise Man, whose name was Asita. Through his clairvoyant faculties he knew that the Bodhisattva had been born. He saw the child in the King’s palace, and was filled with enthusiasm. He began to weep. “Why weepest thou,” asked the King, “I see no misfortune.” “Oh, King, on the contrary, the child now born is the Bodhisattva, and will become the Buddha. I weep because I am an old man and cannot hope to live to see this Buddha.” Then Asita died, and the Bodhisattva became the Buddha. Now the Buddha descends from on high and unites himself with the aura of the Nazareth-Jesus-Boy, in order to contribute his mite to the Great Event of Palestine. Through a karmic connection the old Asita was reborn at about the same time, and became Simeon, who now saw the Buddha who from a Bodhisattva had become what he now was. The Bodhisattva as Buddha, whom 600 years before he had not been able to see, he saw now; for, as he held the Nazareth Jesus-child in his arms, he saw the Buddha soaring above in the child’s aura, and he then uttered the beautiful words: “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for I have seen my Master.”

In 1986 my wife and I traveled to Singapore, Hong Kong and China. In one of those locations, I acquired a book on Buddhism. It was given to me free of charge by Bukkyo Dendo Kyokai, of Tokyo, Japan, entitled, The Teaching of Buddha, 14th Ed., Tokyo, 1981. The following paragraph about the newborn infant Siddhartha Gautama is found in its introductory biographical sketch:

A hermit, called Asita, who lived in the mountains not far away, noticed a radiance about the castle and, interpreting it as a good omen, came down to the palace and was shown the child. He predicted: “This Prince, if he remains in the palace, when grown up, will become a great king and subjugate the whole world. But if he forsakes the court life to embrace a religious life, he will become a Buddha, the Savior of the world.”

I have also found this legend confirmed in authoritative, secular American writings about Buddhism.
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle


Dernière édition par Teiwas le 27/10/2007 12:56:25; édité 2 fois
Revenir en haut
Publicité






MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:35:48    Sujet du message: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:39:28    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

The Solomon Jesus Child of Matthew's Gospel

With this, let us look first at the birth in Matthew’s Gospel. Steiner calls the child there “Solomon Jesus,” because its ancestry is through David’s son Solomon.

The lineage of the Matthew child is traced through forty-two generations from Abraham to Jesus. These are carefully divided into three groups of fourteen generations each. The deep wisdom involved in this arrangement came from a prehistoric Zarathustra of ancient Persia, about 5,000 B.C., who had seen the descending Christ in the Sun’s aura. This wisdom was preserved in the ancient mystery schools. Finally it came through the esoteric instruction of the Essenes’ “True Teacher,” Jeschu ben Pandira, about 100 BC, who taught how it was necessary to perfect what had been given to Abraham in its first rudiments so that a threefold human body would be able to receive the highly advanced human Ego of Zarathustra, who would later sacrifice himself to the entry of the great Sun Spirit, the Christ. To receive Zarathustra, it was necessary that there be three successive cycles of fourteen generations to perfect through heredity first the physical, then the etheric and finally the astral body.

Steiner tells us that heredity works in such a way that the qualities transmitted do not pass from one human being to his nearest descendant in the immediately following generation; the salient qualities and attributes cannot be transmitted directly from father to son, from mother to daughter, but only from father to grandson—thus to the second generation, then the fourth, and so on. Thus, fourteen generations were necessary to have seven hereditary steps for the perfection of each of the three bodies. The physical body was perfected in the first fourteen generations, the etheric in the second, and the astral in the third.

The Individuality (Ego or soul) of the great Zarathustra was intimately involved in the preparation of the Solomon Jesus child. In prehistoric Persia, Zarathustra had given a precious gift to humanity. This most precious gift was knowledge of the outer world, of the mysteries of the Cosmos received into the human astral body in thinking, feeling and willing. Zarathustra had imparted this mighty truth to his pupils, particularly to the two among them who can be said to have been his most intimate disciples and were incarnated later on as Hermes (founder of the Egyptian culture) and Moses. (Much more is said about this in The Burning Bush.) The Zarathustra Individuality continued to develop through successive incarnations, and it could be said that he was the one who above all others had seen most clearly and deeply into the spirituality of the Macrocosm. And with the birth of the Matthew Jesus child, it was time for Zarathustra’s great gift to be given again to humanity, in a rejuvenated form. To this end, the Zarathustra Individuality reincarnated, for a time, in the prepared physical body of the Solomon Jesus child of the kingly line, such line being significant because it has to do with knowledge of the outer world.

The name Zarathustra, later also known as Zoroaster (or Nazarathos), means the great lustrous or shining star. Not only is the etheric body, reflecting the human head and four limbs, shaped like a star, but in Zarathustra’s case, he was the one who had seen the Ahura Mazdao (the Great Aura), or Christ, sojourning in the Sun, had predicted his future Incarnation on Earth, and was thus himself, as the ultimate vehicle of the Christ, also known by a similar name. The knowledge of all of this existed in those initiated from the time of Zarathustra, and these were known as Magi, or kings by virtue of the magical nature of their abilities in regard to ruling humanity (recalling that the authorities in all fields were the initiated priests in ancient times). These initiates were able to see in the etheric world the descent of their master, Zarathustra, into incarnation in Bethlehem, and this is the “star” that brought them there.

And so we see the immense significance of Matthew’s genealogy as an essential part of the Nativity account. But one further point seems critical if we are to appreciate certain things about Matthew’s Gospel. Regarding this Gospel, Steiner speaks again of Jeschu Ben Pandira as the great Teacher of the Essenes. This teacher had five pupils each of whom took over a special branch of his general teaching. The names of these five pupils were: Mathai, Nakai, Netzer, Boni and Thona. Jeschu himself suffered martyrdom on account of alleged blasphemy and heresy, a hundred years BC, but these five propagated his teachings in five different sections. The teaching reflected in Matthew’s genealogy was propagated especially by Mathai, and it is from his name that the title of this Gospel derives.

On the other hand, the special concern of the pupil Netzer was the founding of a little colony which led a secluded existence and which then in the Bible received the name “Nazareth.” There in Nazareth—Netzereth—an Essene colony was established for those whose lives were dedicated to the ancient Nazirite order who lived here in fairly strict seclusion. Hence after the flight to Egypt and the return, nothing was more natural than that the Jesus of Matthew’s Gospel should be brought into the atmosphere of Netzerism. It was for this reason that Matthew spoke of the prophecy being fulfilled to the effect that “He shall be called a Nazarene.” No such prophecy exists in the Old Testament. The Evangelist must surely then have considered Jeschu Ben Pandira to have been a prophet, and have aimed his Gospel at the Essenes themselves. The Essenic connections of Matthew’s Gospel have been seen also by non-anthroposophical writers in recent times.

This then is the background for understanding the significance of the three appearances of the angel to Joseph to announce, first, the marvelous spiritual happenings that he was to implement by fathering Zarathustra’s incarnation in the Solomon Jesus child, whose conception was thus also by virtue of the Holy Virgin (Sophia, Divine Wisdom) in the spiritual world; second, the flight into Egypt; and third, the return to Nazareth. We will return later to the matter of the virginity of the two Marys and the puzzlement of the Solomon Joseph.
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle


Dernière édition par Teiwas le 27/10/2007 12:57:24; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:40:34    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Two Common Features

Now let us consider two things common to both Nativity accounts (there are others, of course).

First, they both trace Jesus’ ancestry through the blood of his father, Joseph. Only Steiner has explained to us the great mystery of how Jesus could actually have been born of the earthly seed of Joseph, otherwise so thoroughly hidden by the Gospel accounts, while at the same time having been born of the virgin Mary. And in this respect, we need not understand the term “virgin” to mean merely “a young woman,” as it can be properly interpreted by translation.

Second, both accounts clearly contain what have heretofore been seen to be errors in genealogical listing. But they are erroneous only if understood merely as indicating history. While they clearly intend to show blood descent through Joseph as the natural earthly father, they have a deeper spiritual purpose in mind in their obviously intentional manipulation of the number of generations.

Matthew stresses the number forty-two, while Luke lists seventy-seven. We shall see the immense and respective significance of these. In order to get to his number forty-two, Matthew leaves out of his middle group of fourteen generations three successive Judean kings (Ahaziah, Joash and Amajiah) between Joram and Uzziah. It would have been virtually impossible for one such as Matthew to have missed these, for they were etched deeply into the history of the Hebrew people. Their intentional omission, in order to be able to come to three groupings of fourteen each, must surely be a significant message to later times.

Luke, on the other hand, adds at least one name to his list in order to get a total of seventy-seven. Except for that, both Gospels list fourteen names from Abraham through David. Luke, however, takes the one Matthew calls “Ram” and makes of him the two ancestors called “Arni” and “Admin.” Old Testament accounts (Ruth and Chronicles) support Matthew’s list on this discrepancy.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle


Dernière édition par Teiwas le 27/10/2007 12:57:58; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:42:21    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

How the Solomon Jesus and Nathan Jesus Became One

It is clear that before the birth of their Jesus child, the Nathan parents lived in Nazareth and the Solomon parents lived in Bethlehem. When the Solomon family returned from Egypt, they went as the angel had instructed Joseph into Galilee and settled in Nazareth. As one might expect in a small community, they were friendly and the children grew up as neighbors until the Luke child was twelve years of age.1

Steiner tells us that the Solomon child was born long enough before the Nathan child to permit John the Baptist to escape the Herod massacre of male children under two years of age. Since John was six months older than the Nathan Jesus, we may assume that the Solomon child was born more than six months before the Nathan child. Those who have studied the matter carefully know that most scholars place the birth of Jesus earlier than our calendar date but that there is a discrepancy of a few years between the proposed dates. Herod the Great’s death in 4 B.C. pretty well establishes the birth of the Solomon Jesus at least four years BC, while from the standpoint of Luke’s Gospel a date as late as 1 BC is suggested. These discussions are beyond the scope of this brief work, but fit the scenario presented.

When the Nathan Jesus child was twelve, an event occurred that had been prepared in the spiritual world over many centuries. It was likely foreseen in the account that reflected the proverbial wisdom of the ancestral Solomon. I speak of the occasion where each of two prostitutes gave birth to a son, one of whom died, whereupon both women claimed the surviving child. Solomon proposed to cut the child in two with a sword and give half to each one, whereupon the real mother immediately gave up her claim so that the child could live. The wise Solomon then pronounced judgment in her favor.

As is so often the case in scripture, the “sword” can mean the mighty Word of God. And we find the wise Simeon telling Nathan Mary that in regard to her infant “a sword will pierce through your own soul also.” As events were to unfold, this can be seen to have truly happened in a most profound way.

Believing it important to know what happened between the birth of Jesus and his ministry, scholars of the last century and a half have bemoaned the inadequacy of the Gospels in giving us only the account in Luke’s Gospel of the twelve year old Jesus in the temple. But the Gospels have given us all that is really important. And except for the divine spiritual intuition of Rudolf Steiner we would even yet not be able to see its immense significance. What then are we told by him that makes it so significant?

The Ego of the Solomon Jesus left him and entered into Nathan Jesus who until then had only the provisional Ego rising from the unspoiled etheric body held back from Adam. Deprived of its human element, the Solomon child withered and died soon after. Nathan Jesus now consisted of the physical body descended from David through Joseph, the unspoiled etheric body held back from Adam, the purified astral body of the Buddha, and the most advanced Ego humanity had produced, that of the ancient Zarathustra and all it had accumulated through many succeeding incarnations—including the one as Zarathos who taught the middle period prophets in Babylon. One of these prophets, called “second Isaiah,” had been able to foresee the birth of this great soul as the suffering servant that the Christ Spirit would use.

Composed as it was of these four elements, this advanced Ego and these three bodies, Nathan Jesus was able to utterly confound the teachers in the temple. But what is even more telling is that this so astonished his own parents. They were astonished because the simple child they had known up until that time was no longer merely pure, simple and deeply in touch with all creatures, but he was now wiser than the wisest in the temple as a mere twelve year old. Had this wisdom previously existed in the child, they would have come to expect this type of thing. As it is they too are incredulous.

When this remarkable fact is revealed to us, we then begin to see the deep wisdom that led the Evangelists to include only it in the thirty years between birth and ministry. But we have yet to exhaust the marvel.

We are told by Luke in a single verse that Jesus then increased in wisdom, age, and beauty—Luke’s way of saying that the wise Ego worked on in these three bodies preparing them further for the next majestic event in the process of Incarnation, the entry of the Christ Spirit. The bodies would have to be magnificently prepared by this wise soul to withstand the entry of the intense, searing power of the Sun Spirit, the Son of God, the Christ.

But there were other developments in the families of the two boys. The Solomon Mary had other children, four sons and two daughters according to Mark’s Gospel. The Solomon Joseph died, probably after fathering all of these children. Soon after the temple incident, the Nathan Mary also died. The two families merged by the marriage of the Solomon Mary to the Nathan Joseph, and all the children then lived together. In terms of Jesus’ Ego, all his brothers and sisters were his own, as was his mother, while in terms of his body, he was the son of Joseph and lived in his native town of Nazareth.

This is the reason Luke says at the beginning of his genealogy that Jesus was the son, as was “supposed,” of Joseph, for the Ego had originally incarnated in the Solomon Jesus and was not therefore connected fundamentally with the Nathan Joseph. We may also ponder the profound depth of Jesus’ question, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” It was especially profound since it was spoken after the further immense change brought about by his baptism when, in respect of his all important Ego, as we shall see, he was no more related to any one person than to all others.

We are not done with family matters, for too much remains to be said about the Marys. Let us defer that momentarily, however, in order to look at the significance that numbers play in these two Nativity accounts.

We’ve already seen how Matthew starts with Abraham and counts forty-two generations in the development of the three bodies, a sevenfold process in each step. It seems strange that, in comparison, Luke goes all the way back to Adam in his genealogy, and in doing so lists a total of seventy-seven generations. If we examine this, we find that we move from the sevens of Matthew’s Gospel to the twelves of Luke’s; from the realm of the sevenfold planetary nature of our solar system into the twelvefold nature of the zodiac, a pattern one clearly sees in John’s portrayal of the reascent of the human being in his Apocalypse. Time, or evolutionary development, is expressed in terms of seven, and timelessness in terms of twelve.

Above, forty-two generations were said to be necessary for the perfection of the three bodies of a descendent of Abraham that would be adequate to receive the Zarathustra Individuality. The requisite degree of perfection of the physical caused there to be a certain degree of perfection in the younger etheric and astral bodies, and thus could be considered the degree of perfection of the three. Steiner tells us that the Essenes recognized that a divine being, the folk-spirit of the Hebrew people, laid into the organic constitution of Abraham the seed for the bodies that were to descend from him, and that the seed was to work through the force of the blood, that is through heredity. Further, the Essenes perceived a spiritual law that the influence of heredity ceases only after forty-two stages: In other words, all traces of heredity have been eliminated from a human being’s soul, and no influence exists, after forty-two generations. This was perceived as six cycles of seven generations, with the seventh cycle of seven representing the stage of perfection.

The hereditary aspects of the human body thus prepared for Zarathustra’s return were mainly those of the physical body and the etheric body. The other two elements of the human being, the astral body and the Ego, would also have to be adequately prepared. For an event of such stupendous importance as the Incarnation this could not be accomplished by one personality, and two were necessary. This is entirely in line with the Essenic expectation of two Messiahs. The physical body and the etheric body were prepared in the personality with whom Matthew’s Gospel is primarily concerned; the astral body and Ego-principle were prepared in the personality of whom Luke’s Gospel tells. Unfortunately, Steiner leaves us at this seemingly mystifying point. How is it that the physical and etheric bodies are said to relate to the Matthew account and the astral body and Ego to the Luke account when we have seen that the Zarathustra Ego of the Matthew account leaves the three bodies of the Solomon Jesus to enter the three bodies of the Nathan Jesus child of the Luke account? This is an example of where one must apply what is elsewhere given in order to make sense of the statement. We have already seen that the Solomon child was probably at least fourteen when the Nathan child was twelve. At fourteen, the Zarathustra Ego had utilized everything it acquired by inheritance by way of the physical and etheric bodies (seven years for each), and it was ready to enter into the period of development of the astral body (which commences at puberty). For that, it needed what was in the Nathan Jesus child. All development by the Zarathustra being from that point to the Baptism was in the three bodies of the Nathan Jesus.

Inasmuch as the physical and etheric bodies are related to the sevenfold solar system and time, the secret of six times seven applies to them, while the astral body and Ego relate to timelessness and to the zodiacal forces, so that the secret of eleven times seven applies to them. In each case, the final seven represents perfection. So in Matthew, the body prepared for the Solomon Jesus child (Zarathustra) is six times seven, or forty-two generations, while in Luke, the body prepared for the Nathan Jesus child (the unspoiled “Second Adam”) is eleven times seven, or seventy-seven generations. As explained in my longer work, generations prior to Abraham included many of what we would call generations, each one extending as long as the blood-enabled memory of a named ancestor’s experiences continued.

We marvel that Luke dares to trace the genealogy of Jesus all the way back to God. But since Luke understood Adam to be the “first man,” he would have started counting with him and not with God. That being so, it was necessary to insert one additional name, even though perhaps not historical (Arni and Admin being one, as noted earlier), in order to get to his vital number seventy-seven. In this manner we see clearly that Luke was not in error in presenting what he intended to say—which was not earthly history but spiritual truth.

That such was his intent seems clearly to be confirmed by the stress upon years in the prophetess Anna passage. We see there that Anna had lived a total of seventy-seven years either as a virgin or a widow (both of which have deep esoteric meaning relating to purity and devotion) and a total of eighty-four years (“great age,” esoteric for wisdom) when she recognized the master. The name “Anna” comes from the Greek which in turn derives from the Hebrew chana, meaning “grace,” and is expressed there in the name “Hannah” (and seems also related to the Jewish festival “Hanuka,” which is literally chanuka). The number seventy-seven thus expresses humankind’s perfecting process up to the final seven years, the twelfth septenary, which comes about by virtue of “grace.” Here Luke merges the concepts seven and twelve in the number eighty-four, the product of the two.

Perhaps now we can begin to see the reason why Matthew left out three kings in his genealogy and why Luke made Ram into Arni and Admin in his. They were telling of spiritual development, to which earthly history was only subservient.

Before moving to the next event, it is noteworthy that not only did Essene prophecy, as discovered this century, predict two messiahs, but considerable early art work during the Christian era shows both Jesus children, as indicated in The Burning Bush.
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle


Dernière édition par Teiwas le 27/10/2007 12:58:33; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:45:21    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

From Jesus of Nazareth to Jesus Christ

It is the child that emerged in Luke’s Gospel at twelve years of age when the two became one that is now properly called “Jesus of Nazareth” until the time of his baptism at thirty years of age. For then an event awesome beyond words took place. At this moment, as John submersed Jesus of Nazareth in the River Jordan, the Zarathustra Individuality sacrificed itself, departing to make way for the Christ Spirit to enter, as Isaiah had foretold, into a servant human being. Every Gospel portrays this as a dove descending from heaven upon Jesus, and the synoptic Gospels all say that on this day Jesus was declared from the heavens to be the Son of God. This is when the Incarnation was consummated, though it remained until the Crucifixion for that Spirit to penetrate all the way into the very bones of Jesus, having only “lit upon him” to begin with. It was then said that these bones were not to be broken.

So it is at his baptism that the one who became Jesus of Nazareth at twelve years of age becomes, in the above manner, Jesus Christ.

We may now understand why it is that Luke places his genealogy after the baptism, immediately after, while Matthew places it before the earthly birth. For not until the Christ Spirit actually entered at baptism was the Incarnation consummated, the Son of God was born on Earth, and that birth could only be understood by a genealogy that went all the way back to the event of Adam’s birth.

With that thought, let us contemplate a point seldom noticed. To establish Bethlehem as the birthplace of the messiah, Matthew quotes from the fifth chapter of Micah:

And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will govern my people Israel.

But he leaves off the last part of the prophecy which reads, “whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.” We have seen how the ancient soul of Zarathustra was in Matthew’s mind. While the Nathan Jesus child of Luke’s Gospel was, as we have seen, in certain respects even more ancient, it was the soul of Zarathustra that lived in Jesus of Nazareth and sacrificed itself for the Christ. Moreover, the Nathan child had only a provisional Ego, and while old in a spiritual sense, in earthly terms it was very young. And the Christ did not enter in Bethlehem but at the River Jordan. So both the prophet and the Evangelist must have had a human soul in mind, the ancient servant-being, Zarathustra.
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle


Dernière édition par Teiwas le 27/10/2007 12:59:07; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 12:48:29    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Seeming Conflicts and Differences

In order to understand the depths to which we have sunk in our quest to understand the birth of Jesus, we need to start by looking at how the best of our theological thinking conjures up before our eyes seemingly irreconcilable conflicts between the two birth accounts, Matthew and Luke. (This was, of course, the first essential step that had to be taken.) All recognize some points of similarity, leading naturally to the conclusion that they both tell of the same event, a conclusion never questioned until the commencement of Rudolf Steiner’s spiritual disclosures early in the twentieth century. So extensive are these differences and conflicts that serious theologians have uniformly concluded that while one or the other account could be fully historical they cannot both be, likely neither.

One problem that theology has either not recognized, or having recognized has chosen to ignore, has to do with John the Baptist. If, as heretofore assumed, both Nativity accounts describe the same event, then there could have been no John the Baptist, for he would have died when Herod, according to Matthew’s Gospel, slew all the infants in the region who were under two years of age, for John was of Judah and only six months older than Jesus according to Luke’s Gospel. The existence of this circumstance, so terribly important, is but one of those many things buried in scripture that were to come to light when the time was right. And one has to wonder how Luke, as thorough as he was in describing the birth of John, could have left unexplained by so much as a single detail how the child escaped such a horrible fate.

Some of the many discrepancies that have been noted between the respective Nativity accounts in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke do not necessarily render the respective accounts incompatible. In other cases, however, the differences are irreconcilable if the two accounts purport to describe the birth of the same child and are both assumed to be completely true.

In addition to the problem of John the Baptist mentioned above, let us look at others that have been widely observed. Let us look first at the differences that are clearly inconsistencies.

The genealogies are different in many ways, including:

a) Matthew’s genealogy begins his account; Luke’s does not appear until after Jesus is baptized by John.
b) Matthew goes back to Abraham; Luke goes back to Adam as the son of God.
c) Matthew lists forty-two generations from Abraham; Luke lists seventy-seven from Adam, with fifty-seven of them being from Abraham.
d) Matthew shows the descent through David’s son Solomon; Luke through David’s son, Nathan.
e) As a matter of form rather than substance, Matthew narrates from father to son; Luke from son to father.

While several of these differences are not necessarily in conflict, item c) would seem to be, and item d) clearly is (this is more fully shown in The Burning Bush).

In Matthew the parents live in Bethlehem before the conception and birth; in Luke they live in Nazareth.

Matthew places the birth in a house; Luke in a stable with the infant placed in a manger.

In Matthew’s account the journey with the child to Nazareth has to be far later than the return there by the family in Luke’s Gospel.

To the four incompatible differences listed above should be added the problem of the survival of John the Baptist previously mentioned.

Other differences listed below have been widely noted and, while not necessarily incompatible on an individual basis, nevertheless paint a picture of such different circumstances as to strongly suggest that they do not describe the same event.

In Matthew the announcing angel appears to Joseph; in Luke it appears to Mary.

In Matthew Joseph is puzzled by his espoused’s pregnancy; in Luke he shows no such reaction.

Matthew tells of the visit of the magi and their threefold gifts, Herod’s scheme, the angelic warning to Joseph, the flight into and sojourn in Egypt, the angelic direction to return to Israel, and the decision to go to Nazareth in Galilee rather than Bethlehem out of fear regarding Herod’s son Archelaus; Luke says nothing of any of this.

Matthew cites five prophetic passages as being fulfilled in his Nativity account; Luke cites none. The last such prophecy, “He shall be called a Nazarene,” is not to be found in the canon, suggesting a wider scope of prophecy applicable to this child.

Matthew’s Nativity says nothing about John the Baptist; Luke gives an extensive account of the birth of John, the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth, Mary’s journey to and sojourn with Elizabeth, the effect of the voice of the impregnated Mary upon the infant in Elizabeth’s womb, and the importance of the child being given the name “John.”

Matthew says nothing of Mary’s inspiration; Luke gives her extensive Magnificat.

Except for the return to Nazareth, Matthew includes none of the enormous panorama of events narrated by Luke’s second chapter, including:

a) The enrollment by Caesar Augustus when Quirinius was governor of Syria;
b) The journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem;
c) The enwrapment in swaddling cloths;
d) The appearance of the angel and then the heavenly chorus to the shepherds by night in the field;
e) The visit of the shepherds;
f) The wonderment by Mary and her pondering of these events in her heart;
g) The circumcision of the infant;
h) The purification according to the law of Moses;
i) The presentation of the infant in Jerusalem, and the offering of a sacrifice there;
j) The account of Simeon’s vision of his master, his blessing upon the family, and his prophecy to Mary;
k) The account of the prophetess Anna; and
l) Most significantly, the account of the twelve-year old Jesus in the temple.

Both Nativity accounts are part of the Bible, and like the larger whole, can be taken to be literally true if not interpreted as one understands our everyday prose. It clearly incorporates some historical facts, but not for the purpose of telling history. It is telling a spiritual story of the greatest magnitude to which any historical facts utilized are indentured—mere servants of a far larger purpose. The story has served so well during that time of Christendom’s infancy, childhood, youth and adolescence. But as the third millennium dawns, a greater maturity of understanding is imperative. It must be seen that allegory, metaphor, poetry, all the literary arsenal, are equally tools to be employed. The important thing in the writing is not whether its account was literally true in the vulgar mode, as mere earthly phenomena, but rather whether it was true in its ultimately more real and lasting spiritual meaning. Ideally and often it was true in both, at least sufficiently so that its earthly connection was clear. But seldom will the deepest meaning be attained through a strictly earthly understanding of the words, for the Evangelists wrote of what they saw with eyes of spirit.

All the major biblical writers utilized forms other than mere prosaic accounts of historical fact. Jesus especially did this for the uninitiated, for he frequently spoke in parables. And Paul shows us specifically in Galatians that Moses spoke in allegories. The things they spoke represented spiritual truth, though they intentionally used a story often wholly or partly fictional from the vulgar standpoint to convey the spiritual truth. Preachers today do the same. Too often when the Bible is read it is assumed that the events reflected in the Gospels superseded the application of this principle of interpretation for those of us for whom the Gospels were written. But we delude ourselves if we think that the stories that have come down to us, and the events that took place in them historically, make us any different from the multitudes to whom the parables themselves were given. The Bible is itself a large allegory reflecting deep spiritual reality in which a few beautiful historical facts are also related.

As it happens, there is more historical accuracy in both of the Nativity accounts than our scholars have imagined. It is only since the last part of the nineteenth century, as Christendom enters its late adolescence if you please, that serious question has been widely directed toward all the seeming conflicts in the Nativity accounts. This was a necessary step in the process of the blooming forth of a deeper understanding in maturing Christendom from adolescence into adulthood in the third millennium of its life
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 13:11:30    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Ces deux généalogies peuvent tout au moins nous laisser soupçonner l'importance des noms. Les praticiens de l'occultisme et les liturgistes la reconnaissent.

Le Père sème les âmes par poignées; elles s'incarnent en groupes; elles voyagent par tribus, rayonnant autour d'elles la Lumière qui leur a été confiée. Les membres d'un même groupe ont un travail semblable. puisqu'ils traversent la même région : ils portent les mêmes signes, puisqu'ils emploient les mêmes facultés; ils sont conduits comme des troupeaux, sous la surveillance du berger avec ses chiens. Cependant, parmi les hommes, bien peu s'aperçoivent de la présence du chien; et infiniment rares ceux qui ont entrevu la haute stature du Berger.

Il faut à nos guides un signe pour nous reconnaître chacun : ce signe, c'est notre nom.

Nos prénoms, familiers ou aristocratiques, cachent un mystère. Ni la gématrie, ni l'hiéroglyphisme, ni la science des incantations, ni la philologie ne nous renseignent sur la valeur vraie d'un prénom. Ces sciences contiennent de très curieuses vérités, mais elles restent approximatives : ce sont des recettes bizarres, efficaces souvent, mais qui appartiennent à la sphère de la sagesse humaine. C'est de la magie : c'est le monde du merveilleux; ce n'est pas le divin monde surnaturel. Ce sont des procédés par lesquels un courant de force quelconque s'engrène sur le courant immédiatement supérieur.

En réalité, la vie est une. Il n'est pas nécessaire qu'une parole soit sanscrite, ou un signe, chinois, pour contenir de la force; j'oserais dire : au contraire. On a tort de prêter au Créateur des sentiments partiaux; Il est bon; Il ne déshérite aucun de Ses enfants; Il ne néglige aucune de Ses oeuvres; Il a répandu partout des dons équivalents. Pour chaque homme, les forces les plus vivantes, les merveilles les plus rares sont là où il se trouve, à sa portée; c'est une illusion que de les chercher au loin. Dieu est partout, la vérité est partout.

Chaque fois que la créature entre dans un monde, son nom primitif est traduit dans la langue de ce nouveau séjour : parce que chacune de ces naissances, qui sont des initiations, est sanctifiée par un baptême purificateur.
Quelquefois cette cérémonie n'est pas célébrée physiquement; mais elle a toujours lieu. Sur cette terre, entre autres, l'enfant présenté aux fonts baptismaux est déjà baptisé dans l'invisible; son parrain, sa marraine, ses parents croient lui avoir choisi ses prénoms en toute liberté; il n'en est rien. Un ange les leur a suggérés; plus particulièrement le prénom usuel leur fut imposé irrésistiblement.

Ce prénom sera le signe propre à cet enfant tout le long de son existence, visible et invisible, par lequel les génies conducteurs, protecteurs et tentateurs le reconnaîtront, et verseront sur lui les prières ou les épreuves.

Quant à son nom essentiel, Dieu seul le connaît, et Il ne le communique qu'à la Vierge, et à cet être mystérieux qui remplit sur la terre l'office du Verbe.

Parce que la connaissance du nom véritable d'un être confère sur cet être un pouvoir absolu; et que celui-là seul en qui repose toute la Lumière éternelle est capable de ne jamais abuser d'un pouvoir (1).
____________________________________________________

(1) L'ésotériste étudiera ici la Kabbale pratique, le shemamphorasch, les mantrams hindous; il analysera les litanies et les chapelets dans le brahmanisme, le lamaïsme, le soufisme et le catholicisme; il méditera Arbatel : « Celui à qui Dieu révélera les noms des créatures saura les véritables vertus et la nature des choses, l'ordre et l'harmonie de toute la création visible et invisible »; Pierre d'Aban : « Celui qui connaît le nom réel d'un être, lui commande »; le Dr Marc Haven : « En magie il faut débuter par l'emploi de la seule vertu des esprits; puis, dans la prière, sont révélés les noms en El, qui sont transitoires et qui servent rarement au delà de quarante ans; puis les noms en Iah ». Puisse-t-il, dans ses explorations, ne pas rencontrer quelque tourbière ou il s'enlise !
#%^* #%^* #%^*
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
Raphaël
Conseil des Anciens
Conseil des Anciens

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 14 Jan 2007
Messages: 1 396
Centre

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 20:16:46    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Thank you, dear Teiwas ; I'll try to read this without my "robert & collins"... It would be a little difficult... But I'll do my best !

De quel ouvrage vient le dernier post ?

love
_________________
"Seul est grand celui qui transforme la voix du vent en un chant que son propre amour aura rendu plus doux." [Khalil Gibran]
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 27/10/2007 23:20:44    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Auteur Edward Smith,

Introduction
by Will Marsh  Que j'ai mis au début du poste. #%^*

_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 28/10/2007 06:41:38    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Nathan le prophète.
Ami et conseiller du Roi-Musicien David clind
La tradition nous enseigne que les prophètes se réincarnent selon le besoin des Temps


Citation:
Ce prophète de l’Éternel, dont le nom signifie «donné» fut précisément donné par Dieu à David comme un conseiller et un ami fidèle selon Prov. 27:6. Son nom sera au livre de Zacharie, ch. 12:12, le symbole de cette famille des prophètes qui reconnaîtra à part la profondeur de son péché.

C’est au chapitre 7 du second livre de Samuel que cet homme de Dieu est introduit sur la scène (lire aussi 1 Chron. 17). David règne alors à Jérusalem. L’Arche de l’Éternel, amenée avec joie de la maison d’Obed-Édom dans la ville de David, repose en son lieu, sous la tente que le roi a tendue pour elle. Et c’est à Nathan d’abord que David fait part d’un projet qui lui tient à coeur : construire le Temple, une demeure digne de l’Arche, ce signe précieux entre tous de la présence effective de l’Éternel au milieu des fils d’Israël.

(...) Nathan, sans prendre le temps de rechercher la pensée de l’Éternel, sans plus attendre, donne son assentiment : «Va, fais tout ce qui est dans ton coeur». Car, il l’affirme : «l’Éternel est avec toi» (v. 3). 2 Samuel 11 et 12 : Les années ont passé. David, parvenu au faîte de la gloire, reste couché sur son lit de repos «au temps où les rois entrent en campagne». Absent du combat, il se laisse surprendre par la convoitise que lui présente habilement l’ennemi de nos âmes, celui qui rôde constamment autour de nous cherchant qui il pourra dévorer. En ces heures terribles, usant pour son malheur de sa puissance temporelle, le roi David va de chute en chute. Ne fait-il pas même finalement porter par Urie, cet Israélite pieux, sa propre sentence à mort ? Joab sera trop heureux de se faire complice de ce mal, pensant asseoir ainsi définitivement son influence sur David.

Et pendant de longs mois, David, cet homme en qui l’Esprit de l’Éternel avait tant de fois parlé, n’est plus en communion avec Dieu... sans paraître en souffrir. Ainsi un navire peut courir un moment sur sa lancée, moteur coupé, en vertu de la vitesse acquise. Un croyant peut avoir encore l’apparence de la piété alors que ses vraies relations avec Dieu sont interrompues. Cet état misérable, plus tard, David le confessera sans réserve (Ps. 32:3, 4).

2.2 Nathan utilisé pour réveiller la conscience
Dieu n’abandonne jamais les siens. Aussi envoie-t-il Nathan, qui, par une parabole saisissante, amène le roi coupable à prononcer lui-même sa condamnation. Le coeur et la conscience de David sont en mauvais état, mais son jugement reste juste... et lorsque le roi déclare : «l’Éternel est vivant que l’homme qui a fait cela est digne de mort !» le prophète lui répond aussitôt : «Tu es cet homme» (2 Sam. 12:5, 7). Parole grave et sévère, d’un effet sur la conscience que rien ne peut rendre.


2.3 Nathan utilisé pour la restauration et au temps de l’épreuveDavid est restauré par la merveilleuse grâce de Dieu, cette grâce dont chaque croyant est l’objet béni, le témoin vivant. De précieux psaumes (32 et 51) sont les preuves évidentes de la communion retrouvée. À la dédicace du second, le nom de Nathan est associé. David connaîtra des jours d’épreuves. L’épée ne s’éloignera pas de sa maison. Mais s’appuyant résolument sur Dieu, il aura en Nathan cet «ami qui aime en tout temps, ce frère né pour la détresse» (Prov. 17:17). Mystère de la grâce, la parole de Dieu nous dit que l’Éternel «aima» le second fils de David et de Bath-Shéba. «Il envoya par Nathan le prophète» et l’enfant, «à cause de l’Éternel» est appelé Jedidia, c’est-à-dire bien-aimé de l’Éternel (ch. 12:24, 25).



2.4 Nathan utilisé pour la louange
Nathan fut aussi, avec Gad, d’une aide précieuse à David quand il eut à coeur de disposer de façon harmonieuse le chant de louange et les cantiques d’actions de grâce (voir Néh. 12:46), dans la présence de l’Éternel. Au temps du pieux Ézéchias, cette règle est retrouvée (2 Chron. 29:25) de sorte qu’au «moment où commença l’holocauste, le cantique de l’Éternel commença». La vraie louange est intimement liée à la bonne odeur de Christ, comme offrande et sacrifice à Dieu.



2.5 Nathan utilisé au temps de la faiblesse
David est maintenant avancé en âge. Adonija, son fils, se lève et déclare, rempli d’orgueil : «Moi, je serai roi» (1 Rois 1:5). Il n’y a aucune crainte de Dieu chez lui. Il était bien connu de tous que Dieu avait choisi Salomon. Dès lors c’est contre Dieu lui-même qu’Adonija se rebelle. Il trouve des complicités dans l’entourage même du roi David. Abiathar, le sacrificateur, oubliant les recommandations de David au début de sa carrière (1 Sam. 22:23) suit Adonija. Et ce dernier, entouré de si belles apparences, devient tout aussitôt, un centre de rassemblement pour le plus grand nombre. Mais il ne saurait l’être pour la foi. Nathan, en particulier, ne fut pas avec lui (v. 8). Adonija se garde bien de l’inviter au festin au cours duquel il compte proclamer son règne. Mais si le roi affaibli par l’âge ne sait pas ce qui se passe, le serviteur fidèle veille à ce que les conseils de Dieu s’accomplissent. Le bien-aimé de l’Éternel doit régner. Le sachant, David s’était lui-même engagé par serment. Aussi Nathan met-il dans la bouche de Bath-Shéba des paroles empreintes tout à la fois de respect et de hardiesse. Puis il intervient à son tour et ses paroles sont toutes remplies de sagesse et de vérité. Il révèle au roi qu’aucun des serviteurs dévoués de David n’a été invité et surtout que Salomon a été volontairement laissé de côté. Ainsi le monde et ceux qui sont sous la domination de l’adversaire ont rejeté et rejettent Christ et les siens. «Nous ne voulons pas que celui-ci règne sur nous». Mais la parole, dont Nathan est ici le dépositaire, demeure. Les conseils de Dieu sont immuables. «J’ai oint mon roi sur Sion... Demande-moi, et je te donnerai les nations pour héritage, et, pour ta possession, les bouts de la terre» (Ps. 2:6 à 8). Le courage de David est ranimé, il donne des ordres décisifs. Il appartiendra à Nathan — le prophète — et à Tsadok — le sacrificateur — d’oindre Salomon roi sur Israël à Guihon. Tout le peuple se réjouit et les conjurés, saisis de peur, s’enfuient.

3 Nathan béni dans sa famille
Nathan comptera deux fils parmi les princes du roi Salomon. L’un sera préposé sur les intendants et l’autre, principal officier, sera «l’ami du roi» (1 Rois 4:5). Ils pourront jouir de la gloire du royaume dans une position d’honneur et d’intimité particulière.


Natanael marcha avec Jésus -(voir Jean)
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
Raphaël
Conseil des Anciens
Conseil des Anciens

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 14 Jan 2007
Messages: 1 396
Centre

MessagePosté le: 28/10/2007 11:50:34    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Teiwas a écrit:
Ces deux généalogies peuvent tout au moins nous laisser soupçonner l'importance des noms. Les praticiens de l'occultisme et les liturgistes la reconnaissent.

Le Père sème les âmes par poignées; elles s'incarnent en groupes; elles voyagent par tribus, rayonnant autour d'elles la Lumière qui leur a été confiée. Les membres d'un même groupe ont un travail semblable. puisqu'ils traversent la même région : ils portent les mêmes signes, puisqu'ils emploient les mêmes facultés; ils sont conduits comme des troupeaux, sous la surveillance du berger avec ses chiens. Cependant, parmi les hommes, bien peu s'aperçoivent de la présence du chien; et infiniment rares ceux qui ont entrevu la haute stature du Berger.

Il faut à nos guides un signe pour nous reconnaître chacun : ce signe, c'est notre nom.

Nos prénoms, familiers ou aristocratiques, cachent un mystère. Ni la gématrie, ni l'hiéroglyphisme, ni la science des incantations, ni la philologie ne nous renseignent sur la valeur vraie d'un prénom. Ces sciences contiennent de très curieuses vérités, mais elles restent approximatives : ce sont des recettes bizarres, efficaces souvent, mais qui appartiennent à la sphère de la sagesse humaine. C'est de la magie : c'est le monde du merveilleux; ce n'est pas le divin monde surnaturel. Ce sont des procédés par lesquels un courant de force quelconque s'engrène sur le courant immédiatement supérieur.

En réalité, la vie est une. Il n'est pas nécessaire qu'une parole soit sanscrite, ou un signe, chinois, pour contenir de la force; j'oserais dire : au contraire. On a tort de prêter au Créateur des sentiments partiaux; Il est bon; Il ne déshérite aucun de Ses enfants; Il ne néglige aucune de Ses oeuvres; Il a répandu partout des dons équivalents. Pour chaque homme, les forces les plus vivantes, les merveilles les plus rares sont là où il se trouve, à sa portée; c'est une illusion que de les chercher au loin. Dieu est partout, la vérité est partout.

Chaque fois que la créature entre dans un monde, son nom primitif est traduit dans la langue de ce nouveau séjour : parce que chacune de ces naissances, qui sont des initiations, est sanctifiée par un baptême purificateur.
Quelquefois cette cérémonie n'est pas célébrée physiquement; mais elle a toujours lieu. Sur cette terre, entre autres, l'enfant présenté aux fonts baptismaux est déjà baptisé dans l'invisible; son parrain, sa marraine, ses parents croient lui avoir choisi ses prénoms en toute liberté; il n'en est rien. Un ange les leur a suggérés; plus particulièrement le prénom usuel leur fut imposé irrésistiblement.

Ce prénom sera le signe propre à cet enfant tout le long de son existence, visible et invisible, par lequel les génies conducteurs, protecteurs et tentateurs le reconnaîtront, et verseront sur lui les prières ou les épreuves.

Quant à son nom essentiel, Dieu seul le connaît, et Il ne le communique qu'à la Vierge, et à cet être mystérieux qui remplit sur la terre l'office du Verbe.

Parce que la connaissance du nom véritable d'un être confère sur cet être un pouvoir absolu; et que celui-là seul en qui repose toute la Lumière éternelle est capable de ne jamais abuser d'un pouvoir (1).
____________________________________________________

(1) L'ésotériste étudiera ici la Kabbale pratique, le shemamphorasch, les mantrams hindous; il analysera les litanies et les chapelets dans le brahmanisme, le lamaïsme, le soufisme et le catholicisme; il méditera Arbatel : « Celui à qui Dieu révélera les noms des créatures saura les véritables vertus et la nature des choses, l'ordre et l'harmonie de toute la création visible et invisible »; Pierre d'Aban : « Celui qui connaît le nom réel d'un être, lui commande »; le Dr Marc Haven : « En magie il faut débuter par l'emploi de la seule vertu des esprits; puis, dans la prière, sont révélés les noms en El, qui sont transitoires et qui servent rarement au delà de quarante ans; puis les noms en Iah ». Puisse-t-il, dans ses explorations, ne pas rencontrer quelque tourbière ou il s'enlise !
#%^* #%^* #%^*


Ce texte en français est-il issu du même livre ? ou bien est-ce du "Teiwas" ?

Merci


#%^*
_________________
"Seul est grand celui qui transforme la voix du vent en un chant que son propre amour aura rendu plus doux." [Khalil Gibran]
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 28/10/2007 12:40:29    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

 Non le livre c'est seulement au sujet des deux enfants  ...Je ne sias si tu le trouveras en Français, mais je pourrais traduire si tu es intéressé.
L'autre texte est un "réuni" de mes lectures -recherches-études sur les prénoms. #%^*
 Comment vont maman -junior et les nerfs de papa?? #%^*  


Je me suis toujours intéréssée aux prénoms mais plus encore après que ma fille ainDonc j'ai grandiée à un très jeune âge m'a dit qu'elle ne s'appellait pas Isabelle, mais Jenny.....Si Jenny c'est unnom bien Anglais-Australien- Américain ce ne l'était certainement pas  en dans un petiti village Français en 1966.
 
Puis il y a eu mon petit fils qui piquait des crises de colères terribles si on ne l'appelait pas pars son nom entier:Lukas  .Pas de Like, pas de Lukey  ou même Lucas.
 Personnellement j'ai changé  Evelyne pour Eve lorsque j'n ai ressenti le besoin  et de fait Eve = 8 Evelyne =9
9 est le changement d'état
8 est le chiffre de ma destinée selon ma naissance. clind
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
lazareleblanc
Esotérisme -Esoterism

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 17 Jan 2007
Messages: 535
France - Tours

MessagePosté le: 30/10/2007 02:27:44    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

Citation:
Ce prénom sera le signe propre à cet enfant tout le long de son existence, visible et invisible, par lequel les génies conducteurs, protecteurs et tentateurs le reconnaîtront, et verseront sur lui les prières ou les épreuves.

Quant à son nom essentiel, Dieu seul le connaît, et Il ne le communique qu'à la Vierge, et à cet être mystérieux qui remplit sur la terre l'office du Verbe.

Parce que la connaissance du nom véritable d'un être confère sur cet être un pouvoir absolu; et que celui-là seul en qui repose toute la Lumière éternelle est capable de ne jamais abuser d'un pouvoir (1).

juste une petite question

C'est qui celui ci ? siffle
_________________
Prépare de la bonne popotte à la portos !!!
Revenir en haut
Teiwas
Modérateur
Modérateur

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 08 Jan 2007
Messages: 9 534
Australia -Red Center

MessagePosté le: 30/10/2007 04:30:39    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

qui est qui??????
Je parle pour tous les prénoms #%^*
_________________
Qui vit en paix avec lui-même vit en paix avec l'univers.Marc-Aurèle
Revenir en haut
lazareleblanc
Esotérisme -Esoterism

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 17 Jan 2007
Messages: 535
France - Tours

MessagePosté le: 30/10/2007 13:55:14    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael Répondre en citant

oui Mr. Green

Mais le terme Le verbe, çà veut dire quoi ? et c'est qui? Embarrassed
_________________
Prépare de la bonne popotte à la portos !!!
Revenir en haut
Contenu Sponsorisé






MessagePosté le: 05/12/2016 18:31:12    Sujet du message: Pour Raphael

Revenir en haut
Montrer les messages depuis:   
Ce forum est verrouillé; vous ne pouvez pas poster, ni répondre, ni éditer les sujets.   Ce sujet est verrouillé; vous ne pouvez pas éditer les messages ou faire de réponses.    Forum sans frontières-without boundary Index du Forum -> Esotérisme/Esoterism.Groupe/group -> Archives 2007-2009 Toutes les heures sont au format GMT + 2 Heures
Aller à la page: 1, 2  >
Page 1 sur 2

 
Sauter vers:  

Portail | Index | créer un forum | Forum gratuit d’entraide | Annuaire des forums gratuits | Signaler une violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Traduction par : phpBB-fr.com