Thanks for dropping in healingherb and I appreciate your thoughtful comment. I do concede the esoteric/exoteric dichotomy and think mysticism is a factual branch of religiosity--from Rumi in Islam to many Christian mystics there is clear historical precedence for differing schools of thought among believers.
Of course I'm familiar with E.O. and I'll look into Farrell. The main point of this post on such issues was that the Bible's historicity isn't factual and neither is its cosmology. What I'm saying is Christian Gnosticism recognizes their narratives as false--even the crucifixion and Jesus as a literal human man--in Gnosticism he was an Aeon in human form and could never be murdered. Gnosticism asserts that the one primary lie of Christendom was that Jehovah was the father of Kristos. Arguably true, from a modernist perspective, the traditional Jesus and Jehovah are psychopaths. This is my position and I would argue its logically and reasonably sound.
I am, however, not asserting Gnosticism as fact and concede mysticism to be possible, too, and in that regard, I would point anyone in the direction of Ken Wilber.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Thanks so much for your lucid reply. What I understood of it was music to my ears!
On Ken W, he argues, does he not, that the nature of Enlightenment changes? (Which is not to confuse the idea of an initiatory chain with enlightenment but still...)
And you are absolutely correct, I believe, about the false narratives. I'm still a little confused and have to go away and think more but as you probably know, crucifixion is symbol of one of the "higher" initiations? Partly, it's perhaps about the idea that the Initiate is so in touch with humanity that its tortures and iniquities tear him/her apart? (That's my interpretation. If it's real, this is a stage lifetimes off for me and many others, I would suggest. Including you. Just in case any of us get any ideas....)
But wow. THANK YOU.
Oh, btw I have to say that I agree fully that in some cases metaphysics masks crap ethics. Brilliant observation. I do it myself. I might post about it. "Magical thinking" is fascinating.
Cool, thanks! Yes, Wilber is, in part, a process philosopher. God is a verb so to speak.
Those are mystical interpretations of the meaning of the crucifixion (something I have zero issue with) but the main historical point is that it didn't appear to have happened; certainly not as described literally.
FYI: what I'm doing on my blog is giving Christian Gnosticism a voice. It's up to any individual, of course, to come to their own conclusions about this whole bloody mess...
And thank-you, too:)