Understanding the Christ-being and His Significance for the Future of Humanity

[Federica]

I would like to express a question, without expecting any direct or immediate answer or comment. It's to the attention of whoever wants to join me in the question, or has considerations to add. I put it in this thread because it seems to me it must be linked to the understanding of the Christ-being in a way or another. It comes from the lecture cycle "The Spiritual Hierarchies" GA 110, also available from RS Press Audio as "The Spiritual Hierarchies and their Reflection in the Physical World".

It is spoken of how each hierarchy of spiritual beings above us passed their human stage during past spiritual-planetary phases. For instance, the Angels passed their human phase of development in the context of the planetary phase called "Old Moon" (which is not the Moon that we commonly signify today with the word); above them, the Archangels passed it at a more ancient evolutionary stage called "Old Sun". And we obviously are passing that stage now. But who are we? What is our being name, since human is not our name, but the name of the evolutionary phase we are traversing?

[AshvinP]

I would like to express a question, without expecting any direct or immediate answer or comment. It's to the attention of whoever wants to join me in the question, or has considerations to add. I put it in this thread because it seems to me it must be linked to the understanding of the Christ-being in a way or another. It comes from the lecture cycle "The Spiritual Hierarchies" GA 110, also available from RS Press Audio as "The Spiritual Hierarchies and their Reflection in the Physical World".

It is spoken of how each hierarchy of spiritual beings above us passed their human stage during past spiritual-planetary phases. For instance, the Angels passed their human phase of development in the context of the planetary phase called "Old Moon" (which is not the Moon that we commonly signify today with the word); above them, the Archangels passed it at a more ancient evolutionary stage called "Old Sun". And we obviously are passing that stage now. But who are we? What is our being name, since human is not our name, but the name of the evolutionary phase we are traversing?

Federica,

In terms of the technical name, I have seen current humans of the 10th hierarchy referred to as the "Spirits of Love", since that is the mission to be fulfilled for the Earth evolution. On the Moon evolution, Wisdom was 'meditated' from within and worked itself into the outer Earth environment. The Love meditated from within Earthly humanity in the epochs to come will work itself into the outer Jupiter environment. Of course, the sharply divided Earthly experience of outer/inner won't be the same on Jupiter, just as it wasn’t on Old Moon, since the fourth convolution will then be unfolded.

In a sense, though, our true humanity is comprised of all the previous human stages of prior planetary epochs as well - the angeloi, archangeloi, archai. That is what we now generally refer to as our 'higher self' (to the extent those aspects of our organism are working progressively). By the end of our Solar evolution, all these higher rhythmic layers of our humanity will once again be integrated, or 'vibrating' in perfect harmony.





The following passage may help put it in context as well. They deal with the "hylozoistic" theory of evolution which is still incomplete, because it doesn't account for the critical role of soul-spirit dynamics, but is still a helpful inversion from standard materialistic theory. We have to generally decondition from the one-sided understanding of bottom-up, simple to complex, natural evolution before we can begin grasping the relations of evolving spiritual hierarchies. And we should also try to understand all stages of evolution existing simultaneously - the 'past' ones that we perceive outwardly and spatially as the lower kingdoms and cultural institutions, and the 'future' ones we experience inwardly and temporally as the ideal impulses, individually and collectively, of the higher self. We could say the already developed half of our current human soul life belongs to the past stages, while the not yet developed half of our soul life belongs to the future stages, so we are now straddling the two with our I-consciousness. Once we fully purify and develop the remaining half of the soul life, the true human spirit can begin transmuting our past bodies which condensed through the convolutions into their spiritual counterparts and thereby realize our fully human potential (and the archetype of that fully human potential is indeed Christ Jesus).

"As the human race excluded more and more bestial elements from itself, its nature became more like the human being of today; this is why the higher animals of the most recent age of earth's history are more like the human beings of the present day than are those of earlier ages [...] It could also be that an as yet undeveloped type of human being might find itself still "developing" precisely by leaving behind as a more bestial form - what we now are. The "superman" dreamed of thereby acquires natural-historical weight. But the later, complete human being who would be leaving us behind in this way as a lesser type of human being, would not be quantitatively greater than but in a certain sense smaller: he would have had to cast off and leave behind, in whole or in part, even our own present bestial elements. But he would be more, inwardly; he would be a more perfect symbol of the "original form.""(Daque)
...
The second choice (the other direction in the theory of on evolution - hylozoistic theory) is not a sequel to the atomistic, mechanical mate-rialism harking back to Democritus, but the continuation of the hylozoism of the ancient Ionians and of Aristotle, passed on to us by way of Fechner.14 This continuation of hylozoism sets before us the archetype of the human being as a cosmic predisposition that comes gradually to manifesta- tion. It is "conceivable" in that it displays a certain analogy with what we know of the development of the embryo and growth stages of the human being. For embryonic develop- ment is also a metamorphosis from a single fertilized cell to a complete human form. From the very beginning, the embryo develops with an inner necessity rather than as the cumulative result of accidental external influences. In so doing, it exhibits the stages of the unfolding of the human form to its perfection-a form that is indeed invisible but not on that account any less real. Here a human organiza- tion, which has been present in potentia from the outset, wrestles its way through until it comes to manifestation.

[Federica]

I would like to express a question, without expecting any direct or immediate answer or comment. It's to the attention of whoever wants to join me in the question, or has considerations to add. I put it in this thread because it seems to me it must be linked to the understanding of the Christ-being in a way or another. It comes from the lecture cycle "The Spiritual Hierarchies" GA 110, also available from RS Press Audio as "The Spiritual Hierarchies and their Reflection in the Physical World".

It is spoken of how each hierarchy of spiritual beings above us passed their human stage during past spiritual-planetary phases. For instance, the Angels passed their human phase of development in the context of the planetary phase called "Old Moon" (which is not the Moon that we commonly signify today with the word); above them, the Archangels passed it at a more ancient evolutionary stage called "Old Sun". And we obviously are passing that stage now. But who are we? What is our being name, since human is not our name, but the name of the evolutionary phase we are traversing?

Federica,

In terms of the technical name, I have seen current humans of the 10th hierarchy referred to as the "Spirits of Love", since that is the mission to be fulfilled for the Earth evolution. On the Moon evolution, Wisdom was 'meditated' from within and worked itself into the outer Earth environment. The Love meditated from within Earthly humanity in the epochs to come will work itself into the outer Jupiter environment. Of course, the sharply divided Earthly experience of outer/inner won't be the same on Jupiter, just as it wasn’t on Old Moon, since the fourth convolution will then be unfolded.

In a sense, though, our true humanity is comprised of all the previous human stages of prior planetary epochs as well - the angeloi, archangeloi, archai. That is what we now generally refer to as our 'higher self' (to the extent those aspects of our organism are working progressively). By the end of our Solar evolution, all these higher rhythmic layers of our humanity will once again be integrated, or 'vibrating' in perfect harmony.





The following passage may help put it in context as well. They deal with the "hylozoistic" theory of evolution which is still incomplete, because it doesn't account for the critical role of soul-spirit dynamics, but is still a helpful inversion from standard materialistic theory. We have to generally decondition from the one-sided understanding of bottom-up, simple to complex, natural evolution before we can begin grasping the relations of evolving spiritual hierarchies. And we should also try to understand all stages of evolution existing simultaneously - the 'past' ones that we perceive outwardly and spatially as the lower kingdoms and cultural institutions, and the 'future' ones we experience inwardly and temporally as the ideal impulses, individually and collectively, of the higher self. We could say the already developed half of our current human soul life belongs to the past stages, while the not yet developed half of our soul life belongs to the future stages, so we are now straddling the two with our I-consciousness. Once we fully purify and develop the remaining half of the soul life, the true human spirit can begin transmuting our past bodies which condensed through the convolutions into their spiritual counterparts and thereby realize our fully human potential (and the archetype of that fully human potential is indeed Christ Jesus).

"As the human race excluded more and more bestial elements from itself, its nature became more like the human being of today; this is why the higher animals of the most recent age of earth's history are more like the human beings of the present day than are those of earlier ages [...] It could also be that an as yet undeveloped type of human being might find itself still "developing" precisely by leaving behind as a more bestial form - what we now are. The "superman" dreamed of thereby acquires natural-historical weight. But the later, complete human being who would be leaving us behind in this way as a lesser type of human being, would not be quantitatively greater than but in a certain sense smaller: he would have had to cast off and leave behind, in whole or in part, even our own present bestial elements. But he would be more, inwardly; he would be a more perfect symbol of the "original form.""(Daque)
...
The second choice (the other direction in the theory of on evolution - hylozoistic theory) is not a sequel to the atomistic, mechanical mate-rialism harking back to Democritus, but the continuation of the hylozoism of the ancient Ionians and of Aristotle, passed on to us by way of Fechner.14 This continuation of hylozoism sets before us the archetype of the human being as a cosmic predisposition that comes gradually to manifesta- tion. It is "conceivable" in that it displays a certain analogy with what we know of the development of the embryo and growth stages of the human being. For embryonic develop- ment is also a metamorphosis from a single fertilized cell to a complete human form. From the very beginning, the embryo develops with an inner necessity rather than as the cumulative result of accidental external influences. In so doing, it exhibits the stages of the unfolding of the human form to its perfection-a form that is indeed invisible but not on that account any less real. Here a human organiza- tion, which has been present in potentia from the outset, wrestles its way through until it comes to manifestation.

"Spirits of Love" - As a guess, I would have said "Spirits of Freedom", because freedom seems to be the one evolving quality that is uniquely expressed at the present stage of humanity (I remember, somewhere in the 10 lecture cycle, Steiner mentions that the higher hierarchies couldn't have taken any evil path, as opposed to us).
I am often tempted to ask early questions, only to realize it's generally wiser to stay a longer while with these themes, and refrain from asking questions at first. And although only experience could remove abstractness completely, the context and suggestions you provide, and the drawing, are very beneficial nonetheless. Thanks Ashvin!

[AshvinP]

I would like to express a question, without expecting any direct or immediate answer or comment. It's to the attention of whoever wants to join me in the question, or has considerations to add. I put it in this thread because it seems to me it must be linked to the understanding of the Christ-being in a way or another. It comes from the lecture cycle "The Spiritual Hierarchies" GA 110, also available from RS Press Audio as "The Spiritual Hierarchies and their Reflection in the Physical World".

It is spoken of how each hierarchy of spiritual beings above us passed their human stage during past spiritual-planetary phases. For instance, the Angels passed their human phase of development in the context of the planetary phase called "Old Moon" (which is not the Moon that we commonly signify today with the word); above them, the Archangels passed it at a more ancient evolutionary stage called "Old Sun". And we obviously are passing that stage now. But who are we? What is our being name, since human is not our name, but the name of the evolutionary phase we are traversing?

Federica,

In terms of the technical name, I have seen current humans of the 10th hierarchy referred to as the "Spirits of Love", since that is the mission to be fulfilled for the Earth evolution. On the Moon evolution, Wisdom was 'meditated' from within and worked itself into the outer Earth environment. The Love meditated from within Earthly humanity in the epochs to come will work itself into the outer Jupiter environment. Of course, the sharply divided Earthly experience of outer/inner won't be the same on Jupiter, just as it wasn’t on Old Moon, since the fourth convolution will then be unfolded.

In a sense, though, our true humanity is comprised of all the previous human stages of prior planetary epochs as well - the angeloi, archangeloi, archai. That is what we now generally refer to as our 'higher self' (to the extent those aspects of our organism are working progressively). By the end of our Solar evolution, all these higher rhythmic layers of our humanity will once again be integrated, or 'vibrating' in perfect harmony.





The following passage may help put it in context as well. They deal with the "hylozoistic" theory of evolution which is still incomplete, because it doesn't account for the critical role of soul-spirit dynamics, but is still a helpful inversion from standard materialistic theory. We have to generally decondition from the one-sided understanding of bottom-up, simple to complex, natural evolution before we can begin grasping the relations of evolving spiritual hierarchies. And we should also try to understand all stages of evolution existing simultaneously - the 'past' ones that we perceive outwardly and spatially as the lower kingdoms and cultural institutions, and the 'future' ones we experience inwardly and temporally as the ideal impulses, individually and collectively, of the higher self. We could say the already developed half of our current human soul life belongs to the past stages, while the not yet developed half of our soul life belongs to the future stages, so we are now straddling the two with our I-consciousness. Once we fully purify and develop the remaining half of the soul life, the true human spirit can begin transmuting our past bodies which condensed through the convolutions into their spiritual counterparts and thereby realize our fully human potential (and the archetype of that fully human potential is indeed Christ Jesus).

"As the human race excluded more and more bestial elements from itself, its nature became more like the human being of today; this is why the higher animals of the most recent age of earth's history are more like the human beings of the present day than are those of earlier ages [...] It could also be that an as yet undeveloped type of human being might find itself still "developing" precisely by leaving behind as a more bestial form - what we now are. The "superman" dreamed of thereby acquires natural-historical weight. But the later, complete human being who would be leaving us behind in this way as a lesser type of human being, would not be quantitatively greater than but in a certain sense smaller: he would have had to cast off and leave behind, in whole or in part, even our own present bestial elements. But he would be more, inwardly; he would be a more perfect symbol of the "original form.""(Daque)
...
The second choice (the other direction in the theory of on evolution - hylozoistic theory) is not a sequel to the atomistic, mechanical mate-rialism harking back to Democritus, but the continuation of the hylozoism of the ancient Ionians and of Aristotle, passed on to us by way of Fechner.14 This continuation of hylozoism sets before us the archetype of the human being as a cosmic predisposition that comes gradually to manifesta- tion. It is "conceivable" in that it displays a certain analogy with what we know of the development of the embryo and growth stages of the human being. For embryonic develop- ment is also a metamorphosis from a single fertilized cell to a complete human form. From the very beginning, the embryo develops with an inner necessity rather than as the cumulative result of accidental external influences. In so doing, it exhibits the stages of the unfolding of the human form to its perfection-a form that is indeed invisible but not on that account any less real. Here a human organiza- tion, which has been present in potentia from the outset, wrestles its way through until it comes to manifestation.

"Spirits of Love" - As a guess, I would have said "Spirits of Freedom", because freedom seems to be the one evolving quality that is uniquely expressed at the present stage of humanity (I remember, somewhere in the 10 lecture cycle, Steiner mentions that the higher hierarchies couldn't have taken any evil path, as opposed to us).
I am often tempted to ask early questions, only to realize it's generally wiser to stay a longer while with these themes, and refrain from asking questions at first. And although only experience could remove abstractness completely, the context and suggestions you provide, and the drawing, are very beneficial nonetheless. Thanks Ashvin!

We can equally say that the evolving force of Love is uniquely expressed by humanity at its current stage, in so far as it is initially expressed between seemingly separate individualities who also are uncertain as to their immortality. So I would take Love and Freedom as practically synonymous in this context. It is only the soul-spirit force of Love that allows an individuated be-ing to flow into the essence of other bei-ngs, and thereby also come to Know itself in the deepest sense, without any compulsion from below or from above. That is another way to conceive how voluntary (lucidly conscious) service of the Divine Will, that is equal to sacrificial Love, is the only path to Freedom.

[Federica]

I would like to signal a particularly inspiring lecture I listened to today, that is helping me better understand the Christ-being, and how He is different from the Father God. Steiner explains how modern theology had become as intellectualistic as the natural sciences, thus making it difficult for Christians to really grasp the redemptive-creative nature of Christ, the Christ Sun, the Son God, as they were understanding Him as a sort of messenger of the Father God. Anthony, maybe you would also appreciate this perspective. It’s the newest recording by Steiner Press Audio. The lecture is part of the Cosmosophy series given in Dornach in 1921: Cosmosophy I, Lecture II.

When we dive down into our inner being, we look into our inner chaos, into our own moon-ness. That is the inner moon. Matter is destroyed there, as in the outer world it is destroyed only where the moon is. Then, however, sun-ness penetrates our senses; the sun's radiance enters our inner moon nature. The matter inwardly dissolving there into dust is renewed by the sun's radiance. Here, in the inner being of man, matter is continuously falling under the moon influence, just as man continuously absorbs through his senses the radiance of the sun. Such is the relationship in which we stand to the cosmos, and so one must have the capacity to perceive these two opposite activities in the cosmos: the moon nature directed toward splintering and scattering, and the quickening, life-giving radiance of the sun.

Through both these experiences one comes to behold, in what is splintering and crumbling to dust, the world of the Father God, which had to be there until the world changed into the world of God the Son, which basically has its physical source in what is sun-like in the world. What is of the moon nature and the sun nature relate to one another as Father God to Son God.

During the early Christian centuries these things were seen instinctively. Now they must be known again with full presence of mind, if the human being wishes to be able to say of himself in all honesty: I am a Christian. This is what I wished to present to you today.

[AshvinP]

I would like to signal a particularly inspiring lecture I listened to today, that is helping me better understand the Christ-being, and how He is different from the Father God. Steiner explains how modern theology had become as intellectualistic as the natural sciences, thus making it difficult for Christians to really grasp the redemptive-creative nature of Christ, the Christ Sun, the Son God, as they were understanding Him as a sort of messenger of the Father God. Anthony, maybe you would also appreciate this perspective. It’s the newest recording by Steiner Press Audio. The lecture is part of the Cosmosophy series given in Dornach in 1921: Cosmosophy I, Lecture II.

When we dive down into our inner being, we look into our inner chaos, into our own moon-ness. That is the inner moon. Matter is destroyed there, as in the outer world it is destroyed only where the moon is. Then, however, sun-ness penetrates our senses; the sun's radiance enters our inner moon nature. The matter inwardly dissolving there into dust is renewed by the sun's radiance. Here, in the inner being of man, matter is continuously falling under the moon influence, just as man continuously absorbs through his senses the radiance of the sun. Such is the relationship in which we stand to the cosmos, and so one must have the capacity to perceive these two opposite activities in the cosmos: the moon nature directed toward splintering and scattering, and the quickening, life-giving radiance of the sun.

Through both these experiences one comes to behold, in what is splintering and crumbling to dust, the world of the Father God, which had to be there until the world changed into the world of God the Son, which basically has its physical source in what is sun-like in the world. What is of the moon nature and the sun nature relate to one another as Father God to Son God.

During the early Christian centuries these things were seen instinctively. Now they must be known again with full presence of mind, if the human being wishes to be able to say of himself in all honesty: I am a Christian. This is what I wished to present to you today.

Thanks for sharing the lecture, Federica. That reminds me of a video series that I was watching on the Christ events and wanted to share with you guys. The lecturer, Brian Gray, is fantastic and includes a lot of helpful diagrams. It gives a comprehensive spiritual scientific understanding while also tracking the gospel accounts very well. I also haven't noticed any misstatements that would be too distracting

[Federica]

Thanks for sharing the lecture, Federica. That reminds me of a video series that I was watching on the Christ events and wanted to share with you guys. The lecturer, Brian Gray, is fantastic and includes a lot of helpful diagrams. It gives a comprehensive spiritual scientific understanding while also tracking the gospel accounts very well. I also haven't noticed any misstatements that would be too distracting

Thanks, Ashvin! I actually watched these lectures in June, and really appreciated Brian Gray, as I shared back then.

As you can see, I didn't find anything nagative to say. Sometimes this does happen to me
I've been actually glued to the screen, and impressed by the living knowledge expressed by the teacher in those lectures.

This past weekend, I have watched half of Brian Gray's three video lectures on Esoteric Christianity. Let me know, anyone, if you are watching them, I am really enjoying these lectures (though I think they are great for beginners like me, maybe less interesting for those who are very familiar with the topic).

[AshvinP]

I would like to signal a particularly inspiring lecture I listened to today, that is helping me better understand the Christ-being, and how He is different from the Father God. Steiner explains how modern theology had become as intellectualistic as the natural sciences, thus making it difficult for Christians to really grasp the redemptive-creative nature of Christ, the Christ Sun, the Son God, as they were understanding Him as a sort of messenger of the Father God. Anthony, maybe you would also appreciate this perspective. It’s the newest recording by Steiner Press Audio. The lecture is part of the Cosmosophy series given in Dornach in 1921: Cosmosophy I, Lecture II.

When we dive down into our inner being, we look into our inner chaos, into our own moon-ness. That is the inner moon. Matter is destroyed there, as in the outer world it is destroyed only where the moon is. Then, however, sun-ness penetrates our senses; the sun's radiance enters our inner moon nature. The matter inwardly dissolving there into dust is renewed by the sun's radiance. Here, in the inner being of man, matter is continuously falling under the moon influence, just as man continuously absorbs through his senses the radiance of the sun. Such is the relationship in which we stand to the cosmos, and so one must have the capacity to perceive these two opposite activities in the cosmos: the moon nature directed toward splintering and scattering, and the quickening, life-giving radiance of the sun.

Through both these experiences one comes to behold, in what is splintering and crumbling to dust, the world of the Father God, which had to be there until the world changed into the world of God the Son, which basically has its physical source in what is sun-like in the world. What is of the moon nature and the sun nature relate to one another as Father God to Son God.

During the early Christian centuries these things were seen instinctively. Now they must be known again with full presence of mind, if the human being wishes to be able to say of himself in all honesty: I am a Christian. This is what I wished to present to you today.

...
Thanks, Ashvin! I actually watched these lectures in June, and really appreciated Brian Gray, as I shared back then.

Oh ok, I'm glad you found and appreciated them. It has been interesting for me how the so-called 'introductory' material is actually the most helpful for orienting my intuition for these profound esoteric realities even more. That is also true for Cleric's various illustrations on this forum. I'm trying to make a habit of always returning to these after venturing out into more diverse domains of spiritual science.

In connection with the lecture you shared above, here is another complementary angle to consider from Tomberg.

Real Christianity, however, means more than preaching peace; in truth, it brings peace into the conflict of ideas. The Christian idea of God—the “three in one,” which is really the view of God taught through the holy wisdom of the primal mysteries—is a concept in which deist, theist, and pantheist can all clasp hands in friendship. The light of the Christian Trinity reveals that a deist acknowledges only the Father, a theist only the Son, and, with the same exclusiveness, a pantheist stands for only the Holy Spirit. All three representatives of these fundamental ideas of the Godhead are correct insofar as they say something positive, but they are wrong to the degree that they refuse to acknowledge other viewpoints. In fact, the Godhead dwells outside the course of world events [Father], is present as the highest example for all beings in the world [Son], and also flows and vibrates through all that exists [HS]. The threefold Godhead is the highest point to which human thinking can soar and find rest; it is the highest view that the human heart can grasp and that human beings can acknowledge with their whole being.

But people must not assume that they can gain a true idea of the Trinity by only one path. They will never find the Trinity by devoting themselves entirely to the study of outer nature; that path leads only to recognition of the Father. And those who devote themselves solely to observing their own inner life will gain an idea of the Holy Spirit’s universal power. But those who study the outer as well as the inner worlds, beginning with the question of what is lacking in the outer world and what is missing in the inner world—not asking what is present, but what is missing from the universe and from humankind—will attain a cosmic concept of the Son.

A gaze directed reverently toward the source of consciousness and life must lead to recognition of the Holy Spirit; an observant, perceptive gaze directed to the outer world leads to conviction of the Father’s existence, the Creator, to whom his work, displayed to perceptive insight, points; but a gaze that views with warm sympathy the misery and imperfection of life leads to certainty of the Son. Whenever piety is lacking in the soul, the Holy Spirit becomes merely an abstract concept; when truth is weak in courage, the Father cannot be acknowledged; and when there is no love in life, the Son cannot be confessed. To acknowledge the Three in One means being able to soar aloft, to see life in a religious, objective, and therapeutic way. Christianity confronts humankind with this claim when the idea of the Trinity is placed before us.

Tomberg, Valentin; Bruce, R.H.. Christ and Sophia: Anthroposophic Meditations on the Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocalypse (p. 131). steinerbooks. Kindle Edition.

[Federica]

It has been interesting for me how the so-called 'introductory' material is actually the most helpful for orienting my intuition for these profound esoteric realities even more. That is also true for Cleric's various illustrations on this forum. I'm trying to make a habit of always returning to these after venturing out into more diverse domains of spiritual science.

In connection with the lecture you shared above, here is another complementary angle to consider from Tomberg.

Real Christianity, however, means more than preaching peace; in truth, it brings peace into the conflict of ideas. The Christian idea of God—the “three in one,” which is really the view of God taught through the holy wisdom of the primal mysteries—is a concept in which deist, theist, and pantheist can all clasp hands in friendship. The light of the Christian Trinity reveals that a deist acknowledges only the Father, a theist only the Son, and, with the same exclusiveness, a pantheist stands for only the Holy Spirit. All three representatives of these fundamental ideas of the Godhead are correct insofar as they say something positive, but they are wrong to the degree that they refuse to acknowledge other viewpoints. In fact, the Godhead dwells outside the course of world events [Father], is present as the highest example for all beings in the world [Son], and also flows and vibrates through all that exists [HS]. The threefold Godhead is the highest point to which human thinking can soar and find rest; it is the highest view that the human heart can grasp and that human beings can acknowledge with their whole being.

But people must not assume that they can gain a true idea of the Trinity by only one path. They will never find the Trinity by devoting themselves entirely to the study of outer nature; that path leads only to recognition of the Father. And those who devote themselves solely to observing their own inner life will gain an idea of the Holy Spirit’s universal power. But those who study the outer as well as the inner worlds, beginning with the question of what is lacking in the outer world and what is missing in the inner world—not asking what is present, but what is missing from the universe and from humankind—will attain a cosmic concept of the Son.

A gaze directed reverently toward the source of consciousness and life must lead to recognition of the Holy Spirit; an observant, perceptive gaze directed to the outer world leads to conviction of the Father’s existence, the Creator, to whom his work, displayed to perceptive insight, points; but a gaze that views with warm sympathy the misery and imperfection of life leads to certainty of the Son. Whenever piety is lacking in the soul, the Holy Spirit becomes merely an abstract concept; when truth is weak in courage, the Father cannot be acknowledged; and when there is no love in life, the Son cannot be confessed. To acknowledge the Three in One means being able to soar aloft, to see life in a religious, objective, and therapeutic way. Christianity confronts humankind with this claim when the idea of the Trinity is placed before us.

Tomberg, Valentin; Bruce, R.H.. Christ and Sophia: Anthroposophic Meditations on the Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocalypse (p. 131). steinerbooks. Kindle Edition.

Yes, I also try to revisit posts and lectures to get a sense of how my understanding is changing. Thanks for this other angle on Christianity by Tomberg. Though I can't properly grasp all the meaning, I do appreciate the elevated perspective. I see the connection with the lecture, that creation and destruction are one, and how the resurrecting power of Love shines in the middle, the unifying principle of everything.

[AshvinP]

It has been interesting for me how the so-called 'introductory' material is actually the most helpful for orienting my intuition for these profound esoteric realities even more. That is also true for Cleric's various illustrations on this forum. I'm trying to make a habit of always returning to these after venturing out into more diverse domains of spiritual science.

In connection with the lecture you shared above, here is another complementary angle to consider from Tomberg.

Real Christianity, however, means more than preaching peace; in truth, it brings peace into the conflict of ideas. The Christian idea of God—the “three in one,” which is really the view of God taught through the holy wisdom of the primal mysteries—is a concept in which deist, theist, and pantheist can all clasp hands in friendship. The light of the Christian Trinity reveals that a deist acknowledges only the Father, a theist only the Son, and, with the same exclusiveness, a pantheist stands for only the Holy Spirit. All three representatives of these fundamental ideas of the Godhead are correct insofar as they say something positive, but they are wrong to the degree that they refuse to acknowledge other viewpoints. In fact, the Godhead dwells outside the course of world events [Father], is present as the highest example for all beings in the world [Son], and also flows and vibrates through all that exists [HS]. The threefold Godhead is the highest point to which human thinking can soar and find rest; it is the highest view that the human heart can grasp and that human beings can acknowledge with their whole being.

But people must not assume that they can gain a true idea of the Trinity by only one path. They will never find the Trinity by devoting themselves entirely to the study of outer nature; that path leads only to recognition of the Father. And those who devote themselves solely to observing their own inner life will gain an idea of the Holy Spirit’s universal power. But those who study the outer as well as the inner worlds, beginning with the question of what is lacking in the outer world and what is missing in the inner world—not asking what is present, but what is missing from the universe and from humankind—will attain a cosmic concept of the Son.

A gaze directed reverently toward the source of consciousness and life must lead to recognition of the Holy Spirit; an observant, perceptive gaze directed to the outer world leads to conviction of the Father’s existence, the Creator, to whom his work, displayed to perceptive insight, points; but a gaze that views with warm sympathy the misery and imperfection of life leads to certainty of the Son. Whenever piety is lacking in the soul, the Holy Spirit becomes merely an abstract concept; when truth is weak in courage, the Father cannot be acknowledged; and when there is no love in life, the Son cannot be confessed. To acknowledge the Three in One means being able to soar aloft, to see life in a religious, objective, and therapeutic way. Christianity confronts humankind with this claim when the idea of the Trinity is placed before us.

Tomberg, Valentin; Bruce, R.H.. Christ and Sophia: Anthroposophic Meditations on the Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocalypse (p. 131). steinerbooks. Kindle Edition.

Yes, I also try to revisit posts and lectures to get a sense of how my understanding is changing. Thanks for this other angle on Christianity by Tomberg. Though I can't properly grasp all the meaning, I do appreciate the elevated perspective. I see the connection with the lecture, that creation and destruction are one, and how the resurrecting power of Love shines in the middle, the unifying principle of everything.

I should have included this section as well which introduces the above section:

***

WHEN WE STUDY the history of human cognition, we find that a problem runs through this history, as an unbroken thread, concerning the common source of the outer world and human consciousness. The cosmic Godhead in relation to the world and humanity was, and ever will be, the most important question for earthly humanity. Since the moment of the birth of thought this question has been answered in various ways. But, regardless of how manifold the answers to the question may be (apart from Atheism, which is a manifestation of spiritual disease rather than knowledge), they may ultimately be combined into three categories. The Godhead may be considered pantheistically, theistically, or deistically; it is the cosmic entity in itself, or it guides the universe it has created from outside, or it is the creative being at rest above the universe who, having created the world, has lost interest in its fate. In the first instance, we have the Godhead of all consciousness, enlightening the world and all life that flows through the currents of the world; in the second, we have the highest being with whom humankind is confronted; in the third, we have the transcendental originator of the cosmic system present in the cosmos, the same way a watchmaker is present in the constructed watch. These views depend on certain basic feelings that are peculiar to human souls in their views of life. One soul feels inundated and irradiated by the divine; another has the experience, as an independent being, of confronting the divine in free exchange; and yet another feels neither the flow of the divine in the cosmos nor its revelations in free interaction, but merely a memory of the divine as the rational principle that governs the universe. Those who hold these fundamental conceptions often stand in irreconcilable opposition, believing that the truth of their own view unmasks that of the other as mistaken. Thus, the pantheist views the theistic concept of God as anthropomorphic; the theist regards the pantheistic concept as naturalistic and vague; and both reject the concept of a deist (say, Voltaire) as an insubstantial abstraction. The deist, on the other hand, considers both the other concepts unscientific and philosophically unsound.

Tomberg, Valentin; Bruce, R.H.. Christ and Sophia: Anthroposophic Meditations on the Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocalypse (pp. 130-131). steinerbooks. Kindle Edition.