TheLightWithin
...through a glass, darkly
- Messages
- 1,778
- Reaction score
- 1,044
- Points
- 108
Essay on the Eucharist
- Thread starter Thomas
- Start date
I love that idea ...
"Er, Dad ... "
"What?"
"I've been looking at the world, Dad, and to be honest it seems pretty .. well, not to put too fine a point on it ..."
(Dad sighs. Somewhere on a continent a cliff slips into the sea). "Son, I gave you one job."
"I know, and I did it like you said, but—"
"But what? I'm bowling here!"
"But ... well ... nothing's changed!"
"Yeah ... well ... (sets His eye on the lane) ... you're mother's two point up. Some things will just have to wait ... "
Part of an essay I wrote long, long ago ...
Part of the obscurity of scripture is that we no longer read the language of symbology, for symbology (like geometry) is a sacred art in that it is, at every level, a means by which the Divine communicates with the mundane world. The tree, understandably, is a symbol common to tradition, and the 'Tree in the Midst' occurs in many, including Qabbalistic and Moslem esotericism, as well as many ancient mythologies. Here, however, we are primarily concerned with not so much the tree as the location.
In the midst, quite simply, means the tree stands at the centre, the axial point, of paradise. It is important to realise that we are now talking of the second chapter of Genesis, so whereas the first concerned creation as such, the second concerns a specific domain within creation, and this is the world of man, not as he is today, but as he was intended and created, in his primordial purity. We can, using the tree as an analogy, say that Genesis 1 is concerned with the trunk, thus the verticality of creation in its entirety from top to bottom, whilst Genesis 2 deals with the branches, or rather a specific branch, and thus the horizontal axis and a given dimension or mode of being. Somewhat vaguely, however, Genesis tells us 'And the Lord God had planted a paradise of pleasure from the beginning:' (2.8) by which we can understand that this paradise was created in Genesis 1, which in turn means it transcends the human state, or rather the mode of man, in all his states of being, which are the subject of Genesis 2. Thus the tree, in the midst, is axial; it reaches up above, and its roots descend below, the paradise of Eden, the specific garden in which the primordial couple find themselves. This is further reinforced, if such was necessary, by the four rivers which flow from the centre, the four directions being forward and back, left and right, whilst the tree comprises the remaining two, up and down. One might add, lastly on this, that the fact that the rivers flow from this point, rather than through the midst, implies that the tree represents the axial point, the centre not only physically in time and space, but the centre and origin of time and space as such.
There can only ever be one centre, but there are two trees. How is it possible that two trees occupy the same central point? Because they are the same tree, but viewed from different dimensions, or rather, that is how the one tree manifests in a different and particular mode of being. The first tree therefore, the hierarchic principal tree, is the tree of life, signifying the action of the First Cause in every mode of manifestation, and this tree grows, like the beanstalk, through every level of creation, top to bottom. The second tree, the tree of knowledge of good and evil, is the manifestation of that tree in a given domain. In another paradise, it will be known by a different name.
Ah, my bad ... they each represent an archetype.
Compared to the Hindu yogas – this from a site picked at random – I've tagged the names.
These are the only four realities in your life: body, mind, emotion, and energy. Whatever you wish to do with yourself, it must be on these four levels. Whatever you wish to do, you can only do it with your body, your mind, your emotions or your energy.
If you use your emotions and try to reach the ultimate, we call this bhakti yoga. That means the path of devotion – James.
If you use your intelligence and try to reach the ultimate, we call this gnana yoga. That means the path of intelligence – John.
If you use your body, or physical action to reach the ultimate, we call this karma yoga. That means the path of action – Peter.
If you transform your energies and try to reach the ultimate, we call this kriya yoga. That means internal action – Paul.
The name Mary (there are more than one in Scripture) signify the soul, or aspects thereof.
Ya reminding me of Unity's 12 powers now Thomas (they study each desciple and the power their archetype has to assist Jesus on his mission) The 12 Powers | Unity of Montclair
As I see it not dissimilar to your method. He took what he found in passages in the bible and other studies.
Charles Fillmore originated the "12 Powers" concept by drawing upon his studies of metaphysics, Christianity, and Eastern spirituality, believing that each individual possesses 12 God-given powers within them, including Faith, Love, Power, Wisdom, Imagination, Understanding, Will, Order, Zeal, Strength, Life, and Release; he detailed these powers in his book "The Twelve Powers of Man," essentially using the 12 disciples of Jesus as symbolic representations of these different aspects of the human consciousness.
Integration of spiritual traditions:
Fillmore combined elements from his Christian upbringing with concepts from Eastern philosophy, creating a system that could be applied to everyday life.
Focus on the inner potential:
The 12 Powers are seen as innate abilities within every person that can be developed through conscious awareness and practice.
Symbolic representation:
The 12 disciples of Jesus were used as symbolic figures to represent each of the 12 powers, allowing for a relatable way to understand their application.
The book free online
Twelve Powers of Man | Truth Unity
Twelve Powers of Man Written by: Charles Fillmore Unity School of Christianity
www.truthunity.net
Or for on your shelf
@RabbiO I recall reading during the formation of the Jewish Canon of scripture. There were to main sects of Judaism, the Bethelem group and the Jerusalem? They each had their own Bible? Neither would agree to a Canon that did not have their version of Genesis? So we get differing 7 days of creation?
Bact to Thomas my metaohysical trinitarian contemplation is that Gen1 is the minds creation, gen2 the thought and we (this evolutionary reality is the action.
Bact to Thomas my metaohysical trinitarian contemplation is that Gen1 is the minds creation, gen2 the thought and we (this evolutionary reality is the action.
Well mine is essentially Scripturally based – but it doesn't cover the 12, as we don't have enough data.
OK, I'm not discounting it – it's just that without a frame of reference I've got 12 colours, qualities, parts of the body, etc, which all seems a bit random, and could be arrived at by lottery?
I looked on the website and it says:
“Inherent in the Mind of Being are twelve fundamental ideas, which in action appear as primal creative forces. It is possible for man to ally himself with and to use these original forces . . .” (The Twelve Powers of Man 52)"
How are the 12 inherent in the Mind of Being?
These statements have no argument or correlation, no metaphysical foundation ... they're just given, to be accepted because he said so?
Why this 12 and not another 12? Where did this 12 come from?
I will look at the book ... but having just checked 'Matthew' and found 4 mentions, attributing qualities with no explanation, I don't hold out much hope. And no mention of Mary at all!
Last edited:
The conjecture is that Jesus gathered folks as disciples that had skills that he/the movement needed to assist in spreading the word...
What enjoy doing is substituting the trait for the man...and as I read a passage see how makes the interpretation of story applicable to my life and experience.
Paul said....Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus. Jesus chose these 12...not Charles.
In Mark 14:32-42, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John to Gethsemane to pray.
In Matthew 17:1-13, Mark 9:2-13, and Luke 9:28-36, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John up a mountain where Moses and Elijah appear.
In both cases he brought faith, wisdom and love, to pray when he needed it most, and in the latter to meet ( the metaphysical Bible dictionary is the result of Filmore's contemplations of the 12) Moses and Elijah are interpreted in a variety of ways, including:
Representing the Law and the Prophets
Moses represents the Jewish Law, while Elijah represents the Jewish Prophets. When God's voice from heaven says to listen to Jesus, it indicates that Jesus is replacing the old way with a new way.
Representing the evolutionary process of nature and spiritual discernment
Moses represents the evolutionary process of nature, while Elijah represents the power of spiritual discernment.
Representing the phase of consciousness concerned with the moral law
Moses represents the phase of consciousness that is concerned with the moral law, while Elijah represents the effect of the law.
Moses represents the highest human concept of God on a certain evolutionary level of human consciousness.
Moses and Elijah appear with Jesus in the Transfiguration, which is described in Matthew 17:1-9. Their appearance symbolizes that Jesus is the successor of Moses and Elijah, and has fulfilled both.
TheLightWithin
...through a glass, darkly
- Messages
- 1,778
- Reaction score
- 1,044
- Points
- 108
I always wondered that too, just haven't gotten around to searching for the sources the Fillmores used.
I wish I had been aware of it as a teenager though. I found out about it years later after I had already learned about things like bible scholarship and wasn't as keen to read it as I would have been when I was still trying to figure out different ways of understanding the bible as a source of truth. I still saw the bible in more mystical terms because of how reverently many people treated it. (including my heterodox grandfather) When I became more aware of the origins of the bible, I ended up wondering about the authority of this kind of thing too, rather than being like "aw, wow, a guide for bible interpretation!!"
One thing I am pretty sure of, is that they did NOT arrive at this through any claims to revelation. Ellen White of the SDAs claimed to experience direct revelation, Joseph Smith of LDS claimed to find his tablets with the help of an Angel, I think Mary Baker Eddy of Christian Science may have a bit more ambiguity around her seeming authority, a century later the Course in Miracles was developed by Helen Schuchman engaging in some kind of revelation or automatic writing, but I m pretty sure the Fillmores never claimed any supernatural intervention around their work. I believe they got their ideas through study of the bible and other religions. (Similarly Charles Taze Russel and Herberts Armstrong, I believe, never claimed divine revelation but only to study the Bible closely. They did not study other religions that I know of)
These people I reference are all very theologically distinct, what they have in common is theological innovation within the US around Christianity.