Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > Resources > Share the knowledge
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-29-2005, 08:57 AM
Draken Draken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 896
Default Knowledge of the Symbol


Pietro Negri, in his article Knowledge of the Symbol, writes:

"According to Dante (Convivium, II, 1), "texts can be understood and expounded according to four senses": the literal sense; the allegorical sense, which Dante says, "is a truth concealed behind a beautiful lie"; the moral sense; and the anagogical sense. This anagogical sense occurs when "reading in a spiritual way way a scriptural passage, which in its literal meaning and in the things being signified points toward the things of eternal glory"; in other words, it is the innermost meaning of a text that, even when it has a literal sense, deals with topics of a spiritual nature. This latter sense must be clearly distinguished from the allegorical and moral senses, which in comparison with the anagogical sense, at least from a spiritual point of view, have a secondary importance."

With this in mind a text, any text, could have these four levels of meaning. Of course, there are many texts lacking this fourth, anagogical level, since it is not trying to convey any spiritual meaning.

Since my opinion is that the text of the Bible also should be subjected to these possible four ways of understanding a text, it follows that one could argue the Bible to be able to convey multiple meanings on multiple levels of understanding. There is not just ONE WAY to understand the Bible.

Jesus himself taught in allegorical stories, where the allegorical, not the literal meaning was the essence. Is it possible to see the allegorical, or even anagogical meaning of Jesus' words? I say yes, but maybe Literalist Christians would say no. This could be because they take everything at face value, like Nex for instance, not realizing the possible ulterior motives for a person being nice to him.

Of course, one can choose to take Jesus' words as they are, interpret them literally and be perfectly satisfied with the result. Jesus makes perfect sense taken literally. But does that mean there is absolutely NO meaning on other possible levels? Surely one should not deny the possibility for others to understand the texts of the Bible differently from one's own understanding?

__________________
Three things are sacred to me: first Truth, and then, in its tracks, primordial prayer; Then virtue–nobility of soul which, in God walks on the path of beauty. Frithjof Schuon
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-29-2005, 09:47 AM
Saturnino Saturnino is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 624
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Draken,
What would be the useful of a revelation from God if this revelation didn't have a meaning that is easy to understand ? The answer is: none, it would be a waste of time.

The Bible is indeed full of subtleties, some better understood by the spiritually mature, but its essence is easy to understand, even for a child. The Bible itself says that it is not open to personal interpretation (2Pe 1:20), and that any other gospel should be accursed.

What you are doing is trying to sell us relativism. It is a totally different discussion that involves epistemology and the nature of truth, not only the Bible. One has to accept relativism before accepting your view of the Bible.

Why don't you for a change tell us what YOU believe the Bible is all about ? Who do YOU think Jesus is ?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-29-2005, 10:48 AM
Draken Draken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 896
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

I will not tell you, Sat, because it's a waste of energy and time to say things twice, sometimes multiple times. I can't be bothered to write it down again, right now, for your enjoyment. Maybe at some later stage.

CC is getting so big I'm having trouble finding my own stuff.

I'm not trying to "sell" anything, Sat, please, you are so off the mark. I'm trying to discuss different ways of seeing things. I'm not disagreeing with you:

First you say this:
Quote:
The Bible is indeed full of subtleties, some better understood by the spiritually mature, but its essence is easy to understand, even for a child
My presponse to the above statement;-) - I wrote it BEFORE your answer:
"Jesus makes perfect sense taken literally"

...and follow it up with this:
Quote:
The Bible itself says that it is not open to personal interpretation
According to my Bible, it is unlikely that this letter is written by Simon Peter.

<a href="http://bible.gospelcom.net/passage/?search=2Pe%201:20-21&version=9;">20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.</a>

What is a holy man but a person? The movement of the Holy Ghost has to be transmitted in SOME way, preferably via a human being?

Anyway, I find it questionable to refer to anything said by anyone else than Jesus, as far as that is possible to determine.

Could you find a quote attributed to Jesus saying that I'm not allowed to have my understanding of his words?

Just because you see only one way to understand the Bible, am I not allowed to understand it on another level? After all, am I not a different person and don't I have other experiences and insights than you; don't I think, behave or feel differently from the way you do? Is "a personal interpretation" to you, any interpretation that differs from yours and therefore not possible?

Could it not be, that the Bible is so well constructed, so as to be able to cater to anyone's spiritual and intellectual demands, regardless of spiritual level?
__________________
Three things are sacred to me: first Truth, and then, in its tracks, primordial prayer; Then virtue–nobility of soul which, in God walks on the path of beauty. Frithjof Schuon
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-29-2005, 12:28 PM
Bouncer Bouncer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 765
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Sometimes I find deeply personal significance in the Bible. It speaks to me in a way that others cannot hear. I also read with care, knowing that any attempt to alter the words or the interpretation is proscribed by the Book itself. Interpretation depends at least in part on hearing the Spirit as He leads you to the proper conclusion and what to do about it. The Bible is a book for action, not just reading!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-29-2005, 02:49 PM
Saturnino Saturnino is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 624
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Draken,

make up your mind, buddy !

Of course you have the right to think whatever you want about Jesus. But I have the right to think your understanding is wrong. We CAN'T have two truths, two different realities for the same phenomena. One of us is wrong.

That's why I said you are a relativist, while I believe in absolute truth. Our reasoning differs in a deeper way than the Bible issue.

Adapting what the Bible says to your life is not the same as saying it is different in its message. It means you get a single, unique message and use it in different ways.

In fact, I believe there is a spiritual component in faith (God gives us faith ultimately) so I am not insisting. I can never "make " you believe by force.
I just think it would make a discussion easier if you posted in what YOU believe.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-29-2005, 04:17 PM
Draken Draken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 896
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

OK, Sat.

It's late here but I quickly say what I believe, the main point.

Truth is much bigger than both your and my idea of it. You're holding the tail of the elephant and I'm holding one of the legs. Therefore you think you're holding a snake and I think I'm holding a tree trunk.

One of us is not wrong. Both of us is right.

We see different sides of the same, Absolute Truth.

I'm convinced of the transcendental unity of religions. All world religions convey the same basic ideas. They differ in their outer shell, their form, but their inner meaning is the same. They all use symbolism that is of a universal character and convey the same metaphysical wisdom, regardless of outer dogmatic forms.

I don't believe one religion is right and all others are wrong. Jesus was not the only one to teach what he taught, so when he says I am the Truth, the Way, the Life, he means that by acting like him the way is open to spiritual fulfillment. He doesn't say, "all those Nordic peoples are wrong" because their Tradition is saying the same thing Jesus said.
Hence, my opinion is that all religions are RIGHT. (But then again I don't agree with Barbara when she says Satanism is a religion, but that's another issue.)

If you are Hindu for example, the doctrine of Jesus would correspond to the way of Bakti, i.e. Love. But there are other ways to reach liberation than by the doctrine of Love, according to Hindu Tradition. The Way of Love is one way among a few others.

Another example is the born-again idea. It's a universal idea of spiritual awakening, the destruction of the Ego, in exchange of the realization and manifestation of the Self. It exists in all manifestations of Traditional civilizations. It is there in Islam as well as in Buddhism, the Tao-Te-Ching, the ancient Vedic religion.

So when Jesus says to Nicodemus "unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God"(John 3:3) I see a universal idea, transmitted through Jesus, who most definately knew what he was talking about, being what in the Hindu/Vedic Tradition is called dvija or a "twice born".

The same goes for certain pre-Christian doctrines like the Mithraic Mysteries, where Mithras killing the bull is a universal symbol of the destruction of the Ego, the false self, and Mithras' "adventures" is an inner journey of the soul, the ending of which is the killing of the Ego.

Hope that clears it up for you.
__________________
Three things are sacred to me: first Truth, and then, in its tracks, primordial prayer; Then virtue–nobility of soul which, in God walks on the path of beauty. Frithjof Schuon
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-29-2005, 05:31 PM
this this is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 281
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Here's my two cents worth:

Penny #1: The Bible like any document should be taken in the context it was written, when it was written, in this case 2000 years ago.

Penny #2: There's a cult in the USA called Dispensationalism that takes selected verses from the Bible, mixes them up, and comes to a conclusion. It certainly avoids Penny #1 in reaching it's conclusions. Dispensationalism is a school of thought roughly 200 years old that at one time relied on the Scofield Reference Bible that added verses to the Bible to strengthen it's position.

My main problem, if anyone cares, with Bible study is when it strays from context. My understanding as it relates to the above, is that Jesus was sent to the people so that they could better relate to a God in their image. He tried to tell the people that they should not look for a warrior king in their God, but believe in God and love God without the pyrotechnics so espoused by the End of the Worlders of today. They should have faith in Gods power and will through spritual faith alone, not through physical proof. Any disbeliever can believe in God and fear him if given pyrotechnics, but such people are not spiritually enlightened by such shows of force.

It seemed that Jesus asked, in his case, where he was, that the Jews should refrain from their materialistic excesses and instead look within to join him in his spiritual kingdom. I need not say more I don't think.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-29-2005, 05:54 PM
nomad nomad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 790
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Quote:
Saturnino wrote:
Draken,

make up your mind, buddy !

Of course you have the right to think whatever you want about Jesus. But I have the right to think your understanding is wrong. We CAN'T have two truths, two different realities for the same phenomena. One of us is wrong.

That's why I said you are a relativist, while I believe in absolute truth. Our reasoning differs in a deeper way than the Bible issue.

Adapting what the Bible says to your life is not the same as saying it is different in its message. It means you get a single, unique message and use it in different ways.

In fact, I believe there is a spiritual component in faith (God gives us faith ultimately) so I am not insisting. I can never "make " you believe by force.
I just think it would make a discussion easier if you posted in what YOU believe.

Who was Jeezus ?

The best salesman of all time ? ... after
surveying the market he reasoned that what
everybody really wants is a product called
eternal life. Pure genius.

The best communicator of all time ?

Using no microphone, without bothering to write
a single letter he is quoted everyday in over
1 000 000 buildings built in his honor.

The best actor of all time ?

He convinced billions that he was none other
than God himself in the flesh ... and his act
is still taking in the Oscars from people's
hearts all over the world.

The best magician of all time ?

Houdini and David Copperfield envy how he fooled the world then and for 2000 years since, how he came back from the dead.

The greatest programmer of all time ?

Bill Gates gave the world the most widespread
program for the computer ... but Jeezus created
the most popular operating system ever made for the mind.

The greatest lawyer of all time ?

Not only did he claim that he wrote the book
of laws known as Torah, but with his words and deeds he built the case that convinced billions of people that he indeed is its author.

The greatest doctor of all time ?

He actually did something that todays doctors can't seem to do with any illness or disease and that is to cure you. His last words were that ignorance was the greatest illness of mankind.

Not bad for a Jew boy.
__________________
:-o
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-29-2005, 06:56 PM
Saturnino Saturnino is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 624
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Thanks Draken,
If we set aside the cross and the claim that Jesus made to be God and that salvation only came thru Him, I could agree with you.
Love, fellowship, peace are taught by many religions. They could be parts from the same elephant.
But I just want to clarify that we are not touching the same elephant. You are touching a Jesus that is just a good enlightened man, and I am touching Jesus, God in flesh. Different things.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-29-2005, 07:29 PM
Stranger Stranger is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 84
Default Re: Knowledge of the Symbol

Sat, interesting observation. That is what I was thinking as well. I was wondering why a past conversation with Drak seemed to make no sense. Then it dawned on me, Drak, whether or not he may know it, views the world through a lens of moral relativism. Like hitting your head against a brick wall. Not saying your wrong Drak, just helps to explain my confusion with some of your writings
__________________
You only live ...twice
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Freemason symbol in Baghdad streets Max Freemasonry 13 08-24-2008 11:06 PM
Peace Sign is a Satanic Symbol ! Bikermice New World Order operatives 3 06-06-2006 09:03 AM
First hand knowledge Stranger Alternate History 19 09-19-2005 02:48 PM
SYMBOL OF THE FLAME/TORCH get_real What is really going on? 6 07-07-2005 05:28 PM
What Is This Cross Symbol-Found In All Matrix Movies? truebeliever New World Order operatives 4 04-14-2005 04:09 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.