[cepAceryTem]

dear rocky, deeze,everyone,

in my opinion, the biggest issue under consideration concerns ideas about "the second coming" and what exactly this means. smith shared this just before the part i had quoted you rocky in post(found where-i'd saved it but not identified where, see chapter so titled in his burning bush). nina

http://www.bibleandanthroposophy.com
"if, as we know, along with all christendom paul viewed the resurrection of christ as central to our faith (1 cor 15,12-19), no less so was the certainty of his return, the parousia, or “second coming” (1 cor 16,22; 1 th 2,19; 3,13; 4,15 and 5,23; 2 th 2,1,8; heb 9,28 and 10,37). but the conviction that his resurrection was “in the body” and the expectation that his return would be likewise have, with the loss of the first century’s inspired vision and the increasing focus upon the modern “scientific” mind, caused the truth to be lost by division (a “house divided,” mt 12,25-26) into opposing camps of internecine misunderstanding. on the one hand are the fundamentalists who maddeningly insist on the reconstitution, atom by atom, of the mineral-physical body not only of christ but also of his followers “on the last day.” on the other hand are the rest who, hopelessly diffused, nevertheless hold tenaciously, likewise as a matter of “faith,” to some type of resurrection and second coming, but cannot swallow the incredible inconsistencies assumed by the “atomic” scenario. in between, erstwhile believers slip away from firm conviction while their younger sensitive counterparts ignore christianity as increasingly irrelevant, understandably disenchanted by both camps.

one senses that just as humanity had to sink to the “right time” before the advent of christ, christianity had to come to this threshold of immolation before comprehension of the reconciling truth of the mystery of golgotha could ripen faith into a faith based upon the greater certainty of knowledge.

anthroposophy shows us that christ incarnated “once for all” and that those who expect its repeat do not understand the cosmic significance of the incarnation in the first instance. yet, while the “atomic” scenario is indeed an ahrimanic (delusively materialistic; see 2 th 2,11) falsehood, it is nevertheless true that the resurrection of christ was in the “body,” so also will be his second coming. paul made a clear distinction, of course, between “the body” and “the flesh,” and it is this distinction that is ignored by the expectation of “atomic” reconstitution. the resurrection of christ was of all of his three bodies, the physical, etheric and astral, while the higher components of his being (see i-9) experienced death without themselves ever having died (jn 11,26). "

and further ahead on p5:
"let us look now at what steiner said about the matter. while in all of the works cited above, steiner speaks of the coming perceptions of christ in the etheric world as the second coming, the most complete assembly of lectures thereon is in the reappearance of christ in the etheric (rce). in the first lecture he speaks of paul’s damascus road experience as a vision (as of one “untimely born,” 1 cor 15,8) of the etheric christ, a first fruit, in a manner of speaking, of what is now more and more to be experienced by humans who develop the necessary organ of perception. the nature of paul’s knowledge was based upon his own experience rather than what he learned from others (gal 1,11-12). he was thus, along with others who had seen the risen christ, an etheric “eyewitness,” the only type relied upon by luke (lk 1,2). and just as paul did not rely upon any written or spoken word, neither will those who now come to experience christ in the etheric world, by raising themselves up to an etheric vision of him (jer 31,33; 2 cor 3; heb 10,15-16). souls who fail in this incarnation to prepare themselves will have to wait until they are again incarnated and will thus lose the increased consciousness during their long term in the spiritual world. the face of the earth will have changed in the interim."