Spiritual Stages of Christian Mysticism

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

For a more in depth look:

[Justin of Flavia Neapolis]

I didn't really have a chance to watch the video yet because I'm at work at the moment.

Are you referring to early Christian mystics or modern?

I would agree there's a lot of similarity to mystic sects from other religions. Thich Nhat Hanh wrote a book called Living Buddha, Living Christ, it was an interesting read.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you an esoteric Christian?

I don't know. My endeavor is to follow The Way.

[Typh0n]

I'm not a Christian but I find myself attracted to the esoteric, or inner, approach to spirituality, and some of that does involve Christian symbolism. For example traditional alchemical illustrations draw upon alot of Christian symbolism.

It's not so much the symbols themselves and what they mean to society, but how those symbols influence you on your path/way. Though I do value scholarly approaches to understanding the proper context in which the symbols appear, hard data is indispensible in that regard.

My approach to research is based on the method developped by Stephen E. Flowers and which he outlines in his books and which he uses to bring to life the systems of magic he works with. The method consists of three steps.

The first step objective analysis: you have to start with the hard data, the best scholarship on the subject you can find. Once you have assembled a good view of the facts regarding the object of your study, you are ready for the next step. This means going to your local library and checking out what they have on the topic, reading books which are the best on the topic.

Then, the next step is subjective synthesis: once you've learned how the system works, you have to figure out what is you want to do with it. In other words if the first step is learning HTML, the second step is what you choose to do with it. Or, as Don Webb puts it, the first step could be considered learning the language, the second step choosing what you say.

The third step is called enactment: this is putting what you have learned, then synthesized, into practice. Getting results, though since we're on the subject of esoterism getting purely external results might not be what is called for. Though personally, I think that if you can't put what you've learned into practice, test it against the resistence of the world, then how do you know its really testing your blind spots? How do you know you're not deluding yourself into thinking you've gained some mighty mystical powers when in fact you are just fooling yourself? How would you know this difference. I feel this step is inevitable. If you're on an initiatory/internal path, like I am, the results here would be visible changes you've brought about in your life, not just changes in your material status (such as the house you live in or the car you drive) but deeper changes in your life.

This is how I approach any "occult" subject which I ultimately try to put into practice, regarldess of what it is. This might not be what the OP is asking, but whatever it's what I got.

[Typh0n]

I have an interest in mysticism and the occult in general. I'm reading a book on the Kabbalah right now, but that's Jewish mysticism. Although, doesn't Christian mysticism stem from Jewish mysticism since they are both from the same branch, but Judaism is older?

From what I know, what we have today of Jewish mysticism evolved parellel to Christian mysticism not before it, though technically you are right in that Judaism is older, and for example the gospels are a good example of texts that were influenced by Jewish concepts, most of them not in the bible. Although the Jewish apocalyptic books that influenced the gospels are not Kaballah.

Traditional practitioners believe its earliest origins pre-date world religions, forming the primordial blueprint for Creation's philosophies, religions, sciences, arts, and political systems. Historically, Kabbalah emerged, after earlier forms of Jewish mysticism, in 12th- to 13th-century Southern France and Spain, becoming reinterpreted in the Jewish mystical renaissance of 16th-century Ottoman Palestine. Safed Rabbi Isaac Luria is considered the father of contemporary Kabbalah. It was popularised in the form of Hasidic Judaism from the 18th century onwards. Twentieth-century interest in Kabbalah has inspired cross-denominational Jewish renewal and contributed to wider non-Jewish contemporary spirituality, as well as engaging its flourishing emergence and historical re-emphasis through newly established academic investigation.

I found it here:Kabbalah - Wikipedia

[LovecraftianMonstrosity]

The Phenomenon of Man by Pierre Tielhard de Chardin was interesting

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin - Wikipedia

[Mole]

Yes, I am drawn to the medieval text, "The Cloud of Unknowing", by Anonymous.

It is interesting that the great medieval cathedrals of Christianity were built by the same person who wrote. "The Cloud of Unknowing", that is, Anonymous. It seems Anonymous walked the talk.

Have a squiz at cloud of unknowning summarized in modern english

[Lark]

The Phenomenon of Man by Pierre Tielhard de Chardin was interesting

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin - Wikipedia

I like his idea of the Omega point, its curious to think that people promoting his thinking were almost accused of heresy and the hierarchy was so confused about it all only for subsequent authorities, including Benedict and Francis, if I'm not mistaken, to validate it.

I've got one of his books, he is a little difficult to understand, Dawkins et al hate him I think, if I'm not wrong went to great lengths to suggest all his contributions were to no end or something.

[Lark]

Yes, I am drawn to the medieval text, "The Cloud of Unknowing", by Anonymous.

It is interesting that the great medieval cathedrals of Christianity were built by the same person who wrote. "The Cloud of Unknowing", that is, Anonymous. It seems Anonymous walked the talk.

Have a squiz at cloud of unknowning summarized in modern english

He single handedly built the medieval cathedrals while writing his book?