So...you're basically debating doctrine and "scripture," which is pointless in terms of understanding how cults operate. You are assuming an awful lot. I don't think there's is any evidence as to what "most Christians" believe or don't believe. If you have any survey data or research citations, please post them.

But, I am not going to debate beliefs.
Cathleen Mann, PhD

Hi Catherine,

Thank you for your input!

What is "not credible" about that site? While it calls itself "liberal conspiracy", it is not Alexjones.com or of that ilk. It is one person's opinions, some of which I agree with, others not so much. To have a problem with it is to have a problem with the concept of blogging itself. Either the arguments stand on their own or they don't. What in particular does the site claim that you find not credible?

"However, I must say that the New Testament of the Christian or Catholic Bible (in any one of its 40+ translations) does not necessarily represent an actual record of Jesus's teaching, even if such as historical figure ever existed. The creation of the Bible was largely a political process with the Council of Nicea. I think it is important to remember that whatever Jesus's supposed teachings were is a matter of faith, not fact. That is just one reason why the Christian bible or any other "holy book" is not a peer reviewed source, and does not necessarily represent a historical or factual rendering."


-Yeah, I don't know that anyone is claiming that? However, there is a certain level of agreement among most Christians (I'm not one) as to what constitutes the religion. A belief in the teachings of the Four Gospels, a belief that "Jesus died for your sins", and the belief that JESUS was "the prophet", not Jim Jones, David Koresh, Steiner, Joseph Smith or any other cult leader that came after. Anthroposophy does not fit into most people's concept of Christianity... because it's not Christian. Whether or not "Jesus existed" is besides the point and not the matter of discussion in this thread.

"I'm not sure what you mean by "mainstream" churches, as the term is vague. There are thousands of "denominations" in the (protestant) Christian religion, notwithstanding the various conflicted Catholic groups, and all portray themselves as uniquely correct. The Roman Church is not the only Catholic position."

-Generally that refers to groups like Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Lutherans. These groups, while having many political differences, believe in a certain core philosophy. It does not refer to groups like Jehovahs Witness, LDS, 7DA, Christian Science, etc. It most certainly does not refer to Anthroposophists.

For me, my disdain for it is not that it "isn't Christian enough", but that it is a flat-out Nazi philosophy with roots in fascist mysticism and a general wandervogel mentality. That pervades down to this day through Waldorf Schools, Triodos, Transition Town, biodynamic farming, and other manifestations. These things are appealing to people who are NOT of fascist background and probably would reject them if they knew of their fascistic roots. They are not just relevant to the '30s, but are relevant TODAY. Note that Waldorf schools have been in the news the past few weeks for their incredibly low vaccination rates. This is based on their pre-Enlightenment rejection of science (aka "Jews"), modernity, science, and rationalism. They still have an impact on our world.

If they were merely "not Christian enough", I could care less. It's that they aren't "non-Hitler enough". that is the problem.

"But, I am not going to debate beliefs."

-And, yet here you are... debating beliefs. It is quite clear that the majority of "mainstream Christians" believe in:

a) the Holy Trinity
b) the notion that Jesus died for your sins
c) the 10 Commandments
d) the Four Gospels as the most important part of the bible

They do not believe:

a) that god lives on a planet named Kolob
b) that medicine is to be shunned, including things like blood transfusions
c) that God is channeled through snake handling

Does that make things more clear? Also, since you like to sign off with your "PhD", what is your PhD in? Where do you teach? What exactly is your point in signing on to this board?

The notion that scripture is "not relevant to how cults operate" is belied by nearly every cult or cultlike movement that has ever existed. It's like saying that Islam is not important to the Islamic State.

You are mistaken that *all* Christians believe the things you list. Perhaps you should read more widely.

I am a member of Rick Ross's advisory board and wrote the forward to his book. Perhaps you can check it out sometime when you feel the need to question my motives, since doing so is ad hominen.

I was never debating beliefs. However, you are incorrect if you think that all Christians agree.

Cathleen Mann, PhD

Well, I apologize, did not realize you were on Rick's board. I had assumed that you were a pro-waldorf poster looking to stir up trouble, which, if you have read the board much, you know is not an unusal occurence.

I would also point out that you did not read my statement carefully as I did not say "all Christians".

Here is what I said, and I stand by my statement.

" It is quite clear that the majority of "mainstream Christians" believe in:

a) the Holy Trinity
b) the notion that Jesus died for your sins
c) the 10 Commandments
d) the Four Gospels as the most important part of the bible"

-Please refute that if you think it is inaccurate.

I have PM'd Mr Ross about this situation.

Meanwhile, let us focus on Anthroposophy.

[www.facebook.com]

My Trial with the Federation of Steiner-Waldorf Schools of France -- Grégoire Perra

[sites.google.com]


[www.facebook.com]

Corboy note: these appear to be exerpts from the transcript.

The Waldorf Review May 26, 2013 ·

Quote

The Trial of Gregoire Perra Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Gregoire Perra is on trial for speaking freely about his experience with Waldorf and Anthroposophy. Below is the Bing translation of a blog he posted and removed on advise of his attorney. It describes the first day of the trial.
Enjoy!

A few moments anthology a trial

Moments anthology trial
(Small skits quasi-fictional, or how Anthroposophy turns publicly Comedy)
Any resemblance is purely coincidental specific facts: it does not seek to give an account of an event but is a work of fiction

for the excerpts quoted from the trial by Waldorf Watch
read here:

[www.facebook.com]

[www.quackometer.net]

Quote


What the Steiner Waldorf School Movement did not want you to read.

by Andy Lewis • June 14, 2013 • 95 Comments

Earlier this month, Grégoire Perra was finally acquitted in a French court

[gregoireperra.wordpress.com]

after the Federation of Waldorf Steiner Schools in France decided to sue Grégoire Perra, a former Steiner teacher, for publishing a critique of the schools and the anthroposophy movement.

The trial appears to have collapsed as the court accepted that the account was not written out of malice but as an honest examination of the Steiner School system.

[gregoireperra.wordpress.com]

It also looked as if the trial had its farcical moments

for the rest of the Quakometer article read here.

[www.quackometer.net]


Ninety-five comments follow this article.

Note how one person tried to minimize the significance of Mr. Perra's
acquittal, calling it a no-brainer.

Quote

Quote

Maryline

March 11, 2014 at 7:46 pm


Whether pro or anti anthroposophy, one fails to look at the fact that this took place in France which is against any form of teaching that doesn’t fall under the criteria of National Education. It has, for many years, tried to close down Steiner Schools brandishing it as a Sect and organising raids in the schools themselves, back in the mid 1980’s, sending the police in the middle of lessons attended by very young children. The French government is currently trying to ban homeschooling which is seen as a dissident movement in order to eventually be able to ban any independent school which does not follow the national curriculum and hasn’t been vetted by the Inspection d’Académie. This in the name of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité… The fact that Grégoire Perra was “acquitted” is no brainer, the school was never going to win that one. If you speak to any French native (and I am French myself) and try to find faults with “Laïcité and its propaganda”, you will see how they foam at the mouth, isn’t that a form of indoctrination

?

Quote

Pete Karaiskos

March 12, 2014 at 2:02 pm


“Whether pro or anti anthroposophy, one fails to look at the fact that this took place in France”

The trial took place in France. Mr. Perra’s observations are common to all Waldorf schools. Confirmation that his testimony is truthful has been abundant.

“The fact that Grégoire Perra was “acquitted” is no brainer, the school was never going to win that one. ”

And still, they sued Mr. Perra. Why? If they knew they couldn’t win, then what was the lawsuit about? Punishing Mr. Perra

?

Finally, an article from "Stop Steiner in Stroud"



[stopsteinerinstroud.com]

Quote


Something Useful to Know

Sometimes it is difficult to know who is an anthroposophist and who is not. Maybe on an open day, most parents would not remember to ask whether a teacher is an anthroposophist – or maybe they would feel a little bit awkward about asking. Maybe it seems like a personal question.

The problem is, that whether or not a member of staff is an anthroposophist could be important when it comes to what kind of education your child will receive at the school. If the person is a member of the Anthroposophical Society, (the fourth circle in the diagram in the blog post “Who are the anthroposophists?”)

[gregoireperra.wordpress.com]

it is more than likely they will believe in reincarnation and karma, and they will think these are acceptable in a school.

One distinguishing feature of anthroposophists may be their name according to Gregoire Perra. Along with their style of dress – certain shades of pink and mauve being popular, (but the general tone is brown,) certain names are common because they are the names of spiritual beings, and are important in Steiner’s cosmology.

These include Michael, Sophia, Gabriel, Theo, Thea, Maria and Marie

Comments

Quote


September 16, 2013 - 12:32 pm

Helen

Apart from those names, anthroposophists may choose certain more unusual biblical names such as Raphael, Noah, Saul, Nora. I mention these as I have heard from people with such names recently. Add Anthony to the list.

Reply





September 17, 2013 - 10:27 pm

Geoff

You may have a valid point about the colour of clothing.
Thing is though, I’m not actually an Anthropop (as we lovingly call them in our school – Anthroposophist is so hard to say in the middle of saying something important), but I do like the idea of re-incarnation.

Reply




September 18, 2013 - 8:51 am

Helen

I never thought you were an anthro!
I think you are a classic case of a parent who has been drawn in, as Greg Perra describes. He has written a section on how parents are indoctrinated. Have you read it?
No, I do not believe everything I read on the internet, but I have some experience to draw on, read testimonies, met those who have suffered,and also read books about how anthroposophy operates.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2015 09:37PM by corboy.

I have refuted your statement, and continue to do so. "Mainstream" Christianity is very diverse. You can either accept that or reject it. It doesn't matter anyway because beliefs are not how cults are defined. I'm glad you are comfortable in your assumptions, but that does not make them facts. I have always posted using my real name. It's easy to check out. I have never used a pseudonym to post anything anywhere at any time.
Cathleen Mann, PhD

Everyone step back and take a deep breath.

This thread is about Anthroposophy not a debate about Christian beliefs.

Please stay on topic.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2015 10:06PM by rrmoderator.

I think at this juncture it's important to remind everyone that the rules of this message board state, "The purpose of this message board is not to promote a specific religious and/or political viewpoint."

See [forum.culteducation.com]

This board over the years has had it's share of people breaking this rule. Often it's done by people that want to drag a thread off topic because they are members of the group being discussed.

Let's try to stay focused like a laser on the topic, which is Anthroposophy.

This thread is not about what constitutes "Christian" beliefs in the mainstream or not in the mainstream. And that discussion is not appropriate for this message board per the rules.

At times people have pointed out certain basic beliefs that a group may express in contrast to commonly understood Christian beliefs if they claim to be a Christian group, only for the purpose of demonstrating how such a group's claims may be inconsistent with the most basic beliefs of Christianity.

But that is not the topic here nor the focus for discussion on this thread.

"This board over the years has had it's share of people breaking this rule. Often it's done by people that want to drag a thread off topic because they are members of the group being discussed."

-Bingo. Apologies to Dr. Mann for assuming that was her goal. Some of these threads are pretty much Corboy and AntiCult doing data dumps for years on end (keep it up!), with only me and a few others chiming in. I wish more people were interested in cults, but that is sadly not the case. And oftentimes when someone aside from the hardcore regualars jumps into these whom we are unfamiliar with, it is often borne out that they are there to disrupt.

And, yes, let's stick to Anthropsophy, there is plenty to discuss there...