{Fundamental Points of View [continued (9)]}[14th March 1988]

[Redbook5:59][19880314:1115i]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (9)]}[14th March 1988]

19880314.1115

[continued]

Is 'my' Christ the Anti-Christ?* Logically, you would have to work outside the framework of the Circles to say so, since the Anti-Christ must presumably be opposite diametrically to Christ, if I understand the concept aright: in relation to +C†I~, the Anti-Christ must be at A~ ([Azrael,] interestingly, the only one of the Circle Archangels who does not seem to come from the Judao-Christian canon,** but from Islam). Satan is (I believe) at A~, and Lucifer's fall*** is from S~ (note the anagrammatical near-correspondence)**** to A~: # this connection of S~ and A~ corresponds to that of R~ and A~.

But I imagine such men as my fundamentalist friend would say that the whole Circles idea is demonic, and must be abandoned. After all, they do not accept the basic validity of scientific knowledge. What this amounts to in the end is exclusion on a vast scale: the problem, as earlier adherents have discovered,#* is that the World has a habit of not being excluded. One way or another, you do have to grapple with it.

*{It would certainly be a devilish trick to present a logically 'closed' system with a Christ-substitute, excluding Christ.}

[ref. [Redbook5:55-56][19880314:1115e]{Fundamental Points of View [continued (5)]}[14th March 1988]]

[& cf. [Redbook5:67-76][19880316:1300]{False Christs; True Christ}[16th March 1988], 67-68]

**'I am Raphael, one of the seven angels who stand ever ready to enter the presence of the glory of the Lord.' (i.e. excluding Azrael, in Circle terms) (Tobit 12.15)

***[See [Redbook5:61-62][19880314:1600]{Lucifer (1)}[14th March 1988]]

****[i.e. of Sariel and Azreal.]

#ref IV [?] ….

#*e.g. Mediaeval Munster? [–] the Anabaptists?

[continues]

[PostedBlogger25012018]