Netero

As in all religions, there are two sides of the coin; exoteric and esoteric.

The Neoplatonic philosopher Sallustius expressed this differently, in mentioning the five different ways to read a myth - the theological, the physical, the psychical, the material and the mixed. The theological concerns itself with metaphysical principles, the physical with natural laws, the psychical with the soul, and the material with concrete substances, such as historic events.

Jung's and Campbell's methods falls under the psychical, in that they apply the myths on a psychological basis, while many egyptologists, for example, utilize the physical method, in portraying the ancients as enthusiastic farmers that couldn't comprehend the ways of nature properly and scientifically. And the material interpretation is more or less how you're interpreting these myths, seeing God as the catalyst of historical genocide.

A theological interpretation is an esoteric interpretation. The higher principles, irregardless of tradition, has always been expressed symbolically, because such writing pertains to our imagination and intuition, and not reason, with the former being more receptive in it's scope than the latter.

The waters of Genesis, for example, aren't literal waters. Water here is used in its symbolic quality of darkness and inertia - in other words, God in his transcendent aspect of non-being, which would equal to the Dao, Brahman and Nun.

I'm not in the mood for a long-winded post, so I'll refer to Sri Yukteswar's "The Holy Science", for a theological interpretation of the Bible in accordance to Vedantic philosophy. Here's a link to his interpretation of Adam and Eve; http://www.vedarahasya.net/genesis.htm

It's easy enough to brush the absuridity off as the writings of delusional madmen, but leave that pleasure to the atheists. The Bible is a beautiful scripture for those with the eyes to see - and these are not the superficial lenses of blind fundamentalists or arrogant scientists. It would certainly do no harm to have a little humbleness and respect towards a fellow mystic tradition.

.

.

.

.

Excellent. Thanks for all the contributions.

I'm exclusively inclined towards the mystical aspect of internal cultivation for now. While I do find the martial and medicinal aspects both fascinating and practical, I'd rather be economical with my focus the first few years of training.

I am rather new to the world of internal cultivation; I only know of two good sources in these strange lands - Max Christensen and Jerry Alan Johnson.

I was hoping you could share what you consider the most potent source(s) in terms of practice - of course, each of us has our own particular constitution, ideals and natural inclinations, so this is not to be understood as a childish attempt to find the "best" system. It is simply an inquiry as to what have worked the best for you.

I've dabbled for a few years with western esoteric philosophy - with the writings of Franz Bardon and the Graeco-Egyptian tradition being among my favorites - as well as practicing some foundational yoga.

While I share many sentiments regarding the nature of man with the magical tradition, I've come to realize that my hearts path lies with internal alchemy. Lately I've been fascinated with the Tantric tradition of Shakti worship.

I've come here to see what I can learn and contribute where I may.