{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p004-p005","extent":"range","passage_number":4,"through":5,"paragraph_count":2,"first_locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p004","last_locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p005","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"title":"V. The Seven Degrees of Initiation","date":"1908-05-23","location":null,"alignment_confidence":"medium","alignment_reason":"beads:length","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"Maud B. Monges","identified_edition":"AP1962","book_title":"The Gospel of St. John","publisher":"Anthroposophic Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA103/English/AP1962/19080523p01.html","evidence":"lecture_page_line","publisher_note":"The publisher is inferred from the edition code in this lecture's source URL, not stated by the source page. The translator IS verified for this lecture: its own source names the translator (evidence: the lecture's page, rsarchive's lecture list, or the cover of the book it was published in), and that page's text was matched against this unit (see match_score and source_url). Cite the translator with confidence; attribute the publisher only as probable."},"edition_coverage":{"de":["original"],"en":["English"]},"record":{"record_type":"unknown","scope":"volume","note":"How this text was taken down (shorthand transcript, listeners' notes or manuscript) is not on record here. Unknown is not an assurance of a stenogram: check the edition's own notes before resting an argument on one word.","evidence":null,"evidence_translation":null,"evidence_source":null},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":1.06,"band":"comparable","note":null,"word_count":7320,"original_word_count":6933,"may_be_abridged":false},"site_heading":null,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/103/1908-05-23/p004-p005","json_url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/103/1908-05-23/p004-p005.json","lecture_url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/103/1908-05-23#p004","word_count":639,"quote_safe":true,"passages":[{"passage_number":4,"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p004","text":"In a consideration of the Gospel of St. John, we should never lose sight of that most important point which was brought out in the lecture yesterday namely, that in the original writer of the Gospel we have to do with the “Beloved Disciple,” initiated by Christ-Jesus Himself. One might naturally ask if, aside from occult knowledge, there exists, perhaps, some external proof of this statement by means of which the writer of this Gospel has intimated that he came to a higher order of knowledge about the Christ through the “raising,” through the initiation which is represented in the so-called miracle of the raising of Lazarus. If you will read the Gospel of St. John carefully, you will observe, that nowhere previous to that chapter which treats of the raising of Lazarus is there any mention of the “Disciple whom the Lord loved.” In other words, the real author of the Gospel wishes to say: What precedes this chapter does not yet have its origin in the knowledge which I have received through initiation, therefore in the beginning you must disregard me. Only later does he mention the “Disciple whom the Lord loved.” Thus the Gospel falls into two important parts, the first part in which the Disciple whom the Lord loved is not yet mentioned because he had not yet been initiated, and that part which comes after the raising of Lazarus in which this Disciple is mentioned. Nowhere in the document itself will you find any contradictions of what I have presented in the previous lectures. Naturally, anyone who considers the Gospel only superficially will easily pass this by, will not notice it and at the present time when everything is popularized, when all manner of knowledge is forced upon us, we can often experience as an extraordinary spectacle much of a very doubtful character in this knowledge.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":311,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/103/1908-05-23/p004","german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"1908-05-23","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p003","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/103/1908-05-23/p003"}],"bead_confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"proposed","verified":false,"length_check":{"de_words":294,"en_words":311,"ratio":1.06,"partial":false},"correspondence":"established","note":"English passage numbering is edition-relative, so the same number need not name the same paragraph in the German. The German original passage(s) above are the edition-invariant anchor — fetch them (lang='de') to verify wording before quoting across editions."},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Maud B. Monges","identified_edition":"AP1962","book_title":"The Gospel of St. John","publisher":"Anthroposophic Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA103/English/AP1962/19080523p01.html","evidence":"lecture_page_line","publisher_note":"The publisher is inferred from the edition code in this lecture's source URL, not stated by the source page. The translator IS verified for this lecture: its own source names the translator (evidence: the lecture's page, rsarchive's lecture list, or the cover of the book it was published in), and that page's text was matched against this unit (see match_score and source_url). Cite the translator with confidence; attribute the publisher only as probable."},"entity_parity":{"status":"ok","checked_against":["GA 103/1908-05-23/p003"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"medium","note":"Every load-bearing name in the German counterpart appears in this English passage. That is a check on NAMES only: a translation can keep every name and still reverse who acts on whom, change a number, or soften a claim. Read the German for anything you intend to rest an argument on."},"note":"quote_safe certifies the bytes of this text. This block is about the translation as a WITNESS: who made it, and whether it carries the same names as the original. See witness_completeness for how much of the original this witness holds."}},{"passage_number":5,"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p005","text":"Who would not consider it a blessing if all kinds of knowledge could be brought to the people through such inexpensive literature as the *Reclam'sche Universal Bibliothek*. Among the last volumes, one has appeared on the *Origin of the Bible*. The author entitles himself a Doctor of Theology. He is, then, a theologian! He believes that throughout all the chapters of the Gospel of St. John, from the 35th verse of the 1st Chapter, John, the author of the Gospel, is the one referred to. When this little book came into my hands, I really could not believe my eyes and said to myself: there must be something very extraordinary under consideration here that repudiates all previous occult points of view that the Beloved Disciple is not mentioned before the “raising of Lazarus.” Still, a theologian ought to know! In order not to pass judgment too quickly, take up the Gospel of St. John and see for yourselves what stands there: “Again the next day after, John stood and two of his disciples.” Here John the Baptist and two of his disciples are spoken of. The most generous point of view that one can take toward this theologian is that his consciousness was filled with an ancient exoteric tradition which declares that John, the author of the Gospel, is one of these two disciples. This tradition is supported by Matthew IV 21. But, the Gospel of St. John cannot be explained by means of the other Gospels. A theologian therefore was responsible for introducing into popular literature a very harmful book. And if one knows how such a thing which is brought to the people in just this way continues to spread, it is possible to measure the harm which arises out of it. This is just an interpellation, in order that a certain protective wall may be erected against all kinds of objections which might perhaps be brought forward in refutation of what has been said here.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":328,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/103/1908-05-23/p005","german_anchor":{"de_prefix":"1908-05-23","de_passages":[{"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p004","url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/103/1908-05-23/p004"}],"bead_confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"proposed","verified":false,"length_check":{"de_words":300,"en_words":328,"ratio":1.09,"partial":false},"correspondence":"established","note":"English passage numbering is edition-relative, so the same number need not name the same paragraph in the German. The German original passage(s) above are the edition-invariant anchor — fetch them (lang='de') to verify wording before quoting across editions."},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Maud B. Monges","identified_edition":"AP1962","book_title":"The Gospel of St. John","publisher":"Anthroposophic Press","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA103/English/AP1962/19080523p01.html","evidence":"lecture_page_line","publisher_note":"The publisher is inferred from the edition code in this lecture's source URL, not stated by the source page. The translator IS verified for this lecture: its own source names the translator (evidence: the lecture's page, rsarchive's lecture list, or the cover of the book it was published in), and that page's text was matched against this unit (see match_score and source_url). Cite the translator with confidence; attribute the publisher only as probable."},"entity_parity":{"status":"ok","checked_against":["GA 103/1908-05-23/p004"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"medium","note":"Every load-bearing name in the German counterpart appears in this English passage. That is a check on NAMES only: a translation can keep every name and still reverse who acts on whom, change a number, or soften a claim. Read the German for anything you intend to rest an argument on."},"note":"quote_safe certifies the bytes of this text. This block is about the translation as a WITNESS: who made it, and whether it carries the same names as the original. See witness_completeness for how much of the original this witness holds."}}],"witnesses":[{"lang":"de","edition":"original","is_original":true,"is_default_edition":true,"first_passage":1,"last_passage":46,"passage_count":46,"word_count":6933},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"first_passage":1,"last_passage":39,"passage_count":39,"word_count":7320,"completeness":{"ratio":1.06,"band":"comparable","note":null}}],"aligned_witness":{"status":"aligned","lang":"de","edition":"original","confidence":"medium","passages":[{"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p003","passage_number":3,"text":"Bei den Betrachtungen über das Johannes-Evangelium dürfen wir nirgends die ganz prinzipielle Auseinandersetzung außer acht lassen, die wir gestern gepflogen haben, nämlich, daß wir es in dem ursprünglichen Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums zu tun haben mit dem von dem Christus Jesus selbst eingeweihten Lieblingsschüler. Es könnte jemand nun natürlich fragen: Ja, ist denn, ganz abgesehen von dem okkulten Wissen, auch vielleicht ein äußeres Zeugnis dafür vorhanden, durch welches der Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums erraten läßt, daß er zu der höheren Art des Wissens über den Christus durch die Auferweckung, durch die Einweihung, die im sogenannten Lazaruswunder dargestellt ist, gekommen sei? — Wenn Sie das Johannes-Evangelium sorgfältig lesen, werden Sie eines bemerken. Sie werden bemerken, daß nirgends im Johannes-Evangelium, aber auch gar nirgends vor jenem Kapitel, das die Auferweckung des Lazarus behandelt, von dem Jünger, «den der Herr lieb hatte» (13, 23), die Rede ist; das heißt, der eigentliche Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums will sagen: Dasjenige, was vorher ist, das stammt noch nicht aus dem Wissen, das mir durch die Einweihung geworden ist, da müßt ihr noch zunächst von mir absehen. Nachher erwähnt er erst den Jünger, «den der Herr lieb hatte». Dadurch also zerfällt das Johannes-Evangelium in zwei wichtige Teile: in einen ersten Teil, wo der Jünger, den der Herr lieb hatte, noch nicht erwähnt wird, weil er noch nicht eingeweiht war; und erst nach der Auferweckung des Lazarus, da wird dieser Jünger erwähnt. Nirgends in der Urkunde selbst werden Sie einen Widerspruch finden mit dem, was in den letzten Vorträgen angeführt worden ist. Natürlich liest ein das Evangelium nur äußerlich betrachtender Mensch leicht darüber hinweg, beachtet es nicht; und man muß heute, wo alles popularisiert wird, wo allerlei Weisheit zu den Menschen dringt, das eigentümliche Schauspiel erleben, daß wirklich oft recht Zweifelhaftes unter dieser Weisheit ist.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":294,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/103/1908-05-23/p003"},{"locus":"GA 103/1908-05-23/p004","passage_number":4,"text":"Wer würde es nicht als einen Segen betrachten, daß durch solche billige Literatur, wie es die «Reclamsche Universal-Bibliothek» ist, allerlei Wissen unter das Volk getragen wird. Nun ist unter den letzten Heften auch eines erschienen über «Die Entstehung der Bibel». Der Verfasser nennt sich auf dem Titel einen Doktor der Theologie, er ist also Theologe. Er meint, daß auf den Verfasser des Johannes-Evangeliums eigentlich durch alle Kapitel des Johannes-Evangeliums hindurch, von dem 35.Vers an im ersten Kapitel auf den Johannes hingewiesen würde. Als mir dieses Büchlein zur Hand kam, traute ich wirklich meinen Augen nicht und sagte mir: Da muß doch eigentlich etwas ganz Sonderbares vorliegen, was gegen alle bisherigen okkulten Ansichten - daß der Lieblingsschüler nicht vor der Auferweckung des Lazarus erwähnt werde - verstößt. Aber ein Theologe sollte es doch wissen! Nun, um nicht gar zu schnell abzuurteilen, nehmen Sie das Johannes-Evangelium in die Hand und sehen Sie, was da steht: «Des andern Tages stund abermal Johannes und zween seiner Jünger» (1, 35). Johannes wird erwähnt, der Täufer, und von zweien seiner Jünger wird gesprochen. Das Günstigste, das für diesen Theologen angenommen werden kann, ist, daß sein Bewußtsein erfüllt ist von einer alten exoterischen Tradition, die da besagt: unter den zweien Jüngern sei der eine der Johannes. Diese Tradition stützt sich auf Matthäus 4, 21. Aber man darf das Johannes-Evangelium nicht durch die anderen Evangelien erklären. Ein Theologe hat es also zustande gebracht, ein direkt schädliches Buch hineinzubringen in die populäre Literatur; und wenn man weiß, wie das weiter frißt, was gerade auf diese Weise durch eine solche billige Literatur unter das Volk kommt, dann kann man den Schaden abmessen, der daraus entspringt. Das sollte nur eine Zwischenbemerkung sein, damit eine gewisse Schutzwand aufgerichtet wird gegen allerlei Einwände, die etwas anführen könnten gegen das, was hier gesagt wird.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":300,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/103/1908-05-23/p004"}],"beads":[{"from":[4],"to":[3],"confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"proposed"},{"from":[5],"to":[4],"confidence":"medium","pairing_state":"proposed"}],"note":"Paired by the paragraph aligner; each language numbers its own paragraphs. A bead at either end of the span can carry text beyond it (the `from` numbers show what each bead covers)."}}