{"corpus":"steiner","locus":"GA 165/1916-01-16/p007","lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"text":"In ancient times, when there were still dream-like, clairvoyant concepts, something was known about the structure of the human being; and something had been handed down to the Gnostics, even if it was distorted. Therefore, these Gnostics had tried to penetrate the coming of the Christ into Jesus of Nazareth with the last remnants of the concepts of the human constitution. But the others, to whom Christianity was now to come, and who were taught by their church teachers, knew nothing of this structure of the human being, nor did their church teachers. And so the big, extensive question arose: What is the actual situation regarding the interaction of the Christ nature and the Jesus nature? How is it possible that this Christ, as a divine being, takes hold in Jesus, as a human being? And it is this question that occupies people like Tertullian. Because they lack the prerequisite for understanding the matter, the problem arises for them again posthumously, as it were — but in the case of Christ Jesus it makes them wonder: how are the spiritual, physical and soul actually connected? They did not know how they are connected in people in general, but they had to find out something about how they were connected in the case of Christ Jesus. Because the Gnosticism of that time had a Luciferian bent, it naturally did not arrive at the right answer either. If you recall certain lectures that I have given here recently, you will find that I said that people, on the one hand, come to materialism and, on the other hand, to a one-sided spiritualism. One-sided materialism is Ahrimanic, one-sided spiritualism has a Luciferic touch. The materialists do not come to the spirit, and the Luciferic spiritists do not come to matter.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"title":"Second Lecture","site_heading":"Bridging Clairvoyance and Reason: The Trinity's Emergence","site_heading_note":"A heading the site wrote for this unit from a summary of it; not in the edition, and not the words of Rudolf Steiner or of the translator. Cite the unit by its title and locus, never by this heading, and do not quote it.","date":"1916-01-16","location":null,"word_count":297,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/165/1916-01-16/p007","alignment_confidence":"high","alignment_reason":"beads:identity","two_voice_volume":false,"translation_credit":{"scope":"unit","status":"established","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2025","book_title":"The Conceptual World and Its Relationship to Reality","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA165/English/SOL2025/19160116p01.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"]},"available_versions":[{"lang":"de","edition":"original","edition_basis":null,"is_original":true,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/165/1916-01-16/p007"},{"lang":"en","edition":"English","edition_basis":null,"is_original":false,"is_default_edition":true,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/en/ga/165/1916-01-16/p007","paragraph_aligned":true}],"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},"paired_german":{"status":"paired","german":[{"locus":"GA 165/1916-01-16/p007","passage_number":7,"text":"In uralten Zeiten, als es noch traumhaft-hellseherische Begriffe gab, wußte man etwas von dieser Gliederung des Menschen; und zu den Gnostikern war etwas, wenn auch in Verzerrung, übergegangen. Daher hatten diese Gnostiker versucht, das Hereinkommen des Christus in den Jesus von Nazareth mit den letzten Resten der Begriffe über die Menschheitskonstitution zu durchdringen. Aber die andern, zu denen jetzt das Christentum kommen sollte, und die von ihren Kirchenlehrern belehrt wurden, wußten nichts von dieser Gliederung des Menschen, und ihre Kirchenlehrer auch nicht. Und so entstand die große, umfängliche Frage: Wie ist das denn eigentlich mit dem Zusammenwirken der Christus-Natur und der Jesus-Natur? Wie ist möglich, daß dieser Christus als eine göttliche Wesenheit in dem Jesus als einer menschlichen Wesenheit Platz greift? - Und diese Frage ist es, die solche Leute wie Tertullian beschäftigt. Weil sie nicht die Vorbedingung haben, die Sache zu verstehen, geht ihnen das Problem gleichsam postum noch einmal auf — aber an dem einen Christus Jesus geht es ihnen auf zu fragen: Wie ist denn eigentlich das Geistige und Physische und Seelische verbunden? — Wie sie überhaupt bei Menschen verbunden sind, das wußten sie nicht, aber sie mußten irgend etwas herausbekommen, wie es bei dem Christus Jesus verbunden war. Weil nun die Gnosis der damaligen Zeit luziferisch angehaucht war, kam sie selbstverständlich ihrerseits auch nicht mehr auf das Richtige. Wenn Sie sich an gewisse Vorträge erinnern, die ich hier in der letzten Zeit gehalten habe, da werden Sie finden, daß ich gesagt habe: die Menschen kommen auf der einen Seite nach dem Materialismus, auf der andern Seite nach einem einseitigen Spiritualismus. Der einseitige Materialismus ist ahrimanisch, der einseitige Spiritualismus luziferisch angehaucht. Die Materialisten kommen nicht zum Geist, und die luziferisch Geistgläubigen kommen nicht zu der Materie.","text_trust":"verbatim","quote_safe":true,"word_count":289,"url":"https://anthroposophy.ai/v1/steiner/de/ga/165/1916-01-16/p007"}],"english":["GA 165/1916-01-16/p007"],"method":"identity","confidence":"high","correspondence":"established","length_check":{"de_words":289,"en_words":297,"ratio":1.03,"partial":false},"pairing_state":"verified","verified":true,"evidence":["length","meaning","anchors","audit"]},"witness_completeness":{"ratio":1.02,"band":"comparable","note":null,"word_count":9551,"original_word_count":9343,"may_be_abridged":false},"witness_quality":{"translator":{"scope":"unit","status":"recorded","translator":"Steiner Online Library","identified_edition":"SOL2025","book_title":"The Conceptual World and Its Relationship to Reality","publisher":"Steiner Online Library","publisher_inferred":true,"match_score":1.0,"source_url":"https://www.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA165/English/SOL2025/19160116p01.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 165/1916-01-16/p007"],"missing_from_translation":[],"present_only_in_translation":[],"bead_confidence":"high","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."}}