Re: my new paradigm

Date: Fri Feb 14 2003 - 12:03:42 EST

  • Next message: Dick Fischer: "Happy Birthday Dear Universe ... (A Little Late)"

    In a message dated 2/14/03 10:32:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes:

    > Don,
    > I see some fundamental problems with your theory, just off the top of my
    > head; when did God become the husband? You easily go from one to the other
    > with that, you agree that Jesus is the bridegroom, but then proceed with
    > how
    > God has to make for *himself* wives. I'd say I have a pretty good knowledge
    > of what the Bible contains and nowhere does it ever say anything other than
    > God being "FATHER".

    I've had some flack in the past for mentioning other religious traditions,
    but sex is an important part of the structure of metaphysics of "ineffable"
    God in the Rg Veda and the Kabbalah, but I think in this case the analogy has
    been taken a little too far, although I have also posted that the composition
    of one who is with God in the gnostic Gospel of Thomas is also androgynous,
    (as allegedly stated by Jesus) reflecting the state before Eve was
    allegorically created from Adam's rib and again the analogy is - once there
    was sex, there was desire - once there was desire the possibility of sin

    God making himself "wives" is a little too anthropomorphic for me.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 14 2003 - 12:04:20 EST