Originally Posted by
eyeoneblack
Ia, this is rather personal but not so much as to embarrass. It is the letter to my brother to which I referred. Perhaps I'll tie the symbolism to your dream a little more coherently if you request.
On observation #1: that I am a Christian under SOME definition.
The article refers to philosophies/ideologies of Christians. It does not pose what I would expect from a worth-while Christian, the queries 1) is Jesus the Son of God?, and 2) do you accept Jesus as your personal savior? I guess these are 'givens' to the likely readership of the article.
So I can find myself in a mix of many philosophical/ecclesiastical permutations of the Person and Gospel of Christ; the theological arguments embrace virtually any personal philosophy one may ascribe to. But how can I be a Christian without first passing those two tests - Son and Savior?
Mundanely, I could not answer either question except 'nay'. Never, since I was a young adult, could I reconcile a God For The Few, chosen. God is not a privilege, for he shines or rains on the good and the wicked without prejudice.
So, is Jesus the Son of God? Yes and no. To equate the Son to any representation of a material son, a child and progeny of our procreation, is a massive mistake. The notion of the son of god dates back to antiquity - to no later than the Phoenicians - for even in that nigh prehistoric time, there was represented the Son of God in stories that have survived through the ages. He was persecuted, desecrated and crucified (martyred) in the same story-line as Jesus. My point being, this story is nothing new. Jesus, the son of god, is not singular but plural.
So yes, I can testify that Jesus is the Son of God. But I have to question any theology that represents itself as the ONE AND ONLY WAY! - that being in the person of Jesus. This is probably where I break from Christianity in order that I might embrace all of human-kind. Christians, on the whole, are a proud lot in feeling that redemption is their’s alone.
I often wonder what Leigh thinks of me. That I am apostate is a given. But, if there is a battle-line, where is it? She is a communalist where I am a soloist. The church is a congregation whereas the monks are solo - seeking in private, supposedly for the benefit of all. In that sense, I would count myself a monk.
“But you can’t know God except in his workings within a group - his miracles that transform relationships - that bind us together”. That is what I hear from the genre of Leigh. Such a philosophy subsumes the personal in favor of the collective. The church is a collective, but the soul is eternally personal. Does the soul survive death? Yes, but only insofar as it recognizes its ultimate destination which is to join, indifferentially with the essence of God - the drop in the ocean, as has been said.
It disturbs me when I think that the Christian has some idea of retaining the notion/illusion of self in the hereafter. To think so severely limits the ultimate ascension of the soul. There are no individuals in the sight of god - we are but one. It is said, god respects no person.
So we come to question #2; is Jesus your personal savior?
I think you know I studied the Kabbalah (whatever the spelling) for quite a few years. It is the core of the ancient religion of the Israelites. It is esoteric even to the Rabbis and keepers of the faith of Judaism. It was those years of study that ‘brought it all together’ for me.
Central to the Kabbalah is the glyph of the Otz Chaim, or Tree of Life. Two profound realizations stemming from the study of the ‘Tree’ changed my perspective fundamentally. For one, we see that the Maker of the Universe consists of a Trinity of forces that are unknowable and, to our material minds, unfathomable. The reason is simple, these forces are subjective even unto themselves and cannot be objectified in any way at all. Sure we have symbols to represent them; the point in a circle which has no center (Kether), the hermaphroditic Son (Chokma), and the dark and sterile Mother, or Spirit (Binah). We can draw a line below these three which indicates we cannot go there. ‘We’ being a product of Creation - rather like the brain observing the mind - an inescapable conundrum. The Universe, for whatever we can perceive of it, cannot fathom the unfathomable source. We simply draw a line there for there is infinitely much to explore in the realm of the Created.
I have to check myself because I realize I could write a dense and lengthy book about my research into Kabbalah (may put that on my bucket list), but here I need to cut to the chase.
There is another Son of God represented in the realm of the Created and this is the Son of God (Jesus) of which we speak. And by His placement on the Tree it is obvious that He is the gate to the evermore ineffable regions we may, with a little license, refer to as the Kingdom.
So yes, my sights are on this ‘Son’ (Tiphareth), the gate to the Kingdom. But no, I cannot equate this ‘Son’ to anything that might be a personal savior. I do not, in fact, require a personal savior. What shall I be saved from? Myself? That is rather up to me, isn’t it?
[I hope you don’t mind that I pass these thoughts along to you. You must not be offended by them as you are more sacred to me than all philosophical mumbo-jumbo combined].
In the love of Creation and brothers,
Dick
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks