My commas and semi-colons need help
Feb. 13th, 2005 07:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
theatokosAs I work my way through my notes in an effort to pull together my thesis (will a rough draft be done by Friday? Tune in next week to find out!) I find tasty bits that won't quite fit. The full on theologian in me has lots to say, particularly on the image of God (Imago Dei) and our connection with that. I find this anthropological aspect of theology to be an important hinge; understanding just what is the image of God and how it relates to us can create a new denomination in minutes. The Orthodox believe that all of creation is an icon of the Creator, that we bear the image of God in us and while we can diminish this, we can never lack it. (I am am unapologetically Orthodox in my understanding of the human person.) The Catholics also believe that we bear the image of God but original sin fucks it up along the way. The Calvinists and many Reformed churches have a theology of depravity- humans have lost the image of God and only grace, which we can have no part in because we're so pathetic, can restore us.
In a nutshell.
But why would God give us a poor copy of the real thing? I believe that God is panentheistic (make sure you catch that second syllable, please)- everywhere and in all things, wholly transcendent and wholly within. This means that the kingdom of God (if you choose to follow the feudalistic metaphor) is actually at hand; it is present, near, and ready to be realized. Not in an external apocalyptic sense, but in a more real and personally present sort of way. Jesus as an example of the fullness of man fully in concert with the living God is a fully divinized human being, meaning that we too can move into and with the Divine. I also believe that Mary is an example of union with God. The obvious suggestion is there: in union with God she birthed Christ, but she also in union with grace moved into the fullness of that grace and her divinization.
I also believe that that spark of divinity within us is a fragment of the diversity that God created. We only know of God that which we see in the world and have experienced in our hearts and in our flesh. The entirety of the world- nature, culture, art, humanity- reflect the great mystery and beauty of the one ground of being some have named God. In naming the Divine we create a sense of power. God, really just a capitilized version of the generic 'god,' is the name humans have bestowed the undefinable. There is power in naming, often power over. We think we named him God, that we claimed God as him. Cannot God name itself? Hasn't it/she/he done so on the face of every creature?
Yes, I realize I am entering into the fruity zone, the area of "Oh, we're all One. We are all God." Um, no. I don't really think so. But the language threatens to take me there. I guess this why I am but an amateur at this point. In time I hope to hone the language and really say what I really mean.
But, the question I am asking myself tonight is: do I or do I not watch the Grammy's?
In a nutshell.
But why would God give us a poor copy of the real thing? I believe that God is panentheistic (make sure you catch that second syllable, please)- everywhere and in all things, wholly transcendent and wholly within. This means that the kingdom of God (if you choose to follow the feudalistic metaphor) is actually at hand; it is present, near, and ready to be realized. Not in an external apocalyptic sense, but in a more real and personally present sort of way. Jesus as an example of the fullness of man fully in concert with the living God is a fully divinized human being, meaning that we too can move into and with the Divine. I also believe that Mary is an example of union with God. The obvious suggestion is there: in union with God she birthed Christ, but she also in union with grace moved into the fullness of that grace and her divinization.
I also believe that that spark of divinity within us is a fragment of the diversity that God created. We only know of God that which we see in the world and have experienced in our hearts and in our flesh. The entirety of the world- nature, culture, art, humanity- reflect the great mystery and beauty of the one ground of being some have named God. In naming the Divine we create a sense of power. God, really just a capitilized version of the generic 'god,' is the name humans have bestowed the undefinable. There is power in naming, often power over. We think we named him God, that we claimed God as him. Cannot God name itself? Hasn't it/she/he done so on the face of every creature?
Yes, I realize I am entering into the fruity zone, the area of "Oh, we're all One. We are all God." Um, no. I don't really think so. But the language threatens to take me there. I guess this why I am but an amateur at this point. In time I hope to hone the language and really say what I really mean.
But, the question I am asking myself tonight is: do I or do I not watch the Grammy's?