Soulforce Community Forums - While we're on the topic of mysticism

Soulforce Community Forums (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/index.php)

- Faith and Nonviolence (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24)

- - While we're on the topic of mysticism (http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6601)

While we're on the topic of mysticism

What is 'the holy spirit?' Is this one of many 'things' in Christianity that is not agreed upon by various churches and their respective traditions? Or is there general agreement about what it is? And WHAT is it?

Is it an element? Does it have properties?
Is it considered alive? Is it considered to be part of God, or Godself, or just what?

What does it do? How does one recognize it and discern it from other 'things,' properties or elements? Does it influence human life a little or a lot, and is it difficult to live with?

It is of God, and it has our best interests at heart

Near the end of one of the gospels, I think it was John, Jesus says that he must leave us, but that he will leave us the Holy Spirit

"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” Those who receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and remain worthy can enjoy His companionship throughout their lives. The Holy Ghost provides direction and comfort and testifies of truth".
John, 14:26

http://www.theholyspirit.com/

It is part of the Trinity, and there is some dispute about exactly how we should view the
Trinity.

See also trinitarianism.

You can Google most of this stuff yourself, but for some of the fine points, ask udog or Andy

Bruce Chris

Two trips to Google, and one to Wiki in the five minutes it took me to write this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BruceChris (Post 71821)

You can Google most of this stuff yourself, but for some of the fine points, ask udog or Andy

Bruce Chris

Two trips to Google, and one to Wiki in the five minutes it took me to write this.

Thank you.

Udog and Andy, and others who like to delve, are probably who/what I'm hoping to hear from in this context.

I did once try a google search but what I recall now is that I did not find quite what I was looking for. (Though I could stand to do one again to get the basic points back into mind, since now I can't remember what I read. That was a couple months ago and when I did not find what I was looking for, I put it all out of mind.)

There is something I am trying to cipher out which probably requires getting into the finer points of the topic.

Gimme a minute...

Hey Zerblet. excellent question. I have many thoughts I want to share about the HS but I have a busy day today and I want some time to organize my thoughts. I'm not ignoring you. :)

Thought I would check Wikipedia, just for fun, to see what the entry said. There is a lot there. However, the heading notes the entry "has issues". And considering the subject, I'm not surprised!

Make of it what you will.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Spirit

Gonna wait to put my two cents in. Off the the Met Museum for the afternoon!

Yes, it is an interesting topic.

Curiosity arose earlier this summer when we were in Germany and all the stores closed in observation of Pentecost. It surprised me that my husband asked "What's Pentecost?" Usually it's me asking and he who explains things like this. But somewhere I had heard what Pentecost was so I explained it to him.

That's when I began wondering whether there is a continuing tradition of a descent of fire or birds, of sudden radical transformations of individuals, or of non-ordinary phenomena, that remains within modern Christianity. Is this a subject that gets talked about?

In particular, I am interested in the reasons behind the symbology as fire, as doves, and in the property of movement associated with this 'spirit.' What have been the visceral experiences behind assigning it the property of fire, or the body of a dove? Was it hot? Did it move in flickering or wing-like motions? Was there in fact a visceral element to the experience of the original Pentecost receivers and of later Christian mystics and saints? What properties has this spirit that it is called fire? What properties has it when it is called dove? In what ways does it move or produce movement in living beings?

Where can I find these questions discussed?

Scriptual metaphors

Both images, of the dove and of the tongues of fire, are found in the New Testament. The dove image is also used in the Hebrew scriptures in the story of the flood, where Noah sent out a dove to see if there was any dry land and the dove came back with an olive branch in its beak.

The dove image appears in all three Synoptic gospels at these places:
Matthew 3:16, Mark 1:10, and Luke 3:22. Here's Mark's version, beginning at 1:9:

Quote:

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased.

The tongues of fire come in the Pentecost story told in the Acts of the Apostles. Pentecost was and still is a Jewish feast that comes 50 days (hence the name) after Passover. In the Christian idiom, it is 50 days after Easter. The archaic English term for Pentecost is Whitsunday. Here's the passage, Acts 2:1-4:

Quote:

When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly a sound came from heaven like the rush of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

So, as you see, another metaphor for the Spirit is wind. In fact, the Hebrew word for spirit is the same word as the word for breath. The Greek word used in Acts has the same root as the English words pneumonia and pneumatic. Genesis 1:1-2, says:

Quote:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters.

The Oxford Annotated Bible has a footnote at the word Spirit that says that "wind" is an alternative translation.

BTW, in case you haven't caught on, Holy Spirit = Holy Ghost, the more archaic term.

I have used the word "metaphor," because I believe that human beings can't understand the depths of the mystery that is God except through metaphors using human images. Notice that the Scriptural passages say, "like a dove" and "as of fire." The early Greek councils devised a trinitarian formula of three persons in one God, the third person being the Holy Spirit. Personhood was a specifically Hellenistic way of looking at the aspects of the divinity. Judaism and Islam, the other Abrahamic religions don't admit of any division in the Godhead. Literal, fundamentalist churches believe that the dove and the tongues of fire appeared just as the Bible says. Progressive interpreters see them as metaphors for the divine qualities of peace, purification and inspiration. God's continuing presence in the world is often described in terms of the Holy Spirit.

Now, I will defer to the theologians among us.

I'm not a theologian, just a teacher. But we all know teachers think they have an answer to ANY question, so...

The doctrine of the Trinity has been a cornerstone of Christian faith for centuries. It is a man-made term used to decribe a God who is undescribable. If you want to read an exhaustive description of the Trinity, google "The Athanasian Creed". That was the church's attempt to describe a God that is beyond description. (It is rubbish in my opinion because I feel that God is beyond our senses and therefore cannot be described. "Transcendental" as the great philosopher Immanuel Kant would say.)

Basically as I see it, the Holy Spirit is God, along with God the Father and Jesus the Son. All are equally God and fully God. The three great works of God are creation, redemption (chiefly the life death and resurrection of Jesus) and sanctification (the working of God in our lives).

The Holy Spirit is the aspect of God that primarily deals with sanctification. The HS is the force that works faith in us, strengthens us in our lives and leads us to do acts of love toward God and for others.

The Holy Spirit is sort of the "electricity" of God. He/She is the power that is at work in people. On the day of Pentecost the disciples were filled with power at the coming of the Holy Spirit. God's grace, the love shown to all people, comes to us through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit we would not have a connection to the "transcendental" God. We would not be able to have the grace of God in our lives or be able to share that grace with others.

This is a far from perfect answer to your question. I don't know if Protestant churches view the Holy Spirit differently, but this is the basic understanding of the Catholic, Episcopal and Lutheran churches. (Lutheran and Episcopal churches are sort of protestant, sort of not. They can't quite decide.)

I think Pablo's got it right.

;)

I also share, as a starting point, the three-in-one view of a trinitarian God. In fact, I think the Holy Spirit is, frankly, the coolest of the three. I say this because he/she/it/other seems to be unbounded by time or space...as well as apparently, poly-lingual. [No small feat, considering my experience with German.:D]

I think of the HS like those old cartoons of a little devil and a little angel appearing over our shoulders when we have an ethical or moral decision to make. The HS is (obviously) the angel -- our "better angel", telling us what we're supposed to do.

I said it was cartoon-ish.

As a[n armchair] genealogist, I see the HS as the ever-present and wise ancestor continuing to communicate and be relevant over all time. God is busy creating; the Son is busy being Jewish, old, and selfless...but something needs to be flitting about everywhere else. When I care about people who helped create me (and many, many others), I feel like I'm worshipping at their altar. Perhaps, then, the HS is the ultimate, the über-ancestor, who incorporates them all.

Haha...not Scripture by a long-shot, but my own silly musings.:)

And since the Father and the Son are traditionally, unequivocably male,

Some chose to see the Holy Spirit as the feminine, or female aspect of God. Of course, some of us liberal Protestants now speak of FatherMother God.

Yours, Bruce Chris

But if you have ever read The Shack, you will find there that God the Father is also female :eek: as well as the Holy Spirit. Jesus is the only male, and dissapointingly not that good-looking. And BTW, none of the three are white.

There is another divine feminine aspect worth throwing into the mix here, and that is Sophia. No. Not one of the Golden Girls!

She's not the Holy Ghost however. At least not in the minds of the majority of believers. However, Gnostics think of her as such. Interesting, no?

Here's the Wikipedia entry. Sorry I can't get the link to work!

Quote:

Sophia (Σoφíα, Greek for "wisdom") is a central term in Hellenistic philosophy and religion, Platonism, Gnosticism, Orthodox Christianity, Esoteric Christianity, as well as Christian mysticism. Sophiology is a philosophical concept regarding wisdom, as well as a theological concept regarding the wisdom of God.

Eastern Orthodoxy

In the mystical theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church wisdom is understood as the Divine Logos who became incarnate as Jesus Christ.[2] In the Holy Family, Sophia is often seen as being represented by the Theotokos (Virgin Mary). Sophia is expressed as the Holy Wisdom of God and the saints, obtained through humility, and Mary the Theotokos is the first and greatest of all saints. In Eastern Orthodoxy humility is the highest wisdom and is to be sought more than any other virtue. It is humility that cultivates not only the Holy Wisdom, but humility (in contrast to knowledge) is the defining quality that grants people salvation and entrance into Heaven.[3] The Hagia Sophia or Holy Wisdom church in Constantinople was the religious center of the Eastern Orthodox Church for nearly a thousand years.
Exterior view of the Hagia Sophia or the Holy Wisdom, 2004.

In the liturgy of the Orthodox Church, the exclamation Sophia! or in English Wisdom! will be proclaimed by the deacon or priest at certain moments, especially before the reading of scripture, to draw the congregation's attention to sacred teaching.

The concept of Sophia has been championed as a key part of the Godhead by some Eastern Orthodox religious thinkers. These included Vladimir Solovyov, Pavel Florensky, Nikolai Berdyaev, and Sergei Bulgakov whose book Sophia: The Wisdom of God is in many ways the apotheosis of Sophiology. For Bulgakov, the Sophia is co-existent with the Trinity, operating as the feminine aspect of God in concert with the three masculine principles of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Vladimir Lossky rejects Solovyev and Bulgakov's teachings as error. Lossky states that Wisdom as an energy of God (just as love, faith and grace are also energies of God) is not to be ascribed to be the true essence of God, to do so is to deny the apophatic and incomprehesiblity of God as God's essence.[4] This is contrary to the official view of the Orthodox Church, and Bulgakov's work was denounced by the Russian Orthodox authorities as heretical.[2][5]
Hildegard of Bingen's art depicting Ecclesia and Sophia.

Roman Catholic mysticism

In Roman Catholic mysticism, Hildegard of Bingen celebrated Sophia as a cosmic figure in both her writing and her art.[6]

Protestant mysticism
Virgin Sophia design on a Harmony Society doorway in Harmony, Pennsylvania, carved by Frederick Reichert Rapp in 1809.

Within the Protestant tradition in England, Jane Leade, 17th-century Christian mystic, Universalist, and founder of the Philadelphian Society, wrote copious descriptions of her visions and dialogues with the "Virgin Sophia" who, she said, revealed to her the spiritual workings of the Universe.[7]

Leade was hugely influenced by the theosophical writings of 16th Century German Christian mystic Jakob Böhme, who also speaks of the Sophia in works such as The Way to Christ.[8] Jakob Böhme was very influential to a number of Christian mystics and religious leaders, including George Rapp and the Harmony Society.[9]

Sophia can be described as the wisdom of God, and, at times, as a pure virgin spirit which emanates from God. The Sophia is seen as being expressed in all creation and the natural world as well as, for some of the Christian mystics mentioned above, integral to the spiritual well-being of humankind, the church, and the cosmos. The Virgin is seen as outside creation but compassionately interceding on behalf of humanity to alleviate its suffering by illuminating true spiritual seekers with wisdom and the love of God.

The main difference between the concept of Sophia found in most traditional forms of Christian mysticism and the one more aligned with the Gnostic view of Sophia is that to many Christian mystics she is not seen as fallen or in need of redemption. Conversely, she is not as central in most forms of established Christianity as she is in Gnosticism, but to some Christian mystics the Sophia is a very important concept.

An interfaith spiritual community currently has its center at what it calls Sancta Sophia Seminary located in Tahlequah, Oklahoma.[10]

In Gnosticism
A mystical depiction of Sophia from Geheime Figuren der Rosenkreuzer, Altona, 1785.

A feminine figure, analogous to the human soul but also simultaneously one of the Feminine aspects of God and the Bride of Christ, she is considered to have fallen from grace in some way, in so doing creating or helping to create the material world.[citation needed]

In Gnostic tradition, the term Sophia refers to the final and lowest emanation of God. In most if not all versions of the Gnostic religion, Sophia brings about an instability in the Pleroma, in turn bringing about the creation of materiality. Thus a positive or negative view of materiality depends a great deal on the interpretations of Sophia's actions in the myths. She is occasionally referred to by the Hebrew equivalent of Achamoth (this is a feature of Ptolemy's version of the Valentinian Gnostic myth).[citation needed] For the Gnostics, the drama of the redemption of the Sophia through Christ or the Logos is the central drama of the universe. The Sophia resides in all of us as the Divine Spark. According to the Pistis Sophia, Christ is sent from the Godhead in order to bring Sophia back into the fullness of Pleroma following her repentance.

Almost all Gnostic systems of the Syrian or Egyptian type taught that the universe began with an original, unknowable God, referred to as the Parent or Bythos, or as the Monad by Monoimus. It can also be equated to the concept of Logos in stoic, esoteric, or theosophical terms (The 'Unknown Root') as well as the Ein Sof of the Kabbalah and Brahman in Hinduism. It is also known as the first Æon by still other traditions. From this initial unitary beginning, the One spontaneously emanated further Æons, being pairs of progressively 'lesser' beings in sequence. The lowest of these pairs were Sophia and Christ. The Æons together made up the Pleroma, or fullness, of God, and thus should not be seen as distinct from the divine, but symbolic abstractions of the divine nature.

Nag Hammadi

In the Nag Hammadi, Sophia is the lowest Æon, or anthropic expression of the emanation of the light of God. She is the syzygy of Jesus Christ (i.e. she forms a unity with Christ, being cojoined with him), and Gnostics believed that she was the Holy Spirit of the Trinity. Sophia is depicted as the creator of the material universe in On the Origin of the World. Furthermore, the planet Earth and everything on it was indeed created by the Old Testament God, but he is depicted as fundamentally corrupt. Because Sophia created the material universe and its god (also known as Yaldabaoth, Samael, and Demiurge) either without her syzygy Jesus Christ or, in another tradition, because she tried to breach the barrier between herself and the unknowable Bythos.

Furthermore, she is also depicted as the destroyer of both this material universe, and Yaldabaoth and all his Heavens. Later in "On the Origin of the World," it states:

She [Sophia] will cast them down into the abyss. They [the Archons] will be obliterated because of their wickedness. For they will come to be like volcanoes and consume one another until they perish at the hand of the prime parent. When he has destroyed them, he will turn against himself and destroy himself until he ceases to exist. And their heavens will fall one upon the next and their forces will be consumed by fire. Their eternal realms, too, will be overturned. And his heaven will fall and break in two. His [...] will fall down upon the [...] support them; they will fall into the abyss, and the abyss will be overturned. The light will [...] the darkness and obliterate it: it will be like something that never was.

The fall of Sophia

Sophia's fear and anguish of losing her life (just as she lost the light of the One) caused confusion and longing to return to it. Because of these longings, matter (Greek: hyle, ‘υλη) and soul (Greek: psyche, ψυχή) accidentally came into existence through the four elements: fire, water, earth, and air. The creation of the lion-faced Demiurge is also a mistake made during this exile, according to some Gnostic sources as a result of Sophia trying to emanate on her own, without her male counterpart. The Demiurge proceeds to create the physical world in which we live, ignorant of Sophia, who nevertheless managed to infuse some spiritual spark or pneuma into the creation of the Demiurge.

After this the savior (Christ) returns and lets her see the light again, bringing her knowledge of the spirit (Greek: pneuma, πνευμα). Christ was then sent to earth in the form of the man Jesus to give men the gnosis needed to rescue themselves from the physical world and return to the spiritual world. Note that, in Gnosticism, the Gospel story of Jesus is itself allegorical: it is the Outer Mystery, used as an introduction to Gnosis, rather than being literally true in a historical context.

In Valentinian cosmology, the three sensations experienced by Sophia create three correspondent types of humans:

* Hylics (who bond to matter, the principle of evil)
* Psychics (who bond to the soul and are partly saved from evil)
* Pneumatics who can return to the Pleroma if they achieve gnosis and can behold the world of light. The Gnostics regarded themselves as members of this group.

The analogy of the fall and recovery of Sophia is echoed (to a varying degree) in many different myths and stories (see Damsel in distress). Among these are:

* The story of Isis told by Plutarch, who while still in the cosmic womb, brings forth the flawed Elder Horus without a consort[11]
* The Christian Gospels: The Church as the bride of Christ
* The abduction and rescue of Helen of Troy, an allegory of special significance to the Gnostic Simon Magus
* Persephone and her descent into Hades, from which she returns to life [but is bound to return to Hades for 3 months every year]
* The story of Eve and the birth of Christ through the Virgin Mary
* The descent of Orpheus into the underworld to rescue his wife, Eurydice
* The return of Odysseus to his kingdom, Ithaca, to reclaim his wife, Penelope
* The rescue of Andromeda by Perseus
* The story of Pandora
* The stories of Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty
* The slaying of the Dragon by St. George to rescue the Princess
* The rescue of the kidnapped Sita by her husband, the god-king Rama, with the help of Hanuman in the Ramayana

Note that many of these myths have alternative psychological interpretations. For example Jungian psychologist Marie-Louise von Franz interpreted fairly tales like Sleeping Beauty as symbolizing the 'rescue' or reintegration of the anima, the more 'feminine' part of a man's uconscious, but not wisdom or sophia per se.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-dog (Post 71829)

Hey Zerblet. excellent question. I have many thoughts I want to share about the HS but I have a busy day today and I want some time to organize my thoughts. I'm not ignoring you. :)

Nag, nag, nag, nag, nag, nag. . . .
:p:p:p

We've gotten several interesting and varied comments on the subject, but that doesn't mean I wasn't interested to also hear yours. Just in case you thought I wasn't interested, I am.

Following the tangent that was offered

Wow, Daniel - that's overwhelming. So many different names and interpretations. . . is it impossible to sift through all of that, and all the discussions of holy spirits, etc? I think we would be dead before having even accumulated an outline in bullet point format. . . . :eek:

But in brief, is this Sophia concept not talked about much in the mainstream culture? I don't hear about it from the people around me, and never did.

Is it common or uncommon then, for people self-described as christians, to anthropomorphize ideals or energies?

Meanwhile, reading what Daniel found and posted, I was strongly reminded of Hindu gods and goddesses. There are a lot of fairly direct parallels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zerbie (Post 71879)

I hadn't forgotten about you! My busy day turned into two busy days (actually Sunday is Half a busy day followed by Half a catatonic day -- church really takes it outa me.)

Let me start with Sophia. Daniel's excerpt from Wikipedia is fascinating but doesn't seem to touch on the Hebrew beginnings of the idea. In mainstream western Protestantism "Sophia" is a product of the Wisdom tradition in ancient Hebrew thought (Proverbs, Psalms, Ecclesiastes, Job, Song of Solomon) Sophia is the personification of Divine Wisdom. She is understood to have preceded the creation and to have been active in the process of Creation. She is also closely associated with the law of Moses and study of the law is seen as essential in understanding Sophia. Embracing Sophia is associated with happiness and prosperity. Ignoring her or not seeking her is associated with chaos, oppression, and disaster. She is an aspect of God but is often depicted as dancing in the presence of God.

She is actually more closely associated with the SECOND PERSON of the Trinity than with the Holy Spirit in Christian thought since the concept of "Sophia" or divine wisdom is very similar to John's concept of the "Logos" or "word" of God. In John the Logos is a personification of an eternal aspect of the divine which is present at and active in creation and also central to the process of the "Re-creation" (or redemption) of humanity. To seek the logos (incarnate in Jesus Christ) is to seek eternal life and happiness (both in this world and the next) and to turn from the logos is to court disaster. The Logos is more than just a person and more than just a "word" it is the internal "logic" of God ... a blueprint of the nature of God ... a glimpse at the heart of the divine. And the Logos is embodied in the life death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.

Conservative Christians don't like to think or talk about or even acknowledge Sophia for a couple of reasons.

1. Any aspect of God being feminine seriously freaks them out. Regardless of what they may say ... their God is a MAN. HE is a FATHER. HE is a KING Blah blah blah. Its a form of idolatry because what they are really worshipping is maleness. just my opinion of course.

2. Any suggestion that Christian ideas or concepts are not original to Christianity seriously freaks them out. That there was even a proto-understanding of the LOGOS before there was a Jesus Christ to reveal it undermines their exclusivist claims to truth.

In the early 90's the was a PResbyterian women's conference called "Re-imagining" that focused heavily on the concept of "Sophia". ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE. In another age there would have been burnings at the stake. People STILL talk about it almost 20 years later. Yikes.

Ok ... the Holy Spirit... in another post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zerbie (Post 71820)

Zerbie,

This is a very difficult thing to begin to talk about because it is hard to know where to begin (and where to stop :lol:)

Let me start with one REALLY important caveat. Any time a finite being begins to talk about an INfinite being ... the inevitable result is going to be nonsense. Because one definition of human language is "a verbal box" and one definition of "God" is "that which won't fit in a box" Having said that ... lets go.

The Holy Spirit is God. It is an aspect of God's being. It is how we talk about our most intimate experiences of the divine. Christians and Jews understand God as being both "transcendant" (totally other) and "immanent" (totally and intimately present). This is paradox -- a mystical form of non-linear thought. The idea that it is possible for two or more logically inconsistent characteristics to be necessary aspects of the same phenomenon. Transcendence and immanence can neither be harmonized nor divided. When they are placed next to each other they create a dynamic tension. It is the dynamic tension which is the truth ... not the two (or more) poles that create the dynamic tension.

True Dogmatic or Doctrinal language is always an attempt to create this "dynamic tension" which will reveal a truth that cannot be expressed or revealed in any other way. Think about the high wire acts at the circus. It requires two poles and a cable stretched between. The show cannot happen without these elements ... but they are not the show. The show is the tension contained in the cable that stretches between the poles. The show is what happens on the cable when the lady in the pink tutu and the parasol steps out onto the cable for the first time. The show is the tightness in the chests of the audience watching the lady in the pink tutu.

In Christianity the truth is not the humanity of Jesus. The truth is not the divinity of Jesus. The truth is the tension between the humanity and the divinity of Jesus. The truth is what happens inside you when you begin to incorporate that tension between humanity and divinity into your own life. Jesus cannot logically be BOTH human and divine and yet he MUST be both.

God CANNOT logically be both ONE and THREE but holding both of these aspects of God at the same time creates a dynamic tension that prevents us from reducing God to a manageable little reality that will fit neatly into our pigeon holes. The truth of who and what God is can only be experienced in the context of this dynamic tension... this paradox... this mystery.

In other words, doctrinal language is not primarily descriptive language. It is primarily a creative and functional use of language. I use doctrinal language to create a space wherein I can experience the reality of a God I cannot describe. DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL?

IF So ... What is the Holy Spirit?

It is an aspect of God. It is not the WHOLE of what God is. The Holy Spirit is that of God which is nearer to me than my own breath. The Holy Spirit is that which kindles in me the compassion of God when I am moved to respond to the brokeness of another human being. The Holy Spirit is that which gives me the courage to do what I know is right even though it is costly and dangerous. The Holy Spirit is what takes the cold, dead words of Scripture and transforms them into the life-giving word of God. The Holy Spirit is that which gives me words to say in the face of unutterable tragedy. The Holy Spirit is what enables me to find blessing in the midst of the shit that life sometimes dishes out. The Holy Spirit is what enables me to confidently put one foot in front of the other when I am walking around in a darkened world.

I will stop now and let you guide me in what else I should say.

What I originally wanted to know is asked in post # 6. Meanwhile, back at the ranch:

Gosh, thank you.

There is a lot more substance in Christianity than I ever thought from the way people have talked about it. Why don't people discuss these matters of real interest instead of quoting (and mis-quoting) brief excerpts? In the churches I've visited, the sermons are so short and they never got anyplace near these important topics. Why not?

This is the kind of information I was looking for when I was a little girl begging to be sent to Sunday School, which never happened. Based on what I've seen from churches since, I wouldn't have gotten this there. Does this never get discussed in the mainstream culture?

And where's Andy? He recommended Juan de la Cruz and I am having an extraordinary time with a translation of Dark Night - every night in fact, for a few minutes before bed. I can hardly put it down to turn the light off. Why did no one recommend me to this book before?!

I need to ask Andy some questions about the book - I think the chapter that doesn't make sense to me is because of the translation. The translator took some freedom to change meaning in certain places, which I'm watching for as I read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-dog (Post 71894)

Zerbie,

This is paradox -- a mystical form of non-linear thought. The idea that it is possible for two or more logically inconsistent characteristics to be necessary aspects of the same phenomenon.

True Dogmatic or Doctrinal language is always an attempt to create this "dynamic tension" which will reveal a truth that cannot be expressed or revealed in any other way.

The truth is what happens inside you when you begin to incorporate that tension between humanity and divinity into your own life. Jesus cannot logically be BOTH human and divine and yet he MUST be both.

The truth of who and what God is can only be experienced in the context of this dynamic tension... this paradox... this mystery.

In other words, doctrinal language is not primarily descriptive language. It is primarily a creative and functional use of language. I use doctrinal language to create a space wherein I can experience the reality of a God I cannot describe. DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL?

Of course it makes sense. That is the way the universe works.

When someone speaks about God nature in this way, just think of the single photon in a sealed experiment which is faced with two perforations and is supposed to choose which hole to travel through. Very simple choice: it travels through both holes simultaneously and emerges at the other side still a single photon. That is the nature of things. The pigeon holes are there in the everyday world for our convenience, but they are somewhat like numbers: representational.

Back to the topic. You paint a very beautiful picture of the Holy Spirit. Is it ever harsh? Is it ever difficult to live with? Or only sweet? Does it move in phases? Does it impact your body? Is it distinguishable from the life force in animals and plants, or IS it the life force in animals and plants?

As to what I was looking for in the first place with this thread, all my questions that still haven't been answered are in post #6. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zerbie (Post 71896)

Back to the topic. You paint a very beautiful picture of the Holy Spirit. Is it ever harsh? Is it ever difficult to live with? Or only sweet?

Quote:

Does it move in phases?

Absolutely.

Quote:

Does it impact your body?

I never really thought about. I suppose so.

Quote:

Is it distinguishable from the life force in animals and plants, or IS it the life force in animals and plants?

orthodox Christian thought has always shied away from Pantheism (the idea that God IS all things) Its another tension. God is with and in all things but is also separate from all things created.

Quote:

As to what I was looking for in the first place with this thread, all my questions that still haven't been answered are in post #6. :)

OK then. I'll go there next. Isn't this fun? :)

Udog in black, Zerbie in blue except when in purple

Grrr. I've been typing and typing but because I typed inside the quote brackets the software thinks my message is too short to submit without typing some more. This is the some more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-dog (Post 71897)

In my experience never harsh but almost always difficult. The Holy Spirit is primarily about the task of transformation, i.e. change, i.e. growth which always hurts to some degree. I would use words like "implacable" and "insatiable" and "annoyingly persistent"

Okay, I'm getting a picture. Do you think most christians would characterize it similarly to the way you have here, or not?

Absolutely.

I would love to hear about how it moves in phases, if that's okay with you. Or anyone else who has experienced it moving in phases. Anyone?

Is it distinguishable from the life force in animals and plants, or IS it the life force in animals and plants?

orthodox Christian thought has always shied away from Pantheism (the idea that God IS all things) Its another tension. God is with and in all things but is also separate from all things created.

Well, the question isn't really: is the holy spirit an animal or a plant, but is it the life force within them or is it separate from the life force, that life force being some other facet of the emanation of existence/God. I'm interpreting your answer to that question as "both," implying therefore a 'yes' that it IS the life force, and there is not a separate one.

OK then. I'll go there next. Isn't this fun? :)

Yes!! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-dog (Post 71894)

The Holy Spirit is God. It is an aspect of God's being. It is how we talk about our most intimate experiences of the divine. Christians and Jews understand God as being both "transcendant" (totally other) and "immanent" (totally and intimately present). This is paradox -- a mystical form of non-linear thought. The idea that it is possible for two or more logically inconsistent characteristics to be necessary aspects of the same phenomenon. Transcendence and immanence can neither be harmonized nor divided. When they are placed next to each other they create a dynamic tension. It is the dynamic tension which is the truth ... not the two (or more) poles that create the dynamic tension.

So God really is Light? A wave and a particle at the same time. Two "inconsistent characteristics" of the same phenomena. Who'd a thunk?

Ok. I am trying to be humorous. But it is interesting to think about.