I've been wondering about people's take on The Songs of Solomon in the Old Testament, the most erotic book in the Bible. I've read that some early Christian Mystics saw it as not merely sensuality but the union of the soul with God.

So I was wondering, have you read the book? What do you think its meaning is? Do you think it was written by a man or a woman? Etc.



MOW

An oriental love song; I think the mystic would it see as love, giving and receiving between Jesus and the mystic. Other Christians might see it as love between Jesus and the Church. Mystics of other religions also recite in such beautiful verse to express the mystical union that is beyond words. In and out of consciousness, physical reality, and the sex we identify with; we become the lover and vice a versa.

Mow, Thank you for brings such beautiful prose to life.

Speaking from my personal point of view as a modern channeller/Christian mystic, I will simply say that I have talked to many different angels, including Jesus, and I have also talked directly to our divine Mother and Father, and I have never -- I repeat never -- experienced my relationship with my angelic friends in the sensual, sexualized, self-absorbed, co-dependent way that I see expressed in Song of Solomon. I cannot in my wildest imagination see myself saying to my mortal mother (a 76 woman who lives in Toronto): "Your rounded thighs are like jewels, the work of a master hand. Your navel is a rounded bowl that never lacks mixed wine. Your belly is a heap of wheat, encircled with lilies. Your two breasts are like two fawns, twins of a gazelle" (Chapter 7, NRSV). She would be shocked, and my father would probably usher me outside and slam the door in my face . . . as he probably should if I were to speak to my mother in such a fashion.

I see no reason to think our divine parents wouldn't react in a similar fashion. They're our parents, for God's sake, not our lovers. They deserve to be treated with dignity, respect, and maturity.

Your somewhat indignant friend, Jen

Love songs come from the heart and speak to the heart, the mysterious Song of Solomon shows the stages of romantic love. It goes through the emotional discovery, initial euphoria, growing intimacy, conflict resolution, and yes, passionate lovemaking, if one sees that image. I feel we can serve God by serving our mates. Mystics can have an ideal relationship with their spouse, God and family and can apply concepts of love to create a beautiful, healthy love song. If the song draws passionate pictures of lovemaking then that is in the mind and the true meaning of love can be seen in that image too. True love encompasses learning, forgiving, complete understanding and simple gift of wonder even in the act of passionate love. We can view everything as a way of learning, growing and realizing the spirit as we ultimately search for our heart's desire of true love. We must keep dreaming, searching and enjoying what God has given us. I feel the Song of Solomon enriches our world with love and affirms that love and even sex is not wrong but can be an act of God, if viewed with a pure heart. A gift of love to anyone who needs a bit of warmth and love. God places mates together so God can touch us so deeply that we renew our respect, love and hope in our relationship with our spouse and with God. We learn not to hold back to protect our hearts. We learn not to hold back with our mate and then again not to hold back with God. Romance, passion, and intimacy are the small parts of love and the longing of the heart that when put together can lead one to true love. We all need a clear vision of what real love between and man and woman can be and what it should feel like so we can gain insight to what real love with God and Jesus should be in a fulfilling relationship. This work is both a commentary and guide to a fuller relationship with a spouse as God intended, a vision of love, friendship, passion and respect. Emotional intimacy rejuvenates and helps us appreciate our emotions of romance, forgiveness, devotion and fulfillment that should characterize some of our deepest and most personal relationships so we can ultimately have a fulfilling and intimate relationship with God.

May we all be married to Christ in true love.

Hello Jen and Soma and thank you for your replies.

I am not a mystic, however I feel that The Songs of Solomon may have the same place in our religion as The Kama Sutra ,or Tantric practices might have in their respective religions. It seems an attempt to show the link between the sexual and the spiritual. Soma, your discription is more complete than mine. BTW isn't there some temple in India, that is covered with sculptures of erotic imagery. I've seen pictures of it ,but I'm not sure where it is or what the name of the temple is.

I do agree though ,Jen, that the erotic motif can sometimes go to far. In a lot of comtemporary gospel music some of the female singers sound as if they are singing to Jesus as a lover ; rather than saviour ,teacher or friend.



MOW

Soma, if you wish to see the Songs of Solomon in the light of romance and intimacy between two loving human beings, then okay. But that's not what MOW was wondering about, if I've understood MOW correctly. MOW was asking whether this book can describe the union of the soul with God. So let me be clear. The kinds of emotions described in the Song of Solomon relate to our personal relationships with other human beings. An intimate relationship with one's romantic partner is not the same kind of relationship that one experiences with God. They are quite different. This is a boundary issue. While it is entirely appropriate for us as human beings to seek closeness, emotional intimacy, and sexual intimacy with our love-mate (regardless of our sexual orientation), it is not at all appropriate for us to transfer the same kind of sensuous or sensual feelings onto our relationship with God. In our human love partnerships, it is possible we may end up learning more about our own true nature, about our own capacity to feel empathy for others, about our own willingness to be emotionally vulnerable. If we are fortunate enough to discover these truths about our own selves, we may appropriately use that knowledge as a springboard to love and trust God at a deeper (but chaste) level. But if we in any way sexualize our relationship with God, we cross the boundary, and we cause our own soul to weep.

This is the path of discernment.

I must also ask, Soma, what you meant when you said above "a gift of love to anyone who needs a bit of warmth and love." I do hope you're not espousing some sort of free love. Perhaps I've misunderstood you, in which case I apologize. As I've said before, I very much believe that sacred sexuality belongs within the confines of a committed, monogamous relationship with one's consenting adult partner and one's self (if I may say so in as delicate a manner as possible). Crossing the line into promiscuous behaviour will also cause one's soul to weep.

To eliminate any chance of misunderstanding in the minds and hearts of others, I would avoid all metaphors of marriage in our relationship with Christ or God. We are not trying to marry Christ or God. Nor are we trying as a community to marry each other as a community. Let marriage be a word reserved for the romantic commitment between two human adults. And let us seek to understand our relationship with God in terms of partnership, equality, teamwork, and family (family of the parent/brother/sister kind).

Jen

P.S. MOW -- I have seen some photos of the temple in India that you describe. Be cautious, though, in applying the term Tantric only to traditions that attempt to link the sexual with the divine. Tantra is a term that encompasses a long and complex tradition of thought within Buddhism.

I don't listen to gospel music, so your description of female singers sounding as if they're singing to Jesus as a lover was kind of creepy. Yuck!

The Christian focus is not sex it is Christ and the spiritual life that leads to heaven. Sex is a gift from God to deepen relationships and yes bring warmth and love with a culmination in Truth. Catholic nuns wear a wedding ring to signify that they are married to Christ. The Roman Catholic Church requires that priests, nuns, and monks be celibate. Legalistic, puritanical suppression of sex leads to obsession and lust dripping sexual sin. We humans are hungering and searching for God, can we use God's gifts to come closer to him? The Bible is not talking about sex with a mother or free love. It is talking about spiritual communion. It is a distortion of biblical sexuality to think it is a self-centered end in itself. Let’s be clear: it is our sin nature that distorts the ideal of marital oneness and the blessing of sexuality. Yes, one can also come closer to God without sex.

Psalm 103:5 says God “satisfies our desires with good things.” Matthew 7:11 says our Father loves to pour out “good gifts” on His children who ask for them. 1Timothy 6:17 says God richly blesses us with “all things.” Ecclesiastes 5:20. Solomon says God will use earthly blessings to bring gladness to a righteous person’s heart, to even distract him/her from life’s harsh realities!

Soma, I'm still not clear on what you're saying. Are you saying that we should view our relationship with God as a state of marital oneness that may include sexual bliss with God as part of that relationship? I see that you believe one can come closer to God without sex. But do you believe one can get closer to God by having an ecstatic, mystical, erotic union with God? I know of mystics who have claimed as such. I maintain that God the Mother and God the Father are our parents. Our divine parents hold the Christ archetype for all Creation. Jesus does hold the Christ archetype. He is one person who embraced the Christ mantle, and lived as a Christ-in-human-form. But he is not the Christ. God the Mother and God the Father are the Christ. From this perspective, those who seek oneness with Christ through erotic mysticism are in fact trying to establish an inappropriate sexual relationship with their parents. Needless to say, this is harmful for all parties involved.

Jen

Oops - I left out a fairly significant "not" in my post just above. In post #8, I typed "Jesus does hold the Christ archetype." In fact, what I meant to say was "Jesus does not hold the Christ archetype." Sorry for the typo. I apologize if I confused anyone.

Jen

Soma, I note that you say "legalistic, puritanical suppression of sex leads to obsession and lust dripping sexual sin," right after you mention the celibacy of Roman Catholic priests, nuns, and monks, and the wearing of wedding rings for nuns. Perhaps you're referring here to the appalling abuses perpetrated by certain clergy on vulnerable members of their flocks. Was the root of the problem a puritanical suppression of sex? Or was the real problem an inappropriate and misdirected understanding of what sacred sexuality is? Jesus did not tell his disciples to marry God. He is mute on the topic of human sexuality, although he is certainly not mute on other topics, such as hypocrisy. Christians who have mystic tendencies should be aware that ancient mystical traditions that teach erotic disciplines as a way to commune with God are using 5,000 year old "traditions" that stem from Egyptian mystery schools. Just because these beliefs are old doesn't mean they're helpful or healthy.

When God the Mother and God the Father gave us the gift of sacred sexuality, they didn't give us permission to use it any ol' way we want. Within the Christian tradition, we've caused ourselves no end of problems by trying to force deeply devout church leaders to shatter their own natural, healthy, human sexuality and project it onto their divine parents. "Don't marry a faithful, loving, human companion," they're told. "Marry God instead. That's much healthier."

I rather think not.

Jen

St. Teresa of Avila in 1566 wrote Meditaciones sobre los Cantares ("Meditations on the Canticle"). In it she endeavors to demonstrate that sexual language is adequate for explaining the love between the soul and Christ, though she acknowledges that people who have not felt a passionate love for God would have difficulty with phrases which talk about unity.

The conception of the union of the soul and God in terms of the love between lover and beloved is symbolic. Everyone sees in the symbol what their mind reflects that is why we can't judge others. I don't think about sexual perversions and only wish to pass on the joy of the mystical union.

................................................................................
................................................................................
..........................................

The mysterious presence of God eludes the sharpest mind
We must return to simple, natural beginnings
As the mist in the mind lifts
The sun can be seen rising over the mountain

The Spiritual path can be seen winding around us
Senses tempted, doubt arises
Passion seizes emotions not tempered
Mind not a peace, the soul is shaken

Spiritual alert, reject physical interpretations and seek only God

God in every act brings joy

I find this discussion interesting from the point of view of "how you know what you think you know". I fully support the mystic but the mystic is always open to the issue of "how you know what you think you know". As a general rule a "red flag" is raised in my mind whenever one says that one has spoken directly with God or Jesus. This is based upon my theological understanding of the nature of God and the nature of Jesus. So, I usually will attempt to ignore that "red flag" and attempt to listen to the "vision" itself to see the value of what is being said. "What is being said" may indeed be touched by the divine, but, if it is, there is no need to attempt to support that with an allegation like Pat Robertson would make. I am wondering if most Progessive Christians would wonder about being "indignant" based upon an allegation of a direct conversation with God or Jesus. Those of us without such "direct" knowledge can only tell the difference between Jen and Pat Robertson by the value of the vision itself.

As far as this particular issue is concerned I appreciate the reference to Jen's family background more than the reference to talking to Jesus. I would encourage more of that point of view rather than the attempt to be separate from your own personal existential situation.

I decided to read the whole of The Song of Solomon again in one sitting . It is one of the shortest books in the Bible and one can read it in a few minutes

There are a couple of things that I noticed. One is that "God" is not mentioned anywhere in it . Indeed it seems that the only reason it seems religious is because its in the Bible. The impression I get is a long erotic dream in which the woman sings to the man and then the man sings back to the woman. There are verses in chapter 5 and 6 that are quite explicit sexually .

Some of it was difficult for me to understand . It reminds me of an article I read in Utne magazine that Americans don't "get" poetry. ( I don't know how things are up in Canada ,Jen) .


MOW

David, I don't know you, and I don't have much framework for where you're coming from. All I know is that I'm saddened by what you've said about me, about your suggestion that I'm separate from my own personal existential situation.

I've worked very hard on and off over the last three years to earn a moderate level of trust from other Progressive Christians by being consistently honest, balanced, holistic in my approach to both science and spirituality, and faithful towards my fellow human beings in terms of my intense belief in their inner potential to be Christs-in-human-form. I continually advocate compassion, empathy, common sense, forgiveness, and inclusiveness. I rejoice in the gift of parenthood. I live a life of constant, ongoing, humble communication with God. The beauty of God's creation fills me daily with wonder. I love God. I love the souls of all my fellow beings. I will continue to be indignant when I see others show a lack of empathy for themselves, for others, and for God. I will continue to speak as honestly as I can. I am as fully whole as it is possible to be. I can't help it, David, if you find it troubling that I've worked very hard to learn how to do what I do (i.e. be a modern channeller), and that I do it well. If there is not a place in today's Christianity for an ongoing dialogue with God as well as an ongoing dialogue with each other, we're up shit's creek without a paddle.

Jen

Now that you mention it, MOW, I'm not really sure about Canadians and poetry, although poetry with a hockey theme might be pretty palatable to many of us Canucks.

Jen

Your struggle with fitting Jen's experience into your "theological understanding of the nature of God and the nature of Jesus" is something will can all respect and perhaps relate to. However theology is ultimately a story that we are working with that helps us make sense of the world and its relationship to its creator. And although our stories may be informed by what we accept as possible they cannot actually affect what it possible...except, perhaps, the life of the person who lives by that story. That is why your theological perspective in no way applies to what Jen is experiencing.

The mystics and the channelers of the world are a real pain in the ass to us because they force us to have to accept (or reject) that which may always remain a mystery to us.

Sometimes we just have to accept the gifts that are offered to us. Jen has accepted her gift. She has a gift to offer us. Accepting her gift does not require a theological perspective that supports it. It is what it is.

Concerning Song of Solomon and the "correct" way of understanding it. The beauty of poetry is that it can transcend both the poet's and the reader's perspective. Poetic expression is far deeper than the perspective from which it came and the perspective by which it is received.

~ Soma

Soma, am I correct in understanding that you have taken monastic vows? Soma would certainly not be the first to experience the Divine in terms of the intimacy described in this poetry...in Christian history or otherwise. As I've already expressed, the mystic's experience will not be bound by beliefs about what is possible...and I will add, what someone might consider "proper" or "healthy". It is what it is.

Put sexual experience into the context of what is truly happening and you have a great model for divine relationship. Yes, between humans, the experience is expressed with a physical act, and sometimes that's all there is to it. But there is much more to it as describe in Song of Solomon. We're talking about a powerful union of souls. We're talking about an ecstatic experience.
For most, this is our first experience with ecstasy. For the mystic, ecstasy can be found in the spiritual realm as well.

I say, BRING IT ON!

Listen, all you all readers who think that being a Christian mystic means you're going to be like Bernini's Santa Teresa with the curled-up orgasmic toes, I wonder if you have thought at all during this lovely academic debate about the hundreds of thousands if not millions of people whose lives have been utterly shattered by the haunting spectre of childhood and/or adult sexual abuse. Some of these people were told by their parents, priests, or other trusted figures that this kind of sexual experience would bring them closer to each other and (in some cases) closer to God. They were told the abuse was "love."

So you'll forgive me if I do not share the smug attitude towards blurred sexual boundaries that some people are expressing on this site.

I myself did not experience childhood sexual abuse. But I have great empathy and concern for those who have. I would not want a survivor of childhood sexual abuse to get the idea that Progressive Christians think that they (the survivors) might be asked by a human spiritual mentor to open themselves up to God in the same way they were forced to open themselves to dysfunctional human beings.

Jen

Haven't you ever felt shivery warmth explode through your body while listening to a beautiful piece of music? Is that an inappropriate way to experience music? Has the musician abused the audience?

I understand, to a degree, the concerns you are expressing, and this is why in the Jewish tradition people weren't even allowed to read this text until adulthood.

Some God experiences are so powerful and beautiful that they cannot be easily described. For some folks, sex may be the closest they can get to describing them. No one here is suggesting that we teach our children or victims of rape or incest to spread 'em and get ready for the hot God injection!

We are talking about intimacy with the Divine...not such a crazy idea.

I think it's possible that the Song of Solomon isn't supposed to be about an ecstatic union of the soul with God but rather about two lovers; as you point out God is not mentioned in it. This also seemed to be Spong's opinion in his book Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism.

However, even if it is about God, I don't really have a problem with it. I don't feel the need to dismiss others' experiences with God if that is how they would describe it. I guess it's just not that big a deal to me. To each their own.

[quote name='fatherman' date='Dec 3 2007, 07:14 AM' post='13349']
Your struggle with fitting Jen's experience into your "theological understanding of the nature of God and the nature of Jesus" is something will can all respect and perhaps relate to. However theology is ultimately a story that we are working with that helps us make sense of the world and its relationship to its creator. And although our stories may be informed by what we accept as possible they cannot actually affect what it possible...except, perhaps, the life of the person who lives by that story. That is why your theological perspective in no way applies to what Jen is experiencing.

The mystics and the channelers of the world are a real pain in the ass to us because they force us to have to accept (or reject) that which may always remain a mystery to us.

Sometimes we just have to accept the gifts that are offered to us. Jen has accepted her gift. She has a gift to offer us. Accepting her gift does not require a theological perspective that supports it. It is what it is.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I agree that theology in part is a personal journey but I also would argue that theology is a communal activity and therefore I would make at least a partial claim that "what Jen is experiencing" is open to communal interpretation. "What Jen is experiencing" is being presented as some form of "The Word of God" although she presents it through the words of Jesus. Such direct dictation from the Divine has a long history. That history includes the claims of direct dictation of the Holy QUR'AN as well as the Holy BIBLE. It is ironic to have on the one hand some who would claim direct Divine dictation of the Songs of Solomon versus Jen who has received direct communication to the contrary (isn't it great when two mystics collide?). This raises the partial, communal theology that we have in common. Does the nature of God include the possible direct communication of very specific pieces of dictation? I agree that more is possible than I experience but that does not preclude the general theological claim that the nature of God does not include the possibility that the Prophet received the QUR'AN as a direct dictation or that God did not provide a literal interpretation of the Bible. I think these fundamental theological understandings are central to Progressive Christianity. I think that it is important during these times of fundamentalism to raise this theological objection to what drives much of the negative religious activity in our world today. Such attempts to bolster religious viewpoints with support from "direct communication with Allah/God" do require a theological perspective in response. In many ways Jen will always remain a mystery to me, however I am not sure that the way the gift is given does not at times work against the gift itself.

Hi Jen,

I don't know you either and I have no reason to doubt your goodness. I know many persons who think that they are on a first name basis with God and who are very good people. My problem with this is theological in nature in that I do not see that it is possible for God to provide direct dictation. This theological disagreement is not a personal attack but this theological disagreement raises a fundamental difference between Progressive Christianity and those who would follow Pat Robertson or those who accept that the QUR'AN is a direct dictation from the Divine. I appreciate the opportunity to diaglogue with you, just don't tell me that I am talking to God/Jesus. That is quite a dialogue stopper.

Great discussion, nice to feel the fire and passion. I took a vow of celibacy when I was a monk. I tried my best to unite the male and female inside me to become whole or holy. I now have been married for 26 years to the same woman and have raised two sons. I feel I have the genes of my mother and father both male and female. I feel many single people and clergy can unite the two and become holy. I am on a different path now having become united with the woman inside me with the woman I married outside myself. Both paths are difficult and valid. I think the key is to know ourselves as David said because when we accept who we really are we can accept who others are and enjoy where they are as they progress on the spiritual path.

Many Christians want to inflict shame, guilt, repression and punishment on human sexuality. We don't have to be punitive for a natural part of life. Many Evangelists have preached against sex and have fallen to their own private sex scandals. We need a paradigm shift to the sacrament of the present moment in God presence. Are we Christians to become similar to the Muslims and support puritanical Taliban antangonism towards human sexuality?

The key is to make love, tune inside and see sex as a gift from God. God has designed sex to be physical, emotional, and spiritual, and in this thread people have talked about it being physical abuse, emotional abuse, and spiritual joy. I choose to see it as spiritual joy and a sacrament of love. It can be seen as just physical or mental union, but I choose to see it as spiritual union too. Deep within each of us is a deep desire for bonding with another, for intimate union. It's a gift that is an expression of an innate longing for intimacy with God.

Mystical Union is the Soul’s Union with God. Yes, we can meditate and experience union with everything, and yes union with another can bring the same experience because one escapes the small i to experience a larger spiritual existence. God rewards us for our love. God's presence can touch our hearts make us melt and let us expand in a world of love. The immaculate heart of Jesus can be shown to the world if we purify our own hearts with his guidance. Sex must be taken out of the darkness of Satan's put downs and condemnation, promoting abuse, sensuality and restored to God's light and love. The Song of Solomon is in the Bible. It is not promoting sex with parents, ministers, priest or nuns. I don't think it is describing a solely physical or carnal act, but the grand meaning and godly purpose of love and unity.

McKenna,

Yes. This poetry is undoubtedly written from the context of the marital relationship between a man and a woman (at least the honeymoon part of it). Ooo...now I need to go back and read this thing again...now that I've been married for 13 years.


David,

I don't see Progressive Christianity is being the anti-Pat Robertson. It does not (or should not) exist solely to be against something. If it does, then it will not ultimately lead to peace or happiness. We have to be for something for that to happen. To me, Progressive Christianity is about breaking free from what this preacher or that preacher or this Sunday School teacher or this tradition says you must believe or experience. It's about reconciliation with the full body of Christ in the world (no one gets left out). Its about living the questions AND living the mystery. Its about deconstructing our faith, but being willing to reconstruct it into an honest, living faith. It's about...[ok, Fatherman, let's not get carried away here]

[WARNING: UNWARRANTED RANT] (ok...let's get a little carried away)

This is probably more directed to the adult sunday school class in my church that doesn't actually attend worship, but just loves to
talk about its irrelevancy.

I'm going to say this loud and clear so that all 6 members of our vital community (he he) can hear this. If you thought Progressive Christianity was the place where you can just stop experiencing God in a real way and just yak about her until Kingdom Come, you are mistaken! Whoa whoa whoa! Wait a minute here! We don't just talk! We serve at soup kitchens and protest the war! No! God is more than a theological idea and Christianity is more than good deeds and just causes. As for what a Progressive Christian is about? You will find the FULL range of Christian expression within the Progressive Christian community. The difference is that we have come to this expression not out of fear or by rote, but by critical thinking, study, spiritual discipline, and willingness to free our minds. We're here to find our own TRUE expression of faith.

[RANT OVER]

Ok, coffee is setting in. Soma, that was beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.

Jen! You just keep living out your true expression! Your writing here makes a real difference in my life (see Jen/Jesus's wonderful thread on forgiveness "From Jesus: Intro To The Practice Of Forgiving"). I'm blessed to be a witness...as am I blessed by all of you here.

Song of Solomon...good stuff.

Great Rant,
Thank you.
I am sorry that I did not say that I also would miss Jen if she did not participate.
I would also actually miss Pat Robertson if he did not participate fully.
I do have to disagree about the role of Progressive Christianity.
It is so, so true that too often this social movement is seen as being against something and not for something.
But, I am wondering how many Progressive Christians would be "for" direct dictation of scriptures.
That does not mean that those who do see the Divine working in that way are evil or not to be accepted.
It's just that we probably are not going to go to the same Sunday School class.

I like to think of Progressive Christians with open minds watching God working magic and loving everything. They are not even against the people trying to close the door to their minds. They they keep the door to Truth ajar without resistance, just joyous contentment. Progressives don't need promises and guarantees because they have the compassionate heart of Jesus Christ.

ohhhh...I like that!

Soma wrote: "I took a vow of celibacy when I was a monk. I tried my best to unite the male and female inside me to become whole or holy."

+++

You may find it interesting that I thought you were a woman up until now!

love, john + www.abundancetrek.com & www.abundancetrek.com/blog + We are intimately, intricately and infinitely connected by a matrix of unconditional, unlimited and uniting love which is miraculous, mysterious and marvellous.

Dear SOMA,

Can I put this post on my blog? It is brilliant. You are brilliant!

love, john + http://www.abundancetrek.com & http://www.abundancetrek.com/blog + We are intimately, intricately and infinitely connected by a matrix of unconditional, unlimited and uniting love which is miraculous, mysterious and marvellous.

I have often thought that the popular heresy of Jesus-olatry appeals to women far more than men.

I have no problem with seeing God in an erotic way as a part of our appreciation of the immense variety of the divine attributes. For me, then, God needs to be a woman!

A Russian Orthodox priest told me that the Orthodox see the spouse as an appropriate and powerful icon. In that sense I adore my wife! But I also understand the limitations of icons. We see God through icons but the icon is not God, at least not God in all of her glory.

We all seek the face of God in our spiritual pilgrimages. I find the face of God in my wife and in many other human faces. My challenge is to find that face in all faces, not just some faces.

love, john + http://www.abundancetrek.com & http://www.abundancetrek.com/blog + We are intimately, intricately and infinitely connected by a matrix of unconditional, unlimited and uniting love which is miraculous, mysterious and marvellous.

I talk to God too and I take dictation!

I think the trick is to accept that you can disagree with God! God keeps changing.

As Walter Wink said: "Satan is yesterday's will of God."

Jacob wrestles with God. His name changes to Israel which means something like "struggling with God."

Abraham bargains with God.

God can change her mind!

God is dynamic, elusive, mysterious, surprising.

I like to talk to her!

She is far wiser than I am but sometimes she becomes humble enough to accept my wisdom. When that happens, I actually add to God's glory.

Is this something close to Process Theology? I think so but I am not an expert on Process Theology. I like it at an intuitive level.

Channeling Jesus is one way some people become one with God. There are many other ways. There are limits in all of our ways because we are only human.

The prophets often said: "Thus says the Lord." We are so impressed that we still say they speak "the word of God." Sometimes, I repeat sometimes, it is possible to take a few things literally rather than metaphorically. But I am usually in the metaphor camp!

Let Jen be Jen! It works for her and is her way of sharing wisdom with us (and foolishness whether she admits that or not!)

love, john + http://www.abundancetrek.com & http://www.abundancetrek.com/blog + We are intimately, intricately and infinitely connected by a matrix of unconditional, unlimited and uniting love which is miraculous, mysterious and marvellous.

PS: It's great to see this forum coming back to life! It has been one of the best and I see now that it has a present and, hopefully, a future. I am trying to catch up.

Hi Mckenna

I hope this is not to obscure a reference, but I'm a musician so I can't help but think this way sometimes. There
was a French composer named Claude Debussy. He's credited for creating the musical concept of Impressionism. Anyway , he wrote a series of piano pieces called Preludes. The interesting thing is that rather than putting the titles of the pieces in the front, he put the titles
at the end of the piece. That way the pianist had to learn the music first than discover what the suggested title was afterwards. Also the
the pianist would have no preconceived notion of what the music supposed to beabout.

Suppose there was no title to "The Songs of Solomon" and you didn't Know that it was from the Bible. what would our "impressions" of the writing be then .

MOW

Exactly. I doubt anyone would tie the piece to God if it wasn't in the Bible. Then again, the fact that someone put it in the Bible might say something about it. I think I remember Marcus Borg being of the opinion that it was about God, while Spong disagrees. So even between scholars there's disagreement.



Wow, I really like that concept!

Mystictrek, Yes please put it on your site. Thank you I take the thought of Soma as a woman as a compliment.

The Sufi's poetry is very sensual and it is all about God. I find The Song of Solomon is sensual, but it makes me think of God too.

Yes...It is so good to see and correspond with old friends again isn't it ?

I view sensuality as an ultimate utilization of our G-d given sense gifts. These gifts enable us, through the utilization of our bodies, minds, and emotions, to experience the inner and outer environments which the Creator endowed us all with.

Our oppositive sexual partners, or sexual partners in general, allow for more complete experiences for us all and a sense of companionship along these necessary journeys. This was all meant to be from our beginnings, if the meanings of Genesis have any validity. These journeys may be the most important parts of our existence, for these experiences inform us at our deepest depths as to the realities in which we exist.

flow....

I knew you would see it as compliment.

I have posted your remarks on my blog. Thanks.

Rabbi Abba Aricha is quoted in the Talmud as saying "Man will have to render an account to God for all the good things his eyes beheld but refused to enjoy" (Jerusalem Talmud, Quiddushin 4:12). This quote is from a book written by the psychologist David M. Schnarch who devotes a whole chapter to Sexuality and Spirituality. He goes on to say the Rabbi Aricha considered the Song of Solomon to be the "the holiest book in the Bible." According to a story in the Talmud, Rabbi Aricha was "the only teacher who saw God in this life and survived" (Sebastion Moore, 1989).

It is nice to correspond with old friends as we go in and out of this forum, breath in and out, go in and out of consciousness and try to figure out if we are in or out with God.

Thank you minisocal

I love that quote from Rabbi Aricha. As an admitted introvert, I found it very challenging . As a liberal/progressive Christian, this thread has me taking a second look at some of the Old Testament(Hebrew Bible).


MOW

We are all introverts in some way and it isn't bad. We are alone with God for long periods of time. We go for long walks with God, slowly through nature. We are so fortunate to have such an understanding companion, not worrying about anything. Mow, you are right Our Lord puts joy in our heart, and we need to express it. I think that's what Song of Solomon is all about. We can use different words words to reveal different ways to send our joy to God. Music opens up the mind and heart. A powerful song can move us, allowing us to lose ourselves in God and enjoy the power of the thought of the Almighty. As the emotions run through us, we express our love of God in different ways. There is no one way to praise, as long as our praise comes from the heart. Our praise, music, love songs and worship can inspire others. The Song of Solomon leads me to connect with God through the powerful imagery.

So David . . . if you read you correctly, you welcome my participation and Pat Robertson's participation (although what Pat Robertson has to do with Progressive Christianity I can't say) and perhaps, if I do not exaggerate, you also welcome the participation of toenail fungus. This is the level on which I feel missed by you, David.

Let me be clear about my theology. It is, of course, my own "personal" theology, but then your own belief system about God is your own personal theology. I hold as my personal, cherished values the values of inclusiveness, eradication of racial and gender barriers between people, and healing of the extreme damage caused by patriarchal belief systems in Christianity and in the secular world. I believe in publicly funded health care and publicly funded schools for people of all backgrounds. I believe in educating our young people about science (not creationism!!!) and history so they will not repeat the scientific and political mistakes of past generations. I watch PBS and TVOntario. I vote for the Liberal party in Canada. I belong to a mainline Protestant denomination in Canada. I have five years of experience working in the mental health field. I have volunteered for health-based charities in my community. I am currently re-enrolled in university, where I am undertaking a second round of graduate studies. I have a grown son who seems to like me as a person. I am a bereaved mother. I have a foster child in Central America. I believe in God the Mother and God the Father. I believe in the Resurrection. I believe in the eternal soul. I believe that our Mother and Father love us. I believe there is life after death, but I do not believe there is a "Hell" created by God. I do not believe in any form of Satan, or devils, or demons, or incubi, or sucubi, or fallen angels. I believe, however, that a close examination of current scientific and psychological research will yield the somewhat distressing news that we, as human beings, can f**k up our own brains, and cause ourselves a whole messload of suffering.

I also am a channeller. If you wish to engage me in a scientific debate about what I am doing and how I am doing it, I can meet me at every conceivable level in that debate. I am a channeller who had the guts to get my brain scanned so that I would have some scientific documentation for what I do and how I do it. I know of no other channeller who has had the courage to stick his or her own brain under a SPECT scanner, and allow the science to speak.

Do I think there are people claiming to channel God who are in fact psychotic or just plain narcissistic? Of course I do. I know my way around the DSM-IV. I am perfectly well aware of the dangers created when people who have had (to name a few examples) a recent manic episode; a recent addictive overdose; temporal lobe seizures; a psychotic split; refractory psychotic depression; psychotic schizophrenia; or entrenched personality disorders such as narcissistic disorder . . . suddenly claim a profound religious conversion.

Well, I'm not claiming a sudden religious conversion, David. I'm claiming a slow, steady, often difficult path of inquiry that has broadened my knowledge in many different fields over the past few years.

You go ahead and be skeptical, David. But please do not place me in the same camp as Pat Robertson. I espouse liberal progressive Christian values, and I live those values. To put the shoe on the other foot, David, I would like to point out, for the sake of argument, that if you were a filmmaker devoted to making documentaries about people who have a liberal, progressive way of relating to God, and I accused you of being like Leni Riefenstahl simply because you're a filmmaker, you would not like it very much.

I am passing on information that I receive, nothing more and nothing less. You are welcome to ignore it (as I'm sure you already do).

Well, gosh, thank you for that faint praise, David. Yippee! I'm not to be thought of as evil! I'll sleep much better tonight (me and my toenail fungus).

Yes, that's probably true. In my Sunday School class, there is still room for a God who works in mysterious ways.

Jen

I can't believe you would say that about God, John. You are a retired pastor. In all your years of ministry, did you did not come across anyone who suffered the extreme trauma of sexual abuse? Do you really imagine there is no connection between sexual abuse and some of the passages in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament? Like . . . we should keep Old Testament teachings about slavery, and about domination and abuse of women, and while we're at it, let's keep Songs of Solomon? What are you thinking?

Maybe you and the others who promote this line of reasoning (it's in the Bible so it must be okay to talk about God using eroto-mystical imagery) imagine that you have the experience and wisdom to engage in eroto-mystical pursuits without falling into the ancient trap of thinking you can keep the sexual boundaries straight in your own head. This kind of pursuit is like spiritual crack cocaine. Go ahead, if you're sure you can stop any time you want to. But don't say nobody told you about the risks.

John, you say of me, Well, poor old foolish me will go right on saying that it's wrong for us to talk about our divine parents in sexual terms, and that it's wrong for us to endorse this line of thinking on a site where young Christians may visit.

Let me reiterate, in case you didn't get it the first few times I said it, I do not dispute the importance of sacred sexuality within a loving, adult, human, monogamous relationship. Nor do I repudiate the vital importance of our sight and taste and smell and hearing and sacred touch as part of our relationship with God. But, you know, a beautiful sunset or a beautiful garden are gentle, loving, awe-filled metaphors for our relationship with God, and they are totally child-friendly and God-friendly, and they do not require complicated apologia. Shouldn't the child-appropriateness of our metaphors for God mean something?

***

And Fatherman, along the same lines, you said:



Oh, come on. How can you equate the sensory joy of appreciating music with having an eroto-mystical union with our Divine Parents? Music is great. Music is wonderful. I hear angelic voices in many of the songs I listen to. The music makes me happy. I'm not an ascetic.

I don't know exactly what kind of shivery warmth you're implying here, though. "Shivery warmth" could be one person's innocent joy, and another person's fullblown orgasm. I guess the reaction a person experiences when listening to a piece of music is up to that individual. I guess there are some individuals who might have a fullblown orgasm when listening to a piece of music that was written by a musician who was contemplating the beauty of the Stargazer lilies in his or her garden.

But if a teenaged child of mine had an observable orgasm in response to music and music alone, I'd be plenty worried as a parent.

Fatherman, if any individual out there has to resort to sexual metaphors to describe his or her powerful, beautiful experiences of God, he or she should take a walk outside, and look at the stars in the nighttime sky, or breathe in the crispness of new fallen snow, or be humbly infected by the incredible grin on an infant's face. If that individual cannot see God in these other venues, and continues to insist that God is best seen though "sexually tinted glasses," I would say that individual has gotten off the Path that Jesus taught us: the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Jen

Jen thank you for sharing with us, I can tell you are concerned with the ills of mankind and the release of any confining patterns that would block forward movement towards a progressive more mature outlook. As Christian members of a progressive society we support the involvement in good living and a just order in society. We also have a feeling and a love for all and don't associate only with Christians. Jesus used his healing power on all kinds of people, not just his favorites or those who could give him a donation. I see you model that virtue too. Therefore, we do not seek to propagate our religious doctrine on you, but point to our need for liberation from anything fixed or confining. Together or alone we are looking through and beyond this planet to a mysterious and inexpressible union in God the Father/Mother in His/Her Almighty love.

How do we know we are doing the right thing? It is self-evident; we don't have to be told. When we eat a good meal we are satisfied, in the same way, we are satisfied with the spiritual path that we have chosen without a doubt. The spiritual pleasure experienced is much more satisfying than the worldly pleasures of the senses so one loses interest in the cruder pleasures like intoxication and sex. The bliss or spiritual happiness one experiences makes one forget about these lower pleasures. We can't understand spiritual pleasure intellectually because others can't accurately describe something that is beyond the mind so we have to experience this higher pleasure by ourselves and that is how we know we are on the right path. If someone is describing a piece of cake to you that doesn't mean you are eating the cake, eating the cake is much better. Everyone would rather delight in the taste rather than the description of spiritual bliss. We are serving out thoughts to each other on spiritual bliss. It might be some people's cup of tea and not appeal to others.

Many people and Christians are experiencing stress, despair, depression, discouragement and defeat today. But it does not have to be so. What then is the answer to living life? It can't be God, because God is perfect. The problems are in the human personality.

We seem to discover truth that is already there. It is not that truth changes, but that we make discoveries. We all have a way of putting a different name to what God's Word has said and calling it our own discovery. In this thread we are sharing our inner most thoughts on different subjects and yes, on sex (the Song of Solomon). We are sharing ideas. I feel no one was putting you down, but on the contrary have a respect for your ideas and opinions. I never thought of the sexual abuse aspect when reading the song, but that would be an interesting thought to explore.

Our inner drives come from a deep source that keeps the animals, the plants and humans under its influence. Even primitive men felt these forces of the higher spiritual mind and called them spirits, demons or gods. We as civilized men and women have acquired a certain amount of will power over this control and can apply our influence wherever we please. We can do our work efficiently and we can manifest our ideas into action without too many obstacles or problems. In practical terms this means that our existence as human beings will never be satisfactorily explained in terms of isolated instincts such as appetite, survival and procreation of the species. Our main purpose in life is not to eat, drink, sleep and have sex, but to be human. Above and beyond these drives of our inner reality there manifests a feeling of pure existence (soul).

When my ego and its passions do not prevail, the ego can't pervert my mind and shackle my consciousness. Then my consciousness can show me the healthy effects of striving for a higher self. I don't think we need a whip and bridle to curb my ego, but an incentive to force it into life so love takes the place of fear as the driving force. When the love for our body and mind expands beyond the ego and replaces aversion as the motive for our determination, our consciousness emerges from the gloom and refuses any longer to be suppressed, as it becomes the guiding light to attain a better life. It gives me an aim in life to free the mind, to know God and to realize that God's pure consciousness is the only cause, medium and effect in our lives. It gives me a motive that spurs me on to hack at the chains that get in our way, chains that bind the mind to pain and pleasure. Information and knowledge are the tools that assist in making a clear cut transformation so understanding, enlightenment and serenity can be achieved and kept in the mind because before bliss can be received the mind has to be spiritualized. I want to thank all on this forum who have challenged me to think, become conscious and have tolerated my thoughts in return. May we come to know ourselves and God together. May the most sacred heart of Jesus guide on in this endeavor. May we not see sex as an end all, but a stepping stone that can be skipped or used to find the Truth.

Jen,
Thank you for sharing more about yourself. Maybe you should know that I am seminary educated and have held several positions in the Christian church but mostly my background has been in the corporate world. Progressive Christianity is now a major concern of mine. By that I mean I am very concerned about the “face” that Progressive Christianity now gives to the world and what that “face” will look like in the future. I am very excited about the current liturgy project just announced by TCPC. So I guess I am a TCPC “cheerleader” in that I support the TCPC in what they have done and what they plan to do.

One thing that they have done is to provide this message board which has a great history of exchanges between people who also are trying to work out what Progressive Christianity means. So I am a little concerned when someone comes on this message board and speaks in the name of God or Jesus. I think it is safe to say that a very large percentage of Progressive Christians do not talk in these terms (Pat Robertson does and that is why I linked you to him). The direct dictation from the Divine has a long history which includes the Book of Mormon, the Holy Qur’an and the Holy Bible. I think it is safe to say that most, if not all, Progressive Christians would suggest that none of these writings are direct dictations from the Divine and so I see no reason to not question your direct dictations from the Divine.

I am not greatly concerned about this discussion because I think that anyone who attempts to speak in the name of God or Jesus (and not in their own voice) will eventually be caught by their own voice. I think that has happened to you in this discussion of the Songs of Solomon. I think that you have attempted to use the "knowledge" of this Jesus that you hear instead of your own voice. I think your voice on the issue of sexuality comes through loud and clear. I would just ask that you accept that it really is your own voice. That voice should be respected and accepted. I do that.

I am interested in "how one knows what one thinks one knows". Mystics will always have the problem of attempting to communicate a vision that does not separate them from the Divine in ways that do separate them from the Divine. We are stuck with this problem. It does no good to ignore the separation that comes with the attempt to communicate with others. If we think that it is possible to not have that separation then we have the potential for some very ugly religious wars between those that think they speak for Allah and those that think they speak for Jesus.

You have a gift to share. It is a valuable gift. Some of your writing I think is truly divinely inspired. I would miss that writing if it stopped.
David

QUOTE

Mystics will always have the problem of attempting to communicate a vision that does not separate them from the Divine in ways that do separate them from the Divine. We are stuck with this problem. It does no good to ignore the separation that comes with the attempt to communicate with others.

Great problem.................Great statement................Fun to try..................

When scientists compare the existence beneath the atomic level with Christian theorist, they agree on the basic nature of creation. The scientists launch their investigation in the external world outside the mind while the theoreticians begin inside the mind exploring the consciousness of our inner world; however, both come to the same conclusion. This agreement is that all things and actions are in harmony and unity. Unity is everywhere, in the minutest parts of our bodies, in the vast space of the cosmos and in the interconnectedness of all things. This consensus is an alternative to the traditional dualistic thought of many separate inert existences. This unity of all things in an intangible consciousness expands our perceptions of the material world and gives us a better understanding of the natural laws of Life as they apply to the individual and his\her relationship to the universal scheme of things. It is a view of unity and harmony that softens the harsh cutting edge of an isolated existence without love. The hostilities we might feel at this moment can be quickly dispelled, if we assist the natural processes that serve the function of reunification. The absence of unity and love in our lives is what makes us feel crude and incomplete so seeing our world as a backdrop for unity, we smooth away the tensions in the body and the mind so we can see energy flowing through dogs, cats, bacteria, people and the food we eat. Freely choosing unity and surrendering to its flow of energy, we assist the natural processes of relaxation that reduce mountainous problems to a size that we can cope with and overcome while we learn to love. Our lives become productive and fulfilling in proportion to the love we exchange so for that reason alone we should learn to appreciate and to feel the greatness of unity. Harmony comes when one feels one with all things.

Our scientists have developed powerful and sophisticated devices to examine the outer world and the inner world of the atom. They have confirmed that it is a vibrating living expanse of energy, moving and in harmony with a greater universe. They have found that all entities living and nonliving are vibrating and are an integral and important part of this external creation. They have also found that these different parts are serving the whole, just as the legs, hands, fingers and ears are meant for serving the total body. With the help of effective instruments these scholars have realized an order of cause and effect, and have begun to see everything as connected, no longer rejecting the idea that everything is united. In contrast, the Christian mystics have discovered the layers of consciousness in the mind. In their minds they have seen these layers lose their individual uniqueness as they retreated deeper and deeper in the psyche. Finally, like a drop of water losing itself in the ocean, the mystics have experienced a union with Christ consciousness where everything is united and one.

Ohhh I'm really excited about the liturgy project too!!! When I read the article about it I couldn't stop smiling

Sorry for the interruption, but I felt a brief sidetrack on a positive note might not be a bad thing

Soma,
It is fun to try.
Your attempts come as close to success as any I have seen.
David

I feel our biggest obstacle to our individual progress is our slave like devotion to precedent, and the way to overcome this long established habit of complying with other people's beliefs is to change our method of thinking. To do this I need a willingness to consider the possibility that the beliefs I follow may not reflect the whole truth. Many beliefs construct an experience of the universe that is narrow and not totally true because they are usually created in an environment of fear. This limits our personal life because it blocks our direct experience and replaces what we experience directly with opinions, positions, judgments and prejudice. The knowledge to change the nature of our reality and ourselves can bring us either success or failure, but it can also enable us to do something towards restraining the uncivilized instincts in society. If we fail we can try again, it is better than doing nothing because we will succeed in life despite the dogma and institutions trying to block our natural understanding of life. When a person changes, the world changes so both change or neither changes because what a person does or does not do has an impact on the world and makes a difference. Regaining our naturalness and genius will bring meaningful change to the world and our minds so Truth can be experienced. Thanks for the encouragement to continue to hack at the chains.

May Christmas be an internal joy and not an external distraction to you all.

There seems to be some continuity here between the Song of Solomon and other parts of the Bible. Consider this well known passage:

Michah 6:8

"He has showed you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?"

Minsocal nicely put, we do need to take on beliefs that encourage love, kindness, understanding and openness and at the same time reduce or do away with beliefs that result in jealousy, competition, envy and resentment. By directing our minds in a positive way we set off Christ's love and grace to create the loving environment and relationships that will enrich our lives and others.