Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Blog powered by Typepad
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Header image by Mieszko Gorski

« Obama includes spiritual dimension in his AIDS promises | Main | Queer blog runs gay Passion and Easter series »

March 14, 2008



although i personally disagree with depicting Jesus as anything but the risen Son of God as portrayed in the bible, i understand the need to personalize Him for the disenfranchized and powerless in society. anything that can bring people to a closer, more intimate relationship with God has to be a good thing in the end.

Jesus, to me, does represent all things. as one all mortal and all divine at the same time i have no difficulty believing Him as all gay and all straight as well. or as all male and all female.

my problem is that each time i try expressing Him as anything but the traditional Son of God, i get this nagging feeling that i am belittling Him by imposing my own political veiws onto His divinity. we have a wonderful woman in our congregation, a female ordained minister in the prebyterian usa dogma. she and i have discussed the male/female expression of Jesus in some depth. the wonderful thing about this woman is that she can randomly use the male and female pronouns in language when speaking of Jesus. truly random. she isn't changing Jesus from straight to gay, or from male to female, but has the ability to understand and express Him as all things at the same time. she doesn't have to deny the male nature of God to express the female nature, or deny any aspect of His supposed sexual orientation to express another. in her expressions i can find truth, not her truth but a universal truth. she can empower the minorities among us without imposing unacceptable change on the majority, or changing the identification of our Lord and Savior from anything to anything else, just by expressing His total being. someday i hope to be that wise and filled with His love and compassion for all. much love and hope, pj


"my problem is that each time i try expressing Him as anything but the traditional Son of God, i get this nagging feeling that i am belittling Him by imposing my own political veiws onto His divinity"

I think the key is to realize that our intellectual expressions of Jesus (or God, or any other spiritual figure), as man/woman, gay/straight, black/white, etc., are at best metaphors for the divinity of these figures. The only time the use of these symbols and metaphors becomes a problem is when we let ourselves forget that ultimately the Divine is over and above all formulas -- even as He contains them all. It is when we start *substituting* our own words for the Word that we fall. But our own words, as creations of finite human minds, are only metaphors for the living, eternal Word. The confusion of metaphor and Reality is what the ancients called idolatory.

In the end the universe itself is poetry in motion, set into motion by the Absolute. Every form in existence is just a metaphor for That -- the formless Supreme Reality that contains and transcends all manifested forms.

In Vedantic terms, we say "Satyameva Jayate" -- the Truth alone triumphs!


This pastor is the worst expression possible of interpreting Jesus through any type of modern socio-political lens. His example casts every black person as an eternal victim with no reason to take responsibility for themselves. If he were a queer pastor standing up there saying those things, I would be just as horrified because the underlying point is being obscured by the delivery and rhetoric.

And couldn't Obama have found some other church in the Chicago area?


yes, i agree ned. all language is by definition metaphore. when one says "hammer" it isn't a real hammer they are conjuring up, it's the image of a hammer. as long as we can all agree on each metaphore we're ok. problem is, we don't. i think that's the problem i have with the re-difinitions of the God of abraham, isaac and israel. in my tradition He is a white, straight, male. in my heart i know that this is true, He is also she, black and gay. i think your statement about substituting our words for the Word makes perfect sense. the minute i break with tradition that's exactly what i feel i am doing, and i believe the ancients are right, it's idolatry.

i understand too, though, that the traditional representation of God leaves a lot of people feeling disposessed. young girls may feel boxed out of the God thing because they cannot understand any man, much less the son of man. homosexuals may feel boxed out because they, of course, were made in the same image of God as everyone else. blacks may wonder what the heck is going on when the only physical representation of Jesus they ever see is white, so what image did you say i was made in?

i will never argue with anyone who chooses to believe God is female, black, asian, homosexual, bisexual, transsexual or anything else, as long as they understand that He is not any of those things exclusively. it is only me that cannot break traditon without feeling that...idolatry thing. the metaphore thing.

i think it a more complete way of defining us would be not that we were just made in the image of God, but that we are the living image of God.....all of us. and maybe not even the metaphoric image, but the substance as well. we, the in motion poetry you speak of, are the physical being of God, God is us and we are Him. humbling, but....sure is a beautiful metaphore. lotsa love and hope, pj


There is no black, white, brown, gay, lesbian, asian, european Jesus.

There is only one Jesus. He is love.


"He" is?

Cleophaus Achollah

I think Dr. Jeremiah Wright was talking the truth, but the way he potrayed that truth was not appropriate. Dr. Wright lived in the era when racism was the rule of the day, hence his pain and anger.

The comments to this entry are closed.