Old Language--New Language
It is hard for us to live with the old and the familiar and to see them as anything but mundane--hardly new. But we must. This is particularly true of our old, familiar religious language that now seems strangely quaint, perhaps, but hardly compelling. Take for example the term used for Yeshua (which was the term he used for himself), Son of Man--suggesting perhaps that he was just an ordinary man in every way, like us, and now, we imagine, after the years of dogmatism, not to be deified any longer.
All of this has nothing to do with what this term originally meant. It was a revolutionary idea understood by the early Jewish visionaries to mean something like, Son of the Macrocosm. If we could imagine that there exists an Eternal Being of Light as the Macrocosmic Man (Human), then Yeshua is claiming to be its representative and manifestation in time, on earth, in an embodied form. The full nature of this vast cosmic phenomenon is held within, and for most it is hidden like a treasure buried in a field, but he uncovered the treasure, set it on a hill, where it beam with burnished light as a beacon for all to see. He became for us the "Son" of the Macrocosmic Man.
All of this has nothing to do with what this term originally meant. It was a revolutionary idea understood by the early Jewish visionaries to mean something like, Son of the Macrocosm. If we could imagine that there exists an Eternal Being of Light as the Macrocosmic Man (Human), then Yeshua is claiming to be its representative and manifestation in time, on earth, in an embodied form. The full nature of this vast cosmic phenomenon is held within, and for most it is hidden like a treasure buried in a field, but he uncovered the treasure, set it on a hill, where it beam with burnished light as a beacon for all to see. He became for us the "Son" of the Macrocosmic Man.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home