navigate

previous
next
newest
archives
profile
bio
cast
reviews
rings
notes
email
guestbook
design
host

imood

The current mood of crazycutter at www.imood.com

tag

Powered by TagBoard Message Board
Name

URL or Email

Messages(smilies)


theological musings, the agape-theory, and am I getting better?

2003-05-15 at 5:57 a.m.


Well, one last entry before I go to bed. Its been a busy night with this thing!

Hopefully tomorrow I should be able to finish my essay on self-injury in the Old Testament for my website. Its almost there, just have to do a discussion of a passage in 1 Kings (you know, the one where the prophets of Baal lash themselves for a bit), then I can at least put something up, before moving on to discuss the New Testament which might be a bit trickier.

Still, its a good sign, I think, I've not been able to concentrate on my subject for ages now, not been able to read a book or even think about it. Which is very odd considering that I was obsessed with divinity until this latest bout of depression started, and the last episode I had, a couple of years ago now, only served to make me obsessed with it! Its been nice to flex my exegetical muscles again! Maybe, one day soon, I'll be able to do something on my agape-theory.

It was the jewel in my crown, that theory. Its quite simple, actually. The Greek word agape is usually taken to mean unconditional love, the sort of love God has for man, or a mother for her children, as opposed to eros, which is sexual or "erotic" love.

I was just sitting one day having coffee and someone just happened to mention as a matter of curiosity that in Modern Greek agape means the same as eros. Well, I'd just been taking a class in sexual theology, hadn't I, so my reaction was, "wouldn't it be interesting if agape and eros had always been similar, or the same?"

So, I hotfooted it to the library, looked in the Greek lexicons and....guess what? It did mean the same, in certain instances. Like, in the Greek Old Testament, agape was used instead of eros - maybe because eros was the name of a Pagan god.

Well, it was like a slap in the head really, the idea that if all those "love" statements in the New Testament refer to sexual love, what does that mean? If we say "God is love", and it means sexual love, what are we saying about God?

I was very excited by my new theory. What I had thought to do was to do a grand synthesis, a magnificent opus drawing together ideas about being the "bride of Christ", the theology of the convent, the idea that, because Christ lives in every believer, having sex with another is virtually having sex with Christ (Paul's stuff about prostitutes), and the work of mediaeval mystics who talked about Christ as a lover. It was going to be beautiful, a repudiation of the dualism between flesh and spirit, sex and chastity, which has afflicted the church since Augustine. It would be controversial, but absolutely defendable.

And boy would it irritate the fundamentalists!

I mentioned it to one of our academics though, and she reckoned the Greek part wasn't supportable. I'm not so sure - and even if it isn't, I reckon I can still defend it, and still make a good thesis out of it.

For one thing, its mine. How often does anyone have a new theological idea? I couldn't find anyone else who had written about it.

When I'm better, when my head is working properly, I'm going to work on the agape-theory. Academic permission really isn't necessary, I can do it on my own, I only need access to books. It should take a while anyway, no half-done theories for me, but a full-fledged beautiful ideal. One of our academics might well be sympathetic - she writes sexual theology anyway, I might mention it to her if I see her before I graduate.

A nice vision, anyway. One day, one day.

On another note, I was thinking about my reaction to mum's comments the night before last.

You know, that was actually rather unusual. I mean, as I mentioned, I fight with her a lot, and it doesn't normally bother me. So why did it provoke that reaction? I'm a bit worried, to be honest, that what I thought was an upturn in my mood and a possible favourable outlook, was actually the opposite. If I'm starting to be unable to deal with something so normal as the occasional blowup with my mother, does that mean I'm becoming more fragile? more easily depressed? I thought it was maybe a last flare-up of the depression before I was set on the road to being better, but perhaps it only marks a new stage. Other depressed people cry at nothing, get terribly upset, and so on. Even the theological interest again may only be me being able to plan without taking action, or may even be the obsession with my subject which I had two years ago when I was last in a major depressive period.

I suppose only time will tell.

-Blaed

<< - >>
Notes | G-book