tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 14 04:38:41 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

RE: bIchuSchoHqu''a'

I really had to put my two cents worth in (although be it late.)  I think the 
use of "parmaq" for "agape" implys more the "intensity" necessary for the love 
of God.  The study of "LOVE" and all it's facets "was" an all consuming 
obsession with me when I was "struggling" with my desire to be a priest (which 
I never became) and my "sexual nature".

My conclusion was that love in it's many manafestations was an "imperfect" 
attempt at the divine love.  The closest were "friendship", "romance", and 
"religious" love.  These three were so close in my mind because of the 
"intensity" they required to be what they are.  Love of priend, Love of 
Partner, and Love of God varied only in how one reacted to the other.  A 
friendship can quicky become a "romance"  (I believe this to be valid whether 
they are "male/female", "female/female", or "male/male".)  Agape too has that 
intensity of the "romantic" love.  Mysticism as best we can describe it uses 
"sexual" analogies.  The Saints and Mystics had a LOVE with God that goes 
beyond the pitiful concept of "charity" or "caring".  Of the words we have.  
"parmaq" would be the best choice at this point. 

I think this can be brought to home by reading C.S. Lewis' "The Four Loves".  
I see it as a "good" attempt to show this relationship, but being a bit more 
conservative Christian, he is biased in his "leap of faith".

KEN

Back to archive top level