Kundalini Gateway Email List Archives

line

To: K-list
Recieved: 1999/12/03 15:36
Subject: [K-list] Fwd: Using God's name in vain
From: Mystress Angelique Serpent


On 1999/12/03 15:36, Mystress Angelique Serpent posted thus to the K-list:

>From: owner-kundaliniATnospamList-Server.net
>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:04:02 -0700 (MST)
>To: owner-kundaliniATnospamList-Server.net
>Subject: BOUNCE kundaliniATnospamList-Server.net: Admin request of type
/\buns\w*b/i at line 7
>
>>From K-listATnospamdomin8rex.com Thu Dec 2 18:04:00 1999
>Received: from imo17.mx.aol.com (imo17.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.7]) by
salmon.esosoft.net (8.8.5) id SAA17969; Thu, 2 Dec 1999 18:03:59 -0700 (MST)
>From: KungaJigmeATnospamaol.com
>Received: from KungaJigmeATnospamaol.com
>Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 20:03:30 EST
>Subject: Using God's name in vain
>To: kundaliniATnospamlist-server.net
>
> >
>X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 45
>
>Hello all,
>
>My grounding in the Judeo/Christian (and, as some would add, Masonic)
>tradition is not that strong. Please forgive me if I have this all wrong.
 I
>welcome correction.
>
>As I understand it, the unspeakable name of God is not the word "GOD." The
>English letters: G-O-D do not comprise the tetragrammaton. Indeed, if
>anything, God is a speakable name of God; a referent rather than a proper
>name.
>
>Now, I am not a Judeo/Christian/Mason. I do not hold, nor does my religion
>address, a notion of a creator deity. I do however have to reference that
>concept in conversation with those that hold it. It has been my
>understanding that it was acceptable to do so by using the word God; using a
>capital "G" to denote personification as opposed to class, ie: gods.
>
>So, to speak of "God" is to frame the conversation in a conceptual tone. It
>is not using any name. It is not taking any name in vain. I hope I do not
>need to add, but will anyway, that I do not speak here of outright profane
>usage by those far with no greater knowledge with which to express their
rage.
>
>I post this sincerely, wondering how I, who have no similar concept, would
>dialogue with someone who holds a concept of a creator deity if my very
>reference to such deity would taking "his name in vain."
>
>Sarva Mangalam!
>~James
>

blank
DISCLAIMER!

Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
blank
K.  List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and  Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
line
  • Feel free to submit any questions you might have about what you read here to the Kundalini mailing list moderators, and/or the author (if given). Specify if you would like your message forwarded to the list. Please subscribe to the K-list so you can read the responses.
  • All email addresses on this site have been spam proofed by the addition of ATnospam in place of the at symbol symbol.
  • All posts publicly archived with the permission of the people involved. Reproduction for anything other than personal use is prohibited by international copyright law. ©
  • This precious archive of experiential wisdom is made available thanks to sponsorship from Fire-Serpent.org.
  • URL: http://www.kundalini-gateway.org/klist/k1999b/k99b03350.html