“Force is virginity.
What is virginity?
Cheers,
Chris
Great post, Chris!
Plenty to chew on...you've got me thinking...
“Force is virginity.
What is virginity?
Cheers,
Chris
it is likely that the words "touch me not" were spoken because Jesus needed to remain in a completely pure state ... of body, mind and spirit. Only afterward does he encourage the Apostles to touch him to verify that he is real, and that wounds were sustained.
~Zag
Please see my above quotation from Mark ch. 5, Thomoas. I think you missed this entirely. Clearly it *did* bother him, else you wish to dispute Mark's account of how "the virtue had gone of him?"One point is that throughout his earthly ministry Jesus constantly had contact with the 'impure' – the dead, the leper, the possessed, the sick, the crippled, the tax-collector, the prostitute, the poor, the homeless, the dispossessed ... it never bothered Him then, why should it bother Him now?
Ah, but this is *YOU* talking, and I prefer the Gospel account. It addresses what happened following the crucifixion quite clearly. The precise reasons for Christ's words may not be presented, but obviously he was subject to "temporal conditions," else he simply had a flare for drama. But I can't see him saying, Jim Carrey-style, "Noooo, touch me - not. You see, I - have not ... ascended. And by the way, there's someone on the wing ... some *thing*!!!"Thomas said:It would seem from the only accounts we have that He was not subject to any form of temporal condition and if indeed He had triumphed over death, it seems questionable that life should present an element of risk? What risk? That he might catch something, go off the rails and hit the bottle?
We do not have to speculate here, or assume anything. The Gospels give us the answers we seek; or at least, they clear up this business as to whether Christ had some kind of immune system that was impervious to all things earthly.Thomas said:I am not making fun, but we have to examine what we assume.
Perhaps this is the right track, but you still do not address the question. If you don't want to speculate, for fear of "assuming" something incorrectly, then let me make a fool of myself instead.Thomas said:Supposing the words 'touch me not' were nothing to do with Him, but everything to do with us – in the same way that the instruction to 'touch me' to Thomas was, again, nothing to do with Him, but everything to do with human incredulity?
In short – suppose the lesson is for us ... not Him?
Thomas
Thomas said:Supposing the words 'touch me not' were nothing to do with Him, but everything to do with us – in the same way that the instruction to 'touch me' to Thomas was, again, nothing to do with Him, but everything to do with human incredulity?
Thomas said:Most Christians aren't interested in theology.
I agree with the first bit, but the rest is an assumption on your part. We do not know this.Thomas said:Jesus testifies constantly that faith in God will not go unanswered, and in this instance He demonstrates that by the fact that He heals the woman then asks 'who touched my clothes?' ... He knew precisely what was happening ...
Hi,
The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are One. It's called the Trinity. sincerely, Karen
Thomas said:Mary Magdalene symbolises the fallen soul purified by love.
This verse is a difficult verse, but my current view is based on the Greek lexicon, which translates 'touch' as also 'clutch' or 'cling' and also 'hold on to' – so I read it as 'do not hold on to me' because Jesus is passing beyond, or transcending, that which she previously knew, He is advising her to not try and possess Him or know Him as she did, but she must let Him go so that she might fully perceive Him as He has become. He is telling her that everything is changed now, everything is different.
Likewise, we must not seek to possess Christ, to know Him, but always to follow Him, deeper into the Mystery of his Being. As soon as we touch Him, or take possession of Him, we stop growing.
So I treat this not as an admonition, but as a very profound lesson, one very carefully crafted into the whole Johannine account of the Resurrection.
It should be noted that Jesus ascended that very day – everything after the death on the Cross is of a supernatural order, the miraculous order, and is not governed by temporal or mundane matters - so I discount notions of purity or disorientation, etc.
So I read the 'lesson' for the Magdalene and the lesson for Thomas as very much the same – who He is totally surpasses human understanding.
Thomas
China Cat Sunflower said:So, post resurrection Jesus has a body which can be touched. Then later he ascends. The angel asks why the disciples are gazing into heaven. Question: What was the mode of ascension? Did Jesus just kinda float off, getting smaller and smaller until he disappeared? Would that imply that heaven is a locale within our dimension.
It may have something to do with metaphysics. I'm pretty sure it might. There is probably some math and science to it as well.And a heavy dose of Love.
InPeace,
InLove
So, post resurrection Jesus has a body which can be touched. Then later he ascends. The angel asks why the disciples are gazing into heaven. Question: What was the mode of ascension? Did Jesus just kinda float off, getting smaller and smaller until he disappeared? Would that imply that heaven is a locale within our dimension.
Chris
Just stickin' my quick two cents in, haven't really followed the thread, but yeah, these are the kinds of questions that keep me on my toes and wondering...... how do we tell where the metaphors stop and the history begins, or vice versa? And does it really matter since we have Paul? That's the kinda stuff that would keep me up at night if I stayed up at night.
Hi Chris –
It's interesting that there are only two Scriptural references to the ascension, and neither tell us much ... what we have has been passed down from Tradition.
With regard to metaphor ... try Googling 'metaphor' and 'Paul Ricoeur' ...
Thomas