Hi everybody, as I just finished the reading of book "Holy blood and holy Grail" I would like to share here my polemic with authors claims in 15. Capitole concerning Jesus sexuality and consequenty parentshood and marriage in the light of his divinity (as Son of God). I cannot agree that these two potential Jesus characteristic is not in contradiction and I introduce below my text:
1)Argument that god who getting closer to people in order to learn their suffering and joy as well cannot avoid so important experience as parenthood does not succeed in because:
God via his soon need mainly getting closer to poorest , humiliated , suffered and estranged ones, it means mainly ones which presumably cannot realizing sufficient marriage and parenthood, respectively those aspect of people psychic which are far from sufficient marriage and parenthood.
If one from most important differences between god and people would be unexperience in feeling concerning this part of human life,
than it could not be good in right sense of term (etc. good omniscient and embracing) .Respectively it is possible to say, that for god , all people are his children, he definitely does not need these specific human experience, on the contrary it would estranged him from people (because of narrower circle of preferred people as human family) and disparaged his task to be present for every
without difference.
2) Concerning sexual restraint.
Yes it is true that here is not reason , for connecting god essence with sexual restraint, respectively it is natural that son of god (Jesus) send between people has sexual tension and so on. But one think is this and another think is marriage and parenthood! I mean that Jesus surely would not be immune towards sexual needs, (what could be as well one from source of his experienced stress) and would be absolutely Ok if for example he use prostitution as purely physical act without emotional and psychics interest.
So summarised from all this results, that if Jesus was married and has descendant , he was “ordinary” mortal men possibly with charisma and ability “fanatize crowds” (in good sense of term) and he could have as well some healing abilities which were not in this time commonly known.
(he could be as well descendant of kingdom genus but) but definitely he could not be god´s son
and saviour acting miracles rightly claiming that “he is this way and life and who is believing in him will not die”.
But individuals which similarly characteristic (as described in first part of previous paragraph) was in this time and area more and it is stated question about true reason of so successful spreading of cult and consequently religious) over whole world which is connected with Jesus.
This fact could vice-versa indicate improbability that Jesus was only “ordinary” mortal men and therefore improbability of marriage and parenthood hypothesis.
Or by other words:
If we accepted that he was god´s son and therefore he was conceived by immaculate conception, it it is logical that he was in some sense physiologically different from ordinary mortal and what is in this case more obvious then improbability to breed descendants?
a) It would resulting from logical connection with his own breeding
b) It would resulting from deliberate intention of impossibility of god´s son have own descendants due to reason described above. (For example claiming “my grandfather is god” is evidently funny and absurd is not it?)
So:
If for example Mar. Magd. carrying Jesus breed and therefore his blood, he was ordinary mortal men and thus there is not reason call this blood “holy blood” or “holy grail”.!!
1)Argument that god who getting closer to people in order to learn their suffering and joy as well cannot avoid so important experience as parenthood does not succeed in because:
God via his soon need mainly getting closer to poorest , humiliated , suffered and estranged ones, it means mainly ones which presumably cannot realizing sufficient marriage and parenthood, respectively those aspect of people psychic which are far from sufficient marriage and parenthood.
If one from most important differences between god and people would be unexperience in feeling concerning this part of human life,
than it could not be good in right sense of term (etc. good omniscient and embracing) .Respectively it is possible to say, that for god , all people are his children, he definitely does not need these specific human experience, on the contrary it would estranged him from people (because of narrower circle of preferred people as human family) and disparaged his task to be present for every
without difference.
2) Concerning sexual restraint.
Yes it is true that here is not reason , for connecting god essence with sexual restraint, respectively it is natural that son of god (Jesus) send between people has sexual tension and so on. But one think is this and another think is marriage and parenthood! I mean that Jesus surely would not be immune towards sexual needs, (what could be as well one from source of his experienced stress) and would be absolutely Ok if for example he use prostitution as purely physical act without emotional and psychics interest.
So summarised from all this results, that if Jesus was married and has descendant , he was “ordinary” mortal men possibly with charisma and ability “fanatize crowds” (in good sense of term) and he could have as well some healing abilities which were not in this time commonly known.
(he could be as well descendant of kingdom genus but) but definitely he could not be god´s son
and saviour acting miracles rightly claiming that “he is this way and life and who is believing in him will not die”.
But individuals which similarly characteristic (as described in first part of previous paragraph) was in this time and area more and it is stated question about true reason of so successful spreading of cult and consequently religious) over whole world which is connected with Jesus.
This fact could vice-versa indicate improbability that Jesus was only “ordinary” mortal men and therefore improbability of marriage and parenthood hypothesis.
Or by other words:
If we accepted that he was god´s son and therefore he was conceived by immaculate conception, it it is logical that he was in some sense physiologically different from ordinary mortal and what is in this case more obvious then improbability to breed descendants?
a) It would resulting from logical connection with his own breeding
b) It would resulting from deliberate intention of impossibility of god´s son have own descendants due to reason described above. (For example claiming “my grandfather is god” is evidently funny and absurd is not it?)
So:
If for example Mar. Magd. carrying Jesus breed and therefore his blood, he was ordinary mortal men and thus there is not reason call this blood “holy blood” or “holy grail”.!!
