 |
| Sacred Feminine Presence elevated as a heavenly power, |
Our original need is to be one with God, but what does that really mean?
Much of history has left religious people centering upon the highly articulated needs of the path, upon certain formulae for recovery, and, of course, upon the emotionally satisfying and real experiences with God that provide the joy of life.
Then, we have more level-centered realities, where religion, equated with need, is set out for the young to comprehend a beginning point—with God, with religion, with faith, with character building and development, and with love.
We even have people trying to rescue others, but how much of this is original to the point that it addresses the need, and the questions that arise out of it, as to how to be one with God?
Even if God speaks through an object, God's voice might be muffled or heightened, characterized by flavor or accent, raspy or fully functioning to purpose, where purpose is understood (for all), in subject and object relationships.
At a time in history when God is specifying Her Needs, it is important that people understand need itself.
We do not have much of a record of anyone expressing what God’s Needs are. We can default to logic, saying that if God created humanity as She Herself is, or as He Himself is, then certainly since people as children of God have needs, they are enough like God to specify what needs God has.
Our problem is that after the Human Fall, people are unaware of what aspects of their needs, whether past, present, or future-focused, are either original or linked to a fallen legacy. Clearly, in terms of needs, people need to know what is original.
Moses, (a man), Jesus, (a man), and many other men, set about to address need, using their positions to explain to others about God, but their very need to understand need was based in their God-given original masculinity. What about women, when do they get to discover the same—that is, that their very need to understand need is based in their God-given original femininity?
We've rattled the cage of history, because history had the daughters of God calling out to Heavenly Father too many times at the expense of themselves, at the very expense of femininity found in all aspects of woman, women, girls, or infants. We found ourselves, not unlike those with dry mouths, unable to find the saliva to lubricate the very mouth of woman God, while men, men saw saliva of woman, women, as the gift of conjugal love—they rejoiced in it, for themselves and for their partnering in marriage. But did they (men) learn to ask the critical questions as to why God gave woman saliva for herself?
Adruma Victoria
March 2, 2017
written to folks subscribed to African Psychology Association
We even have people trying to rescue others, but how much of this is original to the point that it addresses the need, and the questions that arise out of it, as to how to be one with God?
Even if God speaks through an object, God's voice might be muffled or heightened, characterized by flavor or accent, raspy or fully functioning to purpose, where purpose is understood (for all), in subject and object relationships.
At a time in history when God is specifying Her Needs, it is important that people understand need itself.
We do not have much of a record of anyone expressing what God’s Needs are. We can default to logic, saying that if God created humanity as She Herself is, or as He Himself is, then certainly since people as children of God have needs, they are enough like God to specify what needs God has.
Our problem is that after the Human Fall, people are unaware of what aspects of their needs, whether past, present, or future-focused, are either original or linked to a fallen legacy. Clearly, in terms of needs, people need to know what is original.
Moses, (a man), Jesus, (a man), and many other men, set about to address need, using their positions to explain to others about God, but their very need to understand need was based in their God-given original masculinity. What about women, when do they get to discover the same—that is, that their very need to understand need is based in their God-given original femininity?
We've rattled the cage of history, because history had the daughters of God calling out to Heavenly Father too many times at the expense of themselves, at the very expense of femininity found in all aspects of woman, women, girls, or infants. We found ourselves, not unlike those with dry mouths, unable to find the saliva to lubricate the very mouth of woman God, while men, men saw saliva of woman, women, as the gift of conjugal love—they rejoiced in it, for themselves and for their partnering in marriage. But did they (men) learn to ask the critical questions as to why God gave woman saliva for herself?
Adruma Victoria
March 2, 2017
written to folks subscribed to African Psychology Association
 |
| Sacred African Woman |
No comments:
Post a Comment