> On 26 Feb 1997, David Rosdeitcher wrote:
>
> > The "celebration of the divine as flesh" idea is very tricky. During
> > the middle ages the flesh was seen as disgusting. During the
> > Renaissance there began a wave of Aristotelian thinking that saw the
> > flesh as acceptable. Just as when a tree has to bend with the wind to
> > survive instead of break, the church, to stay alive, had to "go with
> > the flow" and adapt the Aristotelian idea that flesh was not
> > disgusting to Christianity, by calling it "divine".
>
> Interesting. The RC church fled from one error to another? [from an
> axiomatic point of view. Not that the church has any interest in
> presenting the Truth [as opposed to the Church--but the Church doesn't
> sell nearly as well, belonging to it HURTS.]]
>
> I have a hyperliteralist interpretation of parts of I. Cor. 6 in mind.
> It directly contradicts both Points of View mentioned above.
I wonder whether either of you has read Theodore Sturgeon's novel
_Godbody_. It's directly related to the question of flesh as evil vs.
flesh as sacred.
Eva