The Non-Christian Cross - An Enquiry into the Origin and History of the Symbol Eventually Adopted as That of Our Religion by John Denham Parsons
page 67 of 159 (42%)
page 67 of 159 (42%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
be androgynous, and addressing the other part of himself. This would
account for the emphasis laid upon the statement that man was created "male _and_ female," like, or in the image of, the Creator. In any case it is clear that if God be not female as well as male, Man was _not_ created in the likeness of God. The theory of the ancients that Man himself was created an androgynous being, capable, like the Creator, of creating life in himself, but was afterwards divided into halves, one of which is ever seeking to find the other, need only be mentioned. Suffice it to add that it can scarcely be said to have been altogether progress in the right direction, which has led us mortals to call the Author of all Life "Our Father," to the utter obscuration of the equally important fact that the Deity in whom we live and move and have our being must also be "Our Mother." CHAPTER IX. THE CORONATION ORB. The fact that though we Christians fail to do the matter justice, the ancients upon the contrary recognised that the Creator and the Giver of Life cannot be rightly spoken of as belonging to one sex and one alone, is not the only fact which those who examine relics of antiquity, such as the coins of the Roman Empire, with a view to ascertaining what evidence is derivable from them that bears upon the history of the |
|