ThatRedHairedGrrl wrote:
On whether the mystical aspects of religion see God as personal or not, my understanding has been that they did both, and that there was no contradiction. All mystics recognize that God is beyond description, but they also don't hesitate to use personal terms - Father, Mother, Beloved, words that express intimate relationship in human terms that people can understand. In reality, they're all symbolic, and have their limits. Describe God as 'he' (or, indeed, as 'she') and you immediately get tied up with human gender politics; describe God as a Mother or Father and you have people's own family baggage to deal with. This is why it's so vitally important that people are free to experience the Divine in their own way. The symbols that speak to one person may not speak to someone else.
As for good and evil, again, the mystical view seems to be that there is only one point of origin, only one all-embracing Source of everything that exists, so there's no other place anything could come from. To say it's 'beyond' our ideas of good and evil is one way of putting it; to say it 'includes' them is another. slowmutant's idea is similiar, I think, to some of the ideas found in the Jewish mystical system of Kabbalah, where all the aspects of God have their negative as well as positive side.
I have no problem using personifications of the divine in an allegorical or poetic sense, but the problem is that most people don't use such personifications in an allegorical context, they turn them into a anthropomorphic figure that has a human-like personality that performs miracles and smites the wicked.