[Milton-L] from unlibidinous to non-jealous

Daniel W. Doerksen dwd at unb.ca
Tue Jul 26 17:24:02 EDT 2011

"without libido" = "they were not jealous, nor did they lust after Eve"

I have aquestion about the use of "jealous" here. God characterizes himself 
as jealous in the Bible, and Donne claims a somewhat similar jealous love 
in "A Hymn to Christ":

But Thou would's have that love Thyself; as Thou
Art jealous, Lord, so I am jealous now;
Thou lov'st not, till from loving more, Thou free
My soul: whoever gives, takes liberty;
      O, if Thou car's not whom I love,
           Alas, Thou lov'st not me.

Maybe the term to use is "envious."

Dan Doerksen

At 04:16 AM 7/26/2011, you wrote:
>"Sons of God" in the plural is a very common designation for angels in
>the OT, but it's sometimes used to refer to human beings in general
>(at least once in the Psalms), and never (to my knowledge) to both
>human beings and angels as a single group.  I also understood the
>lines in question to mean that since the angels loved without libido,
>they were not jealous, nor did they lust after Eve.
>We can take the inverse of that claim and get a sense of what Milton
>means by "libinidous love" by saying that love with libido is jealous
>and does lust.  Since Milton clearly believed in prelapsarian sex,
>then this sex was with desire uncharacterized by lust, and without
>jealousy.  Understanding the difference between sexual desire with
>lust and sexual desire without it is the key.  My guess is that the
>former is focused on the satisfaction of one's own appetites, while
>the latter is focused on one's partner.
>Jim R
>Milton-L mailing list
>Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>Manage your list membership and access list archives at 
>Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/

Daniel W. Doerksen 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20110726/b4e09d24/attachment.html

More information about the Milton-L mailing list