God is Sought Where Answers End and Mystery Begins

Thanks Joe. Your response makes me want to expand a little. Please allow a little more brainstorming.

As I reread my writing I was concerned that my point was rather obscure, or at least unclear. Here are some thoughts that I wrote down while trying to pull this idea out of my unconscious.

• For millennia humans have assigned mystery to the unknown God above all other gods.

• Along the journey of life where answers are no longer found, is where God is.

Another way of putting the first one is that ancient people assumed that there was inherent beauty and intelligence in the unknown structure of life and nature. We still think this way, but today we assume that nature and life are governed by mathematical algorithm. We see no need for a programmer once we've figured out the program.

Some business people, for an easy example, think like this to the extent that they will kill the goose to get the golden egg now, and save the money and effort required to keep up the goose for future productivity. They misunderstand the creative process. Government, business, and religion have all taken up with the Beast of structure. And Structure is a reef of dead coral against which the ships of creativity often crash. A once living community ossifies into immovable, Inert Coagulum. God is not to be found in Structure and Orthodoxy. God is always beyond Orthodoxy, and beyond the Wilderness that is beyond Structure and Orthodoxy. God is, where Becoming is.

If God is just one thing, God is Creativity. Genesis 1 begins with creativity. The God of the Burning Bush is a God of creativity. “I Am What I Am.” “I Am What I Will Become.” “I Am Becoming.” Abraham started out as a rambling sojourner and became a wealth and powerful patriarch (and even warlord). Jacob wrestles with God and becomes himself (Israel meaning wrestles with God), and eventually a nation. Creativity is the talent of the Trickster. The Trickster trips up the status quo and brings about new thinking. The Christ is the opposite of what many believe. The Anointed is not staid orthodoxy, but is instead a continual restlessness and creativity that moves us to higher spirituality and Being.

This is more of what I'm trying to understand. God is beyond questions of Exist, or Not Exist. God is not Is, but Becoming.

Thanks for listening.

bill

Bill

I have been reading with interest, but going thru something of a dry spell -- a loss for words, or anything worth writing.   Your notes on these Bible characters known for their Faith are something we can learn from.

There is something that I see in the journey you describe.  Most of the time when an idea gets known, there are those who lay claim to it as if it belonged to them only.  That is difficult to pull off when you don't know what's out there.  So much of it is not in what you know but as you say, learning that there is a lot that remains out there that one doesn't know.  It kind of takes enough thrust to overcome the gravitational pull of the past.  These people who were heroes of Faith -- they were not such big heroes at the times when they were greatest in Faith.  That came after, then it became something to talk about in concrete terms as  "approved stuff" that can be trusted.  Perhaps their times of greatest Faith were those times when they were weakest in the concrete past. 

What do you trust in when you don't know the answers -- not even the questions.? One possible answer may lie in Potentiality -- that is, becoming.  And maybe one does not become what he/she already is but undergoes something of a transformation.  Much of this reminds me of the greek word 'energeo" as a descriptive of the power of God in transition from one stage to another in life.

reido

Reido wrote: have been reading with interest, but going thru something of a dry spell -- a loss for words, or anything worth writing.

Reido,

Just now am I beginning to understand your earlier encouragement to let the words come. You were referring to Faith as a Commons—which is still not flowing. But I've learned so much more from the process.

So, the dry spells may be, in the end, gestational.

Reido also wrote: What do you trust in when you don't know the answers -- not even the questions.? One possible answer may lie in Potentiality -- that is, becoming. And maybe one does not become what he/she already is but undergoes something of a transformation. Much of this reminds me of the greek word 'energeo" as a descriptive of the power of God in transition from one stage to another in life.

Yes! This is something that I want to better understand. You've touched a chord. In a book titled Beyond Religion, David N. Elkins writes:

In his book Existence, Rollo May said that the word existence comes from the root ex-sistere and means to “stand out” or “emerge.” He said that existential psychologists see “the human being not as a collection of static substances or mechanisms or patterns but rather as emerging and becoming, that [is] to say, as existing.”

Once again I learn something new and look to find that you are ahead of me.

Something that I think I read in your comment is that Faith is something like trust in Trust itself. Faith begets Faith. Potentiality may be a better word because it describes the ever opening cornucopia of regeneration.

Reido also wrote: These people who were heroes of Faith -- they were not such big heroes at the times when they were greatest in Faith. That came after, then it became something to talk about in concrete terms as "approved stuff" that can be trusted. Perhaps their times of greatest Faith were those times when they were weakest in the concrete past.

Elkins dedicated a chapter to art as a way to spirituality. And in that chapter he writes of those many artists whose work was little appreciated, or even scorned, during their lives, but is now recognized for its groundbreaking creativity. Some of his words remind me of your own words. Elkins writes: “Being is the “underground river” that we access in creativity; it is the source of the images and symbols that become part of the artistic work.…From an evolutionary perspective, Being is the creative life force that moves all creation toward higher and higher levels of complexity and continually opens up new vistas of possibility.”

So Existential. So Emergent. This is the Emergence that is misappropriated by the “Emerging Church” crowd, IMHO. Emerging Church cannot be postmodern—it must be post-postmodern. Or even post-post-postmodern. Emergence is not yet. As you said, it is potentiality. It doesn't address today's culture—but it catalyzes tomorrow's.

Your words here turned out to be rather inspiring for me, because you touched something that was waiting for realization.

bill

Bill

Crossreferencing the people you quoted from, I noticed a connection with Peck in that these writers share a psychoanalytical approach to the concept of Faith.  In one post you mentioned something like the possibility that one could end up believing most of Faith is really mental (excuse my rough paraphrase).  Well, this is precisely a possibility that comes under consideration when one undergoes deep questioning of the sources of such things.  I don't think I would consider seriously listening to someone who didn't consider it a possibility -- you might say that is the Agnostic side of me.  And yet there remains Faith...of a different kind.

Why wouldn't those who know psychology simply ignore the whole thing?  Wouldn't the answer lie in the meaning and value of the whole thing?  That is, beyond empirical and/or historical proof, there is something in the psyche that tends toward Faith in some people (granted, not all).  So, it seems this approach simply looks at those aspects of Faith for what they're worth on their own -- not because of some Assigned Value.  What ever do I mean by A. V.?  What I mean is power, authority, the weight of Truth that carries with whatever means of persuasion people choose to defend their beliefs. 

Under light of examination, are such tangibles needed?  Or are they, after all, only twisted reflections of the Real?

 reido

Reido,

You're right of course about the psychoanalytical approach taken by the authors I quoted. While psychoanalysis, as an approach to faith development, was not a conscious choice that I took, in retrospect it seems to follow from my beginnings in this quest with James Fowler, Viktor Frankl and Carl Jung. These led me elsewhere. You may also have noticed the decidedly Existential bent of these writers (and practitioners). Although I'm unsure about Fowler, the others (and their own bibliographies) tended toward a postmodern outlook, as well. Other familiar names show up in their notes; like Paul Tillich, Rollo May, Mircea Eliade, William James, Søren Kierkegaard, Joseph Campbell, Martin Buber, Meister Eckhart, Huston Smith, and others you might think of in related genre. My purpose is not to drop names, but to paint a landscape that might be familiar to you and others who've read some of these authors.

I recognize that you know more about many of these writings than I do. I'm only reviewing them so others, who might not have been following from the beginning, or who forgot all of the twists and turns of this conversation, can follow. And a long and interesting one it has been.

From retrospect, psychoanalysis makes sense to me now—as one important perspective on Faith. But only from the “faith” of authors like those mentioned above, including also David Elkins; and of course M. Scott Peck. These authors, as you know, wrote of Faith and Spirituality as a given human need that should be studied to improve our understanding of it, rather than a thesis to be proved or disproved.

Reido wrote: Why wouldn't those who know psychology simply ignore the whole thing? Wouldn't the answer lie in the meaning and value of the whole thing? That is, beyond empirical and/or historical proof, there is something in the psyche that tends toward Faith in some people (granted, not all). So, it seems this approach simply looks at those aspects of Faith for what they're worth on their own -- not because of some Assigned Value. What ever do I mean by A. V.? What I mean is power, authority, the weight of Truth that carries with whatever means of persuasion people choose to defend their beliefs.

Yes, and it becomes increasingly obvious that Faith has a dark side. There are still cultures and cults that pass down to each new generation a history of hate and fear toward others that, while giving them meaning in a perhaps otherwise meaningless existence, also feeds the smoldering coals of long misunderstood battles and arguments, which then periodically flare up into raging infernos. Is this not the fire and brimstone of Hell itself?

bill

Bill

I couldn't agree more with this redefinition...

"... feeds the smoldering coals of long misunderstood battles and arguments, which then periodically flare up into raging infernos. Is this not the fire and brimstone of Hell itself?"

I have often asked myself in study, "What led the writer of Enoch to paint such a vivid picture of Hell and its guardians?"  Timekeepers place it somewhere around the 3rd century BC even though its namesake would be by far the elder of all.  Was there a postExhilic need, similar to Isaiah's call to repentance -- something that could compete with his fallen kingdom prophecies (that some say came after the fact)? 

I meander some, but if there were ever a need for the figure of Hell as it was used in the OT, today's conflict over the rights of possession of Faith certainly qualifies.  Redefining Hell as choking the life out of Life fits very well.

reido

Dear  Mr Reido

In Hindu phiolosphy, Hell  has distinctive place like Heavens. It is believed that the  souls of  men  go thorgh cycle of birth and death till they are liberated to finally mrge with super soul. The  Dharmadevatha ( Lord of Justice) sits over the court and decides the  destiny of the souls that reach him after leaving this earth.  Lord of death  i.e Dharma devatha  is  one of the demi God and one of the functionery.  In hell, there are many  punishments and tortures.   Boiling  in hot oil, water and  burning in naked fire,  sawing with  large blades and saws.  Piercing  with spears and raising  them   to top, Drowning in waters,  eating piece by piece by cruel beasts and devils, Amputation of limbs, tying to a wheel and turning over at speed while  knives are pierced are some examples. There are many more  and the punishments are  varied as per the sin committed. In India posters are published and sold in which all these punishments  and  the reasons also are depicted. These are used to scare children from committing sins.  Even elders are reminded of gory  punishments by these pictures.  After  suffering at the hell,   the soul leaves to enjoy the heavens if some good deeds  have been done by him or her.  When the account is settled, he takes rebirth and struggles again.  All religions  have concept of hell  to depict the  need of  doing good deeds while  on this earth.  A man is expected to follow a truthful path as prescribed  by the scriptures and suggested by the prophets.  In heavens ,  men  enjoy company of  beautiful girls without end. Enjoyment includes drinking divine liquor,  listening to good music,  conjugal plaesures with divine women   so on so forth. Every where women are seen as the tools for pleasure whether on this earth or in heavens. As long as a man believes in  a religion  concepts of hell and heavens shall prevail. But many also believe that living on this earth itself is like living in hell.

Dr K Prabhakar Rao 

Dr Rao,

Your summarization of Hindu teachings on hell is interesting. Could you provide some developmental information? For example: when, and what was going on at the time, did these teachings appear?

Intuitively, it seems that theological and philosophical ideas move in all directions, taking root where they would. The Silk Road(s) was the Internet of the Axial Age. It just makes good sense that ideas moved along those roads and shipping lanes, along with goods and people. It also follows that those who cut themselves off from the flow, will shrivel up and die, culturally that is.

bill

Reido wrote: I meander some, but if there were ever a need for the figure of Hell as it was used in the OT, today's conflict over the rights of possession of Faith certainly qualifies. Redefining Hell as choking the life out of Life fits very well.

Reido,

Until now, It hadn't occurred to me how closely related today's apocalyptic sermons fit into an historical pattern. Of course the Pope would attempt to (diplomatically perhaps) strike fear of hell into American Catholics—the Vatican is increasingly losing its grip (what grip it had) on America. But I've heard these messages before, on a local level. And I wonder how many times the message that I thought was merely a typical Sunday sermon, was more of a pointed prod aimed at some breakaway constituency.

The development of Enoch makes a great study in developmental theology (and eschatology). Just a cursory look at the Wikipedia pages for Enoch and the Maccabees brings to the imagination several intriguing questions. Here's just three.

• Were the books of 1 Enoch written before the Maccabean revolt, during a time of growing tension between those Jews who remained (or considered themselves such) dedicated to Yahweh, and others who were increasingly accepting Hellenism?

• Or were they written after the victory again their Seleucid puppeteers to draw a contrast between those who had supported the revolt and those who still leaned toward Hellenism and the Seleucid rule?

• Do the several pieces of 1 Enoch cover a long period of Hellenization—a couple of centuries even up to the time of Christ—and the struggle of Yahwehists to not only remain pure, but to survive.

There are many other combinations, but the sense is that eschatological and apocalyptic writings seem aimed at separating the wheat from the tares, and solidifying the position of those considering themselves to be wheat.

In my own experience, on a much smaller scale, during times of congregational conflict, apocalyptic language heats up. On a larger scale, we can even imagine the French and Spanish Inquisitions as apocalyptic responses to the growing diversity of thought during the Renaissance and pre-Enlightenment.

On the smallest scale, disagreements between individuals, each castigates the other, using whatever damning language they can think of to paint themselves holier than the other.

You've given me a new, more personal understanding of apocalyptic messages.

bill

Bill

Just remembering scenes from one of my all time favorite movies, Apocalyse Now was disturbing to me.  It did what it intended -- portrayed the persuasive power of fear. 

reido

Bill

Those 3 probing questions about the context of 1 Enoch were very thought provoking.  To some extent, all 3 may contain an element of fighting a losing battle -- that is, the blessed kingdom was coming under control of foreigners and time was not helping that situation.  Enter the doctrine of Gehenna.

That supports your thinking that perilous times were the background setting for Apocalyptic literature.  I believe you are right, by the way.   One doesn't have to look far to see similar practice in our own times with doomsday prophets resurrecting the ancient texts to an new contextual setting.  That seems to be how these things grow.

reido