-3-
"The Divine Paradox"
The word paradox has a number of definitions and may be
used in a number of fashions. The place to begin here is with a definition as to
what we mean when we talk of paradox in reference to the Divine in this text.
Paradox, then, will mean that two seemingly opposing statements can both be
true at the same time; and yet, of and by itself, there remains a constant. A
paradox, for our purpose, is the plane where opposition becomes a singularity
where neither, or both, of the opposing forces can be true (and one) at the
same time.
We must be careful that we do not use paradox as an excuse
for contradiction. Paradox, as it is being used here, cannot be used to justify
an untruth or an absolute contradiction. We could not use paradox to make two
plus two equal five, even on a transcendent plane. A circle cannot be a square,
although the line, which forms each, can be paradoxical
because it houses the potential to be either, and, is still a line unto itself.
True paradoxes are hard for human beings to comprehend for
we live in a world of duality where things are either
positive or negative, yes or no, or have an opposite. Yet, ironically,
we as human beings live a true paradox every second of our lives but it is so
commonplace that we often fail to see it as paradox. This paradox is what we
call "NOW": the instant where the past meets the present -
where the moment is both the beginning and the end at the same instant. This
idea of "NOW" fits the above definition because we can say
that "NOW" is the beginning - we can refer to "NOW"
as an end; and both statements would be perfectly true. We could also say that
now is neither a beginning nor an end, because of itself, it is always the
constant of being "NOW". This "NOW" is where
all of the past ends; and at the same instant, our new beginnings begin with
all the visions of the future unfolding before us. "NOW" is of
itself a singularity, which merges beginning and end into a single instant so
that either of the opposing forces can be applicable.
We will also-cite fire as another example of paradox in an
effort to help the reader comprehend some of the points we shall be making. It
must be stated here that fire is paradoxical only in a limited sense that we
are using here, and, clarify that we are not making any scientific claims to
its paradoxical nature.
Fire is an energy
that is fire. Of, and by itself, it is neither good (positive) nor bad (negative).
Fire is fire! Yet, fire, as it does what it does, is either positive or
negative in terms of the human perception. We use fire every day to heat, cook,
or perform a number of useful human services. The sun, with its seemingly
eternal fire, provides the necessary element for life itself. On the other
hand, fire can be a destructive force where we can lose property or life. The
sun's fire has the potential to burn and harm us; and in this sense, it is bad
or negative.
Yet, even in its seemingly negative side, such as a forest
fire for example, the destruction can allow the earth to renew and enrich
itself. Thus, from a human perspective the fire might be bad (negative,), but
from Mother Earth's perspective the fire is positive and good. One might say
that this paradox is purely subjective, but that is the point of the paradox -
either opposing statement can be true, but in reality neither truly applies.
Fire is fire, which is neither positive nor negative, while actually containing
those opposing forces within its very nature.
While nothing is quite like God, for She
is transcendent of our human perception in any concrete sense. These two
examples of paradox can help us relate to God in a manner where we might avoid
assigning Him human dualistic qualities, which often, put people at odds in
their Image of God. God truly is - as He is! Of and by Herself
She would be a singularity like the "NOW", where all opposing
forces merge into one.
The metaphor of the Trinity gives excellent symbolic insight
into the paradoxical nature of the Divine. In a very real sense She is three in
one, the potential of the opposing; and yet; always a constant unto Herself.
The truth is, one needs to be very careful about making
statements such as, "God is good," for, He transcends goodness
as we could understand it. Nor could God be evil in any sense of our
understanding, because God is perfection unto itself; being what She is, which
is: the singularity where all opposition merges into one in perfect
harmony.
God also becomes transcendent of being
called an entity, a being, or a person. God is "BEING"
itself, containing the potential for all the duality of existence emanating
from this state of Being. It would seem that God
houses, if you will, the positive and the negative of all Her
creation in a blend that is very consistent with our example of "NOW".
The very Scriptures tell us this:
"I Am the Alpha and Omega," says the Lord God, who 'Is',
and who 'Was', and who 'Is to Come'; the sovereign Lord of all.
(Revelation
1:8)
Thus, the Lord God, becomes the beginning and the end of all the creation,
embodying all of its present, all of its past, and all of its future. And, as
the "NOW", She is a constant and real
that is ever changing. God, like time, is Singular yet all! She is Male and
female! He is all and nothing, positive and negative, personal and Impersonal.
God is all these things in the same Force that is infinite without beginning or
end; making Him, transcendent of anything we can describe dogmatically in terms
of our perceived dualistic reality.
God
answered, "I AM, that is who I am. Tell them
that I AM has sent you to them."
(Exodus
3:13)
Recognizing the paradox of God may be confusing, but our
Image of God should be confusing. This type of approach could help us avoid the
type of arrogance which has led to Christians telling Jews they are not saved;
or the persecution of the Muslims in the crusades; or the slaughter of Native Americans
in colonial America; or the self righteousness that so often prevails today;
where, people sit in judgment of another's faith and beliefs.
God is bigger than any human definition. The Image we hold
of God may be the correct one for us for it could very well be a part of the
Divine circle that we need to see. But, another may need a different Image of
the Divine, or, they may be seeing a different part of the
Too often, theologically, we are living in a vacuum of
faith that is based upon a limited amount of revelation. The paradox allows us
to keep our faith, or Image, while at the same time allowing us to view God's
revelation through someone else's perspective. Ultimately, such can help us to
grow in our belief, because we are refining and adding to our Image of God in a
manner that is tolerant, "SEEKING," and capable of seeing more
of the
There are other advantages, some psychological, to seeing
this paradoxical reality of the Divine. If, for example, the human race is
truly made in the Image and likeness of a paradoxical God, He/she would have to
be both male and female at the same time; otherwise, one sex or the other would
not be truly in God's Image. We could say that God is without gender, and this
might be closer to the truth. But, if God is the Creator, and we recognize
duality at least in Her Intellect; then the creation ought to reflect His
Intellect - and, at that level, there are both male and female characteristics.
Such assertions about God are admittedly pure speculation
at best, but what we must keep in mind is that all our intellectual
declarations about God are truly nothing more than speculation. God can not be
really known to the Intellect because She is
transcendent of it! What we need to keep in mind is if we see God in this
paradoxical way, there is no psychological advantage for one sex over the
other. An Image of God having both genders is much healthier, and makes it much
easier, to establish true equality of the sexes in a given society. For
centuries, women have been second class citizens, at least in part, because we
have assigned God a masculine Image based upon our Biblical interpretations.
But one can just as easily cite the Bible to support these
paradoxical theological conclusions. We have two Creation stories in the Book
of Genesis. Genesis 1: 26,27 supports the paradoxical
nature of the Divine.
Then God said, "Let US make man in OUR Image and Likeness to
rule the fish in the sea, the birds of the heavens, the cattle,
.................. So, God created man in His own Image. In the Image of
God He created them; male and female He created them.
It is the second creation
account, which was written earlier than the first one quoted above (About 400
to 500 Years); people had less knowledge of the world around them. These people
were very limited in their ability to understand the Divine they were finding
in themselves. Yet, it is from these peoples, we have developed the patriarchal
ideals so prevalent in our societies. In Genesis 2:20-25 we read:
...but for the man himself no partner had been found. And so the
Lord God put man into a trance, and while he slept, he took one of his ribs and
closed the flesh over the place. The Lord God then built up the rib, which he
had taken out of man, into a woman. He brought her to man, and man said,
"Now this - bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh! This shall be called
woman, FOR FROM MAN THIS WAS TAKEN!" That is why a man leaves his father
and mother and is united to his wife, and the two become one flesh.
The many contradictions between these two creation accounts
will be covered in the chapters dealing with scriptures. Suffice it to say
here, that a paradoxical ideal of the Divine is very consistent with our
Christian Bible. While this account above is the second in the book of Genesis,
it is the first written. It can lead to sexism and a type of psychological
mentality that makes men feel superior over woman in some way. We see the consequence
of this doctrine in our history and are just beginning to overcome the bias it
has delivered.
Now the paradoxical Image of God, in the book of Genesis,
is written much later. It would seem that the inspired writers by this period
could grasp the concept of a paradoxical God, referring to Him in the plural in
these passages. But these writers grasped a significant truth from their
inspiration; that, Men and women are the same in God.
So, God is what She is. He can be
both male and female, the yin and the yang as the eastern religions see the
Ultimate concern. A responsible theology needs to be very careful in presenting
its Images of God, choosing paradoxical ground whenever it is possible. In this
way, ideas do not cancel out each other. The supernatural can be part of the
natural order, for singularities exist. And, God becomes big enough to be more
than one thing at the same time, which is truly the symbolic concept expressed
in the Trinity.
Kings 19: 11-13 gives us
another example of the paradoxical essence of the Divine:
Then Yahweh himself went by. Thence came a mighty wind, so strong
that it tore the mountains and shattered the rock before Yahweh. But Yahweh was
not in the wind. After the wind came an earthquake. But Yahweh was not in the
earthquake. After the earthquake came fire; but, Yahweh was not in the fire.
And after the fire came the sound of a gentle breeze. And when Elijah heard
this, he covered his face with a cloak.
Of this passage, Karen
Armstrong in her "HISTORY OF GOD" tells us:
Yahweh is not in any of the forces of nature but in a realm apart.
He is experienced in the scarcely perceptible timbre of a tiny breeze in the
paradox of a voiced silence.
(p27)
It defies logic that our
religions should resist the idea of paradox when it comes to God. Jung
expresses it so nicely:
Without prejudice to my own subjective convictions I should like to
raise the question: Is it not thinkable that when one refrains from setting
oneself up as an 'arbiter mundi' and, deliberately
renouncing all subjectivism, cherishes on the contrary belief, for instance,
THAT GOD HAS EXPRESSED HIMSELF IN MANY LANGUAGES AND APPEARED IN DIVERSE FORMS
AND THAT ALL THESE STATEMENTS ARE TRUE - is it not thinkable? I say, that this
too is a decision. The objections raised, more particularly by Christians, that
it is IMPOSSIBLE FOR CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS TO BE TRUE, must permit itself to
be politely asked: Does one equal three? How can three be one? Can a mother be
a virgin? And so on. Has it not yet been observed that all religious statements
contain logical contradictions and assertions that are impossible in principle,
THAT THIS IS IN FACT THE VERY ESSENCE of RELIGIOUS ASSERTION?
... If Christianity demands faith in such contradiction, it does
not seem to me that it can very well condemn those who assert a few paradoxes
more. Oddly enough, the PARADOX is one of our most VALUABLE SPIRITUAL
POSSESSIONS, while uniformity of meaning is a sign of Weakness. Hence, a
religion becomes inwardly impoverished when it loses or waters down its
paradoxes; but their multiplication enriches because only the paradox comes
anywhere near to comprehending the FULLNESS OF LIFE. Non-ambiguity and non-contradiction
are one-sided, and thus, not suited to EXPRESS THE INCOMPREHENSIBLE.
(C.G.Jung, PSYCHOLOGY AND ALCHEMY, Tr. R.F.C.
The paradoxical Image of God also might help us to resolve
the conflict between good and evil, eliminating some of the projections we have
built into our theologies; ultimately, placing the responsibility for evil
where it belongs - that is, in our own lap!
So much of our present Christian theology is preoccupied
with a war that exists between God and the Devil. While such concepts make neat
little religious packages of dogma, they really do very little to help us on a
road to fulfillment or salvation. In the first place, such ideas create
projections, which justify evil to the point where we cannot control it, yet
alone, overcome it. We become dependent upon God to rid us of the evil, for
much of this theology contends: we are weak willed and unable to fend off the
devil without the Divine. In other words, evil is the natural state.
Another, more philosophical argument about this separate
God and Devil; is, that no matter how you slice it, God becomes the creator of
evil! In order for there to be conscious choice and free will, one must have
the potential to choose wrongly. Thus, God would have to endow we creatures with the potential to commit evil.
So as not to be misunderstood, in this discussion, it
should be pointed out that because we are assigning the paradoxical quality to
the Divine, we are not saying that God is evil. God cannot be evil, and
therefore God cannot be good - for She is transcendent
of such. But the force or power of evil (the actual existence of it in
reality), just the same as goodness, comes from the "BEING" which
allows it to be - which is God. It is human beings who make such evil by their
choices, but the power of Satan and God are the same.
All we need to do to substantiate this paradoxical
potential from the Divine is look to the natural creation. The natural forces
take no heed to goodness or evil of a thing. One only need
to look at the beauty, gentleness and sometimes touching side of nature, and
then, contrast that with the violent harsh and often seemingly cruel aspects of
it. Contrast a beautiful sunrise with the violence of a hurricane. Or, picture
a bird feeding its young and contrasts that to a cat eating the bird for lunch.
The desert provides the hot arid climate for its creatures, while the arctic
offers the cold and ice to which its life forms have adjusted.
Nature can be often cruel; but she is never evil, for the
cruelty serves the greater purpose for which it was intended, ultimately
serving the goodness of the whole. The point is: violence and cruelty are
necessary components of the natural order, but, only in humans’ can they become
self-serving or so consuming that they lead to greed. While God uses such
forces according to the actual need, always providing renewal or usefulness to
such force; man often uses the Divine forces to his own selfish end, which is
often at odds to the whole.
We might speculate that the will of God serves the greater good and never its own selfish end, whereas, human wills can
be very self-serving and destructive to the common good. This is how we
manifest the negative from God, which is what we term evil.
Thus, the terms good and evil can only apply to human
beings, for we alone have the choice to be either. Evil will need its own
separate discussion as to its definition, but for now suffice it to say, our
definition will be: that which irresponsibly imposes its will causing needless
destruction, hurt, pain, death, or oppression for selfish reasons or personal
gain. A good example would be rape, where an individual gratifies one's self by
forcing their desire upon another. Another might be theft, where we take what
we want. It should be pointed out here that when we discuss morality we will
quickly see that it is not so easy to define evil as in these simple examples,
because, we do not have a full perception of all things. God could not act
irresponsibly, nor selfishly, therefore the term 'evil' as used here does not
apply to Her. But God does become the singularity that
houses the positive and negative forces upon which we draw as the natural order
so clearly demonstrates. And we must reiterate that negative forces do not necessarily
have to be evil, any more than positive forces have to be good (see morality).
In a sense, what we are saying here is, God and Satan are in a sense the same
entity - this is why the myth has them almost equal in status. It is we who
make the choice of whom we serve. It is we who are masters over our own
destiny. It is we who misuse God's power of Being,
therefore, we are the creators of the reality of Satan.
If we bear with this for a moment, thinking about it
logically, we will quickly see the folly in our literal view of Satan.
Realistically, God would have to be a real tyrant to create a being like Satan,
one who is almost equal to Herself - one that He knew would revolt! Then, after
creating it, allow it a free reign over us weak willed and somewhat powerless
creatures. Moreover, it doesn't make any sense that God would allow Satan to
tempt our first parents without any balance to help them make an enlightened
decision about consuming the fruit of the tree. Again, it becomes literalism
that stands in the way of seeing the forest through the trees.
Satan is in God's nature, just as evil is in the potential
of fire, but the devil is in fact our own egos. Each of us having the Divine
Image within us, and at the same time having free choice to determine our
destiny and purpose, have the potential to actualize
our being for evil purposes that are basically ego driven for
self-gratification.
This is why in our childhood
legends, the devil sits upon our left shoulder and God, or his representative,
sits upon our right shoulder. God is a singularity, but we are not; therefore,
we must choose and accept responsibility for how we will exercise the potential
for being that we all have.
Simply put: Satan is the misuse of God's gift of life that
is within ourselves. Evil is so alien to the Divine
purpose that we perceive it as the opposite of God, which often leads to a
projection for ridding ones self of the responsibility of misusing one's own
life. We claim "the Devil made us do it," when it is we who freely
choose to distort the precious gift God has given of Herself.
In effect, we use the power of God against God. We justify our own failure by
inventing this image of a devil that has immense power. In doing so, we
psychologically lessen our ability to overcome the evil that is within
ourselves, because the ultimate responsibility for the evil lies outside us (in
the devil).
When one sees the true paradox of God, the Devil becomes
nothing more than a distortion of God by us. Evil then,
becomes the manipulation of goodness for selfish motivation by us, whereby;
another aspect of the creation suffers because of us. Satan, therefore, is that
which is contrary to the purpose for which God intended it. It is not God who
creates the Devil, but we who turn the power of God (life's force or being)
into the devil by the selfish distortion of its intended purpose. Without such
potential choice, there is no free will or conscious awareness. The possibility
of evil is the consequence of the Divine giving us conscious choice.
In this paradoxical Image then, we become responsible for
the creation of Satan because it is we who choose how to actualize the
potential that God has placed within all of us. The essence of God is in our
own life force with all its potential for being. When, we choose to misuse or
abuse that life force we turn the power of God against God, and, Satan becomes
the result. The myth gives him control because we are in control of ourselves.
We have power over our own actions! The myth makes him in the Image and
likeness of God because we are in the likeness of God.
God has already saved us because God is also a part of us.
All we need do is harmonize with the purpose for our creation. Salvation can
not be achieved by doing battle with the self purpose; but rather, by doing
battle with ego-selfishness, more commonly known as greed. The only way
individuals can overcome evil is if we are willing to accept responsibility for
it! We would like to reiterate here that the question of Evil will be dealt with
in much greater depth in our discussions about evil and morality in Chapter
Four of this work.
It should also be reemphasized that we are not saying God
is evil. It would serve no more purpose to misconstrued this ideal and justify the
existence of evil by placing the blame upon God; than, the existing belief in
the devil. Like fire is a force or energy, God is our life Force or energy -
the Source of being. What we do with this potential becomes our choice, and
until we acknowledge this in our faith, we stand little chance in ever changing
the darker aspects of the human condition.
Existing theology offers us a symbol for our ability to
overcome evil that is its idea of "Grace". But unlike the many
long-winded explanations, Grace is not given by God; but instead is already
within us. That we are made in God's Image gives us grace, for Grace is a
sharing in the life of God; thus, we are potentially capable of making the
right choices necessary for us. To do this then, we must begin to accept
responsibility for our own actions and cease from blaming a devil, or waiting
for God, to solve the problems which He has already given us the power to solve
for ourselves.
Seeing the paradox of God, that is, all the opposing forces
of the universe in the one singularity from which they proceed, will lead us
into our next section, which is the Diversity of God. But this theme of paradox
will reoccur many times in the course of this text. This should not surprise or
confuse the reader for in the end the creation itself is a composition of
opposites that ebb and flow, balance and harmonize, to create the constant of
existence. Reality would not be if it were not for the opposition of positive
and negative. There could be no day, if there were no night. How could we have
hot or cold if one or the other did not exist? We can only experience joy
because of sorrow! Without bitterness, there is no sweetness. And so often,
what is tragedy for one man is fortune for another. Creation is the birth of
opposition in harmony!
Such is the paradoxical nature of reality, for if we were
to remove the opposition, the counterpart could not stand. Even life and death
are part of this intricate balance, for the life of one thing is dependent upon
the death of another. This is the creation in its existence, and if this were
created by an intellect, the design must reflect the Essence of the designer!
If God gave us the best of Herself, than our reality
is the best of all possible choices available to Him. If this is not the case
than God cannot be considered a good Father or benevolent Creator!
Another area we can address with paradox in the Divine is
the concept of the personal and impersonal God; disputed most noticeably in
East verses West theologies. What is often ignored in this debate is that God
once again here becomes in such perfect harmony that She
is the singularity where it merges. Thus, God is concerned for every aspect of Her creation in a personal and individual way as Jesus
proclaims:
Are not sparrows two a penny? Yet, without your Father's leave not
one of them can fall to the ground. As for you, even the hairs on your head
have all been counted
(Matthew
5: 43-48)
But God is equally concerned
for the whole and its totality, as in this testimony from Jesus:
You have learned that they were told, "love
your neighbor, hate your enemy". But I tell you this, "Love your
enemies and pray for your persecutors; only so you can be children of the
heavenly Father, Who makes His sun rise on the Good and bad alike, and
sends his rain on the honest and
dishonest ... there must be no limit to your goodness as your heavenly
Father's goodness knows no bounds.
(Matthew
5: 43-48)
Knowing the best of all
probabilities allows God to be in the perfect harmony which is needed to
produce all reality. The singularity then becomes the point where God can care
for everything at the individual level, yet, at the same time balance the needs
of that individual thing to the needs of the whole that She
would care about equally. This is why true goodness is always concerned about
how he or she affects things around them, whereas, evil has its roots in
selfishness and greed. It is never the extreme that produces goodness, but a
balance between the self need and the whole's need to the advantage of both.
God has this balance because He is one with both; we can draw upon this balance
because we can draw upon the Image of God within ourselves.
Recognizing God in this paradoxical manner when it comes to
the personal and impersonal also has psychological advantages. We have the
assurance that God cares about us and provides the best She
can give (of course this doesn't mean we always take advantage of it). Yet, the
impersonal aspect of God will help us to avoid a narcissism, which allows us to
be so smug as to think all of creation exists simply for us as individuals, or,
special groups of individuals. Finding God within our own being leads us to see
Him in all that surrounds us, and this is the paradoxical mystery which can
feed one's faith.
There needs to be a word of caution interjected about the
paradoxical concepts that are being discussed. While this can be a very healthy
Image of God, one must be careful it is not carried to such an extreme that it
becomes the same non-productive belief that so many of our images take upon
them. The paradox can be distorted in such a manner that it itself is used to
justify evil, poverty, injustice and war. This is done by assigning the
potential, which is in the Force of the Divine itself, the responsibility for
the actualization in our reality - which is solely of our doing. In other
words, in claiming that God in some way intended for the evil to happen,
therefore there was no stopping it. On an orthodox level, the doctrine of the
Redemption fits this criteria in that God willed the
death of Her Son. If we begin to place the responsibility for the ills of the
world in the Creator's lap we can end up very much like some of the eastern
belief structures where the caste system becomes the projection to rid the
society of responsibility for the atrocities just mentioned.
A way to avoid this projection is by calling to mind an
earlier statement made here about contradiction. God would not be an
"antithesis" of Herself, which would be
yet another way of defining evil. Such would be a contradiction rather than a
paradox or singularity. Even in its negative potential and manifestations, one
must speculate that the Creator produces positive results. Something where
nothing should be from the diversity of energy in the universe is an example of
such positive results. Often, even when we commit evil, while it is our
responsibility, God will compensate by providing some good coming from it.
There are many examples of this, but that does not excuse our evil. Hitler
might be one of the best examples. Medical science, rocket science, economic
opportunity for many needy Germans (even the Jews getting a homeland after
waiting a millennia): were all either directly, or indirectly, influenced by
Hitler and his Nazi movement. And while his evil is inexcusable, and he and
those who perpetrated this evil are totally responsible and accountable, the
Source of our being has the potential to provide a balancing factor to even our
most horrendous acts.
The key to recognizing the paradox is in leading us to take
responsibility for our own actions, as well as allowing us to respect and
tolerate those who may see the Divine differently. If the paradox does not
serve that end, the faith in it does little to be productive in reality. The
truth of any theology lies in what it creates; and never in what it says!
All this brings us to the final paradox to be discussed in
this section. That being, the manifestation of the Divine
paradox that becomes actualized in the Image of God in which we were made.
It is far easier for us to recognize and accept the paradox in the Divine if we
acknowledge it and see it within ourselves.
We are all a composite of opposing forces acting as a
singularity known as an individual or person. All of us are a mixture of good
and evil, masculine and feminine, creative and destructive: with an equal
potential toward actualizing the opposition. We can give life or we can kill.
We all have numerous personalities that in there extremes can be very dangerous
or very loving. Most of the time people are a harmonious mixture of all these
things, but, when we tip the balance, we can run into serious trouble. This is
why we are in the Image of God, rather than being Godlike. God as a singularity
would be seen as always in perfect balance. We, on the other hand, have to
strive to maintain even a limited balance.
The myths and sacred revelations tell us over and over, in
a number of ways, that the key to life lies in our ability to balance the
paradox, which is within us, in a responsible manner. This balance would
include the self with the whole; the needs of the self to the needs of the
whole making sure we do not deprive others or waste in our own selfishness. It
requires that we give back to others, as well as to the creation - in direct
proportion to what we receive and take. It requires us to have the objectivity,
to view ourselves as we are seen by others so that we can make harmonious
decisions about our actions - beyond the blinding ability of our own ego. It
requires us to develop empathy, so that even when we do not agree with others,
we might see and respect where they are coming from.
This is another area we need to address in its entirety but
has its roots in paradox. The idea of paradox creates a paradox in itself, for
in viewing God as a paradox we will better be able to see the potential of
paradox in ourselves. In recognizing our own paradoxical natures, we will be
batter able to accept God in the paradoxical Image, which can be so
constructive in our spiritual evolution. The constant (just the same as the
constant "Now" in time) becomes the unity between us and the
Divine - ultimately leading us to the harmony which is necessary to fulfill our
individually created purpose.
The concept of paradox in the Divine is not new to
Christianity, but the concept to expand upon it is. If we are to make any sense
of our world and its reality, we need to Make sense of
all the opposition in terms of the Creative Principle we believe in. Balance
means, we must find integration of opposition that is harmonious in our
religious attitudes, because denial and condemnation of what we perceive as
unacceptable is a denial and condemnation of the creation itself.
If we look to our sacred revelations, inspirations, and
real observations in a manner which strives to balance the variety of beliefs
which exist, we will see greater truths and a more positive approach to this
life than is possible in literalism or blind absolute faith. We will see that the
message of God is both universal and paradoxical, yet
remaining constant. In talking about the perception of fact, the author William
James in his classic work "THE VARIETIES OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE,"
says:
It is notorious that facts are compatible with OPPOSITE emotional
comments, since the same fact will inspire entirely different feelings in
different persons, and at different times in the same person; and there is no
rationally deducible connection between any outer fact and the sentiments it
may happen to provoke. THESE HAVE THEIR SOURCE IN ANOTHER SPHERE OF EXISTENCE
ALTOGETHER, IN THE ANIMAL AND SPIRITUAL REGION OF THE SUBJECT'S BEING.
(p150)
James seems
to be saying that truth depends on the Life Force and our use of it, and that
this is what determines our perception, interpretation and reaction. We may all share common ideas, but the
individual experiences them individually, and that may be totally different
from someone else's experience of the same thing. For example, we all have an
idea of what we refer to when we talk of the color blue, but whether we like it
or not depends on how we as an individual see the color in our impression of
it.
What is it that moves us in our differences of likes and
dislikes, our philosophical concepts, our joys and our sorrows, our perceptions
of good and evil? If one acknowledges the spiritual side of man, and that we
are in the Image and likeness of God in that we share in Her Life Force, than,
all the opposition of that Life Force is housed therein. James tells us later
in the same chapter:
But provisionally, and as
a matter of program and method, SINCE THE EVIL FACTS ARE GENUINE PARTS OF
NATURE AS THE GOOD ONES, the philosophical presumption should be that THEY HAVE
SOME RATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE, and that systematic healthy-mindedness, failing as
it does to accord to sorrow, pain, and death any positive and active attention
whatever, IS FORMALLY LESS COMPLETE THAN SYSTEMS THAT TRY AT LEAST TO INCLUDE
THESE ELEMENTS IN THEIR SCOPE.
The Bible itself gives a most
poetic view of the paradox in the reality of our existence. In the book of
Ecclesiastes we read:
For everything has its season, and
for every action
under the heaven, there is a time:
a time to be born and a time to
die;
a time to plant and a time to
uproot;
a time to weep and a time to laugh;
a time for mourning and a time for
dancing;
a time to scatter stones and a time
to gather them;
a time for embrace and a time to
refrain from embracing;
a time to seek and a time to loose;
a time to keep and a time to throw
away;
a time to tear and a time to mend;
a time for silence and a time for
speech;
a time to love and a time to hate;
a time for war and a time for
peace...
Whatever 'IS' has
been already, and whatever is to
come has been already, and God summons
each event
back in its turn. (3: 1-16)
All these things have their
time because all these things are of God. The existence of the opposing forces
is meant to be; it is only our misuse of the opposition that creates evil.
Ultimately, each of us is our own devil!
The paradox cannot and should not be used as a catchall to
justify any and all theological speculation. Paradox is not the end all of all dogmatic
truths; but it is rather, a place to begin a search for Divine revelation
consistent with the directive of Christ to "be like little
children," approaching God with complete humility. Truth is seldom a
cut and dry thing, very often requiring one to harmonize and compromise
opposites to arrive at a proper conclusion. Just as we balance the flow of
positive and negative electricity to give us our electric lights, so too it can
be with the light of truth.
In the Nag Hammadi Manuscripts
discover in 1947 in Egypt, in a book called the GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THOMAS,
Jesus gives us one of the most beautiful examples of paradox in all of our
inspired literature:
The disciples said to him: "Warn us how our end will be."
Jesus replied, "Have you already discovered the beginning, now that you
are asking about the end? Wherever the beginning is, there shall be the end.
Blessed is it who stands at the beginning, for he
understands without tasting death. Blessed is he who was, before he became.
(Logion
18)
God 'IS' because He is all that 'Is'. The
Essence of what She is must be reflected in the design
that proceeds from Him. Her power is actualized in both the positive and
negative energies that fuel our cosmos and whatever may lie beyond it. God's
magnificence lies before us in the harmonious functions of opposition, which
produce the perfection of the universe we behold before our eyes.
To see the paradox in, and of, the Divine is to stand at
the beginning and the end at the same instant. It is the "Now"
of the spirit, which will allow us to move forward and continue to evolve. Just
as the paradox of the "now" contributes to the physical
evolution of human beings, the paradox of the "Divine" will
aid our spiritual evolution. It is clear that our world is in dire need of an
improved relationship with its Creative Force; and one only need look at our
collective societies, to see the reality of this statement.
Our religions hold the symbols and the truths of this badly
needed Divine Inspiration, which might very well improve our state of being.
But, until we remove the blindfolds, which lead to projection and blame, we
will fail to recognize God's truth in a manner that will help improve the
condition of our world. Religion has often been an intricate part of human progress,
but if it is to continue to serve in that role, its theology must recognize the
folly in making dogmatic assertions about a Divine that is truly transcendent
of our intellectual reasoning.
God is much more than any one of us can dare imagine. Responsible
theology must avoid the pitfall of presenting an Image of God, which presents
the individual from relating to God in the manner that God chooses to reveal Herself to them.
Please email us with your thoughts!