THE GOD PARADOX

There are many ways to describe God, none of which are in themselves adequate or come close to a definitive description.  Christians, for the most part, are all over the place when trying to define God.  I tend to equate the term God with the scientific Theory of Everything; as yet, an incomprehensible force  and process which resulted in us and the universe we live in.   In past posts, I have described God as a Verb, Light, and Love.  As such, these terms seem more comprehensible or at least relatable as some form of activity rather than a paradox. 

We humans have trouble relating to the concept of a paradox; that contradiction of terms or statements regarding their being simultaneously true.  As such, I understand God as the ultimate paradox.   Consider the following statement from Psalm 139:12,"Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee."   If darkness and light are alike, does that mean God doesn't care or is there something more mysterious going on?  

Consider the claim, "God is good."  The contradiction to God is good is that God is evil.  Consider how God comes across in dealing with Job or the Egyptians in Exodus and any number of small Canaanite kingdoms where God is depicted as demanding the Israelites to engage in complete genocidal warfare.      

Darkness and light in bible-talk are interchangeable with good and evil.  With that in mind Psalm 139:12 can be paraphrased as, "Yes, that which is evil cannot hide from you; evil is as illuminated as good to you; in that, evil and good are both counterparts of each other to you."   So much for the theodicy argument.  

Paradox as God's modis operandi can be unsettling to those who wish to see their idea of God as strictly being on the good/love side of the proverbial coin. The counterpart to love in scripture is fear which results in hate.  Love accepts and embraces, fear avoids or fights; as such, we can find both love and fear operative when it comes to depicting God's activity in scripture. 

The irony is that when God does something considered evil by us,  God's evil action is always considered good because God is not accountable to any higher power, as God is the highest power.  Should we commit an evil that God would entertain, we would not only be accountable to whatever justice system we live under but also to God.  The fear of God is not only the beginning of wisdom but also the bedrock of any justice system.  "May God have mercy on our souls."

* * *

Pushing moral arguments aside for the moment, good and evil are always at work when it comes to creative processes.  For example, there are many reasons that could be attributed to most humans being afraid of change.  Change always involves, at some level, a deconstructive process in order to create something new.  Sculptors chip away at stone or wood.  Food requires the destruction of animal or plant life.  For the human these are good things, but for the tree, the mountain, the animal and the plant, if they were cognizant in the way we are, such events would be considered evil.  

If one doesn't like change, the following line from Revelations 21:5 has to send shivers up one's spine, "Behold, I make all things new."  To make all things new means the destruction and elimination of all things old.  On the other hand, if one considers making all things new a good thing, it necessitates in engaging in what some would consider an evil; as in, the destruction of the comfortable or familiar.  This could explain why Episcopalians and other traditionalist denominations take issue with the Book of Revelation as they would prefer a God who "changes not" (Malachi 3:6), as opposed to a God who makes all things new.

* * *

If paradox is accepted as alike by God, is God capricious or hypocritical?    Thus we are back to entertaining the theodicy question.  Paradox does not involve capricious or hypocritical behavior.  God or the universe's approach to paradox is one of equanimity.  God is morally equanimous.  The difficulty for us mere mortals is that we are not.  We struggle with paradox, just as we struggle with morality because we not naturally equanimous beings; in that, we differentiate good from evil, this from that, and differentiation is the cause of much of our human suffering.

Take for instance, Jesus warning in Matthew 7:1-2, "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged."  Judging is what we do.  We discriminate.  We discern.  We seek difference so that we can identify same until sameness bores us and we seek difference.  In this sense humans are not equanimous.  It is far easier to forgive than it is to avoid judging other.  Forgiveness is a response to judgment.   In fact, there are those who would withhold forgiveness unless one would except the judgement of whoever might offer such forgiveness. This is the human conundrum:  We are doomed to judge and, according to Jesus, in judging others we are doomed to be judged.   Thus, we become the arbiters of our fate.

* * *

Seeking equanimity is part of many contemplative and meditative practices.  Very few, if any, have ever reached the paradoxical equanimity by which the universe (God) operates.    There is much violence and creativity in the universe.  We can witness with our own eyes (via telescopes) the destruction and creation of stars, solar systems and galaxies, which often result in new forms of existence.  What we are will be no more.  What our death (destruction) will give birth to is consigned to God's, the universe's, creativity.  Death and life is a paradoxical construct. We begin dying the second we are born.

Norm

 

IN A TIME OF REFLECTION

I am nearing four months since leaving church.  I would be less than honest in saying that I don't miss it at times.  What I miss most is the people in the congregation and, of course, playing the organ.  Some in the congregation know why my wife and I left but others do not or have not heard the full reason for leaving from me.   Few have directly asked for a reason which leads me to believe they have come to their own conclusions.  

My intent on not giving reasons was twofold.  The first was to avoid getting into a battle about or with the priest which would do a fragile congregation little good.  The second reason is related to the first reason, I no longer felt I could honestly worship in the prescribed manner of its liturgy, which I feel portrays Jesus wrongly and tries to define the indefinable creative force referred to as God in outdated language as many mainline denominations do.  

As some of you may have noticed, I have taken a break from posting.  I tried several times, but I found myself deleting what I wrote.  It didn't feel right, because I wasn't feeling right.  I admit that I struggle with having left a church I served as a lay preacher, worship leader, and organist for almost 30 years and no longer being a part of a congregation of peculiar people to which most Episcopal churches lay claim.  I liked its peculiarity because I felt at home with peculiarity but there was a part of me that urged me to let go and take time to reflect on my life and life in general.   

My wife and I still consider ourselves Episcopalian and we continue to attend services at home by watching the services at Washington National Cathedral on YouTube and occasionally I watch services at Trinity Wall Street in NYC.  I feel more at home within those contexts than I do in the local Episcopal church.  In those larger churches there is sense of open-mindedness with regard to scriptural interpretation, the use of liturgy,  and I feel they both exhibit a truer commitment to the teachings of Jesus than to a strict adherence to the apostolic teachings about Jesus that evolved after Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire.  

The local priest in my parish and the bishop of the diocese are both concerned about keeping strict adherence to the liturgical forms in the Prayer Book, the church's canons, and its doctrines than emphasizing the teachings of Jesus and their relevance in today's chaotic world   I see such a stringent  approach to doctrine as Christianity's Achille's Heel as they are more about control through indoctrination than taking an opportunity to explore a broader understanding of who we are, not only in the light of ancient scriptures, but more importantly in the light of our increasing knowledge of the universe and the role we humans play in creating the chaos that has the potential to destroy ourselves and the world we live in.  

* * *

I am sure that many of you have heard about or have listened to Bishop Mariann Budde's sermon at the National Cathedral during its National Prayer Service after President Trump's inauguration in which she directly addressed President Trump regarding the fears brought about by his administration's agenda regarding immigrants, LGBTQI individuals and asking that he show mercy on them and on all people feeling disenfranchised and fearful.   I was not surprised by her doing so and it gladdened my heart that she did.   The National Prayer service included clergy from Native American, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, Sikh, African Methodist Episcopal, Baptist, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Mormon, and Presbyterian religions and denominations.  

Bishop Budde was very pastoral in carrying out her prophetic duty in reminding the President of God's Executive Orders as in Rev. (Sen.) Rapheal Warnock put it in his sermon at the cathedral this past Sunday.  The National Prayer Service also served as a reminder of what this nation has long honored by placing  this diverse group of religious leaders on equal footing in an inclusive (DEI) setting which as Rev. Warnock also pointed out that Dei is Latin for God.  

* * *

I try not to watch too much TV.  The national news is depressing.  I do not understand what has happened to the citizens of this nation that has made them so cynical about our nation and the world as to entertain the thought of electing those who have dictatorial aspirations.  There are always things that need adjustment, but adjustments or realignments in a constitutional republic such as ours requires much thought and careful management.  Above all, the apparent reckless disregard for people's lives by the current administration seems to be a recipe for moral decay and disaster on a national and worldwide level.

Now that I'm in my seventies, it seems odd that I should leave things that have been part of my life for most of my life.  I have to confess I don't have a clue as to where this leaving is leading me, if anywhere.  Even my digital piano which I loved playing is not functioning well largely because I probably played it out.  Thus, I don't have that relief from the loss of playing a pipe organ.  It would appear that I need to let that go also.  

What I enjoy is reading and that is what I mostly do.  I am trying to get back into painting, but that is proving to be a slow process as my hands are not as steady as they used to be nor my eyesight as good as it was in my twenties. When the weather permits, I go for walks to get fresh air and take in the world around me. 

In past posts I have talked about the "pauses" in one's life.  I believe this is such a moment for me.  My past experiences with such pauses has taught me that a willingness to let go might result in finding a deeper meaning to life or even a new or a renewed sense of purpose to my life.

Norm

 

AT THE CUSP - A Poem

At The Cusp

                      At the cusp where endings and beginnings meet,

                      at the liminality of the present; where the past and 

                      the future pause ever so briefly, where time seemingly

                      stops at the pivotal point where the dusk of hopes not met

                      and the dawn of hopes yet to be converge, all is peace.

                      In that space look at the night sky between the last

                      minute of the old year and the first minute of the new year

                      to contemplate the absence of that which disturbs and 

                      ponder the absence of that which disrupts.  Consider the vastness                                                                of being before entertaining the anxiety of hope.

                      Norm Wright,

                      January 18, 2025

THE UNIVERSE AND US

The advantage of being an agnostic is that I can admit to not being certain about much of anything.  This is not to say that I don't have beliefs and opinions about things that are based on factual knowledge as we know it today, but facts are not immutable.  Facts are prone to change as new facts are established about our world, ourselves, and the universe we inhabit.  There is much that we humans have opinions about and believe that have no basis in fact apart from us having them.  Unfortunately, these are the types of opinions and beliefs that are often treated as concrete, absolute truths, which only serve to divert us from seeking the factual. 

Being at the debatable top of the food chain on the speck of cosmic dust we call our planet home has led us to become rather arrogant and self-possessed about our place in the universe.  After all, as far as we can tell we humans are the only life form that we actually and factually know to be cognitively aware of ourselves and our surroundings.  We are intellectually capable of creating diverse cultures and keeping a historical record of our activities unlike any other life forms on this planet (or so we believe at the moment). At presents, we can only speculate that if we exist there is a good chance that there are other intelligent life forms we share the universe with. 

That we humans are conscious beings is as much of a mystery as our existing at all.  Consciousness is a mystery to brain scientists and neurobiologist.   Where consciousness comes from remains unknown.  It's not traceable in the brain even though the brain is obviously involved.   It is not a sense like the other senses which can be traced to their geographic locations in the brain.  It is a phenomenon that simply is.  

I speculate that consciousness is foundational to the "I" capabilities all life forms possess:  Instinct, Intuition, and Intelligence.  I have no doubt that some readers will argue that plants and some animals do not possess any of these capabilities; that only higher forms of animal life may possess them.  While these particular "I" capabilities are unique to Homo sapiens, other life forms have similar or like capabilities unique to them.  

Plants behave in conscious ways.  They possess an awareness of their surroundings even though they are largely immobile and having nothing that represents a central nervous system, yet they are capable of  responding to their environment and sending messages to members of their species when endangered.  Even single cell life-form is reactive to its environment and behaves in conscious ways via the impulsive nature of DNA.  If that were not the case, evolution could not have occurred and I wouldn't be writing this post.  

What does this say about the universe we live in?

* * *

Before answering that question, it is best to spend some time examining us human beings.  Perhaps the most conscious and cognizant creatures on our planet (at least in our collective opinions), the mystery that is us conscious beings points to the greater mystery of a conscious universe.  This simple correlation is based on the fact that we have evolved from the universe itself; that there is something about and within the universe that gives rise to consciousness and suggests that the universe is conscious in a way completely unknown to us.  

The universe appears to have an awareness of itself as demonstrated by the laws by which it operates and can be deciphered by conscious beings like us.  We know things about the universe because it is knowable and because the universe is a reactive entity imbued with the knowable which it emits to conscious receptors like us who seek to understand it. You might ask how the universe communicates as sense of  consciousness.  

The observable universe communicates through chemical means, light, and colors.  It pulsates and emits sounds that can be heard.  It has a gravitational pull on us both literally and figuratively. We sentient creatures must remember we do not stand above or below nature; we are merely part of it.  Our purpose may simply consist in our being the sensors that makes the Universe conscious.  We could be part of an extensive neural (organic transmitting) system made up of other sentient and conscious beings that are located throughout its vast expanse.  Within the scope of the universe, we are no more than a spark of a consciousness transmitter by which a possible eternal universe experiences itself.  

Everything in the universe is derived from the constancy of its mass and energy, including us.  That the universe expands or contracts neither adds or subtracts from this constancy.   In other words, we consist of recycled atoms that are likewise an eternal factor that comprises the universe.  No matter how much we make or destroy on this speck of dust, it has no effect on the weight of universe's mass and energy.  The only thing new about us or about anything in the universe is the particular arrangement of its atoms and their particles that currently take our form.  

Interestingly enough, this reality was intuited by writer of the Ecclesiastes 1:9, who said, "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." That is certainly true at the atomic level of existence.  In this sense, reincarnation seems a bit more likely than resurrection, but one must keep an open mind about this because the universe likely has its own methods when it comes to such processes.  

What seems to be factual is that the sum of our parts consists of recycled particles rearranged as us.  The you and me that exist now may be a one time life form that will never exist again, in the dimensional sense we exist now.  What we leave behind in the macrocosm is our atomic particles that may or may not be used with other atomic particles found in the universe to create newer life forms sometime in the distant future.

* * *

Early on in my posts I mentioned that I did not like to use the word mystery.  My reticence in using that word within a theistic context was that mystery serves as a locked door to keep questioning minds out; as in, "It's a mystery.  You can't understand it.  Just believe it."  In the realm of science, however, mysteries are the things that stimulate a need to seek an explanation, to explore and to establish facts and theories that deepen our understanding.  In the scientific world mysteries abound regarding the universe and  life on our planet home.  There is a great deal that we do not know but that does not mean we won't increasingly discover the universe's secrets and solve its mysteries.  

Norm

  

HOW DID WE COME THIS WAY? - A Poem

 

                                        How Did We Come This Way?

                             How did we come this way?

                              Did we miss a fork in the road?

                              Did we ignore a sign?

                             Was this path meant to be?

                                                                                               * * *

     

                                Stony the road ahead we tread,

                                Watching one’s step along the way.

                                The thoughtful mind filled with dread,

                               Its thoughts shall never say.

                                                                                              

                                                                                               * * *

                                 The careful do not speak,

                                The complacent do not hear,

                               The compliant do not see,

                              The arrival of their fear.

                                                           Norm Wright

                                                           December 1, 2024

ART'S PERSPECTIVES

When exploring the variant realities we humans create, the museum, the theatrical stage, the concert hall, the library and the restaurant prove to be the best resources by which to navigate the broad spectrum of those realities.  Sight, smell, sound, taste, and touch flood the emotional senses of awe, ambivalence, joy, happiness, love, compassion, longing, anger, fear, hate, disgust, sorrow, sadness, and the like to create and recall memories that shape our perspectives and understanding of the realities we humans have created.   Similarities can be as shocking as the differences we discover which challenge our perspectives and understandings of the realities we have created within this creative universe.  

Art is paradoxical.  To construct art always involves the deconstructing of something; usually the products of nature like rocks, plants, and animals to create the food we eat, the sculptures, the musical instruments, the paints, the theaters, the libraries we make and the books we write, and so on.  The art of living things is made up of living things that have been deconstructed by nature.  The atoms we are made of are recycled from the atoms that once made up dinosaurs and one-celled animals that evolved from stellar and planetary collisions billions of years ago.  Birdsong, hoots, howlers, squeals, booms, and the human voice evolved into the language of earth's species that began with the deconstruction of a universal silence, known as the Big Bang which created an eternal hum that sings throughout the universe to this day.  

Art is analytical.  All art is an analysis of what is.  The tools that we and other animals have created to feed ourselves and make life more comfortable began with an analysis of the conditions in which we live.  Even plants, perhaps amongst the most creative life forms on the planet, are analytically reacting to the conditions of their environment; having the ability to create chemicals from light in order to protect themselves and which other life forms, including we humans, have become dependent on in order to exist. For us humans we use every from of art to express and analyze who and what we are.

Art is proportional.  This may strike some as me exposing a bias to certain forms of art that "make sense" mathematically.  Math certainly is evident in art and almost all art forms can be understood and dissected mathematically, but where art is concerned, proportionality must also fall within the domain of art's paradoxical and analytical domains to express the disproportionate.  In the visual arts, proportion and disproportion exist in classical and abstract forms of art.  In music, proportion and disproportion exist in classical harmonies and lyrical sequences as well as dissonant harmonies, syncopations and tonal qualities.  In the theatrical performance, we find both classical and absurdist theater.  In literature, especially in poetry, there are classical, abstract, and dissonant forms.  Even novels are increasingly exploring proportionality with the twisted or absurdist plots that apparently have no connection to reality as we know it, but which make us think about the reality we live in, the purpose behind all art. 

Human beings as works of art from which the variant perspectives of reality emerge and are expressed is too big a topic to include in this post, but collectively we are the outcome of universes creative processes, works of art.  Within that creative process we have created realities that are expressed and analyzed in the art we create.  The universe is an ever expanding work of art that we cognitive creatures are blessed to enjoy and ponder in the time we are given to interact with it.  

Norm

   

  

 

FAITHFULLY AGNOSTIC

What does it mean to be a faithful agnostic?    

When I began this blog, my definition of a faithful agnostic was one who remained faithful to the Christian faith I belonged to as I questioned certain aspects of its teachings.  It comes as no surprise that  I have come to understand that Christianity does not lend itself to being questioned. 

While some theologians claim that doubt is a path to faith, as an agnostic I can only respond paradoxically by saying, "Perhaps but perhaps not."   Both theists and atheists dislike that sort of answer.   For Christians, doubt is tolerable as long as it doesn't result in denial of its main tenets.  On the other hand, atheists are frustrated with someone who doubts but holds that there might be some meaning to a long-held beliefs that have no factual backing.  Humans are uncomfortable with the grayness of ambiguity.  "Either be for something or be against it."    

There is a Christian (and thus a cultural) bias against being non-committal which I grew up with and is expressed in the third chapter of the Book of Revelation where its author writes:  

"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:  ... I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth."   That's an image that can stick with one. 

What about religion?

When it comes to theistic religion, I have cooled down to the point of being on the cool side of tepid rather than lukewarm.  I get that a good many people feel they need religion in their lives as it gives them a hint of certainty and a modicum of control over the chaos we all fear.  On the other hand, I also know that all religions have their ardent ideologists who have caused much of the chaos we fear and have led to the most violent wars in history.    

I am reticent to discuss the topic of God, which I've done a great deal of in past posts, but I feel compelled to give a brief repost of where I'm at on the topic.  The term God is problematic as it generally personates something as accessible and capable of being appeased or manipulated to do what we ask.  There has never been nor can there ever be any proof that such an individuated being exists.  

When I use the term God, I am thinking of a ubiquitous force that permeates the universe, including us.  Hypothetically speaking, we are because it (the universe) is.  That is perhaps the closest one can get to certainty with regard one's existence.  

What about reality?

I have said in past posts, that reality is consensus of perceptions.  In that sense we humans are dealing with a multitude of realities at any given point in our collective history.  Every religion, theistic and secular, creates its perceptions of reality.  All perceptions are malleable.  Those that constitute common shared perceptions of objects are those which have been handed down as a continuous chain of perceptions.  Ultimately, reality is nothing more than  perceptions that have no intrinsic meaning.  

Beyond shared mundane perceptions of objects, reality becomes increasingly diverse as abstract perceptions called ideologies.  Most malleable realties are those that broadly fall under the domains of economics, politics, and religion; realities that have an impact on the welfare of every living creature on our planet home. 

Being an agnostic does not mean I don't care about such ideological realities.  I care very much about them.  My skepticism does not make me ambivalent to them - quite the opposite.  Skepticism leads me to research and understand the ideological realities that we humans create and are dealing with.  

If one wants to study the vastness of the realties we create, art in all of its various forms is a great place to start.   Dance, music, novels, plays, poetry,  paintings, sculptures, all forms of audio, culinary, and visual arts are ways to engage our senses and our variant perceptions of what is real in the world of our making.  In the post that follows, I will ponder with the reader how art projects our perceptions and shapes our sense of reality.

* * *

Norm