‘God’ as the one forged in the aftermath of religious experience

Here is another level to the reflections I have been exploring over the last number of posts. Here I wish to point out that ‘God’ is not to be understood so much as the source of intervention (apocalypse, the impossible) but rather as that which is formed in the aftermath of it.

So much theology and philosophy (onto-theo-logy) begins with the idea of God and, through an understanding of this God as one involved with creation, claims that one can have an experience of God. Even if we put so-called ‘religious experience’ first, this simply means that we use religious experience in order to point toward the God which we already believe in.

However, in contrast, we may say that religious communities worth their salt are born and maintained in the affirmation of an apocalyptic experience from which ‘God’ is created. In other words, genuine faith begins with the happening of an Event, an impossible experience (impossible because it lies outside the horizon of our expectation and decentres us - e.g. Abraham and Issac) from which we form our ideas of God. This ‘God’ is formed in the aftermath of the experience and reflects something of that experience. However, when these diverse, provisional and ethereal ideas/icons are divorced from the grounded life and commitments of these communities they reify into theological idols. In other words the molten liquid that flowed through the lives of the original community cools down so that the next generation can form lifeless idols from the hardened shards.

This does not entail that the one worshiped by Christians is a mere fiction. Rather it means that the one worshiped by Christians is never made present in abstract ideas. It is an affirmation that God is made manifest in the lived experience of real people rather than in the abstract speculation which takes place on many pulpits. It means that when those with faith say ‘God’ they are responding to the impossible that is or has occurred in their lives.

The Judeo-Christian tradition is testimony to the molten presence of this impossible experience. To affirm religious experience is to be prepared to leap (or be pushed) into the molten stream, to live the impossible life, to tread where most fear to even look. It is to risk living in a place of perpetual transformation and challenge (where we may be asked to live among the poor, give away our possessions, offer forgiveness to the unforgivable and suffer oppression for the sake of the oppressed). It is in this white-hot, living stream that we postulate God, it is here where God is born, it is here where God is formed, it is here where God is found.  

Apocalypse

Question - What does it mean to affirm intervention as primary?

Answer - It means that we affirm the idea of apocalypse as something that has happened in our life. Or that we are open to the incoming of apocalypse in our life

Question - What is an apocalypse?

Answer - Apocalypse is the incoming of the Event which we could never have foreseen, anticipated or predicted and whose presence strikes us as utterly incomprehensible, bedazzling and transformative. An apocalypse is the Happening which ruptures our world, which acts as a rent in our being, ensuring that we are never the same again…

apocalypse is revelation

Interventionist (God): Beyond fundamentalism and secularism

Following on from my reflections below (which you would need to read first) I wish to draw out how the position by which we retain the belief in intervention while questioning the belief in God can provide a way of moving beyond both secularism and fundamentalism.

The basic ideal of secularism (a word much used and little understood) is the formation of an ontologically neutral public space where individuals can enter ideologically naked. In short, this means that when we enter the marketplace we must privatise our religious and political views, keeping them hidden away in our homes and churches. When we enter the public arena we must act in a non-political and non-religious manner (as if these are really possible, the end of politics only meaning the reign of one type of politics).

In contrast, fundamentalism seeks to bring Christianity squarely into the marketplace, wanting it to gain public acceptance in the schools, universities and ultimately in the Government. We can see this at work in, for example, the Creation verses Evolution debate of fundamentalism or in the political power exorcised by the religious right in America.

While secularism thus seeks to build consensus into the public arena (whereby we all agree to keep our particular religious and political views to ourselves in favour of the shared ideals of living peaceably with one another), fundamentalism points out that this is an illusion and that the creation of a “non-political” sphere is itself political and the creation of a “non-religious” marketplace is a religious position. However, the rejection of liberal consensus results in the affirmation of a conflict or antagonistic model of social relations (such as that of Carl Schmitt – where people are reduced to friend/enemy, saved/unsaved etc).

Instead of these positions, the uncompromising affirmation that something has occurred within our lives, alongside the humility of accepting that our interpretation of this happening is precisely that, an interpretation, means that while we bring our beliefs and actions firmly into the marketplace we do not attempt to force our views onto the marketplace (rather we live them out).

This is a rejection of liberal privatisation and fundamentalist attempts to make their beliefs public practice. It is then the rejection of both consensus and antagonistic models of social interaction. Instead it affirms an agonistic approach (by which we acknowledge a conflict/tension between different views while making sure the conflict never degenerates into war). We bring our beliefs into the marketplace but simply live them out.

It is this space that Ikon seeks to occupy: by meeting in a public bar (rather than in a private room in the bar) while it is open (rather than closing it so that only people wanting to go to ikon can attend) we are forming a symbol of the above. The point is not that we are missional, seeking to reach those in the bar for a drink, rather we simply live out our fragile faith in a public space: speaking of our joys and struggles through music, art, poetry, reflections etc.

The point is not that we are creating a seeker service (whereby we make the space as accessible to strangers as possible), or that we hide away in a privatised space (exploring our faith in safety). Rather we meet in public and share our lives in public. The result? A tense space is created where the people in ikon often feel ill at ease (because we are sharing our lives while strangers look on), while the people who enter feel equally fearful (not being used to seeing such things in a bar). This is the agonistic space, and within it we attempt to practise hospitality: welcoming people, explaining what is going on etc. The result is that sometimes there will be heckling and at times disruptions from the fruit machine. But this is all part of ikon and part of what it means to live our fragile faith in public. This desire not to be missional is however what makes the space a missional one – both for those who attend and those who participate.

Reflections on an interventionist God

If we take the idea that Christianity traditionally affirms the belief in an interventionist God then we can outline the following three responses to this view,

(1) We retain an unquestioning belief in this idea
(2) We question this belief in its entirety
(3) We question the belief in intervention but retain the belief in God (as source or ground)

Many of us begin our Christianity with an affirmation of the first position. Then, perhaps, we experience certain things that cause us to question this view. I should be clear here that when I say “question” I do not mean “reject”. I am primarily thinking of a level of doubt existing amidst our active affirmation (I have written elsewhere about why such doubt is a virtue rather than a vice), although the questioning could at times come close to that of utter rejection. This questioning will generally be reflected in the affirmation of either position 2 (which, at an extreme level, veers toward agnosticism) or position 3 (which, at an extreme level, veers towards methodological atheism).

There is however an often-overlooked fourth position, one which I would argue is more in line with the Judeo-Christian tradition and mystical experience (an argument I will have to substantiate elsewhere). This forth position can be articulated in this way,

(4) We retain the belief in intervention while questioning the belief in God

This forth position is important as I believe it reaches into the heart of Christian faith, namely there is an affirmation that revelation has occurred and/or will occur, yet, at the same time there is an aporia (meaning something akin to a blockage) as to the nature and state of existence concerning the source.

Here the belief in God is not primary but rather the movement of God is. This may seem peculiar at first, however it offers a means of breaking free of philosophical abstractions. One can say “I have been touched by God in a manner that is undeniable by me, however I am still open and free to wonder, at times, whether this God of which I speak can be explained in natural terms”. Or, to put it another way, one can say, “as a human being I am always haunted by doubt as to questions concerning God etc. however I cannot deny that something happened to me and that I love the source of that experience with all my heart”. After all the book of Revelation itself informs us that it is our testimony that is able to overcome (rather than some abstract belief). For Christians it is a happening, an event, which we affirm and respond to – regardless of the ebbs and flows of our abstract theological reflections.

Position 4 thus represents the Christian affirmation that we have been called and must respond to the call with our whole being, while at the same time allowing for a level of questioning concerning the nature and state of being of the source. This approach opens up a Christianity that is not grasped by much of the contemporary church and represents a new wine that cannot be contained in the old wineskins. It is here, in this space, that I think Ikon attempts to operate.

Good and True interpretations of the Bible

This is something I recently posted as part of a discussion on the review article mentioned below – in Church and Pomo. I thought I would paste it here for your consideration.

I am interested in the idea of the incoming of the unspeakable (God) being made manifest in an outpouring of words, life, energy and transformation (as Jean Luc Marion would say – the ontological infinity of God being experienced by the individual as epistemological incomprehension – one which brings life rather than death).

The result means a different way of looking at how we approach the bible. A more traditional view concerning a good interpretation of the bible may claim that it must make sense of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. While a true interpretation ought to reflect the intentions of the one who lies at the source of those scriptures.

In contrast I would like to explore the idea of a good interpretation of the bible as one which reflects the inner dynamism and kinetic nature of the Judeo-Christian scriptures. And a true interpretation of Christianity as being one which brings about the type of soteriological transformation we witness within them.

I have been criticised for being too playful with parables (rewriting them with alternative endings or interpreting them in ways that do not do justice to the context). Guilty. However, I wonder if the parables were less about describing an ontological reality and more about evoking a religious rupture in the audience.

A while back someone told me the following antidote:

A child is busy drawing a picture with crayons. His mother comes in and asks what he is doing.

“I am drawing a picture of God” says the boy

“But no-one knows what God looks like” replied the Mother with a smile

“Maybe not” says the boy “but they soon will”

The person then said to me that this was what Jesus was doing with the parables. Yet I wonder if they were less about drawing a picture of God and more about tearing them up. In other words, whether, instead of Jesus being like the little boy and we being analogous to the Mother, it is precisely the other way around!
 

Whose afraid of doubt? Reflections on J.K. Smith

Just a quick note to say that there is a debate occurring at the excellent website Church and Pomo (run by Geoff Holsclaw) concerning the recent publication of Who’s afraid of Postmodernism by J.K. Smith.

This book comes from an academic schooled in continental philosophy who takes contemporary religious and philosophical thought very seriously. It is also seen by many to offer a radically different approach to faith in a postmodern context from my own work. Indeed the books, which are similar in size and aimed at the same market, have been described as two alternative ways forward for emerging church theory (Smith’s Radical Orthodoxy - influenced by people like Milbank - and my Heretical Orthodoxy - influenced by people like Caputo). Of course there are other ways as well! Anyway I have contributed a review on the site. Having just re-read it (I wrote it very quickly a while ago) I think it may be a little tough going (a good key into understanding it can be derived from my reflections below on revelation), but you may want to check it out

Jesus is a Fat man!

Jesus is a fat man with a mobile phone.
I know. Because I saw him.
He got out of the community transport bus,
slightly breathless,
helped the old lady out,
and walked her slowly towards her front door.
She fumbled for her keys,
with shaking hands which once were young,
but now were old;
which once attracted, but now repelled.
'See you tomorrow, Maud,'said the fat man.
'See you tomorrow, love'.

If it wasn't Jesus,
It was someone very like him.

I am led to beleive this wonderful fragment of wisdom was written by Simon Parke in Origins.

Dubh - journey into the eye of God

You may have noticed that I have recently added the Ikon CD Dubh to my sidebar. This album draws together a rich blend of ambient scapes and sparse lyricism in an album crafted in such a way as to consume the listener and take them on an inner journey through darkness and melancholic yearning to the point of mystical joy and divine expectancy.

The title of the album is Irish for black. When we look at someone we are drawn to the eyes, indeed we are drawn to that void in the centre of the eyes, the place where there is nothing but darkness. It is as we gaze into this void that we encounter the other. Dubh is black, but it is not nihilistic… rather it endeavours to be the void where we encounter God.

All that for only £12!

Here is an excerpt from the inside cover,

The Secret
 
A secret loses its secrecy when shared, for once exposed to the light its darkness dissipates. Yet God, if we may speak of God at all, can be understood precisely as the One who remains secret in the sharing. In the same way that art withholds its message in the midst of its manifestation (remaining open to the play of multiple meaning) so God can be understood as remaining concealed in revelation.
 
Every month a disparate group of theistic atheists, atheistic theists – and everything in between – quietly descend upon a bar in Belfast in the hope of being transformed by the radiance of this secrets incomprehensible beauty. We are neither a community of alchemists, seeking to expose the wealth of this secret, nor a gathering of magicians, desiring to harness its power, rather we are fragile, fractured lovers, who attempt to bow before the ineffable mystery of this secret. In that sacred place we lay down our desire to grasp in favour of being grasped and temporarily relinquish our need to know so as to experience the wonder of being known.

As such we celebrate ambiguity, complexity and doubt as we seek to dwell faithfully in that God shaped void which is formed in the aftermath of the divine – a void which is not filled by faith but rather forged by it. Dubh (the Irish word for black) seeks to draw the listener into that place in which we are nourished by our hunger, fulfilled by our desire and at home in our homelessness.
 
The first Ikon CD was offered as a free gift to those within Ikon and came with the guarantee that, if the listener was open, they would be exposed to the voice that calls.
 
The CD was blank.
 
‘Dubh’ is not, and yet the hope remains that while you listen to these fragments the recorded music would slowly dissolve and the music that lies silently beneath would be heard.

Comments working again!

Due to some error on the site anyone using Internet Explorer could not leave comments (including me). This has just been resolved. It still means that you have to register in order to leave comments. But only once. I look forward to hearing from you!

Does God exist (and does it matter)

Some of you may be interested in the following ten-week course I will be running at the end of September. Here is the title and blurb, 

.

Does God exist (and does it matter) 

.

For millennia many of the greatest philosophical minds have pondered the question of God’s existence. Some have argued that God must exist, others that God cannot and still others that the question is meaningless. This course seeks to outline the history of theistic, atheistic and agnostic debate from the medieval discussions right up to post-modern theory. In the process we will be reflecting upon the religious thought of individuals such as Aquinas, Anselm, Descartes, Freud, Marx, Nietzsche and Derrida. 

.

Preliminary timetable 

. 

26^th Sept

The first three ways of Aquinas

(the Cosmological arguement) 

. 

3^rd Oct

The third and fourth ways of Aquinas

(Absolute Being and Teleological arguements) 

.

10^th Oct

The ontological argument of Descartes

(with ref. to Anselm's non-ontological version) 

.

17^th Oct

Arguments against God

(Hume) 

.

24^th Oct

Religious rejection of apologetics

(Pascal, Kierkegaard and Marcel) 

.

31^st Oct

Irreligious rejection of apologetics

(Compte and Nietzsche) 

.

7^th Nov

Radical theology and the death of God

(Altizer and Cupitt) 

.

14^th Nov

TBC

.

 21^st Nov

TBC 

.

28^th Nov

TBC 

.

As I am away in November Phil Harrison will be covering the last three weeks (taking a more literary approach to the issues). The course costs £44 (£27 concession) and will take place in Queens University, Belfast. If you would like to attend contact the Institute of Lifelong Learning on 02890973323