|
| |
Where is Thy God?
An Address on the Person and Essence of God
by Rev. Willard D. Pendleton
It is the faith of the New
Church that there is a God and that He is Divine Man. Yet because the
existence of God is not demonstrable in terms of sense experience, some
question His existence and others deny it. To deny God, however, is to
assume that the universe is but a blind flux of physical energy which,
although devoid of purpose and intelligence, has somehow fallen into an
ordered pattern capable of producing and sustaining life. One would think,
therefore, that reason would incline to faith; for where there is order it
is reasonable to assume that there is intelligence, and that where there
is intelligence there is a purpose. But because many at this day are not
willing to admit to a purpose in creation, they seek to discredit faith;
and like those of whom the Psalmist speaks, they support their denial by
casting doubt upon the credibility of any evidence save that of the five
senses. Hence they say, in disbelief: "Where is thy God?" (Psalm
42: 3)
In a deeply troubled world
which seems to have lost all contact with any definitive source of moral
and spiritual values, this question is pertinent. Indeed, it would seem
that if there were ever a time when man stood in need of faith it is at
the present day. But by faith we do not refer to a blind trust in some
invisible deity whose ways transcend all human understanding, but to a
God who is visible to the sight of the mind. Yet to see God, man must
first form some idea of Him, and this idea must be determined to some
object of thought. Thus the Writings insist that "no one can think of
the Divine itself unless he first presents to himself the idea of a Divine
Man"; (AC 8705) for to think of God apart from the idea of a Divine
Man is to think indeterminately, "and an indeterminate idea is no
idea." (Ibid.)
The primary or primitive idea
of God, therefore, is the child's concept of the Lord; that is, of a
Divine Man in human figure. How else can the little child think of the
Lord? The idea of figure is basic to all advanced concepts, and apart from
figure, man cannot form an idea of anything. Thus it was that before the
Lord came into the world He revealed Himself through the human of an angel
who appeared to the prophets as a Divine Man in human figure. It was this
basic idea of God that enabled men to think of Him as a person, although
their idea of Him as a person was derived through those prophets and kings
who in turn represented Him to the people.
It was, then, in terms of
those who represented Him that the ancients thought of Jehovah as a
person. In this also the faith of the pre-Christian churches did not
differ from the faith of the child, for the child thinks of the Lord even
as he thinks of those who temporarily stand in His place. Herein is to be
found the representative function of parents, for it is from the idea that
he forms of his parents that the child derives his first idea of God. The
reason for this is that the child thinks of God as of one who, like his
parents, possesses human attributes such as love, wisdom, judgment and
authority. We can understand, therefore, why it was that the Israelites
thought of Jehovah as one who was like those who were authorized to speak
and act for Him, and why it is that the child's first idea of the Lord is
centered in the concept of a Heavenly Father. But in this, as in all human
representations, the idea is limited and qualified by the person or
personality of him through whom it is represented.
While a representative idea of
God is sufficient to the faith of first states, the time comes when the
mind can no longer be held in the acknowledgment of a God who is known
only through the, instrumentality of others. Thus it was that in process
of time the Lord put on a human from the mother, and He who was formerly
known through the person of others came into the world and revealed
Himself as Divine Man in His own Divine person. It is this that accounts
for the striking difference between the Old and New Testaments. Whereas to
the ancient Israelites, Jehovah was a remote deity who was to be feared
and therefore obeyed, to the Christian, the Lord became a personal God who
was intimately concerned with the individual. Here was a new concept of
God - a concept that was so different that many have found difficulty in
reconciling the Scriptures. Whereas Jehovah's concern seems to have been
for Israel as a nation rather than for the Israelite as an individual, the
Lord taught men, saying: "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye
love one another; [even] as I have loved you, that ye also love one
another." (John 13: 34) How, it is asked, can you reconcile the idea
of a jealous God, who was relentless in the government of the nation of
His choice, with the doctrine and person of Jesus Christ, who taught
forgiveness and mercy?
It was this apparent
discrepancy between the two Testaments which in time led to the doctrine
of a plurality of persons in God. In identifying Jehovah with the person
of the Father, and the Son with the person of Jesus Christ, the Christian
Church sought to establish the unity of the Word. In brief, the
explanation was that an angry Father, having sent His Son into the world,
and having perceived His Son's suffering upon the cross, was moved to
compassion, and because of His Son forgave all who had faith in Jesus
Christ. Further, it is held that this salvation is continually effected
through a third person, who is identified as the Holy Spirit. Thus it is
believed that although God is one as to essence, He is at the same time
three persons; yet the Writings state that "no one can comprehend how
the Divine, which is one, can be divided into three persons, each one of
whom is God, for the Divine is not divisible. And to make . . . three one
through . . . essence or substance does not take away the idea of three
Gods." (Lord 57)
But if, as the Writings
insist, God is one, not only as to essence but also as to person, why is
it that the appearance of three persons is found in the New Testament? The
reason is that in this, as in all the appearances in which the letter is
written, there is a truth involved. The truth is that in all unity there
is a trinity, and apart from the trinity, the unity of a thing cannot be
seen. In God, as in the man whom He created after His image, there is a
trinity - a trinity of soul, body and mind. Were this not so, God would
not be Divine Man; neither would the man whom He created be man. But
whereas in God these three discrete degrees of life are infinite and
uncreate, in man they are finite degrees receptive of life. In God, as in
man, therefore, there is a trinity of being. Hence the Writings say:
"Take the idea that there is one person, with a trinity in that
person." (Ath. 110) When understood in this way, the truth will be
seen. But we are told that in thinking of the Lord as a person, we are not
to think of His essence from His person, but of His person from His
essence. (AR 611: 7)
II
While it is true that every
man is a person, there is a deeper reality to whom the Writings refer as
the essential or real man. It is this man who in essence is man. If, like
the Psalmist, therefore, we ask, "What is man?" we must abstract
our thought from the idea of man as a person and think of him in terms of
the use he was created to perform. For man is a form of use; that is, a
living form endowed with the capacity to see truth, and from truth to do
what is good. It is in this that man differs from the beast; for although
the animal experiences all those sensations which come to consciousness by
way of the five senses, it cannot abstract knowledges from experience and
order them in such a way that truth may be seen. But because man can
perceive what is true, he can, if he wills, do what is good. That is what
is meant when it is said in the Writings, "Who does not know that a
man is not a man because of his having a human face and a human body, but
because of the wisdom of his understanding and the goodness of his
will?" (TCR 417) This also is what is meant by the statement that
"to love the neighbor, viewed in itself, is not to love the person,
but the good that is in the person." (Ibid.)
As it is with man, so it is
with the Lord, who is Divine Man. If we would know Him we must know Him
not only as He who came into the world in His own Divine person, but we
must see and acknowledge that in essence He is good itself, and that all
good with angels and men is from Him. But as God, or good, cannot be
presented to the sight of the understanding except in the form of truth,
the Lord gave the Word; and it is in the Word, and not apart from it, that
the Lord may be known among men. Thus the Writings teach that the Word is
the medium of conjunction between God and man. Yet how many at this day
believe this? For the most part, men think of the Word as the testimony of
the religious experience of the prophets. And while many believe that the
prophets were somehow inspired, they do not understand the nature of their
inspiration; neither are they prepared to believe that within the
appearance of the letter there is a spiritual sense which constitutes an
authoritative statement of truth.
To see the truth is to see
God. But as truth cannot be communicated except by means of words, it is
as the Word that the Lord is revealed to man. Hence it is said in John:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God." (John 1: 1) But whereas the Word of the Old Testament
was given through the instrumentality of the human of an angel who was
seen by the prophets, and whereas the Word of the New Testament was given
through the instrumentality of a human derived from the mother, the
spiritual sense of the Word is a direct revelation of the Lord in His own
Divine Human; that is, a revelation of Him who in essence as well as in
person is Divine Man. Yet because few at this day perceive that the
Writings are the spiritual sense of the Word, and as such the essential
Word, it is no wonder that many have lost faith in the Scriptures, for
apart from the spiritual sense, the Word in its letter cannot be
understood.
We should have no difficulty,
therefore, in understanding why it is that men in increasing numbers are
saying, "Where is thy God?" Some say it in scorn because they
are convinced that the idea of God is a primitive myth, and that there can
be no real progress in human affairs until the mind of man is emancipated
from the idea that there is a supernatural being who imposes His will upon
men. Yet there are others who ask this same question, and this because
they will to believe in God, but in their confusion they do not
understand. It is to the latter, and not to the former, that the Writings
are addressed, for what the Writings offer us is a new concept of God;
that is, of a God who is Divine Man not only as to His person, but who in
essence is the Spirit of good and of truth. As the Lord said to the woman
of Samaria: "God is a Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship
Him in spirit and in truth." (John 4: 24) And as He said to His
disciples on the eve of the crucifixion: "I have yet many things to
say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of
truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth." (John 16: 12, 13)
The essence of a thing is its
spirit. As already considered, therefore, man is not man because he
possesses a human figure, but because he is endowed with a human mind. In
other words, the spirit of man is the mind, and the mind is the man. Thus
it is that we do not know any man except in so far as we know his thoughts
and affections. This is a matter of communication, and as ideas cannot be
communicated except by means of words, it is as the Word that the Lord is
revealed as Divine Man. But as the Word in its letter cannot be understood
apart from the spiritual sense, the Lord has come again as the Spirit of
truth; that is, as He who in essence is Man. Here He may be seen, not as
He was seen by them of old time, nor as He was seen by His disciples, but
in His Divine Human, which is the Divine Mind. Hence it is said in the True
Christian Religion that "the second coming of the Lord is not . .
. in person, but in the Word, which is from Him, and is Himself"; (TCR
776) and also, that "this New Church is the crown of all the churches
. . . because it is to worship one visible God." (TCR 787)
By a visible God is not meant
a God who is objectively revealed to the sight of the senses, but a God
whose love and whose wisdom may be rationally perceived in the
understanding. It is in this, above all else, that the Writings differ
from former revelations; for whereas in the letter of the Word the thought
of the mind is held in the idea of God as a person, in the spiritual sense
the thought is directed to the inner reality which underlies the person.
That is why we are taught that we are not to think of the Lord from His
person, and from this of His essence, but from His essence, and from this
of His person; (AR 611: 7) for in the Lord the essential Man is good and
truth, even as the man whom He created in His own image and likeness is in
essence a form receptive of good and truth. To see the Lord, therefore, is
to see and acknowledge the truth of the Word that is from Him. Under no
other form can He be made visible to the sight of man's mind.
III
It is one thing, however, to
see and acknowledge the Lord; it is another, to love Him. Hence the
question, which so frequently arises, How does one love the Lord? Yet in
asking this question we are thinking of the Lord as a person; and while it
is true that He is a person, it is not on account of His person that He is
to be loved. In explanation of this we would remind you of the passage
which was quoted earlier in this address, where in treating of the
neighbor who is to be loved, the Writings state: "To love the
neighbor, viewed in itself, is not to love the person, but the good that
is in the person." (TCR 417) This applies to the Lord as well as to
man, for in the supreme sense, it is the Lord who is the neighbor.
To love the Lord, therefore,
is not merely to love Him as a person, that is, as a Divine Man who came
into the world and revealed His love for all men through His person; it is
to love the good which is from Him. Concerning this the Writings state:
"Those who think . . . naturally and . . . not at the same time . . .
spiritually . . . are unable to think otherwise than that the Lord is to
be loved as to . . . [His] person." (Wisdom XI: 1) But "to love
the Lord means to do uses from Him . . . for the reason that all . . .
good uses that man does are from the Lord. . . . No one can love the Lord
in any other way; for uses, which are goods, are from the Lord, and
consequently are Divine; yea they are the Lord Himself with man."
(Love XIII: 1) If, then, men ask, "Where is thy God?" let them
but look to those uses which underlie all human relationships, and in them
they will find Him who is good, for to see the good that is implicit in
use is to see God.
For the most part we think of
uses in terms of occupations and services. But these human activities are
not uses; they are only the forms which uses take. Nevertheless, to be of
use we must perform some service; that is, we must in one way or another
serve as a means whereby good is done to the neighbor. Yet in serving the
neighbor, the appearance is that the good that is done is from ourselves;
but the Writings insist that this is not so, for of himself man cannot do
good, but he can do good from the Lord. In this the choice rests with man.
He can do what is good from the Lord, or he can turn what is good into
evil in himself. In so far as he turns what is good into evil he perverts
and subverts the use.
Take for example, the
institution of marriage. Here is a use which is said to excel all other
uses, and this for the reason that it is the Divinely appointed means
whereby the Lord provides that there may be a heaven from the human race.
The use is the Lord's, but man enters into the use; and in so far as he
looks to the use he shares in the delights which are proper to it. But if
in the marital relationship, as in any other human relationship, man's
primary concern is for self, he turns what is of use into what is
essentially selfish, and he destroys in himself the unique faculty or
ability into which all men are born; namely, the capacity to enter with
delight into the service of use.
By this we do not mean to
imply that through selfishness man renders himself incapable of serving
others; but we do mean that the delight which he finds is in those things
which accrue to self and not in the use. There is a world of difference
between these two motivations; for whereas in the one, man's affections
and thoughts are centered in self, in the other his essential concern is
for the use that self is intended to serve. Hence we are taught in the
Writings that the love of self is not necessarily an evil love, for when
it is rightly subordinated to the use it is intended to serve, it actually
perfects the man. (TCR 403) That is what is meant when it is said in the
Gospel of John: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay
down his life for his friends. Ye are My friends, if ye do whatsoever I
command you." (John 15: 13, 14) But what is it that the Lord has
commanded us? Is it not that "thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul . . . and thy neighbor as
thyself"? (Matthew 22: 37-39)
In essence and purpose these
two great commandments are one. The reason for this is that we cannot love
the Lord unless we love the neighbor, and we cannot love the neighbor
unless we love the Lord, for to love the Lord is not merely to love Him as
a person; it is to love the uses which are from Him. And to love the
neighbor is not to love him on account of his person, but because of the
good which he does; that is, because of the uses which he performs. Thus
it is that to love the neighbor is to love the good and truth which are
from the Lord with the neighbor. Concerning this the Writings teach that
"the man who loves good because it is good, and truth because it is
truth, loves the neighbor eminently, because he loves the Lord who is good
itself and truth itself. There is no love of good and love of truth from
good, that is, love to the neighbor, from any other source. Love to the
neighbor is thus formed from a heavenly origin. It is the same thing
whether you say use or good; therefore performing uses is doing good; and
according to the quantity and quality of the use in the good, so far in
quantity and quality the good is good." (TCR 419)
IV
There is, then, a God, and He
is good; and as stated in the Gospel of John: "All things were made
by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made." (John
1: 3) To believe otherwise is to believe that man is but a chance product
of physical forces which somehow emerged as a living soul. But the atom
does not think; neither does the molecule display any
of the attributes of the human
mind. Of all created forms, man alone can see what is true, and from truth
do what is good. Hence man is said to be a form of use; that is, a living
form capable of self-determination in the doing of those goods which are
of use to the neighbor. It is, then, in the exercise of the God-given
faculties of freedom and rationality that man is man. But man is not man
from himself, for of himself he cannot do good. He is man because God is
Man; that is, Divine Man, who in essence is good and truth. Hence we are
not to think of Him from His person and from this of His essence, but from
His essence, and from this of His person, for in no other way can we
attain to a rational understanding of a God who is a Divine Man.
-New Church Life
1965;306-313
Back to
Further Reading
| |
|
