New Book Out Now: Post-Metaphysics and the Paradoxical Teachings of Jesus

By admin On January 29th, 2010

Hello friends

My first book has just been published by Peter Lang and is out now!
 
It’s titled: Post-Metaphysics and the Paradoxical Teachings of Jesus: the Structure of the Real… and you can check it at and even take a peek inside
here…

 

It’s revolutionary stuff… Within its 330 pages I uncover the authentic voice-print of Jesus’ radical teachings on the Kingdom of God and thereby outlines a new approach to theological language after the end of metaphysics.

By showing that the paradoxical deep structure of Jesus’ most radical teachings survives the Death of God and the deconstruction of metaphysics in twentieth-century continental philosophy, this book aims to reconstruct the original teachings of Jesus in a way that can begin a new conversation on what it means to be a Christian in a post-Christian world, while drawing on a remarkable range of supporting material, including John D. Caputo’s award-winning theological appropriation of Derridas deconstruction, the pioneering work of John Dominic Crossan on the parables of Jesus, and the novel insights of Jesus Seminar scholars Robert Funk and Branden Scott. Beginning with questions surrounding the end of metaphysics in Martin Heideggers existentialist philosophy and moving on to the ethico-political dimensions of Derridas work, this volume examines Nicholas of Cusas notion of God as the coincidence of opposites, Buddhist genius Nagarjunas dialectic of Emptiness, and the Hindu concept of non-duality in raising the possibility of a post-metaphysical theology. Following an original unpacking of the parables of Jesus, the central thesis is woven together with reference to Moltmanns important work on the crucified God, as well as Kierkegaard and the Absolute Paradox, negative/mystical theology in the Christian tradition, twentieth-century Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitaro, and aspects of Nietzsche, Thomas Aquinas, Plato, Aristotle, Meister Eckhart, G. K. Chesterton, Slavoj Zizek and Ken Wilber.

Here’s a couple of reviews to hopefully spark your interest:
 
“Cameron Freeman breathes a new life of interaction with the Word into the familiar stories of Jesus that we so easily and dangerously think we understand. Freeman shows how continuously subverting is the teaching of Jesus towards all complacency and all attempts to tame that radical knowing of God that is the Gospel and that has changed the way human beings see God and themselves. With intelligence and careful scholarship this book also transmits that first thrill of seeing what Jesus is really getting at and the relief of seeing superficial interpretations collapse.”

-Father Laurence Freeman director of the World Community of Christian Meditation and widely published author

 

“In this fascinating book, Cameron Freeman has done two things usually considered to be between the improbable and the impossible. First, he says something new and interesting about the parables of Jesus by pondering them not just as discrete stories but as a total discourse. Second, he challenges the long-held ascendancy of philosophy over theology by using the deep structure of that parabolic complex as normative not just for Christian theology but even for post-modern philosophy itself.”

-John Dominic Crossan world renowned New Testament scholar, best-selling author and co-founder of the Jesus Seminar

 

“This work undercuts the assumption that post modernism’s criticism of Western metaphysics leads to either nihilism or atheism. Dr. Freeman takes to heart the criticism of Heidegger and Derrida and uses their insights to illuminate the heart of the Christian message making it accessible to the post modern mind. It is an invaluable contribution that will set the pace of theology well into the future.”

-Rev. Gregory J. Mayers, C.Ss.R., Zen Teacher of the Sanbo-Kyodan Religious Foundation and of the Empty Cloud Sangha, Director of the East-West Meditation Program at Mercy Center in Burlingame, CA 
 
Take a look and buy yourselves a copy. Why? Because the paradoxical secret in radical center of Christ’s teachings is guaranteed to shatter the complacency of civilized normalacy with a weird intrusion from the Real… for Truth is not so much “inner peace” but a painful, traumatic encounter with the dazzling obscurity of the midnight sun!

The reverse side also has a reverse side.

Jesus and the Kingdom of God Part II

By Dr.Freeman On May 12th, 2009

For Part 1 Click here

To continue the surprising and generous response to this post I just want to turn this inquiry upside down and begin by showing that there is indeed a strong and significant overlap between the Integral framework and the basic tenets of the Christianity (at least as I see them). For starters, “Free to be Fully Human” – the creative tension between Freedom (human) and Fullness (divine) at the core of the Integral Life catch-phrase, corresponds exactly to the paradoxical nature of orthodox Christology – where the person of Jesus is held to be 100% divine (free) and 100% human (full).

Moreover, in SES (volume 1 of the Kosmos trilogy), KW also unpacks the interlocking and overlapping conjunction of humanity and divinity (“Free to be fully human”) in Christianity in terms of the Non-dual union of Other-worldly Ascent and This-worldly Descent, which is also an integration Eros and Agape… where Eros is the love of the human (lower) for the divine (higher), and Agape is the love of the divine for the human.

So where the Christian story holds to the Absolute Paradox of God-in-time, in SES Ken also maintains this same kind of secret non-dual union of Eros and Agape: where Ascending and Descending paths are inextricably interwoven, as he writes in his footnotes on the Real: “the realization of the One-in-the-Many and the Many-in-the-One, is, of course, common and definitive of all Non-dual schools”[1] an insight which also points directly to the paradoxical teachings of Jesus and a profound convergence between Integral and Christianity…

In this respect one of the key points of SES is that an emphasis either too much Eros/Ascent or too much Agape/Descent have their own distinctive and correlative pathologies. The shadow of a merely Ascending (Eros) path is called Phobos (a repression or avoidance of the material-sensual world) the characteristic dysfunction of Western monotheistic religion; while the shadow of a merely Descending (Agape) path is Thanatos (a fixation to the material-sensory world) what Freud called the death-drive and something that is commonplace in flatland…

So where the secret Non-dual embrace of Integral can help to re-imagine, re-contextualize or re-configure the Christian tradition, and balance some of the lop-sided perspectives that have prevailed in Western Christianity, there is also something about the Gospel story of “the god-forsaken God” that slips through the AQAL net and offers a distinct alternative to the Eastern (Non-dual) enlightenment traditions.

The (real/apparent?) dissonance here has been put well by Slavoj Zizek (see The Puppet and the Dwarf: the Perverse Core of Christianity 2003) who reminds us that the Great Chain philosophy that underpins the basic orientation of the Integral model is actually a pagan philosophy (as exemplified by Plotinus, the Neo-Platonic mystic-philosopher). That is, the notion that we have to throw off the lower world of the flesh (material-sensory), purify ourselves and advance through higher stages from body to mind to soul to union with the One – is a purely Ascending (or pagan) philosophy… It has nothing to do with the Gospel message that “Jesus is Lord” (i.e. Caesar is not!) and denotes the very movement from the human to the divine (Eros) that Christianity overturns and reverses with the “Logos made flesh” (Agape)…

To get to the heart of the matter, according to Zizek (arguably the most radical Christian thinker alive today), the primordial fact is the “non-coincidence of the Absolute with itself.”[2] This means that God is not at one with God’s self. There is an irreducible gap or tension in the heart of the Real that refuses any proper resolution or any mediation of opposites in a higher synthesis - i.e. there is no such thing as a secret Non-dual union… There is only the inherent gap of the One with itself – an Absolute Paradox - and this is particularly true of the Christ-event, the dividing point of Western history where God becomes “en-fleshed”, fully participates in the worst that the life-process has to offer, and puts radically into question all other man-made religions and philosophies, which in the wake of the crucified One are exposed as barely concealed and all too human attempts at self-deification…

The key difference here is that with Jesus and his death on the Cross, the fundamental gap between humanity and the divine is now radically transposed into God’s own self. This means that the very thing that once seemed to separates us from God (suffering, abandonment, death) is now the very thing that unites us with Him… That is, in my weakness and abandonment, when I am vulnerable and powerless - precisely then I am identified with Christ, the God-man, the one who was also abandoned and powerless on the Cross. As Zizek says, “we are one with God when God is no longer one with Himself, but abandons Himself, ‘internalizes’ the radical distance that separates us from Him. Our radical experience of separation from God is the very feature which unites us with Him – only when I experience the infinite pain of separation from God do I share an experience with God Himself (Christ on the Cross).”[3] For Zizek, the basic message here is that “God now trusts us” (i.e. the supernatural mythic God that guarantees an orderly universe is dead), and he goes on to argue that this is the only original freedom and fullness available to the Western tradition.

So in Christ, God becomes Incarnate (finite, temporal) and descends into the pain and messiness of life, God internalizes the painful gap between the human and the divine and becomes one of us, a broken, imperfect and suffering creature… and this Agape (descending) path is in direct contradiction to pagan (and Eastern) religions in which human are to purify themselves and move to the higher spheres of the Great Chain of Being.

So where Christianity finds an inseparable union with God in identifying with Christ crucified, the love of God in Christ is a radical disclosure of the “non-coincidence of the Absolute with itself”, the gaping wound in the heart of God’s own self… as German theologian Jurgen Moltmann says: God cannot love if God cannot make himself vulnerable.3 And just as Christian gospels tell us that God is radically present to us precisely when God is not at one with God’s self, the paradoxes of Jesus on the Kingdom of God also renounce all attempts to collapse this minimal difference (or irreducible gap between opposites) by either reducing one aspect to the other or enacting a “higher” synthesis of opposites.

The point here is that there is a paradox at the heart of things, or what Zizek calls a “structure of imbalance”– a paradox that was also alluded to by Ken Wilber at the end of SES (1995) when he gives an all too brief prelude to Volume 3 of the Kosmos Trilogy (still as yet unpublished). Given a working title The Spirit of Post-Modernity when summarizing the basic contours of Volume 3 Ken says that all of our endless dualisms (agency/communion, coherence/correspondence, integration /differentiation, etc) are fated to battle it out forever, with no side ever, ever ultimately winning – and here we have what Zikek calls “the Real of irreducible tensions as such”, where Yin and Yang never find any ultimate reconciliation.

So there is an irreducible tension, gap or antagonism at the heart of the Kosmos, and in the Incarnation (the central mystery of Christianity) what we call God is precisely that which is fully present (and therefore becomes real) in the midst of this absolute contradiction… And in the same way, just as the teachings of Jesus challenge and overturn the ‘rational order’ of the pagan universe with a paradoxical reversal of meaning – or a “weird intrusion” that interrupts the semantic code of the default (pre-given) world - Christ himself is the ultimate diabolic figure, insofar as diabolos (to separate, to tear apart the One into Two) is the opposite of symbolos (to gather and unify).

As the Absolute Paradox (the irreducible gap in the heart of the Real) Christ brought the “sword, not peace,” in order to disturb the existing harmonious unity and turn the world as we know it inside out and upside down. Thus the Christian stance is radically different from the teachings of New Age (pagan) philosophy and Western Buddhism which claim that the universe is the abyss of the primordial Ground in which all “false” opposites - good and evil, appearance and reality, light and dark, etc. - coincide. Christianity proclaims as the highest action precisely what New Age paganism condemns as the source of all evil—the gesture of separation, a principle of ir-reconciliation, an event of rupture, a drawing of the line, a singular truth-event, a clinging to an element that disturbs the balance of the All

This is a pretty radical position but as far as I can see the paradoxes of Christianity are thoroughly orthodox, and they also evidenced in the parabolic structure of Jesus’ teachings on the Kingdom … And while there is indeed space for convergence between the Non-dual embrace of Integral and Christianity, as Zizek says of the New Age philosophy of ‘cosmic balance’, which seeks the global harmony opposites: “precisely what I find horrible in these new forms of spirituality is that we are simply losing our sense for these kinds of paradoxes, which are the very core of Christianity.”[4]

So the question here for me is this: Does the Absolute Paradox of Jesus Christ (God-in-time) reveal the secret Non-dual embrace of Eros and Agape, Human and Divine, Ascending and Descending currents, or is this “Kosmic balance” precisely what the paradoxes of Christianity break open and throw into question with the scandal of the crucified God and the non-coincidence of the One with itself?

That is, are we, like a good psychoanalyst to resolve the enigma of existence by supplanting it by an even more radical enigma? I don’t know the answer to this one, but any and all comments would be appreciated…

Entering the Kingdom…

By Dr.Freeman On May 12th, 2009

When it comes to the question of entering the Kingdom, we do have this memorable aphorism from Jesus: “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it.”[1] So we enter the Kingdom through the narrow gate, which in contemporary terms means we are to live with Jesus’ paradoxes - the creative tension between opposing perspectives, and this is indeed the road less travelled…. and about as much fun as child birth.

So Jesus does not say that the Kingdom is “always already” within us, that it has always and already been there, and that we need simply awaken to what we have all along possessed. Were that the case, then the Kingdom would be a matter of Platonic “recollection,” of anamnesis, and entering the Kingdom would amount to nothing more than a kind of Neo-Platonic conversion, a turning in that recovers what we have always possessed but have lately forgotten. This is a very Greek metaphysical (and even an Eastern Enlightenment) view of things and essentially at odds with the temporality and historicity of biblical experience.

So I’m not sure it’s a good idea to simply conflate the Kingdom with either the Greek metaphysics of ‘recollection’ or Eastern Enlightenment teachings on ‘always already’ awareness… So while the Kingdom is indeed “entos humon”: inside you, within you – it is not simply that it has always been within us and we just need to remember something forgotten (in involution, etc) but it is already happening, right now, and you are in the midst of it. As Jesus says: “But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out devils, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you” (Lk. 11:20),

So it is more accurate to say that the Kingdom has “come upon us”, not that it has always been within us. The Kingdom is not always already present, but something that is happening now, something that has begun to happen today, with the advent of God’s rule that Jesus announces. It is a prophetic conception that God’s rule has come over us (ephthasen), and therefore an essentially historical conception- and not a Buddhist or Pagan theory about the make-up of the human soul which has driven off the highway of eternity into the ditch of time. So the proclamation of the Kingdom is not a theory about humans being always already perfect, but the announcement of an historical event, that the time of God’s reign has begun. Now, today… as a permanent challenge that is already beginning, where one becomes what one is not, and one ceases to be what one was. I have had a change of heart, I have been transformed. I have not become what I am but I have become something else, something new…


[1] Matt 7:13-14

The New Atheism as Mysticism

By Dr.Freeman On May 12th, 2009

Does it strike anyone else a little odd that the violence and bloodshed perpetuated in the name of God in this post-911 age makes the New Atheism of Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins look like a moral imperative for the 21st century?[1]

For centuries we have been told that without God we are nothing more than egotistical animals fighting it out for our own survival, and now – with the civilized world under increasing threat from religious fundamentalist of all flavors – the traditional equation of religion and the good life has been turned upside-down… In the present day it seems that our human dignity and self-respect needs to be asserted in no uncertain terms against those religious adherents who claim to be hard-wired to the will of God!

But the New Atheist’s rational critique of religion is nothing new - philosophers from Hume to Kant to Nietzsche have been saying this for about 500 years now… But what is new is that the New Atheists are not merely atheists in the traditional sense of the word (i.e. deny belief in the existence of God) – they are “anti-theists “– or as Christopher Hitchens argues in God is Not Great, his latest NY Times best-seller - the notion of God as a Cosmic Designer or a Celestial Dictator that is aware of our every thought and deed is a wicked, poisonous and evil idea - and  we cought to celebrate the fact that it is not true…

From an Integralist’s perspective the conventional wisdom is that Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris (and others) are just throwing out the baby with the bathwater – they want to demolish the archaic, magic and mythic versions of God but they will not allow the rational, post-modern and integral versions of God any legitimacy… But if we take a closer look this is not so!

Christopher Hitchens on Transcendence

A contrarian philosopher with a razor-sharp wit and a blatant disregard for all things sacred, Christopher Hitchens has made a career out of exploding liberal illusions (see his formidable critiques of pop culture icons Bill Clinton, Princess Diana and Mother Theresa). However, while he argues that the bad things innate to our species are strengthened and sanctified by religion, Hitchens does have an unexpected open-ness to what he calls “the order of the transcendent” or the mystical dimensions of human experience.

With a kind of `luminous” faith in humankind, Hitchens at least starts out by affirming the Socratic oath of ultimate Not-Knowing that launched the Western philosophical tradition, where his definition of an educated person is that you have some idea how ignorant you are.

But moreover, he also declares his appreciation for mystical dimension of human experience (i.e. higher states of consciousness) – what he calls “the numinous” or “the transcendent” – and gives examples of where this sublime dimension can be encountered in everyday life: the beauties of science, the extraordinary marvels of nature, the wonder and consolations of philosophy, the infinite splendors of literature and poetry – all of which have mystical and devotional aspects that Hitchens is quite prepared to honor and include in his otherwise dark and ironic view of the world…

In all of these pursuits, Hitchens claims that there may be found a sense of awe and reverence that does not depend at all on any of our man made religions – and he verges on an Integral (or second-tier) perspective here in so far as his openness to the transcendent dimension of life is also one that is often bored and sickened by what passes for spirituality in the New Age - ghost stories, UFO tales, tarot charts and the barely veiled narcissism of The Secret, etc…

Richard Dawkin’s Mysticism

Probably the world’s most steadfast and notorious atheist, Richard Dawkins was up until recently the professor for the public understanding of science at Oxford University.

From this colorful writings on Darwinian evolution as a deeper, richer more astonishing account of human origins than what is offered by the Genesis myth, to his most recent interview-debate with Francis Collins[2] (See Time Magazine “God vs. Science” - Sunday, Nov. 05, 2006), Dawkins is also keenly aware of the perpetually surprising and astonishing nature of the world revealed by evolutionary biology and modern science.

As Dawkins states to Collins on the belief in God “But it does seem to me to be a worthy idea”, refutable – but nevertheless grand and big enough to be worthy of respect… I don’t see the Olympian gods or Jesus coming down and dying on the Cross as worthy of that grandeur. They strike me as parochial. If there is a God, it’s going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.”

Right there we have a statement that any Integralist can whole heartedly affirm, - God is bigger than our minds can contain - and furthermore, according to Dawkins: “There is mystery in the universe, beguiling mystery… There is mystery but not magic, strangeness beyond the wildest imagining, but no spells or witchery, no arbitrary miracles.”

So Dawkins is no denier of the Mystery – he does accept that there may be things far grander and more incomprehensible than we can possibly imagine. “To me, the right approach is to say we are profoundly ignorant of these matters. We need to work on them. But to suddenly say the answer is God–it’s that that seems to me to close off the discussion.”

In his Un-weaving the Rainbow, the positive message throughout is Dawkins’ impulses to awe, reverence – the same impulse to and wonder that leads other scientists, philosopher and poets to mysticism… He claims that the scientist has the same wonder, the same sense of the profound, as the mystic, but with an additional impulse: let’s find out what we can about it… And in close parallel with the core driver of an Integral approach he concludes the final two paragraphs of this book by saying that human beings are the only animal with a sense of purpose in life, and that our true purpose should be to construct a comprehensive model of how the universe works, i.e. a Kosmology

And with that ultimate view of things, Dawkins would do well to read Ken Wilber’s latest work on post-metaphysical spirituality — a Kosmic Giga-glossary that spans the entire spectrum of humanities experience of the Divine – from volcano gods of primitive tribes to the post-conventional claims of the world’s most realized mystics such as Meister Eckhart or Sri Aurobindo…

Sam Harris on Buddhist philosophy

Another one of the most outspoken atheists in the world today, Sam Harris is also a practitioner of Buddhist meditation, as a tried and tested path to see clearly into the true nature of consciousness.

For Harris Buddhism is more a science than a religion, for a person can embrace the Buddha’s teaching, and even become a genuine Buddhist contemplative without believing anything on insufficient evidence. The same cannot be said of the teachings for faith-based religion, for which there is very little empirically tested evidence. In many respects, then, Buddhism is very much like science. One starts with the hypothesis that using attention in the prescribed way (meditation), and engaging in or avoiding certain behaviors (ethics), will bear the promised result (wisdom and psychological well-being). This spirit of empiricism animates Buddhism to a unique degree. For this reason, the methodology of Buddhism, if shorn of its religious trappings, could be one of our greatest resources as we struggle to further develop humanities spiritual self-understanding. As Sam Harris writes in The End of Faith,

“Attentive readers will have noticed that I have been very hard on religions of faith–Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and even Hinduism–and have not said much that is derogatory of Buddhism. This is not an accident. While Buddhism has also been a source of ignorance and occasional violence, it is not a religion of faith, or a religion at all, in the Western sense… the esoteric teachings of Buddhism offer the most complete methodology we have for discovering the intrinsic freedom of consciousness, unencumbered by any dogma… it would be intellectually dishonest not to acknowledge its preeminence as a system of spiritual instructions.”

So where the conventional critique of the New Atheist movement is that it’s critique of religious myth and superstition throws out the baby with the bath water by denying higher, deeper forms of spirituality (based on direct experience not beliefs), it is actually the case that all three of the major authors driving this cultural phenomenon we call the New Atheism are mystics or one sort or another, and probably just lack a language that they can use to express their sheer astonishment that anything exists at all…




[1] Indeed, religion is as much a living spring of violence today as it has been at any time in the past. The recent conflicts in Palestine (Jews vs. Muslims), the Balkans (Orthodox Serbians vs. Catholic Croatians; Orthodox Serbians vs. Bosnian and Albanian Muslims), Northern Ireland (Protestants vs. Catholics), Kashmir (Muslims vs. Hindus), Sudan (Muslims vs. Christians and animists), Nigeria (Muslims vs. Christians), Ethiopia and Eritrea (Muslims vs. Christians), Sri Lanka (Sinhalese Buddhists vs. Tamil Hindus), Indonesia (Muslims vs. Timorese Christians), Iran and Iraq (Shiite vs. Sunni Muslims), and the Caucasus (Orthodox Russians vs. Chechen Muslims; Muslim Azerbaijanis vs. Catholic and Orthodox Armenians) are merely a few cases in point. These are places where religion has been the explicit cause of literally millions of deaths in recent decades.

[2] Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute since 1993, Collins headed a multinational 2,400-scientist team that co-mapped the 3 billion biochemical letters of our genetic blueprint. In The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (Free Press), he laid out the arguments for belief in God. Collins believes that studying the natural world is an opportunity to observe the majesty, the elegance, the intricacy of God’s creation. If your mind is open about whether God might exist, Collins argues that you can point to aspects of the universe that are consistent with that conclusion.

Integral Life’s No. 1 Blog (after the CEO’s Integral Life Sucks…)

By Dr.Freeman On May 12th, 2009

Jesus and the Kingdom of God

In a way that seems to go beyond the requirements of any other of the world’s religious faiths, Christianity stakes its truth-claims on certain historical events – particularly the life, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. As the event of God’s most explicit self-communication to human beings, Christianity is about something that happened in world-history, where the person of Jesus is the Christ – the “Logos made flesh”, the embodied story of God in time.

So it is this Jesus, the one who absorbs evil with love, that one whois radically present in the tangible depths of human suffering and death, that we must turn to if we are to speak about God from a Christian perspective.

And when we begin to peel back the layers of literal-mythic Christianity (amber), with the tools of post/modern critical Jesus scholarship (orange science, green hermeneutics) the most uncontested fact today is that Jesus of Nazareth is the one who announced the Kingdom of God (basileia tou theou).

References to “Kingdom of God” are found more than one hundred times in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke), and so our ability to understand who Jesus is and the origins of his historical mission is intimately linked to his understanding of the Kingdom of God, a Kingdom that is disclosed to us today in the enigmatic twists and turns of his recorded parables.

So with the tool of post/modern critical-historical scholarship, I want to briefly re-construct here what Jesus may have actually meant by the Kingdom of God, in order to isolate the Founder of Christianity from what was Founded in his name (the Church) in the hope of getting a discussion started on what an Integral Christianity might look like…

The Parable of the Leaven - Luke 13:20-21 (also see Matthew 13:33, Gospel of Thomas)

“What shall I compare the Kingdom of God to? It is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into a large amount[i]of flour until it worked all through the dough.”

The parable of the leaven received the highest number of red votes of any parable among the participants of the Jesus Seminar, and is therefore considered (arguably) the most authentic of the sayings that have been attributed to Jesus in the gospels and handed down to us.

Leaven is made by taking a piece of bread and storing it in a damp, dark place until mould forms, and in the ancient world leaven was a well-known symbol or metaphor of moral corruption.[ii] So in 1st century Israel there’s an ancient association between leaven (moldy yeast) as “profane” and the un-leavened as “sacred”, e.g. the holy Jewish festival of the Unleavened Bread.

In this parable Jesus invokes a deliberate and unexpected reversal of the old standard, whereby leaven – which is held to be corrupt, is really the source of what is sacred. With Good News for those who are considered corrupt/sinful/degenerate by the established structures of power, the shocking reversal of expectation uttered with the simple word “leaven” would have thrown Jesus’ audience utterly off guard.

And just as the process of leavening is worked through until everything is corrupted[iii], those relegated to the outside of the Jewish socio-religious code would have been are astonished and overjoyed, while those inside the Temple would have been perplexed and confused, as Jesus overturns and abolishes and the boundary between the sacred and the profane and offends the deeply held religious sensibilities of the status quo.

For this itinerant Jew is essentially saying the last thing that people want or expect to hear about the Kingdom of God: it is in the concealment of something small and corrupt that the revelation of the Kingdom becomes manifest.[iv] The parable of the Leaven is typical of many of Jesus’ many pronouncements[v] and it provides a very good indication of precisely what Jesus meant by the Kingdom of God. It is a decidedly “un-kingly” kingdom, one that explodes our assumptions about the very meaning of Kingdom, and one that offers a permanent challenge to our religious and political convictions about precisely who or what is sacred and profane

The Parable of the Mustard Seed

Mark 4:30-32 (also see Matthew 13:31-32, Luke 13:18-19, Thomas 20)[vi]

30Again he said, “What shall we say the kingdom of God is like, or what parable shall we use to describe it? 31It is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest seed you plant in the ground. 32 Yet when planted, it grows and becomes the largest of all garden plants, with such big branches that the birds of the air can perch in its shade.”[vii]

In this parable Jesus again reverses a 1st century symbol for the Kingdom, this time the mighty cedar of Lebanon, which was widely regarded to be a central guiding metaphor for Israel’s messianic hopes. However Jesus “lampoons the whole apocalyptic tradition”[viii] by comparing the Kingdom of God to a mustard seed, which is the smallest of all seeds while finishing with images of ‘trees’ where ‘birds made their home’ in the same breath to conjure up conventional associations with the mighty cedar of Lebanon (in Ezekiel and Daniel).

But it not simply that the mustard plant starts as the smallest of seeds and grows into a large tree for the birds of the air, it’s arresting impact is further witnessed in that the mustard plant is a relatively short lived shrub or tree that tends to take over domestic agricultural areas[ix] and grow out of control precisely where it is not wanted.

As Crossan describes it, the mustard plant is a “pungent shrub with dangerous takeover properties, something you would want in only small and carefully controlled doses - if you could control it”[x] while also attracting birds within these cultivated areas where they are not particularly desired.[xi]

Moreover the mustard plant is a weed, and in ancient Jewish times the planting of mustard seeds in a garden is prohibited by Mosaic Law (Leviticus 19:19).[xii] So the paradoxical shock of Jesus metaphor is not simply that the mustard seed starts small and becomes the largest of all garden plants (which is true enough) but that its bigness is dangerous, deadly and illegal.[xiii]

We can therefore see that Jesus again invokes an arresting reversal of his audience’s background assumptions regarding the Kingdom of God. With a comic inversion of traditional assumptions Jesus pokes fun at the messianic expectations of 1st century Jews by saying that the smallest seed – and that one which grows into the most unruly and undesirable of all plants - is really the new symbol of God’s Kingdom (Empire, Caesar).[xiv]

Of course, by the time the New Testament was written (100 AD), Jesus’ early followers had buried and domesticated the radical edges of these and other subversive teachings. But in it’s original context, it now seems that Jesus used the term Kingdom to express his paradoxical wit, to given added intensity to his provocative message, to pop open awareness with a new configuration of reality that discloses to us what the world would look like if God was running the show…. The fact that much of our current language on the Kingdom of God is no longer dissonant or paradoxical only shows us how we have domesticated it over the last few thousand years…

As an Integrally informed scholar/practitioner, the most perplexing aspect of the Gospel story for me is that the Kingdom of God is not for the best and brightest, not for those who meet the requirements of second-tear awareness, and not for those with turquoise qualifications and credentials, as Paul said of the early Christian apostles,

“Not many were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low and despised in the world… to bring to nothing things that are.” (Cor. I:27-28)

In his privileging of those without privilege, Jesus of Nazareth was more of a Rebel than a King, and his parabolic discourse consistently challenges and overturns this implied structural network of associations between kingdom, power, sovereignty and God. As one recent Jesus scholar put it:

“The Kingdom of God was made – 1st, for children, and those who resembled them; 2nd, for the outcasts of the world, victims of that social arrogance which repulses the good but humble man; 3rd for heretics and schismatics, publicans, Samaritans, and Pagans of Tyre and Sidon… The doctrine that the poor… alone shall be saved, that the reign of the poor is approaching – was, therefore, the doctrine of Jesus.”[xv]

The point here is that the story of Jesus is still a strange, foolish, awkward and dangerous story when read through an Integral (AQAL) lens… The love of God in the scandal of the Cross defies logic while subverting many of our religious, cultural and philosophical assumptions in ushering in a revolutionary understanding of God. For in Christ God is now fully identified with the god-forsaken - as Chesterton said: from all the religions of the world it is only in Christianity and Jesus’ cry of desolation from the Cross does it look like God, for an instant, became an atheist…

So the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a radical paradox – it does not make everything make sense, it disturbs and unsettles and throws everything off balance… So for me (and I would appreciate any comment on this thorny issue) there is this deep tension between the second-tier “elitism” of Integral - an excellence to which everyone is invited, and the undeniable privileging of the outcast, the afflicted, the powerless in the Gospel story of Jesus – who is for me the human face of God…

As Paul writes, those who find their righteousness in Christ “glory in their weakness”… where the love of God is freely given in suffering and the Cross – and where the boundless love of God is revealed to us in the form of an executed criminal, a despised and abandoned heretic…

So there is no getting around the fact that Christ shows up not at the top of the socio-cultural pyramid, but on the margins, as the menace at the Temple gates, or as the mustard seed that slip through the crack s of the established order and de-centers all fixed enters of power and privilege with good news for the poor and the permanent possibility of offense for the sanctified who put themselves on the throne of the divine…

In contrast to meeting the requirements of an ILP as one who follows the way Jesus, my main form of spiritual practice is to risk letting go of my confidence and eloquence, and to confess not the abundance but the exhaustion of my verbal, intellectual and spiritual resources… I am only really praying when I acknowledge that I do not know how to pray.

Cameron



[i] The Greek here is “three satas” which is about 22 liters – a very large amount and enough to feed about 100 people. It also reminds Jesus’ listeners of the story of the angels who give a prophecy concerning Issac’s birth in Genesis 18, among the items Sarah prepares for them is cakes made from “three satas” of flour…

[ii]For more see Bernard Brandon Scott, Hear Then the Parable: A Commentary on the Parables of Jesus (1989)

[iii] Scott 2001, p.27-34

[iv] The leaven is “concealed” krypto (Luke), enkrypto (in Matthew) is a much more negative word for hiding (it means to keep secret) than the more neutral kalypto. The phrase “by a woman” is also an unexpected reversal and a problematic representative of the sacred. Woman as the un-favored gender role in the Roman Empire, subject to fathers and husbands and at a disadvantage when it comes to purity codes, so Jesus’ use of woman as a symbol of the sacred is again arresting and provocative

[v] Funk 1996, p.157

[vi]Thomas has ‘falls on disturbed ground’ which is absolutely right, botanically. Mark has ‘is sown’ which is absolutely wrong… it’s a weed… but this fits with Mark’s chapter 4 ’sowing’ theme. Matthew and Luke (who used Mark) also have ‘sown’.

[vii]Only the version of this saying in Thomas refers to the herb as a “plant”. Mark 4 refers to is as a “shrub”, Matthew 12 as both “shrub” and “tree” and Luke 13 as a “tree”. In actual botany, the plant is called SINAPI (Greek) and in this parable it was an annual wild herb that never grew to a size that any Mediterranean person would ever call a tree. (Mahlon Smith CrossTalk - 14 Jun 1998)

[viii]Crossan 1991, p.277

[ix] Funk 1996, p.157

[x] In putting the distinction between insiders and outsiders into question, the mustard seed is “is a startling metaphor, but it would be interpreted quite differently by those, on the one hand, concerned about their fields, their crops, and their harvests, and by those, on the other, for whom fields, crops, and harvest were always the property of others.” - John Dominic Crossan, Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography (1994)

[xi] Crossan 1991 as Roman natural historian Pliny the elder (23-79AD) writes, mustard “with its pungent taste and fiery effect is extremely beneficial for the health. It grows entirely wild… when it has once been sown it is scarcely possible to get the place free of it, as the seed when it falls germinates at once.” Pliny (the Elder) in Natural History 29.54.170 (LOEB), p.170-171 quoted in Scott 2001, p. 37

[xii] Douglas Oakman, “It is hard to escape the conclusion that Jesus deliberately likens the Kingdom of God to a weed.” (1986, p.127 quoted in Crossan 1991, p.278)

[xiii]Crossan 1991, p.278 In further establishing the mustard plants (Brassica Nigra) subversive meaning, it has been likened by Smith to “a colonizing annual that appears in disturbed ground and, often, after sturdier plants appear in a few years, disappears. This might have parabolic implications.” (CrossTalk - 14 Jun 1998)

[xiv] Funk 1996, p.157

[xv]Ernest Renan, The Life of Jesus 1972, p.194-196

The Parables of Jesus: Shrewd Business Manager

By Dr.Freeman On May 12th, 2009

The Shrewd Business Manager, Luke 16:1-8

1Jesus told his disciples: “There was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions. 2So he called him in and asked him, ‘What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management, because you cannot be manager any longer.’

3″The manager said to himself ‘What shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I’m not strong enough to dig, and I’m ashamed to beg— 4I know what I’ll do so that, when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses.’

5″So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, ‘How much do you owe my master?’

6″ ‘Eight hundred gallons of olive oil,’ he replied.
“The manager told him, ‘Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it four hundred.’

7″Then he asked the second, ‘And how much do you owe?’
” ‘A thousand bushels of wheat,’ he replied.
“He told him, ‘Take your bill and make it eight hundred.’

8″The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly. For the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light.

Often regarded as the most puzzling of all the parables, this short narrative also gives voice to the same deep structure that resides at the radical center of all of Jesus’ most recognizable teachings while again frustrating our everyday expectations about what it means to enter the Kingdom with subversive twists and unexpected turns.

In essence, this parable of Jesus is the paradoxical story of a subordinate (manager) outwitting his superior (rich man/master). The rich man’s manager is a swindler who wastes his masters’ goods and possessions, and is immediately dismissed from his position. This same manager further perpetuates his fraudulent behavior by cancelling the agreed upon amount of the masters debtors, and in a final, unanticipated turn of events, the dishonest manager ends up being commended by his master for his astute judgment and his inventiveness under stress.

The central scandal of this narrative – the master’s praise of the dishonest action of his steward, has perplexed and bewildered many parable scholars. The approval of the master cuts against the sense of justice that prevails in the everyday social world and undermines our expectation that the master would respond with anger and condemnation when he becomes aware that he has been taken for a ride by his subordinate. But when the shrewd manager turns his hopeless situation around by using his wits to make friends with his master’s debtors and reducing the size of their debts – so that they will take him in after his dismissal, his master can only marvel at what he has done to save himself from total disaster. The rich man’s manager is indeed a dishonest rascal, but one who acts with grace under pressure, and so in one of Jesus’ most shocking paradoxes the sacked manager is actually commended for being so clever in worldly affairs – even as he takes a moral holiday at the master’s expense. And where the master’s sanctioning of such dishonest behavior runs in direct contradiction to ones expectations of punishment, this amoral reversal – from judgment to forgiveness, is itself definitive of the original teachings of Jesus as a whole and can therefore be considered to stem from the authentic voiceprint of this 1st century sage from Galilee.

So again, there is a paradox at the heart of this parable: the rich man’s manager is abruptly sacked for being a fraud, just as his fraudulent response to this sudden crisis is held up as an example of good management and spiritual discernment. In Jesus’ true paradoxical style: what appears to be the respected manager of a rich man is really a swindler who loses his master’s possessions, and what appears to be a fraudulent swindler in his dealings with the rich man’s debtors, is really an applauded business manager who is much admired for his shrewdness. Or put simply: a manager is condemned as a fraud just as this fraud is praised as a manager.

There is also another paradoxical reversal disclosed in the narrative structure of this parable which further points to the radical message of Jesus and his preaching on the Kingdom of God. Essentially, the rich man - the privileged agent in this parable, in ruthlessly sacking his manager is represented in villainous terms as a ruthless and judgmental man, whereas the shrewd manager, the apparent victim or the rich man’s anger, is seen to be a successful rogue - the hero of the story, as one who is opportunistic in a crisis and thereby comes out on top. The paradoxical reversal, where the upright master is ‘bad’ and the dishonest steward is ‘good’, overturns the assumed value-hierarchy and shifts the meaning of victim and perpetrator in another one of Jesus’ radical language-events: for where the business manager at first seems to be a victim of the rich man’s arbitrary will, he is really the perpetrator of justice, while the rich man at first seems to be the perpetrator of justice he is really the victim of the shrewd action of the business manager.

When the perpetrator becomes a victim, and the victim becomes a perpetrator everything is turned upside down and the hearers of Jesus’ enigmatic tale now have no way to navigate their world; its established co-ordinates have been shattered. Is the rich man cruel or way too kind? Is his shrewd manager a hero or a villain? Over and again in these parables, when our horizon of expectancy collides with the narrative structure of Jesus’ explosive teachings, we are called to redefine the meaning of our lives as the arresting shock of Jesus’ unexpected reversals subverts conventional wisdom and challenges the way that justice operates in the social consensual world. For in this parable, Jesus’ breaks the bonds between power and justice that constitute conventional notions of morality, so that “the victim’s power as a rogue is clearly greater than the supposed power of the rich man as a dupe.”Kingdom of God is also a great leveler… Cutting against the grain of our taken for granted assumptions, Jesus now equates justice with vulnerability and power with powerlessness, for where both the rich man and his manager have their integrity put into question they both exhibit the capacity to act graciously under pressure.

And in collapsing any meaningful value-hierarchy between the upright master and his degenerate steward, the advent of the Kingdom of God is also a great leveler…

There is one final paradox here that also breaks open the structure of ordinary expectations, for at the end of this parable a distinction is made between the children of this age (wordly/profane), who are clever in arranging business affairs for themselves, and the children of the light (otherworldly/sacred) whom simply do not compare in worldly wisdom and resourcefulness. With another characteristic reversal of meaning, Jesus’ says here that seeming shrewdness in worldly affairs, is really a form of spiritual discernment, and seeming spirituality of the ‘people of the light’, is really a kind of irrelevant and childish naiveté in terms of the resourcefulness that is required for dealing with business in the world.

Shot through with shocking paradoxes, this parable is not so much a puzzling story about the sanctioning of immorality but an unmistakably authentic communication from Jesus of Nazareth about how things happen in God’s domain. As is the case with all of Jesus’ authentic teachings, everything is turned inside out and upside down: fraudulent behavior is radical justice, the rich man’s cruel judgment shifts into an act of praise, the immoral villain of the story becomes an esteemed hero, the ruthless perpetrator becomes a powerless victim, a sudden crisis is an opportunity for creative action, the vulnerability of the shrewd manager is powerful, the upright master is powerless, Jesus champions a rebel over a king while those shrewd in worldly affairs are spiritually awake…

The paradoxical stories of Jesus do not make things make sense - they perplex, confound and unsettle us with an altogether new figure of reality in which our cherished assumptions and presuppositions are regularly put into question with an “infinite qualitative intensification and an immediate and pressing demand” that sets up the conditions of possibility for authentic Christian faith.


Dr. Freeman

Jesus at the Edge of Chaos: Towards and Evolutionary Christology

By Dr.Freeman On April 7th, 2009

This paper was published in The Global Spiral (March 2009)

This exploration aims to resolve the fundamental split between two diametrically opposed worldviews in the present day:  the evolutionary story of the universe as described by modern science since the time of Darwin (1859) and the traditional Gospel story of God’s self-communication in Jesus Christ that informs the lives of up to 2 billion Christians in the world today.

Karl Rahner, the influential Catholic theologian whose writings were behind the many of the reforms of Vatican II initiated this critical inquiry in the 1970s with a pioneering paper titled “Christology within an Evolutionary View of the World.”1 In seeking out an intrinsic unity between the decisive event of God’s self-revelation in the person of Jesus and the 13 billion year process of cosmic, biological and human evolution, Rahner maintained that in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ “the basic tendency of matter to discover itself in spirit . . . reaches it’s definitive breakthrough.”2 So for Rahner, in Jesus Christ we discover New Creation—the necessary and permanent beginning of the divinization of sentient life in the evolving universe, an event signifying to us that the absolute self-communication of God to the world-historical process of evolution has been irrevocably inaugurated and is even now moving towards its far-off goal.3

As is well known, the orthodox Neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, as upheld by the likes of Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett has consistently maintained an opposing viewpoint: evolution is a blind and purposeless process—natural selection simply sifts through whatever is thrown up by random mutations in the genes, and over hundreds of millions of years things such as eyes and nervous systems are accidentally cobbled together. According to Neo-Darwinian theory, all such forms of adaptive complexity (including ourselves) are the result of cunning survival strategies that ‘just happen’ and which are then honed through natural selection4 mechanically sifting through these random mutations in the genes—just some of which are lucky enough to be beneficial in increasing an organism’s probability of reproductive success.

But while Neo-Darwinian evolution highlights what is taken to be the blind aimlessness of an evolutionary process basically ‘red in tooth and claw’, in recent years an increasing number of biologists5 have expressed their belief that other explanatory features are at work in the overall trajectory of the evolutionary process from atoms to molecules to organisms to reptiles, mammals and the higher primates, and particularly in regards to the relatively abrupt origination of new forms of life in the aftermath of unexpected catastrophic events. As a result, these more marginal evolutionary biologists have broken with the dominant paradigm and argue that the mechanism of Darwinian selection winnowing through random genetic mutations (while true enough) does not adequately explain the dynamic patterns and directional trends in evolution towards increasing exterior complexity and interior consciousness, what Whitehead called evolution’s creative advance into novelty.6

Self-organization (Kauffman)

It now seems that the formative features of a new integration of the evolutionary epic of modern science and the Christian story of creation and redemption, will come from some of the more recent developments at the leading edge of scientific research—a field known as the “sciences of complexity.” Also called the evolutionary systems sciences, the sciences of complexity is a field that includes a wide range of scientific disciplines that describe the dynamic patterns of change that connect across disparate domains (physical, chemical, biological, psychological, socio-linguistics)7 with profound implications for the ongoing dialogue between evolutionary science and Christian theology.

The general claim of the sciences of complexity is that evolution exhibits some dynamic patterns, its formative features are invariant, and evolution repeats itself through in general ways so that we may now be able to glimpse its fundamental nature for the first time.8 The core insight of sciences of complexity is that matter on planet earth has the capacity to be ‘self-organizing’ on the account of the inherent nature of the processes that atomic, molecular, chemical and biological entities undergo. 9 So in contrast to the infamous Second Law of thermodynamics that dictates an overall increase in disorder (in isolated systems) leading to the ultimate ‘heat death’ of the universe, it is becoming increasingly clear that complex systems in open energy exchange with their environments can become unpredictable and chaotic in their observable behavior and then ‘self-organize’ or propel themselves onto new, higher levels of exterior complexity (and interior consciousness), commonly called ‘order out of chaos’.

In other words, it is now recognized that when a constant energy flow is passed through dynamic open systems, they have the propensity to undergo abrupt transformations and organize themselves into new and unexpected forms of order characterized by an increase in structural organization and complexity.10 In fact, all evolving systems in the real world exist in open energy exchanges with their environments and when driven ‘far from equilibrium’ have this tendency to undergo chaotic instabilities and propel themselves to new and highly organized regimes. 11 And since self-organization in complex systems occurs across all levels of the known universe, evolution can now be seen to be engaged in an irreversible or ‘uni-directional’ pattern of change creating “order out of chaos” and pushing complex systems towards higher levels of structural organization and complexity.12

Evolution on the Edge-of Chaos

Now, evolving systems on the ‘edge-of-chaos’ are very different from closed systems at thermodynamic equilibrium13 and tend to be poised at a critical threshold between order (periodic change) and chaos (a periodic or random change).14 Commonly named the “edge-of-chaos”, it is precisely here in this critical state delicately poised between too much rigidity and too much fluidity that evolving systems in open energy exchange have the significant tendency to evolve towards new, more complex adaptive structures.15

The edge-of-chaos is therefore the “source of order” in the universe (Kauffman), bringing “order out of chaos” (Prigogine), and moving evolution towards new dynamic regimes with higher levels of complexity and spontaneous “emergent order” (Phillip Clayton). As Kauffman explains, “Self-organization is a natural property of complex genetic systems. There is ‘order for free’ out there, a spontaneous crystallization of generic order out of complex systems, with no need for natural selection or any other external force.”

Self-organization in complex systems finely balanced at the creative tension between opposites has also been termed “chaosmos” (James Joyce) in describing the delicate interplay between chance and necessity, stasis and change, chaotic disruption and emergent novelty in the evolutionary trajectory from inanimate matter to self-replicating life to self-conscious humanity. And in a way that speaks directly to our current global economic crisis, at this critical state of creative tension between opposing forces the outcome of any evolutionary process is said to be unpredictable in detail and inherently indeterminate, i.e. it is impossible to tell whether the system in this state of creative tension (i.e. the existing economic system!) will disintegrate into chaos or leap into a new, differentiated higher level of order.16

However the important point for the aims of this paper is that modern science has now discovered that the very site of evolutionary change is the creative tension between opposites at the “edge-of-chaos” – an insight which corresponds directly with orthodox Christian theology.17 For this same paradoxical tension between opposites is central to both dogmatic Christology – the irreducible tension between ‘fully human’ and ‘fully divine’ in the person of Jesus18 as well as (and more pointedly), the original structure of Jesus’ teachings on the Kingdom of God that reside within the earliest layers of the Christian faith tradition.19 That is, almost all of the recorded parables of Jesus of Nazareth have the same paradoxical voice-print, the same deep structure, where opposing perspectives are held together in the same creative tension at the “edge-of-chaos” that the sciences of complexity and self-organization have recently discovered at the wildly unpredictable edge of evolution’s creative advance. So Jesus of Nazareth spoke in paradoxes to usher in a new world (the Kingdom of God) and inaugurate a new horizon of what it means to be fully human by evoking the very same tension between opposites that has recently been discovered by the sciences of complexity and self-organization.20

For more discussion on the deep structure of Christ’s teachings, see other articles on this site (e.g. Source Code) or a paper previously published by on The Global Spiral: (“Towards a Post-Metaphysical Theology2008) where it is shown that the same paradoxical structure, what is also called a dynamic pattern of “bi-polar reversals” is clearly evidenced in the narrative center of at least 30 of the parables of Jesus recorded in the synoptic gospels…

So where the central teachings of Jesus all give voice to the same paradoxical tension between opposing perspectives, the sciences of complexity now provide direct supporting evidence for the view that the creative tension of Christian paradox is indeed the ‘condition of possibility’ for the coming into being of emergent novelty in the structural dynamics of evolution at the “edge-of-chaos”. So the Christian hope for New Creation as is synonymous with this critical threshold between opposing forces described by the sciences of complex emergence, while this paradoxical tension is also attested to by Jesus as the very place in which significant change and transformation can take place.21

So where there are new grounds here for a direct correspondence between the creative tension of Christian paradox and the sciences of complexity, and to further unpack this we can briefly turn to the central mystery of the Christian faith where the God of Israel is revealed to us in the scandal of the Cross. As Jesus says in probably his most well known paradox and one which holds the radical tension between opposites: “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross, and let him follow me! For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake will save it.”(Mark 8:34-35) So where the figure of Christ crucified holds the creative tension between saving (self-expenditure) and losing (self-preservation) one’s life we have a direct witness to what Jesus called “the narrow gate’” of transformation at the edge-of-chaos, where the same creative tension between opposites that constitutes the meaning of the Cross22 and the radical core of Jesus’ authentic teachings on the Kingdom of God23 can also be seen from the worldview of modern science to depict the very contours of evolution when taken to it’s highest pitch and most creative, unpredictable and surprising edge.

So where the centrality of paradox to the Christian faith (and the teachings of Jesus) corresponds seamlessly with the recent discoveries of modern science, with the paradoxes of Jesus at the heart of the Gospel story we also discover the flesh and blood story of a God who becomes human and participates fully in the world’s struggles, pains and convulsions. In Christianity the unsearchable mystery of God’s love is revealed in the capacity of a vulnerable, suffering creature to go all the way and fully embrace the contradictory tensions of existence. For just as it is in the face of death that life is a gift, it is in the face of the cross that resurrection is a word of grace, and it is in the midst of sin and suffering that salvation is freely received, as Jesus absorbs evil with love and transforms this-world into a new world in which the inexhaustible love and radical justice of God can reign. And moreover, in addition to embodying the creative tension between opposites at the edge-of-chaos, the evolutionary worldview of modern science also allows us to depart from the image of an immutable God that is untouched by the world’s suffering and give renewed significance to our sense of God being present in the tangible depths of life’s long, painful, unpredictable and perpetually surprising evolutionary journey.24

Made of Star Dust

This cruciform pattern of change that describes how the creative tension between opposites at the edge-of-chaos leads to the emergence of new forms of complexity is not only of great importance for understanding the paradoxical heart of the Christian faith but is also evidenced in some of the more significant macro (large-scale) transformations at several critical points of cosmic, biological and human evolution in the 13 billion year unfolding of the universe.

One of these points concerns stellar evolution, and particularly the supernovae explosions that signify both the death of a star and the chemical enrichment of the cosmos. All of the heavy life-forming elements (C, N, Fe) that make up our own living bodies are synthesized deep in the interiors of these collapsing stars. As they contract, burn up all their fuel and reach the end of their existence, the chemical building-blocks of life are thrown out across the universe with the gigantic supernova explosion that signals the chaotic end of the star’s evolution. Through this dynamic process of ‘order out of chaos’, which parallels the self-organizing dynamics of complex systems in holding the creative tension between expansion and contraction, death and novel emergence, we can see that the catastrophic end of a star’s life leads to the emergence of complex bio-friendly chemistry in the universe, preparing the ground for the formation of planetary systems and the subsequent emergence of life on earth.25

The Emergence of New Species in the History of Life

Evolution on the edge-of-chaos is also evidenced in the central mystery of evolutionary biology – the emergence of altogether new species in the history of life. In a long-standing challenge to the explanatory scope and power of the Neo-Darwinian theory, and one which furnishes us with further evidence for a theory of creative tension at the edge-of-chaos, comes from palaeontology and particularly the work of Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge.

These palaeontologists challenged the traditional gradualist conception of change in the Neo-Darwinian theory, specifically the notion that evolution takes place through the slow, continuous, incremental mutation of favourable characteristics in organisms over long stretches of geological time. According to Gould and Eldredge, the ‘phylogenetic incrementalism’ (gradualism) associated with the name of Darwin is “alarmingly out of whack”26 with respect to the evidence of the fossil record and they subsequently published a major paper in the scientific journal Palaeobiology in which they announced a deep challenge to the Neo-Darwinian orthodoxy.

In essence, ‘Punctuated Equilibrium’ is a linking of the pattern of stasis – that observation that “once a species appears in the fossil record, it tends to persist with little appreciable change throughout the remainder of its existence” 27 with the simultaneous recognition that most evolutionary change seems bound up with the abrupt origination of new species, called ‘speciation’—the basic regularity that organisms with novel anatomical characteristics tend to show up relatively suddenly in the fossil record.28 As against five to ten million years of stasis, speciation happens in approximately five to fifty thousand years, or 1000 times shorter than the average duration of species. This contrast of rates makes the emergence of new forms of living complexity look instantaneous in the fossil record so that when we do see the introduction of evolutionary novelty it usually shows up ‘all at once’ and fully-formed, leaving virtually no evidence of any intermediate forms. 29

We can find a striking parallel here between the pattern of stasis and punctuated emergence in the fossil record and the discoveries of the sciences of complexity. As we have already seen, the self-organizing dynamic of evolution of the edge-of-chaos can be established when it is recognized that open systems (physical, chemical, biological or social) can be driven far from thermodynamic equilibrium where they reach critical ‘bifurcation’ points and leap abruptly into new states of emergent order and greater complexity. Now in the same way, the notion that speciation in the living world is correlated with sudden changes in self-organizing systems, which pass through periods of instability and then lock onto new stable patterns, fits very well with the models of transformation as described by both the theory of punctuated equilibrium and the sciences of complexity.30

As a result, in opposition to the tradition notion Darwinian gradualism (for which there is a conspicuous lack of evidence of the fossil record) it is more reasonable to think that the critical transformations between species that give rise the incredible complexity and diversity in the evolution of life have arisen through these relatively abrupt transformations and symmetry breaks, which is confirmed by both the dynamic pattern of self-organization on the edge-of-chaos in the sciences of complexity (where new forms of life suddenly emerge at the critical threshold between necessity and contingency) and the pattern of stasis and punctuated change exhibited in the fossil record.31

The discovery that evolution has been punctuated by a series of mass extinction events that are followed by sudden bursts novel emergence where new species appear as if ‘at once’ and fully formed is a large-scale evolutionary pattern that has repeated itself time and again at the critical ‘bifurcation’ points in the evolution of life. At least five such ‘great dyings’ have occurred in the history of life, and there is now little doubt that these major decimations are responsible for the overall shape of evolution in the biosphere.32

As a result we can further establish this cross wiring of the sciences of complexity and the creative tension at the heart of Jesus’ most memorable teachings on the Kingdom of God, for both of these approaches to the critical question of how transformation happens maintain that significant evolutionary change happens at the edge-of-chaos, where the capacity to embody paradox and navigate the irreducible tensions of the life-process brings forth emergent order and new forms of adaptive complexity.

The Dialectic of Progress in Human History

This edge-of-chaos dynamic can also been traced through the historical development of the human species. Human history has been shaped by a number of painful and messy socio-cultural upheavals and critical periods of ‘disruption and novelty’ where the dominant regime reaches a point of chaotic instability and gives way to a new more organized socio-cultural structure. Indeed influential world history scholar Arnold Toynbee’s theory of “challenge and response” depicts socio-cultural change in much the same way to these modern day evolutionary sciences:

During the disintegration of a civilization, two separate plays with different plots are being performed simultaneously side by side. While an unchanging dominant majority is perpetually rehearsing its own defeat, fresh challenges are perpetually evoking creative responses from newly recruited minorities, which proclaim their own creative power by rising, each time to the occasion.33

This pattern of historical change through the creative tension between opposites is also reminiscent of Hegel’s developmental philosophy, which has subsequently been taken up and modified by other Enlightenment thinkers such as Marx and Habermas. According to this theory of historical change, each stage of socio-cultural development unfolds until it reaches its own ‘catastrophic bifurcation’ called an internal contradiction, which generates a great deal of chaos and instability. To escape this chaos (often stemming from unexpected changes in the environment) the social system must evolve to a more highly organized pattern, thereby diffusing the problems and inherent limitations of the previous stage of development, and beginning a new process of evolution’s unfolding.34

By touching on how the creative tension between opposites is also driving force human history, this brief analysis simply demonstrates how this fundamental pattern, what can be called “death and renewal” at the edge-of-chaos is manifested in the macro-dynamics of evolution from cosmology to biology to human history. This dynamic pattern of self-organization via instability and transformation is evidenced in everything from the supernovae explosion of the primordial elements that give birth to the building blocks of life to the catastrophic mass extinction events that catalyze the emergence to new living species on our hot house planet to the passionate and bloody upheavals of human history. And as we saw above, this capacity for evolution to find new creative solutions to complex problems at the “edge-of-chaos” corresponds almost perfectly with the deep structure at the center of Jesus’ most radical teachings, and thereby intersects with the very constitution of the Christian faith tradition.

Evolvability

So while the process of evolution is shot through with accidental, random and contingent events, in view of the sciences of complexity it can equally be said that it is precisely “through the portals of contingency that what is truly new enters the world”35 for it now seems that significant evolutionary change happens at the edge-of-chaos, and it is the creative tension between order and chaos where the outcome of the process is inherently unpredictable or unforeseeable that allows for the continual admittance of disruptive novelty and emergent order.

Moreover, the dynamics self-organization on the edge-of-chaos is also considered to be the likely precondition of evolution itself, which thereby provides the fundamental tie between self-organization and natural selection. As Stuart Kauffman, one of the pioneers of the sciences of complexity and self-organization puts it in a recent interview:

“There are all sorts of neat reasons why it’s incredibly advantageous to be at the edge of chaos… And what could possibly be doing that tuning? Well, natural selection, because it’s highly advantageous. So here is a marriage of self-organization (transformation) and selection (adaptation). Both are necessary. So self-organization affords the capacity to be critical (at the edge-of-chaos) and then selection gets it and maintains it. And maybe it’s so general that it’s a law for any biosphere.”36

In other words, since complex self-organizing systems exist far from equilibrium at “the edge of chaos”, natural selection keeps complex genetic arrays in this dynamic range between too much fluidity and too much fixity, as the creative edge in which alone significant evolution can take place.37 And according to Kauffman this reworking of natural selection explains “evolvability” that deep property of living things which accounts for the capacity for qualitative change in evolving systems to an altogether new horizon of possibilities in the overall increase in novelty, complexity and diversity that we see in the basic directionality of evolution over the long haul. In other words, evolution on the edge-of-chaos is not only the central characteristic of self-organization in complex systems, it can also explain what Eric Jantsch has called “self-realization through self-transcendence” and account for the capacity of living organisms to go beyond a given range of possibilities and introduce new creative twists and evolve onto more complex and dynamic regimes.

As a result, self-organization in complex systems far from equilibrium demonstrates that things “evolve to evolve” to the edge of chaos, which corresponds to a delicate interplay between chance and necessity, chaotic fluctuations and emergent order, that also sits at the founding gestures of orthodox Christian theology (see note 14). So in fundamental congruence with the paradoxical heart of Christianity, the capacity to evolve at the edge-of-chaos can also be construed as the driving force of large-scale evolutionary dynamics, where natural selection works to keep evolving systems in the dynamic regime that holds the tension between opposite poles and fine-tunes the novelty and diversity that is constantly and spontaneously being generated.

This more general explanatory framework can embrace the essential truth-claims of the Christian tradition while providing a potentially rich (and inclusive) alternative to the orthodox Neo-Darwinian theory of evolution. The multitude of life forms that have evolved in the natural world are not merely the outcome of blind chance and long stretches of geological time but rather the outcome of a dynamic interplay between Darwinian selection (working to optimize reproductive fitness) and the immanent self-organizing dynamics (evolvability) of complex systems working to bring forth new forms of living complexity across successively higher hierarchical levels of evolution (physical, chemical, biological, socio-cultural).

So from this perspective, it is possible to incorporate the fundamentals of Neo-Darwinism into a broader evolutionary framework, where selective pressures constitute the surrounding matrix over which the intrinsic self-organizing factors of physical, biological and socio-cultural systems are disclosed. As Kauffman again writes, evolving systems:

… are not deeply entrenched in an ordered regime . . . they are actually very close to the edge-of-chaos transition, where things are much looser and more fluid. And natural selection is not the antagonist of self-organization. It is more like a law of motion, a force that is constantly pushing emergent, self-organizing systems toward the edge of chaos.

So, while we can reject overtly reductionist slide of Neo-Darwinism which holds up the billions of tons of single-celled bacteria (prokaryotes) on our planet as the dominant exemplar of Darwinian fitness in the history of life,38 we can preserve the central Darwinian mechanism of natural selection and incorporate it into a broader and more inclusive evolutionary framework. This means that we remove natural selection as the primary mechanism of evolution, that which guides and controls the task of optimizing reproductive fitness. In contrast natural selection can be seen to operate, but in a modified sense where selection moves diverse forms of adaptive complexity to the creative edge of evolution while discarding whatever mutations are not compatible with the minimal constraints survival and reproduction (these biological constraints that become increasingly unnecessary in human socio-cultural evolution). In this more general context, natural selection acts as a broad survival filter where the criteria of Darwinian fitness (maximal reproductive success) that can be recast as a structural feature of our biological hard-wiring and a loose constraint to be satisfied rather than optimized.39 So where biological survival drives (e.g. sex and aggression) are deeply rooted in our collective Darwinian inheritance, as evolution moves forward into new and unforeseen horizons natural selection permits any living organism, local population, or species that has sufficient integrity to adapt to its environment and spontaneously organize its self to navigate the creative tensions at the edge-of-chaos and evolve further.40

In this way natural selection favors any organism capable of living at the edge-of-chaos, any organism capable of enduring the contradictory tensions of an evolutionary trajectory that is “rife with happenstance, contingency, incredible waste, death, pain and horror.”41 As Kauffman again argues: “much of the (emergent) order we see in organisms may be the direct result not of natural selection but of the natural order selection was privileged to act on . . . Evolution is not just tinkering . . . It is emergent order honored and honed by selection”.42

This is a significant reworking of the core Neo-Darwinian doctrine and entails a radical rethinking of evolutionary biology. In pointing directly to a fundamental change from the active constraints of maximizing reproductive fitness (where population span actually decrease as the tree of life unfolds) to the intrinsic self-organizing dynamics of complex organic systems,43 this re-framing of the Neo-Darwinian theory of evolution also opens the way for a re-consideration of the truth-claims of Christian theology, and specifically how the paradoxes of the Christian faith and the capacity to absorb and transmute the contradictory tension of our creaturely existence now find scientific legitimacy in the discovery of evolution on the “edge-of-chaos”.

Life Finds a Way

It seems reasonable to assume that if Christian theology is going to survive in the 21st century it must acknowledge the incredible waste, turmoil and contingency of the emerging evolutionary story of modern science. By facing up the horrific cost of evolution, where over 99% of the species ever evolved are now extinct in a “nightmare spectacular taking place on a hot-house planet where the routine activity is for organisms to be tearing others apart”44 theology in a post-Darwinian world must finally recognize and even embrace the nearly 500 year old rational-scientific critique of mythic religion,45 and do away with comfortable idea of an Intelligent Designer that has everything under its omnipotent and benevolent celestial supervision.

However in tracing the cruciform nature of large-scale (macro) transformations in the evolutionary epic of modern science, it is again possible to reaffirm the sense of life’s constant openness to new creation at those critical thresholds where two opposing forces are held together in creative tension. In making this transition into a post-Darwinian God-view, the sciences of self-organization and emergent order can embrace this dynamic pattern of crisis and regeneration where new forms of life bubble up on the chaotic edge of evolutions reaching out into new creative possibilities, while simultaneously conforming to the very same tension between opposites that sits at earliest beginnings of the Christian faith tradition.

For the Christ-event (the life, death and resurrection of Jesus) is an “edge-of-chaos” phenomenon. Jesus comes to us as one we did not see coming, he throws things off balance, he goes where he cannot go, through the narrow gate at the frothy edge where impossible becomes possible and new worlds spring forth through the gate-less gate of his mind-bending paradoxes. In pushing the envelope of the creative edge of human evolution, the crucified and risen Jesus embodies the paradoxical tension between opposites to the point of maximum intensity where ones soul reaches it breaking point… and yet does not break—but instead shifts into a deeper and more genuine expression of its own inherent potentials.

In the person of Jesus we discover the archetypal event of God’s self-revelation in the world where the creative tension of paradox that constitutes the original structure of Jesus’ teachings exposes us to “the fresh wellspring of novelty” that gives rise to “the endlessly novel forms of life”46 that are evidenced in the evolutionary story of modern science. By showing that cosmic, biological and human evolution are ceaselessly creative in ways that are unpredictable, perpetually surprising and structurally unforeseeable, we can therefore tell the evolutionary story with renewed depth and meaning by showing that the creative tension at the edge-of-chaos evidenced by modern science also re-activates dangerous memory of Jesus and the paradoxical heart of the Christian gospel.

We can further draw out this pattern that connects Christian paradox and the science of emergent order by showing how the Gospel story of Jesus of Nazareth holds together two inextricably intertwined narratives is a way that corresponds precisely with the edge-of-chaos dynamics in the scientific account of evolution. One the one hand Jesus is the one announcing the permanent challenge of an already arriving Kingdom – and doing so in his very own words and deeds, giving love to the unlovable, giving sight to the blind, giving healing to the sick and offering congratulations to the poor. And on the other hand, Jesus’ very enactment of the Kingdom activates an equal but opposite force – the powers of darkness that must preserve the established order at all costs, those destructive forces that see in the Nazarene only a dangerous heretic, a demon-possessed blasphemer, a violator of time-honored traditions.

These two diametrically opposed forces – Jesus proclamation of a his Kingdom program and paranoid violence of the powers that be came together in the final week of Jesus life in probably the most wildly unpredictable and unexpected series of events in human history, a tumultuous crescendo that ended with Jesus being directly exposed to the worst horrors that the world-historical process has to offer in being executed as a heretic on a Roman cross.

In Jesus’ last hours these two opposing forces came together at the “edge-of-chaos” in the most shocking and disturbing fashion, but of course this was not the end, for from out of this creative tension bursts forth the most unexpected and surprising event of all – the resurrection of Jesus, his qualitative emergence into a new form of life, his radical mutation into an altogether new horizon of what it means to be human.47 Just as the sciences of self-organization suggest that evolving systems have a propensity to self-organize at the edge-of-chaos and at those critical disruptions that punctuate of evolution’s creative advance, the notion that the reinvention of a thing goes hand in hand with the capacity to move to the vulnerable edges of life and death goes hand in hand with Jesus’ paradoxical teachings on the Kingdom and is part and parcel of the Christian narrative of God’s decisive self-revelation in human history.

So just as the paradox of Christ crucified is a scandal – foolish to the wisdom of the Greeks and a stumbling-block in the way of Jewish messianic expectations, what at first seems to be an unpredictable or chaotic instability where we find ourselves torn between two equal but opposite poles is actually the edge-of-chaos, i.e. the threshold of the radically “self-transcending” capacity of life towards newer and more complex forms in general, what Martin Luther King called “that power that can find a way out of now no way”.

In fact, if the natural and human worlds were devoid of obstructions, it is highly probable that living beings would never evolve at all. For evolution to move forward, from this post-Darwinian perspective it is extremely important that life be continually presented with challenges, and that natural selection keeps evolving systems at the edge-of-chaos pushing them to go beyond its given status. Guy Murchie, in noticing this dialectic of crisis/opportunity in the evolution of life on earth, argued that evolution is a kind of “soul school” and that in a post-Darwinian worldview, the trajectory new life through critical instabilities is as good a one for nourishing the soul as we could possibly imagine.48

The basic message of this integration of the evolutionary epic of science and the Gospel story of Jesus Christ is that Life finds a way to overcome even the biggest setbacks, the most impossible obstacles and the most devastating catastrophes. From the primordial fireball that followed the Big Bang to the massive supernovae explosion that prepared the conditions for first self-replicating organisms, to the catastrophic mass extinction in the evolution of life on our planet to the socio-cultural upheavals and revolutions of human history, evolution keeps on going beyond itself in unfolding ever new, more complex forms and structures in a tremendous sweep of creative activity running from star dust to the first glimmers of a divinized humanity.

And so we too are part and parcel of this all-encompassing evolutionary current, the dynamic, unpredictable, surprising and unexpected turns of the world-historical process through periodic edge-of-chaos transitions into radically new forms of sentient life and consciousness.For where the love of God in Jesus Christ at the radical dawn of Christianity was expressed in paradoxical stories that antagonized the existing order and set up the very conditions for awakening to the Kingdom of God, there is in the evolutionary epic of modern science a secret current of all-pervading Love that also holds open the paradoxical tensions of a creatively chaotic process (chaosmos) in bringing new life out of seeming catastrophe at the frothy edge of our evolutionary journey.

Moreover, in the traditional Christian story Jesus is the “Word (Logos) made flesh” and is said to be that one in whom everything is created – the cosmic Christ in and through whom the entire creation comes into being and reaches fulfillment. And since evolution on the edge-of-chaos is Christ-like or cruciform in its innermost nature in holding the creative tension between opposites at the edge-of-chaos, we can also affirm here the distinctive truth-claim of the Christian faith that Jesus Christ is the Logos – the true center of human existence – for the wisdom of God in the figure of Jesus also comprises the inner-guiding force of the evolving universe and encapsulates the very meaning and purpose of sentient life in the evolving universe…

Conclusion

Standing before the self-organizing, self-transcending trajectory of evolution on the edge-of-chaos from matter to life to mind, in recent years many scientists, philosophers and theologians have asked if evolution has an ultimate direction or purpose, a fundamental drive to manifest ever-greater forms of complexity and consciousness.

By showing that the serendipitous creativity of evolution springs forth through unexpected portals of paradox we find in the self-organizing dynamics of evolution an inexorable striving for new possibilities in spite of the sheer contingency, incredible pain and irreparable suffering that inheres within all life. For just as the first reptiles or amphibians that evolved on our planet could never have imagined the eventual emergence of human culture and everything from the Great Pyramids of Egypt to You-tube, our own collective future (if we make it through our the current global crises and challenges) is itself unimaginable, an ever-receding horizon that is inherently inconceivable, and structurally open to an absolute future that we can only be called God or Christ consciousness (by whatever name).

Given the persistent tendency of evolution to constantly go beyond what went before, it seems likely that we are part and parcel of a universal story that is unfinished and still evolving – and that there are higher stages of evolution to be attained in the collective future of the human species. And since it is precisely in and through creative tensions at the edge-of-chaos, critical disruptions of the status quo and the unexpected turns of Jesus’ paradoxical teachings that evolution moves towards its unforeseeable future, it seems probable that the post-human future of evolution is ultimately headed towards a rendezvous with God through the dynamics of crisis and regeneration in a potentially endless process that is constantly bringing forth new forms and structures, an evolution that has been and always will be driven to manifest more and more of its mysterious creativity.49

That is, with the recent scientific understanding that significant evolutionary change happens at edge-of-chaos there is a hidden impetus to the evolving universe, an intrinsic connection between the swirling galaxies, the myriad of life-forms that pervade this planet and the creative passions of human history. For given that evolution has the inherent capacity to overcome even the biggest obstacles, if we are to follow the way of Jesus Christ we are to take up our cross and stand in the transformative fire of Jesus’ paradoxes, go to the place where we cannot go, to go to the place where the world is in pain, to embrace the contradictions of a world that is right now going through birth pangs and unpredictable earthquakes, a world that is groaning for fulfillment…

And if God in the Christian story is fully present in the heart of flesh, and if the edge-of-chaos is the source of the serendipitous creativity in the evolving universe, then maybe Jesus’ death and resurrection is the story of God’s work throughout the entire universe, and just maybe the Kingdom of God is the New Creation and maybe, just perhaps, our existence here matters even more than we have ever conceived possible…


Endnotes

1 Karl Rahner, “Christology within an Evolutionary View of the World” in Foundations of Christian Faith, 1978, p.178-203

2 Rahner 1978, p.181

3 Rahner 1978, p.193

4 The philosophical implications of the Darwinian picture of life are pointed out by F. J. Ayala, “This is the conceptual revolution that Darwin completed – that everything in nature, including the origin of living organisms, can be explained by natural processes governed by natural laws. This is nothing if not a fundamental vision that has forever changed how mankind perceives itself and its place in the universe.” (Francisco J. Ayala, “Darwin’s Revolution,” in ‘Creative Evolution?!’ ed. John H. Campbell and J. William Schopf (Boston: Jones & Bartlett, 1994), p.4)

5 Some of the more notable evolutionary biologists in this camp include Brian Goodwin, Conrad Morris, S. J. Gould, Stuart Kauffman, Francisco Varela and Rupert Sheldrake.

6 This paper will continue this trend and challenge the status quo by turning to a variety of scientific discoveries that have been made over the past few decades and showing that the orthodox neo-Darwinian theory is not exactly wrong, but it may well be extremely partial, inadequate or incomplete. So while this paper in no way endorses ID (intelligent design), it does insist that in order to do justice to all the available scientific evidence we would do well to re-think evolution in a way that acknowledges directional trends in the history of life, and that without minimizing the very real contingency and unpredictability of the process we can again ask the big questions of the meaning and purpose of evolution, and suggest that maybe, just maybe, this evolving universe that brought mathematics and poetry out of rocks in motion is indeed is going somewhere…

7 These sciences of complexity include many specific disciplines, such as General Systems Theory (Bertanffy, Weiss, Laszlo), non-equilibrium thermodynamics (Prigogine), cybernetics (Weiner), cellar automata theory (von Neumann), self-organization (Kauffman), autopoietic systems theory (Varela, Maturana), as well as catastrophe, chaos and dynamic systems theory (Thom, Shaw, Abraham). Wilber 1995, p.14, Laszlo 1995, 1996, Jantsch 1980

8 Laszlo 1996, “Scientific evidence of the patterns traced by evolution in the physical universe, in the living world, and even in the world of history is growing rapidly. It is coalescing into the image of basic regularities that repeat and recur. It is now possible to search out these regularities and obtain a glimpse of the fundamental nature of evolution—of the evolution of the cosmos as a whole, including the living world and the world of human social history.” Laszlo 1996, p.15

9 Peacocke 1993, p.51-53—Of course, it has not always been this way. For in the Newtonian paradigm of classical science it was believed that any given physical system, conceived as a closed or isolated unit of matter or energy, would move from a more organized and energetic state towards a less ordered state of increasing randomness and disorder with time. And from this perspective, according to the famous Second Law of Thermodynamics, it was predicted that the material universe was running down to state of ever increasing entropy or disorder to end finally in “heat death”, or complete thermodynamic equilibrium where all interesting activity would cease.

However, with the emergence non-equilibrium thermodynamics (beginning in the 1970s) it was revealed that that complex systems in the real world are not closed or isolated as in classical science, but are open to energy flows in their environment. And furthermore under certain conditions such open systems can ‘propel themselves’ irreversibly into new dynamic regimes, what is commonly called ‘self-organization’. The problem is not that the Second Law is wrong (aspects of the physical realm do indeed act in a deterministic and mechanistic-like fashion, and are indeed running down), rather it is just partial and so the subtler, more dynamic aspects of the material realm were overlooked. (Wilber 1995, p.15, Laszlo 1996, p. 17-18) And it is now known that evolving systems are not closed or isolated, and so the Second Law does not fully apply to them. Evolving systems are open to energy exchanges from their environment, and when such systems are taken ‘far from equilibrium’ they have the propensity for self-organization or the sudden emergence of new structures and forms of behavior. (Capra 1997, p.85, Laszlo 1996, p.24)

10 Davies 1989, p.83-85

11 As Kauffman writes, the evolution of physical, chemical, biological and historical complexity is ultimately “a natural expression of a universe that is not in equilibrium”. (Kauffman 1995 quoted in Keller 2003, p.189)

12 Wilber 1995, p.14, Davies 1989, p.113-114, Laszlo 1996, p. 18-19

13 To further explain, systems in the real world can exist in one of three different types of states, two of which are at or near equilibrium. However, systems in the third state ‘far from thermodynamic equilibrium’ are very different from stationary states and tend to be poised on the edge-of-chaos – critical threshold between order and chaos where systems have the significant tendency to evolve towards new, more complex dynamic regimes. And further more it now seems that evolution is singularly consistent in bringing forth this same kind of basic entity, called a “system in the third state”, in all domains of reality from physics to chemistry to biology to society. (Laszlo 1995, p.23) And despite the fact that dynamic systems in the third state have the propensity to evolve to new highly organized and more complex states, this domain remains as yet largely unexplored. Funnily enough the classical models of closed thermodynamic systems discussed in most physics textbooks, which have formed the principle topics in mechanics for 300 years, actually belong to an incredibly restricted class, as Paul Davies states “in thermodynamics, the near-to-equilibrium closed systems presented in textbooks are highly specialized idealizations. Much more common are far-from-equilibrium open systems.” (Davies 1989, p.158) In the same way Joseph Ford also points out that our classical linear models and closed thermodynamic systems at or near equilibrium “are very nearly as scarce as hen’s teeth, despite the fact that our physical understanding of nature is largely based upon their study.” (quoted in Davies 1989, p.55)

14 See Prigogine “Self-organization processes in far-from-equilibrium conditions correspond to a delicate interplay between chance and necessity, between fluctuations and deterministic laws.” (Prigogine and Stengers Order out of Chaos, p.176)

15 The “edge of chaos” is described by post-modern process theologian Catherine Keller in the following terms, “precisely in the interactivity of an open-ended, nonlinear process (that) extraordinary transformations, “phase transitions”, can occur. (Keller 2008, p.150)

16 Keller 2003, p.18 Because these states are so “ripe” for change they can be influenced or manipulated into change with small fluctuations, while out of this edge-of-chaos state comes something that could not be predicted by an analysis of its individual components, i.e. an emergent property of the system

17 The well known Catholic author Chesterton defines Christianity is the following way: “Christianity is a superhuman paradox in which two passions may blaze beside each other.” (Chesterton, G. K. Orthodoxy, 1959, p.112)

18 Paradox or ‘the co-existence of opposites with the tension between them’ constitutes the orthodox Christology of the early Church.

19 See Freeman, C. Towards a Post-Metaphysical Theology” (2008) in the Global Spiral. http://www.metanexus.net/Magazine/tabid/68/id/10652/Default.aspx

Ina series of recently published articles it has been argued that the “paradoxical tension between opposites” informs the deep structure of virtually all of Jesus of Nazareth’s teachings on the Kingdom of God. So where all of the sayings of Jesus that tended to be remembered and re-told within the early Christian communities have an explosive paradox in their narrative structure, the main point to be established in this paper is that the new scientific story of cosmic and biological evolution also affirms that there is a creative tension between opposites at the very heart of what makes things changable and transformable…

20 In speaking to the capacity of Jesus’ paradoxical teachings to turn ones world inside out and upside down, order arises out of chaos through what Isabelle Stengers calls a “conceptual upheaval”, a phrase that describes the precise nature of Jesus’ parabolic sayings. (in Keller 2003, p.188)

21 Truth in paradox is also found in the wisdom teachings of many of the world’s great philosophers and sages throughout human history from Heraclitus to Lao Tzu, from Zen masters to Nagarjuna, from Nicholas of Cusa to Carl Jung and from the Jewish Kabbalah to Derrida’s deconstruction.

22 As Joseph Sittler writes, “A Cross is a blunt and graceless form. It has not the completeness and satisfying quality of a circle. It does not have the grace of a parabola or the promise of a long curve… A cross speaks not of unity but of brokenness, not of harmony but ambiguity, it is a form of tension and not rest… The cross is the symbol because the whacks of life take that shape… And unless you have a crucified God, you don’t have a big enough God.” Joseph Sittler quoted in Westhelle, V. “The Scandalous God: The Use and Abuse of the Cross” Fortress Press, Minneapolis 2006.

23 See note 19

24 Haught 2000, p.46 This story of life’s transformation through suffering love is central this theme of the Christian faith’s image of a suffering God’s eternal restraint, which allows for the world’s self-creation while suggesting to theology a notion of ultimate reality much more intimately involved with and powerfully effective in the world than a forcefully directive divine agency would be. (Haught 2000, p.56)

25 Bourriau 1992, p.6

26 Eldredge 1995, p.58

27 Eldredge 1995, p.67

28 Eldredge 1995, p.94

29 Eldredge 1995, p.95-99 As Laszlo states: “Nature progresses by sudden leaps and deep seated transformations rather than through piecemeal adjustments. The diagram of the branching tree of life is no longer resembles the continuous Y-shaped joints of orthodox Darwinian theory; it is now pictured in terms of abrupt switches”. Laszlo 1996, p.76-78

30 This connection between punctuated evolution and the sciences of complexity—the general pattern of long-term stability, sudden crisis, and brief bursts of creative activity—can also be found in the science of “catastrophism”, an approach to evolutionary change originally popularized by French scientist Cuvier that has emerged with renewed popularity in recent times. (Huggett 1997, p.42) In opposition to the commonly accepted ‘uniformitarian’ view of Lyell, Cuvier believed that the geological record shows a pattern of catastrophic events involving a series of mass extinction events that are followed by bursts of creative activity where new species appear without any trace of incremental evolutionary development. Two catastrophes in particular stand out: the Permian extinction of about 245 million years ago, which exterminated half the families of marine invertebrates and probably more than 90% of all species; and the famous “K-T” extinction at the end of the Cretaceous era, about 65 million years ago, which exterminated the dinosaurs and a massive number of other species.

31 According to G. L. Stebbins, a principle architect of modern evolutionary theory, examples of such punctuated emergence in evolution include the appearance of the central nervous system, the digestive tube, elaborate sensory organs, vertebrate limbs and complex social behaviour. Stebbins estimates that there have been about 20 to 100 instances of dis-continuous evolution in the history of life and evolutionary theorists Theodosius Dobzhansky and Francisco Ayala have called these relatively abrupt events of sudden transformation evolutionary transcendence because in each of them arose a new order of existence in the evolution of life. (Wilber 1995, p.43-44)

32 Depew & Weber 1996, p.422

33 Toynbee 1972, p.228

34 Wilber 1996, p.64

35 Haught 2003, p.58

36 Kauffman, S. (interview) Rethink Evolution, Self-Organization Is Real go to: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0805/S00052.htm

37 Kauffman, S. “Complex systems tend to be poised on the border between order (no change or periodic change) and chaos (a-periodic or random change), because this is the most flexible and evolvable position. Things at the edge-of-chaos are optimized for adaptation and information-processing because there is a naturally occurring property of the physical world that forces complex systems into dynamic readiness states near the edge of transition. So not only does natural selection favor things near there, so that things “evolve to evolve” there is also some inherent drive towards this edge.” (Rethink Evolution, Self-Organization Is Real, http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0805/S00052.htm)

38 As Varela writes, “The constraints of survival and reproductive success, which have their optimal fitness effects in the bacterial mode, are simply far too weak to provide an account of evolution’s overall advance in new forms of complexity and diversity.” (Varela et al 1991, p.194)

39 See Kauffman, “A fundamental implication for biological evolution itself may be that natural selection is not powerful enough to avoid the generic self-organized properties of complex regulatory systems persistently ‘scrambled’ (randomly shuffled) by mutation. Those generic properties would emerge as biological universals, widespread in organisms not by virtue of selection and mutation, but by virtue of their membership in a common ensemble of regulatory systems.” (Kauffman 1984, p.145) In other words, “rather than reflecting selection’s successes, such order (self-organization) may reflect selection’s failure” (Kauffman 1993, see Part 1: Adaptation on the Edge of Chaos)

40 Varela 1991, p.194-5 Without going into too much detail, we can simply state that innovative theorists in contemporary evolutionary research like Kauffman, Laszlo, Gould, Eldredge, Mayr, Varela, Jantsch, Depew, Weber, Lewontin and Levins appear to be working in their own way towards a theory of evolution along these lines. It is now virtually undisputed and even championed that evolution has some kind of “self-organizing” capacity within its processes, a capacity that goes beyond and preserves the essentials of the Darwinian theory, while more effectively explaining the large-scale emergence of novel forms of complex adaptive design in the evolution trajectory from matter to life to mind.

41 Haught, The God of the Galapogos, Nature, Vol.352, p.486

42 Kauffman 1993, p.173, 408, 644

43 Varela, Thompson & Rosch 1991, p.198, Depew & Weber 1996, Kauffman 1993, 1995)

44 Becker 1973, p.283

45 This rational critique of religion finds its contemporary expression in the New Atheism of Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens

46 Haught 2000, p.6

47 As Pope Benedict XVI said at his first Easter mass, borrowing the language of evolutionary science, the Resurrection is “the greatest ‘mutation’, absolutely the most crucial leap into a totally new dimension that there has ever been in the long history of life and its development: a leap into a completely new order which does concern us, and concerns the whole of history.”

48 Haught 2000, p.29 Murchie: “If one wanted to create an environment to facilitate the spiritual development of human nature . . . one would find it impossible to create a better world than God has already created.” Guy Murchie 1978, p.621-622

49 Given that only the fittest will survive, the key question is now: what does fitness mean now that Darwinian imperatives (maximal reproductive success) obscure more than they reveal? Once these selective constraints (survival drives) are lifted and re-configured, overturning the co-ordinates of what constitutes “fitness”, new forms of life and consciousness are allowed to emerge. Freedom from selection lets genes get creative (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/mg19926752.200-what-happens-to-life-when-selection-stops.html And if Jesus Christ is the center of human existence (as Christian theology maintains), what are the criteria of evolutionary fitness now? Could fitness now mean faith, hope and love… as well as the capacity to live with paradox and navigate the irreducible tensions of evolution at the “edge-of-chaos”?

CamFessions: Euro-Asian Travel Blog

By Dr.Freeman On September 30th, 2008

G’day each and all,

A big hello from Kao San road (Bangkok)…. and a brief update on my
Euro-Asian travel adventures, where the goal of the journey is always
and already accomplished, and so never really attained… Some
memorable fragments in chronological order:

Thailand - I suppose Cold Chisel put it best in the Aussie rock
classic Kao San, “I’ve been to South East Asia, and the Answer sure
ain’t there…” Sagely advice, for IMHO we would do well to give up on
the popular Western idea that the ultimate pillar of Wisdom, the
secret spiritual treasure can be recaptured out here in the East, in
this forbidden exotic place… The ugly truth is that Thailand is
really just an Asian version of the capitalist Wild West - karaoke
bars intermingled with Buddhist theme parks and massage parlors for
Western tourists… Ko Phi Phi Island is great case in point – sublime
and majestic when first seen from afar, a kind of heaven on earth…
but up close it is a paradise of filth, a gigantic pile of shit… Go
there and see for yourself… And Patong – where civilized Westerners
come by the thousands to do the Western men do - penetrate the exotic
Other - is both fascinating and terrifying… A little friendly
advice, the best looking girls are really boys and don’t ring the bell
at the bar – or you’ll be shouting the entire bar a drink…

So to escape the debauchery of Phuket in the south I went directly to
Chang Mai in the north where I met a girl named Fhar, we drank
together most evenings while I tried to convert her to Christianity
arguing that Buddhism seeks a fictitious peace beyond the pull of
competing forces… and that in SE Asia this once noble religion has
become a blank screen for the projection of Western ideological
fantasies… this last shelter of ancient Wisdom is really just a
primitive superstition propped up by cheap tricks and magic rituals…
She is still a Buddhist - and I don’t know who I am, but we had a
memorable time together…

Europe…

I agree with Ken Wilber here: I love the southern European climate
(France, Italy, Croatia) but prefer the northern European people
(Germans, Dutch, some of the English). Unfortunately in Europe you
can’t have it all - it’s either one or the other… Nature or
Culture… I think this is what Slovenian philosopher Zizek means by
the irreducible “gap” in the heart of the Real…

Germany/Mainz – I was here for a Christian meditation conference,
which reminded me of precisely how deluded and ignorant I really am –
and that joining a monastic community would only reinforce this
illusion…

But one of the most memorable experiences was sitting at the local bar
in Mainz pretending to read the drinks menu in German, only to lookup
up and see a long pair of German legs attached to a g-string and a
topless red hot body standing above me on the bar – I open my mouth in
astonishment and this very cheeky woman begins to pour a bottle of
vodka down my throat… after which I could speak fluid German…
later that night I met and flirted with the two blonde-bombshells from
the band “Funk Factory”, who were actually on TV the following day,
apparently their really big in Hamburg…

France/Taize – a very unique place for thousands of young Christians
to come to live and worship in a contemporary style of contemplative
prayer, with some very wise and compassionate brothers running the
show… One time, we studied the Book of Job at one of the gatherings
and I learnt a lot about “letting go” of the need to make meaning out
of ones life… The shocking truth of the Book of Job (one of the
central texts Western civilization) is that God does NOT guarantee for
us in an orderly universe or a purposeful existence - Rather, God
tells Job that the whole of creation is a radical accident… and
since there is no Big Story that makes things make sense, we are
better off just accepting that we live in a world of meaningless
suffering…

So the key to deep and abiding peace is to give up the need to find an
explanation for our suffering or a “reason why” to explain what
happens to us - The stories we tell ourselves about ourselves are just
a heroic fiction - nothing more - things DO NOT happen for a reason…
The secret is that there is no Secret that makes things make sense –
Yeah, the Bible rocks!

Next installment coming soon…

Cameron Freeman

The New Wounded and the Post-Traumatic Subject

By Dr.Freeman On June 30th, 2008

In The New Wounded (Les nouveaux blessés), Catherine Malabou proposes a radical reformulation of Freudian/Lacanian psychoanalysis. In essence, she argues that classical psychoanalysis can no longer think Trauma as such – where trauma (the central topic of psychoanalysis) is what Lacan called the impossible/Real – an unexpected /violent intrusion or shattering experience around which our language circulates but can never directly confront…. In presenting her thesis about what she calls the “post-traumatic subject” (the prevailing form of person-hood in the 21st century), Malabou begins with the critical distinction between the Internal and External trauma.

For Freud and Lacan unexpected shocks and violent/shattering encounters from the External world draw their traumatic impact from the way they touch a persons pre-existing Internal psychic reality… When one undergoes a shattering experience the truly traumatic core of this shock is due to the way it arouses or disturbs some already preexisting internal wound…. In other words, all external intrusions owe their traumatic effect to the resonance they find in “internal” psychic life: sexuality, the death drive, unconscious guilt feeling, etc … Basically, then, for Freud and Lacan, the external event itself doesn’t really count… it must first find an echo in yr psychic reality – the Real of ones pre-existing inner trauma…

Now for Malabou this no longer holds today for we live in a socio-political life world that imposes multiple versions of external intrusions/traumas – meaningless brutal disruptions that destroy the symbolic texture of subject’s identity directly – i.e. in a way that leaves no therapeutic recourse to Freudian psychoanalytical regression. First, there are the multifarious forms of physical violence: terror attacks like 9/11, the US “shock and awe” bombing of Iraq, street violence, rapes, bashings, murders, etc. There are also natural catastrophes, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. Then, there is the “irrational” (meaningless) destruction of the material base of our inner reality (brain-tumors, Alzheimer’s disease, organic cerebral lesions, breast cancer, etc), which can utterly change, destroy even, the victim’s personality. And finally, there are the destructive effects of socio-symbolic violence (social exclusion, the invisible violence of power exercised systemically the established order, etc)

Malabou’s point is that independently of the cause of trauma (social, natural, biological, symbolic) in the face of such widespread socio-political interruptions the same form of person-hood or subjectivity is produced – the post-traumatic subject, a disengaged and neutral subject devoid of emotions and lacking any kind of engagement with other people in the world…

So from this perspective, Freud’s problem is that he succumbs to the interpretation of meaning – he is not ready to accept the direct destructive efficiency of external shocks that destroy the psyche of the victim without resonating in any pre-existing inner traumatic truth. Freud always looks for the “internal” childhood trauma – but it is obviously obscene to link traumatic encounters like the psychic devastation of the Muslim terrorist in Guantanimo Bay (for instance) to masochism, death drive, Oedipal dramas and guilt feelings – No, the terrorized Muslim is not devastated by his unconscious anxieties – he is brutalized by a meaningless external shock that can in no way be hermeneutically appropriated…. it is in no way related to a pre-existing internal trauma…

The problem for the post-traumatic subject is that the story that one tells oneself about ourself is erased in the face of these direct external interruptions and so there is no possibility of a regression to a pre-existing trauma… All that is left are subjects deprived of their symbolic substance… the shock is too strong, the destruction is direct… and so what we have are the living dead, totally devastated but still aware of the void that is now ones life…

As a brief aside there is a central paradox here: the post-traumatic subject is not shut up in their private ‘inner’ worlds while the rest of us are directly engaged with reality, rather they are directly exposed to the shattering experience of the traumatic/Real without any protective screen, while the rest of us (barely) function on a day to day level by investing in a series of social codes that provide a protective screen against the irruption of the traumatic/Real…

But back to the main theme: the problem with Freud is that he cannot see that the post-traumatic victim “survives its own death”, i.e. the trauma destroys your conventional personality but you still survive… However Malabou believes that in these troubled times a new subject is emerging that is characterized by lack of emotional engagement, indifference and detachment, a living death, a life deprived of erotic enjoyment (sexual, artistic, religious or sensual)….

So if the 20th century was the Freudian century, the century of libido, so that even the worst nightmares were read as (sado-masochist) vicissitudes of the libido (sex drive), for Malabou the 21st century is to be the century of the post-traumatic / disengaged subject – the first emblematic figure being the Muslims in US concentration camps… a radically new subject whose entire past is erased… an emotionally blank existence that is the death drive embodied…. a subject that is now multiplying in the guise of refugees, terror victims, survivors of natural catastrophes, as well as masses of living dead on public transport and staring at computers in office buildings, the endless streams of mall zombies, the countless victims of family violence, and so on… The feature that runs through all these figures is that the cause of the trauma remains utterly meaningless and resists any interpretation…. for the subject has no substantive identity – no story to tell itself about itself – no inner psychic life to work with - and it is just this that psychoanalysis is unable to think…

But I tend to disagree with Malabou. As far as I can see, the experience of being deprived of ones identity – where all ones psychic substance is erased and rendered meaningless – this process is actually constitutive (definitive) of the subject itself - and the very goal of psychoanalysis… In this sense, the real lesson of psychoanalysis is that the conventional story we tell ourselves about ourselves is a survival-lie, a cheap bluff designed to radically reject any feelings of helplessness, weakness and vulnerability… and so we simply must be de-centered, disillusioned, unmasked, and left with nothing left to hold on to in order to realize our true condition… That is, we must come to accept the reality of loss, defeat and meaningless suffering to become an authentic and free-functioning person - and this is the goal of any successful psychotherapeutic practice…. So where the destructive efficiency of the many and varied external shocks/traumas in the 21st century do indeed destroy the psychic stability of the victims identity - even to the point where such intrusions they do not trigger any inner traumatic kernel of truth, when the vital-lie of one’s character (i.e. the story we tell ourselves about ourselves) is undone… instead of becoming one of the living dead we can instead: a) let go of the self-contraction, b) rest in the empty ground of awareness (Consciousness without an object)… c) rejoice in the contingency and ambiguity of those events that reside at the limits of human experience… d) refuse attachment to any single perspective… and e) playfully enact a world without the need for a “self-contained symbolic order as the ultimate guarantee of Meaning” (Zizek)…

In other words, the external trauma is not so much the death of the subject but the “condition of possibility” for the constitution of an authentic and integrated subject… where the authentic subject is one that no longer needs to find a “deeper meaning” for their suffering… but can say Yes to life in a joyful embrace of paradox, which is - of course - not so much a question to be answered but an enigma to live with…

Post-Metaphysical Musings Part II - Jesus’ Paradoxes and the Myth of the Given

By Dr.Freeman On June 2nd, 2008

Click here for For Part 1

“The excitement of transcendental experience is found only at the edge of language… and the only way to find that excitement is to test those edges and those limits.” John Dominic Crossan The Dark Interval (1980)

My own approach to post-metaphysics (see the Source Code blog on this site) calls us to live with paradox - the creative tension between opposing perspectives. And since paradoxes are un-objectifiable (i.e. structurally open to Not-Knowing) and since they have no “fixed center of meaning” they refuse to be pinned down by the rational accounting of metaphysics (including an Integral Post-Metaphysics) which is still deeply conditioned by the traditional assumptions that underpin the rational-scientific demand for evidence and the quest for cognitive certainty. In other words, the paradoxical nature of reality frustrates our desire to possess or “get a handle” on the Mystery, for truth be told the mystery of God simply does not depend on what we think about it…

Historically, the foremost example of paradox being utilized as a skillful means for facilitating God-realization is found in the parabolic discourse of Jesus of Nazareth who consistently disrupted conventional wisdom (the myth of the given) by celebrating the ambiguity of those truth-events that show up at the very limits of human experience…

To draw out the key difference between Ken Wilber’s IPM and Jesus’ paradoxes we can briefly refer to the structuralism of Claude Levi-Strauss who famously argued that “in every system of myth we will find a persistent sequence of binary discriminations as inside/outside, up/down, one/many, followed by a ‘mediation’ of the paired categories thus distinguished.”

This description of myth is a perfect description of what Integral theory claims to do. That is, the basic contours of Integral theory perform the same specific task of reconciling or mediating opposites. The conviction that ultimate reconciliation is possible is the heart of all mythic religion, so much so that more important than the proposed solution itself (religious or philosophical) is the belief in the possibility of a solution…

Now, the opposite of myth (i.e. a story that reconciles opposites) is paradox which creates contradiction and dissonance where previously there was seamless certainty, bringing not peace but a sword. Jesus’ paradoxes are hidden in stories like the Prodigal Son and the Friend at Midnight, stories that shatter the deep structure of the commonly accepted world (which can only paste over the cracks through which the Kingdom irrupts) and thereby render clear and evident to us the relativity and historical contingency of the conventional world…

Jesus’ paradoxes they do not furnish us with easy assurance of myth but challenge us with an explosive reversal of meaning that they removes our defences and makes us vulnerable to God… In this manner Jesus’ parables show us the seams and edges of “the Myth of the Given” (traditional metaphysics) by shattering expectations and creating contradiction within a situation of complacent security…

So rather than providing a pre-packaged program of rules and procedures for admission into the Kingdom of God, the paradoxical strategy of Jesus disrupts the quest for cognitive certainty and thereby sets up the necessary conditions for the decision of faith with an ‘aporetic anxiety’ that invites and challenges one to follow to this singular teacher’s own realization of the Kingdom of God. By interrupting commonplace metaphysical assumptions with an outrageous abrogation of our fundamental laws of logic, the post-metaphysical heart of Jesus’ teachings consistently refuse to give us straightforward answers in response to our quest for what is Real, as his paradoxes call for a free movements of faith that is made in the face of an impossible situation, involving risk, uncertainty and an openness to the unexpected that is grounded in a confession of ultimate not-knowing (which is itself the very occasion of Satori or Enlightenment!)…

In contrast to the logical calculus and pin point clarity of an IPM, in view of the post-metaphysical paradoxes of Jesus an authentic faith commitment is structurally blind and takes root only when the road seems obscure and when the storm clouds of life buffet us, when we are overwhelmed, when we stumble, and fall, and yet still move forward in spite of all evidence to the contrary… For just as Kierkegaard wrote, the “infinite passion of inwardness” (i.e. Christian faith) that has nothing to do with objective explanation at all, and as such the real journey only begins when forgo all metaphysical anchors and confess that we don’t see directly where we are going…

So in my view, Christian paradox is Integral grown self-aware and self-critical… Paradox (e.g. security comes from accepting insecurity as our mortal lot) enhances our knowledge of ignorance, which is the beginning of philosophy and the heart of mystical experience… So where Mythic consolations (e.g. the AQAL co-ordinates of an Integral Post-Metaphysics) establish a world, Paradox subverts this world with a story deliberately calculated to show the limitations of myth, and shatters its presupposed categories so that its relativity becomes apparent…

And by keeping us humble through the dark night of truth, where the idolatry of metaphysics in its demand for cognitive certainty is exposed for the vital-lie that it is, we are precisely therein and thereby broken open to an encounter with transcendence…

In all in Jesus’ teachings, the Kingdom eventuates when ones world is overturned and challenged in its depths… The powerful distinction in Integral theory between exoteric (bad) and esoteric (good) religion can therefore be defined thus: exoteric religion gives one the final word about “reality” and thereby excludes the authentic experience of Mystery, and esoteric religion (paradoxical) continually and deliberately subverts final words about “reality” and thereby introduces the possibility of transcendence.

So Jesus’ paradoxes ask us why things might not be just as well some other way rather than the way we expected and presumed – they tell us that the reverse side also has a reverse side… and remind us that God, particularly in the Judeo-Christian tradition, does not play the game by our rules…

We can conclude this key distinction between the logical clarity IPM and the enigmatic vision and challenge of Jesus with Heidegger who wrote that “in the openness of authentic disclosure (the meaning of Being) we admit the possibility of something unknown, even contradictory, to our world; for we put into question our own faculties rather than blindly measuring and evaluating what is real on the basis of these.”

And as Kierkegaard reminds us, “Everyone shall be remembered, but each became great in proportion to his expectation. One became great by expecting the possible; another by expecting the eternal, but he who expected the impossible became greater than all…”