Monday, June 17, 2019

Why does God have to sacrifice Himself?


In a conversation with Jean-Pierre Dupuy, philosopher Slavoj Zizek says the following:
“Why does God have to sacrifice himself? People usually answer me, there was sin, and sins have to be paid. No! This idea that above God there is some kind of sense of cosmic justice, that even God has to pay, is a Pagan idea. The other popular idea was that God makes a deal with the Devil.” - https://youtu.be/NEEBYNNpX9o

“Deal with the Devil” is far from a specific answer, but two excerpts from the poet William Blake offer insight to how this deal could be viewed.
“Nail his neck to the cross : nail it with a nail. / Nail his neck to the cross : ye all have power over his tail."
“What can be done with those desperate fools / Who follow after the heathen schools? / I was standing by when Jesus died. / What they called humility I called pride."
Analyzing these segments, W.B. Yeats said:
“Christ's two natures impelled Him to crucifixion. [Christ] went to ‘humble Himself to God,’ and also to proudly destroy the serpent in himself; his own spectre, or Satan. This Satan is the false (view of) Christ worshipped still.” - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_works_of_William_Blake,_poetic,_symbolic_and_critical/2/The_Everlasting_Gospel
Yeats can write better than myself so I will quote him at length describing William Blake's reworking of Christian theology:
“Jehovah, in the persons of the Elohim, and by the agency of the Angel of the Divine Presence, created this dark world as an act of mercy and of cruelty. It is of mercy because it enables the weak emotions to look through symbols upon prophecy, and also because it passes away, being under Time. It is of cruelty because it cuts off joys of mind and adds on pains of mind — of that lower and shrunken part called body. It is also Satanic, because it is the region where the Accuser triumphs by means of the law which is 'the strength of sin,' as the lesson in the Anglican burial service reminds us. Satan is the Accuser. Accusation is the great mental sin. Other sin is merely physical, and belongs to the things of Time that pass. Accusation is not the only mental sin. Denial is equally deadly. Satan is not only the moral accuser but the denier of Imaginative truth, for he would have Reason and Memory only considered to be intellectual attributes. With these he builds the dark fiction of error — a belief in that delusive Goddess Nature, who is the mother of physical morality, and of mental immorality. She is Mary, the pure, and Rahab the Harlot. She is Rahab because she binds the red cord of blood in the eyes, the windows of the soul. She is Mary, because it is of that cord the red robe of flesh is made that was put on by Christ at the incarnation. Thus Mary is the greater Rahab. Rahab's harlotry is typical of mental mixture of convictions. It may be found in the physically pure. She is therefore called the Harlot-Virgin.
"The Image of God in which man was made is the form of the Imagination. This is common to all men and will end by becoming One Form. It will unite all. It will survive all... In a word it saves them from Satan, God of this world. Reason and memory tend also to unite men's personalities into one great Temporary Delusion. This is the great Satan, opposite of the great Saviour... [The great Satan] coheres by the water of death; fleshly instinct. It is bound by the fire of vegetation; fleshly growth and decay. At the incarnation Christ put on this water and this fire. The one burned the other. He ended by putting them both off. His mother was Law and Nature. His body was Satan. When crucified he was his own destroyer, destroying the Serpent in Himself. This Serpent, Satan, was what was nailed to the tree. This body was destroyed or devoured in three days. This devouring is the meaning of the serpent with his tail in his mouth. Christ's self-sacrifice (or suicide) was the thrusting into death of Satan, and who had become Himself as a result of the Incarnation. It was the eternal putting-off of Reason and Memory and Morality as delusions, that Imagination, Eternal Present, and Forgiveness might survive."
For Blake, Satan represents Error, not Sin. “Sin is to be forgiven, Error is not.”

Blake believes that we have re-created the same hypocritical system as the Pharisees that Jesus rebelled against, and, as with then, the hypocritical system is the primary source of Satan’s delusion today. Unlike in Jesus’s time, however, hypocrisy is as likely to be found in scientism as in moralism:
“I am your Rational Power O Albion & that Human Form / You call Divine, is but a Worm seventy inches long / That creeps forth in a night & is dried in the morning sun…
So spoke the Spectre to Albion. He is the Great Selfhood / Satan: Worshipd as God by the Mighty Ones of the Earth” - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Jerusalem._The_Emanation_of_the_Giant_Albion/Plate_33a

In short, Christ's "deal with the devil" was that rather than following the Divine order to preserve life made in the image of God, Christ acts through a healthy bodily-Satanic pride, which is of a lower order than Mind and imagination. Now, return to Blake's verse: “What can be done with those desperate fools / Who follow alter the heathen schools? / I was standing by when Jesus died. / What they called humility I called pride."

The "desperate fools" believe that Christ humbled himself before men. Blake utterly rejects this type of humility. Yeats explains: "Humility is forbidden and sinful as modesty is (which blasphemes the Symbol of God, the naked body). Humility is forbidden because it is doubt, not faith, and doubts the Godhead in ourselves, His chosen Temple... Death and Error are Reason when confined to the experience of the five senses, proud of its humility, its limits and arguments.""

The correct interpretation is that Christ humbled himself only to God, not to men. In accepting Crucifixion, Jesus was not moralistically accepting the judgment of Pilot and the pharisees. Rather, he was employing Satanic-bodily pride, parallel to the pride in his claim "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32).  Yeats explains in the higher order, 'pride' is "Elation of joy and delight in Vision," but "Healthy Satanic pride in the energy of that lower part of mind called body, has also a right to its elation because 'everything that lives is Holy'."
Christ's pride in crucifixion is Satanic because it is of his bodily, human existence, not directly related to divine Imagination.

Those who take pride in moralism and scientism are in error, because this type of pride (connected to abstract systems as opposed to Imagination or Body) necessarily leads to hypocrisy--the valuing of rules over belief.  "Death and Error are Reason when confined to the experience of the five senses, proud of its humility, its limits and arguments."

10 comments :

  1. I have a longish response.

    1. I note in the discussion you link that both speakers seem to reject the concept of resurrection. This ignores what many would see as the central event of Christianity, namely the resurrection of the Son of God, and also results in a distorted view of the Christian God. I think Zizek's view is colored by his "pessimistic" communism. Basically, of course Zizek would not believe in the ultimate victory of God because Zizek thinks the ultimate expression of the Gospel is the communist party, which is a movement that has faded away into history.

    2. I don't think there is any Scriptural evidence that God "sacrificed" Himself in the sense that God is the one responsible for Christ's death. This phrase seems to find its origin in the idea of penal substitutionary atonement, which I think is often misunderstood. It is clearly the case that Christ died for our sins (1 Cor. 15:1-3), but it is evident as well that we are not saved through the mechanism of His crucifixion, as though it were a transaction, but rather through Christ's authority (Mark 2:5-12). This authority flows from the Father's love for Christ, and the sin is "charged" to Christ (Philemon 1:18), but the murder of Jesus was perpetrated not by God, but by men, and not just any men, but the very men Jesus came to serve and rule.

    3. I cannot state how strongly I disagree with the idea that Satan was somehow within Jesus. I suspect you think this because you think that Christ's human nature cam with sin along with it. I reject that, as I believe Jesus was the fulfillment of God's creation and in His human nature was therefore the very image of God. (1 John 1:15).

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tom, I typed a whole lot more but it didn't publish. I'll re-type again later.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 4. I don't think this world was created "dark" as Yeats does. I believe that when God created the universe that it was good. (Genesis 1).

    5. I disagree that "accusation" is the great mental sin. If we are going to rank sins, I would put idolatry as the most egregious. Idolatry is the one sin in the Old Testament that caused the Spirit of God to leave Israel. (Ezekiel 8-10; see also Hosea 2:2). This divorce was not reversed until Pentecost, when the honor of Israel was restored relative to the powers of the world (Daniel 7:1-14), and the wayward bride Israel was redeemed to her husband, the Lord. (Hosea 3:2)

    6. I am curious if you could explain to me what you think the Pharisees' error(s)/system are.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 7. If it is true that Christ humbled Himself only to God and not to men, please explain Christ's model of leadership (Mark 9:35), and His washing of the disciples' feet.

    8. Again, I disagree with Yeats that Christ's body was somehow Satanic, and I am struggling to find a Scriptural basis for the idea that Mary represents Law and Nature.

    9. It sounds as though Blake/Yeats are arguing that Jesus and Satan somehow merged together at the incarnation. This seems to me flatly contradicted by the tempting of Christ in the wilderness ("When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left [Jesus] until an opportune time," Luke 4:13. If the two were merged, how could the devil leave Christ?), and also by the afore cited passage from 1 John 1:15.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 10. How do you delineate between "sin" and "error".

    11. Did Christ humble Himself before men? It seems clear that He humbled Himself toward the disciples, most notably by washing their feet. He further exhorts the disciples to show humility to one another and that this ethic will differentiate them from the rest of the world. (Matthew 2-:20-28; 18:4-5). Christ humbled Himself toward someone surely (Phillipians 2:6-8), and the character of not just His death, but certainly His life indicate to me that humility was to men as well, who He served in spite of being their king.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 12. You conclude that, "Christ's pride in crucifixion is Satanic because it is of his bodily, human existence, not directly related to divine imagination." Once again, I disagree with this statement as well. There is nowhere in the Old Testament that the crucifixion is alluded to more clearly than Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53, which seem to indicate that the excoriation of Christ was holistic rather compartmentalized.

    The figure in Isaiah 53 is commonly referred to as "the suffering servant" precisely because this figure is serving Israel/humanity. "He has borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows." (Isaiah 53:4). "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and by his stripes we are healed." (Isaiah 53:5). This figure has humbled himself before all men, placing his own righteous self in the place of those that deserve judgment. It is my transgressions that merit punishment, yet it was He that bore it. This is humility toward men to an incredible degree, as Paul notes, some might dare to die for a good man, but Christ submitted Himself to sinners for sinners. (Romans 5:7-8).

    In Psalm 22, again the afflictors are mentioned, and they are certainly men and not God. (Psalm 22:6-8). The assault in Psalm 22 is not merely against Christ's body, but against His kingly identity and His divine character.

    In the Letter to the Hebrews, we are told Christ endured the "shame" o the cross so that He might gain "the joy that was set before Him," namely to be "set down at the right hand of the throne of God." (Hebrews 12:2). But where did this shame originate? Not from God, surely, for it is God that heaps upon the Lamb "power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing." (Revelation 5:12). This shame originates from men, who mock Him (Matthew 27:39-44; Psalm 22:7), beat Him (Luke 22:64), and displayed Him naked (Matthew 27:35). This shame undoes the shame in the Garden that prompted Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness (Genesis 3:7).

    Finally, I would ask where in the Scriptures do you find any evidence for distinction between spirit/body/soul? This distinction is Greek in origin, not Hebrew. The Scriptures do not present a picture of humanity that distinguishes between "mind" and "body"; the Image of God is on display in humanity as a whole. This is seen in the metaphor of marriage, which Paul uses as a pictures of Christ's relationship to the church. (Ephesians 5:25-32), which is expounded upon in Revelation where it is shown that those raised in the resurrection are one flesh with God Himself. (Revelation 21:27; 22:4; 19:7-9). In sum, there is in the end no distinction between "body" and "spirit", for all of it together is the image of God which sanctifies it, redeems it, and dwells together with men.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Kevin, here is my response to numbers 1-11. I will respond to #12 in my next comment, hopefully within the next day or two!

    #1.
    I’m not overly concerned with whether the stories in the Bible or allegorical or historical. I believe the Bible was written to promote spirituality, and so what I will focus on is whether I agree with the spirituality that the stories promote. The concept of Christ's Resurrection, I believe is superfluous and a spiritual distraction. As Matthew 18:20 states "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." I agree with Zizek when he says "Holy Ghost is Resurrection already."

    #2.
    I think when Jesus prays “Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done”, it is making it clear that the crucifixion is aligned with God’s will. I agree God is not directly responsible, but it is a sacrifice in the sense that God did not “remove the cup.”

    #3, #8, #9.
    I believe that Satan, as ruler of this world (John 12:31), is never fully absent, even though we may succeed at times in suppressing him. In my understanding, the story of Satan tempting Jesus in the desert is about an internal struggle against the temptation of “easy living”, where the focus is on one’s body, one’s social status, and one’s power, rather than on God. Satan personifies these temptations, and when Jesus tells Satan “Get thee hence” (Matthew 4:10) he has successfully supressed these internal drives.

    #4, #10
    Genesis 1:2 says “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” Then Genesis 1:5 “God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.”
    I don’t think Yeats is intending a negative connotation to darkness, necessarily, except maybe only in contrast to the negative connotation that most of his readers will have to darkness. “Good” and “bad” are part of the moralism that Blake sees as idolatry, writing
    “Without Contraries is no progression. Attraction and Repulsion, Reason and Energy, Love and Hate, are necessary to Human existence. From these contraries spring what the religious call Good and Evil. [What the religious call] Good is the passive that obeys Reason. [What the religious call] Evil is the active springing from Energy.”
    In his “The Last Judgment”, Blake writes “Satan thinks that Sin is displeasing to God he ought to know that Nothing is displeasing to God but Unbelief & Eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil.”

    “Error” concerns our spiritual focus, whereas Sin is simply a concept under the Old Covenant. Paul writes “the strength of sin is the law” (1 Corinthians 15:56), meaning that as long as we operate under the Old Covenant with its focus on laws, we are missing the point of Christ’s coming. Sin is part of the ongoing negotiations between contraries--”Energy vs. Reason, Attraction vs. Repulsion, Love vs. Hate.” Error is the identification of one side of these contraries with holiness, which leads to idolatrous moralism. True Spirituality, personified by Christ, sees beyond contraries and the legalism they create. Blake identifies the two main sources of Error--”Eating of the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil” (identifying one side of a contrary with holiness) and “unbelief” (spiritual apathy).

    #5, #6.
    “Accusation” is a form idolatry, because it worships moralism. As one reviewer of one of my favorite books on Blake put it
    “the greatest trick the devil pulled was not only to convince human-kind that he does not exist, but to be worshiped under the guise of Morality by the theistic adherents of religion and under the guise of Reason by the atheistic adherents of Science.” - http://tryingtoseereality.blogspot.com/2015/12/zac-hassans-review-of-god-of-left.html
    The Pharisees’ error is a misdirected spiritual focus. As Jesus put it “ You are like whitewashed tombs... on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.”

    ReplyDelete
  8. #7, #11.
    In my understanding, washing a traveler’s feet was a common courtesy at the time, as much as giving a friend a ride to the airport or offering something to drink to a visitor would be today. I think Jesus was symbolically communicating to them that he expects them to travel and spread His Gospel. The word “humble” derives from Latin “humus” meaning “ground, soil”. For Blake, this world exists in order that we can understand prophecy. Humility should only be before God, because only in comparison to God should human life be compared to the soil.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think "humility towards people" is precisely what Jesus accuses the pharisees of in Matthew 6:5 -- "for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and. in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."

    Humility towards people inherently becomes about enhancing the other person's perception of you as "a humble person" rather than about the worship of God. The worship of God is an active engagement with His creation, whereas humility towards others falls into a idolatrous moralism. "What the religious call Good is the passive that obeys Reason" in Blake's words. To be clear here, it is perfectly fine to obey Reason in certain situations, but humility towards others associates that kind of obedience to holiness, and that is the problem.

    I disagree with Romans 5:8 that Jesus died for us. I agree with Blake:
    “He acts with honest triumphant pride,
    And this is the cause that Jesus died.
    He did not die with Christian ease,
    Asking pardon of His enemies.
    If He had, Caiaphas would forgive:
    Sneaking submission can always live.”


    Christ died with pride because facing death proudly without fear is the overcoming of Satan’s greatest power over us--”the slavery of belief in nature” (Yeats).

    Yeats’ defense of this argument gets quite theological. Satan “tempts man to lust that he may accuse him, restrain him, make him take morality [or science] for religion, and so absorb him in the delusions of Nature and live in his absorption.” This is a very good description of the “Culture of Narcisism” (Christopher Lasch) that America has become. Morality and science both give us absolutist perscriptions for how to live that cut us off from spirituality. Tori Amos’s song “Crucify” beautifully captures the dichotomy between the two versions of the crucifixion story as she asks “Why do we crucify ourselves? My heart is sick of being in chains.” The moralistic version tells us that Christ’s crucifixion was for our sake, but moralism leaves our heart in chains.

    Christoper Lasch - The Culture of Narcissism
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture_of_Narcissism

    Tori Amos - Crucify https://youtu.be/jhSM1MrNxp0

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeats’ argument:

    “The Image of God in which man was made is the form of the Imagination. This is common to all men and will end by becoming One Form. It will unite all. It will survive all. It will redeem all, saving them from violation or experience and the slavery of belief in nature, in accusation, and in the mental permanence of sin. In a word it saves them from Satan, God of this world. Reason and memory tend also to unite men's personalities into one great Temporary Delusion. This is the great Satan, opposite of the great Saviour. It is negative, imagination only being positive. It is not the final Humanity and Union of all, but the final Limit of Opacity, the aggregate of separateness massed. It is piled-up dust, not the water of life. It coheres by the water of death; fleshly instinct. It is bound by the fire of vegetation; fleshly growth and decay. At the incarnation Christ put on this water and this fire. The one burned the other. He ended by putting them both off. His mother was Law and Nature. His body was Satan. When crucified he was his own destroyer, destroying the Serpent in Himself. This Serpent, Satan, was what was nailed to the tree. This body was destroyed or devoured in three days. This devouring is the meaning of the serpent with his tail in his mouth. Christ's self-sacrifice (or suicide) was the thrusting into death of Satan, and who had become Himself as a result of the Incarnation. It was the eternal putting-off of Reason and Memory and Morality as delusions, that Imagination, Eternal Present, and Forgiveness might survive.
    “The cross was the tree of vegetation, since it was the burning stake at which Satan was consumed. It was Moloch, the Wicker Man of Scandinavia. It was also sensuality. Sex in the body is the cross because it is vegetative division and vegetative transfixture. Lust is fire. It is also the basis of our human imagination which develops from it. Thus lust, seeking to destroy mind and make body everything, unites the sexes bodily, consumes their separateness, and is the basis of that union which is the entrance of mankind into the state called Man. In other words, it is the destruction of the dust-type of separateness, and the release of the Image of God from that dust by the Breath Divine that moved on the waters and made them the source of Unity in the infinitely divided. Thus it made dust water, and water fire, for the waters burned up the divisibility of the Divided, and the Divided ceased to exist as Dust.
    “Thus, to this hour, Satan also, himself the type of Christ by being Christ's mental opposite, tempts man to lust that he may accuse him, restrain him, make him take morality for religion, and so absorb him in the delusions of Nature and live in his absorption. But the Divine element in man does not leave him when he enters into lust, but accompanies his three regions of Head, Heart, and Loins, as the Form of the Fourth accompanied the three men in the furnace. It takes Man in all men into this vegetable fire, and comes out of it with him. Satan also sacrifices himself in the vain attempt to sacrifice others to himself. So he also becomes a Redeemer while still the contrary of the great Self-Sacrificer, and his suicide, with its evil intent, complements the good suicide of the crucifixion. This latter suicide began when God allowed his Image to be of two sexes, and when "Male and Female created he them," whose name was called " Adam " — red earth.
    “Thus as the final unity results from a thousand divisions, so paradox and contradiction create truth.”
    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_works_of_William_Blake,_poetic,_symbolic_and_critical/2/The_Everlasting_Gospel

    ReplyDelete