In my faith journey, I have struggled with the concept of the Trinity. Like many other followers of Jesus I suspect, I have lived for many years with questions, even misgivings, about this doctrine. The orthodox teachings of the church I have received over the past 40 or so years are no longer helpful to me. I believe now that the only way we can speak sensibly about our beliefs, and God in particular, is from our human experience. It is our brains that interpret all of our experiences and do so in the context of our personal histories, our prejudices, our environment, our knowledge and intellect as well as our specific predispositions at the time of each experience. All this is subjective but that is the only way, I think we can approach such issues. To speak of ‘revelation’ or some objective knowledge we may think we have been given is still to understand these in the way our brain filters, interprets, and appraises them. It can be no other way. So in this paper I speak of my experience; the experiences I have of the world beyond me, my experiences with other people and the ‘internal’ experiences of personal decision making and self-examination. So I speak of ‘God beyond’ me, ‘God between’ me and others and ‘God within’ me.
As in the title of this paper, I have continued, through this paper to avoid the use of the articles ‘the’ and ‘a’ when referring to God. I have tried to avoid language which points towards the idea of God being a supernatural ‘being’ or some other entity.
Preferring not to use the articles, produces some strange sentences but I do not think this should be frowned upon; after all we are speaking about that which is mystery – ultimate mystery. If we do not link the concept of mystery to God, then we have lost our way and are in danger of becoming dogmatic and maybe even intolerant of insights with which we disagree.
I have used the definite article when using such words as Source and I think this is permissible because words like Source, Sacred, Divine, More, Mystery can be thought of as abstract and not handcuffed to a specific entity even when preceded by the article. I have often given these words a capital letter making them nouns even though some of them are rarely used as such.
I have lapsed into very anthropomorphic language when trying to comment on the ‘activities’ of God beyond, God within and God between, late in the paper. What I am trying to do there is to comment on the ways that God can be experienced, not the nature or essence of God.
Because of the immense amount of baggage that comes with the word God, I am somewhat reluctant to use it at all, however, with the prepositions ‘beyond, within and between’ following it, I think it is nearly permissible. With the use of these prepositions I would hope that at least some of this ‘unwanted’ baggage could be left behind.
If what follows makes me an atheist, so be it. Strictly speaking I would class myself as an a-theist, i.e. one who is not a theist. However, I still say that I believe in God.
What follows is based on the fundamental premise that any concept of God that is born out of religion usually starts with linking God with goodness not evil, with love not hate, with creativity not destruction.
In my church life years ago I was introduced to the idea of the Trinity.
There is God the Father, the creator – the First Person. We worship God as the almighty creator of the universe. There is God the Son, Jesus Christ – the Second Person. Here God is ‘revealed’ in human form. There is God the Spirit, the Holy Spirit – the Third Person. This is God who bestows human gifts and guides us into all truth, reminding us of all that Jesus said and did. Three persons, the Trinity. This, I was told, was the ‘Modal’ way of understanding the Trinity – three modes.
Then it was suggested to me that God had to be a community if God was love. It is not possible to conceive of love except that it is given and received. Hence there needed to be more than one ‘person’ in the Godhead. Love is a community experience.
Then there were the many different metaphors that were summoned to help my understanding. The rose was one. A rose has shape, colour and scent. The rose would not be a rose if it lacked any one. The three aspects go to make up the one rose.
All these have been helpful during my faith journey but they are of little assistance now.
Now, I have no need for a creator. We are always looking for answers to questions about our origins. To say that ‘God created the universe’ and then to think we have answered the question of origins, is no longer helpful to me. That statement just forces the question, ‘Who created God?’ My answer to this question is simply that humans did, or at least we created the concepts we have of God. To talk of the creation of the universe is to get into realms beyond time and space and that is, at present, still a mystery to most of us. I am content with the statement, The Universe self exists and has been there for about 13.8 thousand million years.
I don’t need Jesus to be a Second Person of the Trinity. It would appear that in the early centuries after Jesus there was a strong claim that he was both human and divine, both God and man. To claim that Jesus was God, even in human form, gave rise to another reason to create a doctrine of the Trinity. I don’t need Jesus to be God in order to hear his call and commit my life to follow him.
The Holy Spirit is a different matter for me. The only trouble I have with the Third Person of the orthodox Trinity is that the church has personified the concept and again, put it into concrete dogmas and doctrines. Personifying Spirit limits, restricts, and puts in a box that which cannot be so treated. Spirit is spirit and not a concrete entity – a person. Also the idea that the Holy Spirit comes to us and abides with us is no longer helpful to me.
I think a major purpose in personifying God is to answer questions like: Who do I pray to if God isn’t a person? How can I pray to an abstract? Can I worship God if God is not a person? Can I worship an abstract? Can I love an abstract? Not unreasonable questions!
Discussion of these questions would require other papers. The scope of this paper does not include prayer or worship.
The orthodox Trinity seems to emphasize the away-ness, the separatedness of God. I have been taught that God the Creator is other than and separate from the creation. God is not inherent in it. God the Son, Jesus, had to come to this earth, I have been taught. After his earthly life he left and went away again, back into heaven. The Holy Spirit has to come and abide, I have been told. These were not the only things taught to me but they emphasised the core of the teachings I have been given over the years by the church.
For me, as I have said, this all emphasizes the ‘away-ness’ of God. God is separate, away in some other place, near or far away but in some other realm and there is a great gulf between God and humans that needs to be bridged. All this speaks to me of dualism. I find this unhelpful now.
God beyond, God between and God within – very different, yet in a way, a somewhat similar trinity.
God beyond is that ‘More’ outside me but not distant from me and in a sense not separate from me; inherent in me but in no way limited to me. God beyond is that which keeps me together but keeps everything else together as well. God beyond is the Life Force within all that lives, including me, but not limited to me. Other people, trees, ants, rocks, moon, stars and galaxies, most microbes and bacteria are outside, beyond me. God beyond is God that everything has its being in. The phrase God beyond is appropriate because nearly everything is beyond or outside of me.
God beyond is the source of and the all-pervading creative energy sustaining all that is, whether there be only one or even multiple universes. This energy has been there before and at least for 13.8 thousand million years. It is everywhere in the expanding universe.
An important quote for me from the Christian sacred book is, ‘..for in him we live and move and have our being’. Acts 17:27. I wish to include in the ‘we’ all that is physical, non-physical and abstract, known and unknown, whether within or untethered to time and space.
God is not limited to me, others and everything else that exists. I, others, and everything else have limitations but, for me, God has none. This is God beyond.
God beyond is not God ‘away’ for me. The word ‘beyond’ is meant to convey a limitlessness, outside time and space and all other categories. God beyond is beyond that which is beyond but not distant. ‘Beyond’ is not meant to convey a separateness but the special dimension of everything that is. ‘Beyond’ is meant to convey the ‘bit more’ that makes everything sacred, that gives everything a uniqueness, that enables individuality to emerge but which holds everything together. ‘Beyond’ is meant to convey that which is above, below, inside, outside, surrounding, enabling, participating, stabilizing, changing, establishing, binding, dividing, etc., all that is, including me. God beyond refers to all that is beyond me.
God beyond is what, I think, the Psalmist was pointing to when saying, ‘If I climb up to heaven, thou art there; If I make my bed in Sheol, again I find thee. If I take my flight to the frontiers of the morning or dwell at the limit of the western sea, even there thy hand will meet me ……’ (Psalm 139:7-10)
I can imagine the poetic pictures could be even greater and more inclusive if they were written today. Galaxies, super-novas and the Big Bang as well as the atoms and molecules which temporarily combine to form me may get a mention. Who knows?
And God beyond is sure to be benevolent simply because many thousands of different things needed to have happened in sequence and now be in place, for human life to come into being. It took thousands of millions of years for little me to emerge, for the atoms and molecules that are thousands of millions of years old, but which form me, to come together. What an evolutionary marvel! What a benevolent miracle! If all these thousands of things did not happen in the sequence they did and how they did, I would not be here! This is benevolence par excellence!! Not that it all happened because I was the end result being sought or the purpose for it all happening. Rather it is that I happen to be part of the fortunate end result, maybe the inevitable result of the evolutionary process.
My efforts at thanksgiving are totally inadequate. Remaining speechless is probably far more appropriate. Tears begin to well up when I contemplate it all. Awe and thankfulness are my responses to this mystery.
For me, God beyond can never be thought of as a person. It is far too limiting; far too parochial, far too human, anthropomorphic. Some would want to say, “God is a person but more than a person.” That just doesn’t work for me anymore. For me, that statement is another expression of ‘Your God is too small’.
A major statement of my belief now is, God beyond is a totally limitless benevolent mystery.
Time and space are both a mystery;
God is beyond.
Limitless yet with a history;
God is beyond.
When we think of human millions,
Study galaxies in billions,
When we ponder stars in trillions,
God is beyond.
In nonillions*, yet are living;
God is beyond;
Tiny cells are unforgiving;
God is beyond;
Genes bequeath to us our hist’ry,
Germs attack and give no mercy,
Microscopic – all is mystery;
God is beyond.
Science drives investigations;
God is beyond.
Offers many explanations;
God is beyond.
Gathered facts we list together;
Growth of knowledge – our endeavour;
Much is understood, however
God is beyond.
With our questions we stand silent;
God is beyond.
Overwhelmed, in raw amazement;
God is beyond.
When we contemplate creation;
Honour countless variation;
We are hushed in meditation;
God is beyond.
*A nonillion is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
God within is, in a way, a paradox to what has gone before. Yet it is consistent with it.
As soon as I think of God within I am into the realms of ethics and interpersonal relationships. God within is an expression of my personal relationship with God beyond.
If I live and move and have my being in God and God lives and moves and has being in me, then this announces God within. There is a divine dimension to humanity, my humanity. This is universal and not the possession of just a few. There is a divine dimension of me, you and all that exists.
The paradox, even contradiction exists, in that while I have no control over God beyond, I certainly do have some control over God within. I have little control over my immediate environment, less over the environment further away from me and minuscule control over the larger environment. I liken this to the life of a house fly and the influence it has on the whole earth. Not a great deal! The same can be said of my life and the influence I have beyond my immediate environment even though I am connected to everything. Such is my lack of control regarding God beyond.
However, because of my ability to participate in decision making and thus over my behaviour, I do have at least some control over God within. I can, through my behaviour, return to the universe the benevolence the universe has shown me or I can refuse to do this.
In other words I can, if I decide to, do unto others as I would have them do to me. I can nurture life as my life has been nurtured. I can, as part of an interdependence system, contribute or refuse to contribute. I can act responsibly with regard to all else or I can manipulate, abuse and destroy because it suits me or amuses me; I can regard all else as being there for me without any thought that I also have a responsibility to be there for all else.
Even though God within is within (supported by the comment in John’s Gospel: ‘All that came to be was alive with his life.’ John 1:3.), God beyond intrudes in my life as God within. I don’t mean that the intrusion is from outside. I mean intrusion in terms of making a presence, which is already present, felt. Because I can involve myself in decision making, I can co-operate with this intrusion/influence or work against it. I can let it be exposed or I can keep it suppressed and inoperative.
Instead of the Second Person of the orthodox Trinity, the Jesus Christ phenomenon gives me a picture of complete human cooperation with God within. Jesus Christ is the story of what God within is all about; what God within looks like when continuously exposed, uncovered. This is why I changed the words of one of my sets of lyrics from ‘My God is like Jesus’ to ‘My God is in Jesus’ and in that lyric I try to spell out something of what this looks like in human terms. God within has free reign in Jesus Christ. This is why Jesus is still so central to my beliefs. When I think of God within I immediately think of what Jesus said and did, of how he lived, loved and died.
Jesus, for me, is the historical person around whom many faith statements have been uttered, many of which have been preserved in our sacred book. Many of these were embellished and some were eventually set in concrete church dogma and doctrine. This complex of the historical person together with the faith statements about him evolved into what many of us understand as Jesus Christ. The Jesus of history and the Christ of faith are so entwined now that it is impossible to separate the two. As Greg Jenks, in his book ‘Jesus then and Jesus Now’ says “No critical research will ever succeed in capturing the historical Jesus…” That no longer concerns me. Together they form the complex that calls me to follow. I try to.
This belief about Jesus makes him very available. As the Second Person of the Trinity, who is seated a God’s right hand making intercession for humanity, even metaphorically, is quite unhelpful to me now. Again, it emphasizes ‘away-ness’, separation, dualism.
This is why I dislike the lyrics of traditional Christmas carols so much. They speak of the ‘away’ God making a fleeting visit to earth from who knows where. I wish to speak of the ‘welling up from within’ of God within. In Melbourne, Australia, at one of the meetings at which I lead a discussion on my lyrics, someone said that it was sad that I could not enjoy the poetry and imagery of the meeting of the realms, a coming together of God and man, which they said is championed by the Christmas carols. I said I couldn’t enjoy the poetry because, for me, it was about a fundamentally wrong or non-existent movement. The movement is not a meeting but an exposure: not a ‘coming together’ but a ‘coming out’.
Why do I think that humans are basically good? It is because I believe that God within is inherent in all life – within in a way that human beings can appreciate. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that humans are spontaneously good and concerned for one another. I believe it is the millions of little people who produce this evidence. They keep love alive.
Obviously the potential for both good and bad is present in all of us. The extent to which we allow God within to have influence, our potential for good is enhanced. Power, greed and fear, I believe, are main aspects of life which can corrupt us.
The problem of evil is yet another issue beyond the scope of this paper. Akin to this is the problem of the hopelessness and tragedy in so many lives caused by either nature, by accident of birth, by human ignorance or by human wrong motives and wrong doing.
Returning to the subject at hand however, God within, I suggest is not dependent on any set of beliefs, not especially evident in religious people, not the prior possession of any particular human group or culture, but universally inherent. God within is exposed and expressed when love and compassion are lived. And this is lived out in a million places by millions of people in millions of unreported human encounters. These encounters are sometimes prompted in rebellion to, or in compensation for the behaviour of the powerful, when they behave badly, irresponsibly or corruptly. Many of these encounters of love and compassion, however, also happen quite spontaneously, especially in response to some particular and present human need.
For me, there is another aspect of God within that has nothing to do with ethics or behaviour but has to do with ‘connectedness’.
God within is the personal, individual aspect of God beyond. God within is Source of the ‘glue’ that keeps me together. God beyond is Source of the glue, the energy that keeps neutrons, electrons, positrons, protons, etc. together in the atom; is Source of the ‘glue’ that keeps atoms together in molecules, molecules in compounds, compounds in materials, materials in structures and organisms, structures and organisms in planetary, solar and galaxy systems, etc., etc. God beyond is God within keeping me ‘connected’ within and connected to all else. Scientists may call this glue gravity, magnetism, forces of attraction, etc. For me, the Source of it all is God beyond, active and inherent in everything and as regards me, this is God within.
A major statement of my belief now is, God within is a totally and continuously inherent mystery.
From beginning to each ending
God is within.
Human and divine keep blending;
God is within.
In our coming and our going,
In our learning and our knowing,
As we struggle in our growing
God is within.
When supportive help is needed
God is within.
When our limits are exceeded
God is within.
When life is a hopeless jigsaw,
When we cry we cannot take more,
When downtrodden we survive, for
God is within.
When we cease from being greedy
God is within;
As with Jesus serve the needy
God is within.
When we use our wealth for sharing,
When we stand with those despairing,
When we live our lives in caring
God is within.
When we act with human virtue
God is within.
Strive for fine ideals we value,
God is within.
When we guard and guide each other
With compassion, we uncover
Our true self and we discover
God is within.
God between is very much a Spirit concept for me. I go straight to such concepts as the ‘spirit of Christmas’, abstract but very real, experienced and understood.
We speak quite easily about ‘the spirit of Christmas’ or ‘the spirit of generosity’. Why can’t we think in this way about the spirit of God? What can be more holy than the spirit of reconciliation, the spirit of generosity, the spirit of forgiveness, the spirit of inclusiveness? Why must the spirit of God be personified and thus limited, humanized and put in a box?
God between has something to do with the statement, ‘A group is more than the sum of the individuals who comprise it.’ Something more is present than just the sum of all the individuals.
When God within is uncovered, expressed by one person and interacts with another person then a relationship of love, concern, compassion is created. Love is given and received. There is more at play than just the existence of the two separate individuals. There is a connection, an interplay, a movement back and forth. There is an action, a reaction, a re-reaction, a re-re-reaction and so on. Something is going on between these two people. When this occurs, it is what I mean by God between. God is involved in, is partner to this movement back and forth.
So in the wider community, when justice is done, when reconciliation is achieved, when good laws are passed, when diplomacy triumphs over hostility, when the hungry are fed, when the handicapped are noticed, when corruption is replaced with honesty, etc. etc. God between is evident and experienced.
When joy is shared, when affirmation is voiced and heard, when forgiveness is given and accepted, when encouragement is volunteered and received, when a smile is seen and returned, when lovers are both fulfilled, when …….. something significant then happens between people. When this happens between people it is an expression of God between.
Whenever I visit anyone who is sick and in hospital, I just about always become extremely frustrated at not being able to find a convenient parking spot. So many cars! However, on some patient reflection, I realise this situation is brought about by so many people who must be visiting sick friends or relatives. This is evidence of God within those who are doing the visiting and I hope that both patients and visitors are experiencing God between as the visit continues.
In some ways the relationship between God within and God between is, for me, somewhat akin to the relationship between the Second and Third persons of the orthodox Trinity. John’s Gospel tells us that the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity, would bring to mind all that Jesus, the Second Person of the Trinity, said. John 14:26. In somewhat like manner, God between is that which is experienced when God within is remembered and expressed between people and this for me, as a Christian, has to do with Jesus.
A major statement of my belief now is, God between is a totally and continuously involved mystery.
In community with others
God is between.
Prizing them like sisters, brothers,
God is between.
God involved in human action,
Spark of life in each reaction,
Core of every interaction
God is between.
When we learn to live together
God is between;
Harmonizing with each other,
God is between.
When corruption is deemed loathsome,
When our diff’rences are welcome,
When community is wholesome
God is between.
When equality is central
God is between;
Justice, truth when fundamental
God is between.
When our leaders show they’re honest,
Comp’ny profits when kept modest,
Disadvantaged, when they’re noticed
God is between.
When compassion flows quite freely
God is between;
When we share our love sincerely
God is between.
When we suffer no rejection,
When our strength provides protection,
When in love we make connection
God is between.
(I can’t help but try to put my theological convictions into lyrics for others to sing!)
My beliefs in or about God have to do with a God-dynamic. By that I mean God beyond, God within and God between are always on the ‘move’. God beyond – creating, gluing together, encompassing, God within – influencing, guiding, sustaining, God between – initiating, responding, connecting – are all dynamic, on the move.
This is very anthropomorphic talk and maybe all of this paper is; as such it demonstrates the inadequacy of language. Like Dr. Val Webb’s ‘Catching water in a net’ or trying to be noisy by clapping with one hand, whenever we talk of God we may be talking nonsense. But talk we must!
The statements above about God beyond, God within and God between are not attempted statements about the nature, the substance or the essence of an entity I might call God. The statements are about how I experience, how I perceive, how I relate to, how I respond to the Mystery, the Divine, the Sacred, the More.
With these beliefs in God beyond, God within and God between, it is totally unnecessary, even quite absurd to talk of the intervention of God in this or that event at this or that time and place. If I entertained the interventionist line, it would raise many questions. Why now and here? Why not then and there?
For me, this is all linked to the personification of God with its accompanying limitations. With beliefs that I now have, God is so much part of everything, every time and every place that intervention is something that just doesn’t fit in the picture. Intervention presupposes separate-ness. ‘Involvement’ is the word that makes more sense to me. God is totally involved and inherent so to talk of intervention makes no sense at all.
If all this makes me to be not a Christian, so be it. It certainly does not put me outside the group who would call themselves the followers of Jesus. Not for me anyway! Not that it worries me much what people or I call myself. The quality of my life is what is important.
These beliefs engender in me a reverence for all life, a wonderment at the cosmos, a positive attitude to my fellow humans, a challenge to love and live life the way it was meant to be loved and lived (like Jesus) and most importantly, it compels a rejection and a replacement of the ‘away’ God I have been taught about.
I wish in no way to suggest that, in order to have a reverence for all life, a wonderment at the cosmos, a positive attitude to one’s fellow humans and a challenge to love and live life the way it was meant to be loved and lived, one needs to have the same beliefs about God. All I am saying is, “This works for me at present.”
God beyond is a totally limitless, benevolent mystery.
God within is a totally and continuously inherent mystery.
God between is a totally and continuously involved mystery.
If these comments/ideas/beliefs are more acceptable to you when you omit the word God, that’s fine. I would still want to hold onto the three ideas of mystery as being what I experience and what I think permeates all our existence. We might substitute the words goodness, love or creativity for God. You may wish to substitute others.
I have tried to capture these thoughts/ideas/beliefs in the lyrics below which hopefully might be enjoyed by congregations in church services.
There are no words by which we catch the myst’ry;
Yet still we sing, we praise and we adore;
There are no words in which we hold the history
Of all creation. We just stand in awe.
God is beyond our wildest fantasies;
God is beyond, yet we respond.
God is beyond exotic ecstasies;
God is beyond, yet we respond.
When love is shared and people show compassion,
As Jesus did, once there in Galilee,
When love is shared and given without ration
We show how fully human we can be.
God is between, involved in all events;
God is between, although unseen.
God is between involved in every sense;
God is between, although unseen.
Within our souls, the stirrings of our spirit
Prompt us to try to make all conflict cease;
Within our souls we’re conscious of the merit
Of gentleness, of love, of grace and peace.
God is within to share our human need;
God is within; rejoice therein.
God is within; our life is blest indeed;
God is within; rejoice therein.
God is beyond, between, within – not absent;
Not far away, not on some lofty throne;
God is beyond, between, within so constant;
No gulf to bridge to some angelic zone.
This is Good News; we know that we belong;
For God is love; for God is love.
This is Good News, the everlasting song;
For God is love. Yes! God is love.
Grace and Peace George Stuart October 2014
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.