International Institute of Advanced Studies in Mathematical Theology
TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 3 Oct 2011
Anthony Judge – TRANSCEND Media Service
Self-reflexive Global Reframing to Enable Faith-based Governance
Introduction
The strategic importance of faith-based governance is evident from the conflicts sustained by it as well as by its continuing significance in the politics of dominant superpowers. Despite the claims of science and atheists, adherence to extraordinary world views is increasing, as documented by editors of The Economist, John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge (God Is Back: how the global revival of faith is changing the world, 2009). It is even argued that “God-based thinking” is destroying the economy (Joshua Holland, How Conservative Politicians Wait for God to Fix the Economy, With Frightening Results, AlterNet, 26 September 2011).
The relation of religion to science-based secular world views sustains another form of intractable conflict. It might also be said that the resource problems of the world are the consequence of various understandings of the scriptural injunction to “multiply” (Genesis 1:28).
It is however also evident the extent to which strategic proposals for governance of the complex challenges of society are now promoted with the expectation that all concerned are called upon to take such proposals “on faith” and to “believe” in their positive outcome — despite widespread expressions of concern regarding “breakdown of trust”. This is exemplified in the case of responses to the current financial crisis. Conventional deprecation of “faith” as intangible and nebulous has been radically challenged by the central role of “confidence” and “trust” — usefully understood as synonyms — with respect to the financial system. Collective initiatives of any kind are also now typically formulated in terms of sets of principles and values, which participants are expected to believe, to promote and to embody.
Given the relative lack of impact of inter-faith dialogue on the bloody conflicts with which the world is confronted daily, the strategic argument here is whether the more fundamental differences could not be more productively explored through mathematical theology. This follows from the number-governed manner in which fundamental beliefs tend to be framed by religions and the “higher dimensionality” to which they variously aspire.
The proposal here for an “International Institute of Advanced Studies in Mathematical Theology” is a deliberate provocation. It is a call for a global reframing of the conventional understanding of each of the terms in this well-known institutional pattern of academic activity. This is seen as a means of exploring new ways of enabling the faith-based governance upon which all are now seemingly called to depend.
The purpose here is to explore the range of issues which might determine how such an initiative could be formed (especially in a mathematical sense), what themes it might include, how it might be organized, who might be interested, how it might function, where it might be located, and the like. In a sense such a scoping exercise might itself suffice to stimulate exploration of mathematical theology within other institutional contexts.
The question raised by this presentation is what a variety of others might bring to the table in scoping out the possibility, whether or not there is any commitment to making it a reality. More generally, what is the imaginative initiative that a fruitful interaction between mathematicians and theologians could engender and render sustainable through any adaptive cycle? Perhaps even more intriguing is what might the young imagine that these disciplines would engender — as an attractor within which they in turn could aspire to strive.
Concern with the “divine”, with which theology is conventionally preoccupied, is radically reframed in this exploration in order to encompass that to which people may well attribute the term “divine” in their lives — in which they believe most profoundly, or in which others (including politicians and economists) call upon them to have faith. Can more sophisticated mathematics offer insights into the nature of that engagement with belief and the confidence it offers — as previously discussed (Human Values as Strange Attractors, 1993). Are such insights as relevant to the most spiritual as to those who associate their most profound beliefs with sport, friends, music, gardening, dance, wine, an ideology — or possibly with the exemplars of that world?
PLEASE CONTINUE READING THE PAPER IN THE ORIGINAL – laetusinpraesens.org
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 3 Oct 2011.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: International Institute of Advanced Studies in Mathematical Theology, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.
Personally, I think that the important theological questions that need to be answered are with regards to whether God exists or not; whether humans have the ability to speak to God and to perceive signs and revelations in response, from God; and we need to explore how to apply this science of metaphysics to solving social problems. Cynics hold that we have to bomb nations in order to change how the world does business. I disagree. Education coupled with theology is potent enough of a reality to generate social progress.
Note that the article, in the Conclusion section, states that deity is “totally beyond human ken”. The name of God is ineffable, yet God’s will is knowable. That is the conclusion of Jer 31:31-34. His New Covenant will not be written on stone. Rather, it will be written in our minds and on our hearts, and everyone will arrive at the knowledge of God. This covenant was instituted at the Last Supper, where Christ referred to the cup of wine as the blood of the New Covenant. However, St. Jerome mistranslated that into “New Testament”, thus clouding the meaning of the verse. This translation was then adopted by the Authorized Version (KJV), following Jerome’s Latin Vulgate that was rendered into English in the Douay-Rheims Bible, a few years before it was copied into the Authorized Version. The article errs in stating that deity is unknowable. The author is unfamiliar with the Scripture, and, following modern religions, fails to take into account the teaching of Scripture – throughout the Bible – of signs and revelations from God. The Christian and Moslem teachings follow the Hebrew in that the greatest commandment is to love God.
With respect to the first comment, this is addressed in the Conclusion (http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs10s/maththeo.php#conc) as the second comment recognizes.
With respect to erring regarding the knowability of deity, that conclusion uses the well-documented mathematical challenges of proving the so-called “enormous theorem”, suggesting that the knowability of deity should be compared to that — rather than assuming a degree of simplicity which many would challenge (however erroneously in the views of some). The argument goes further to suggest that both the mathematical enormous theorem and deity as an “enormous theorem” are potentially comparable to the challenge of the hypothetical “enormous strategy” which may be required to address the global problematique. Lack of consensus on the knowability of the latter is the issue which merits attention.
Mr. Judge, I think that the problem of formulating an “enormous strategy” to find Deity-based solutions to the “global problematic” has first to be approached from the perspective of a new Reformation. For example, it is now possible for post-Reformation Protestants and Catholics to read the Scripture in English, German, Spanish, etc. However, having won this ground, I find that Protestants and Catholics, in general, don’t read the Scripture. This makes it possible to install a Church hierarchy that doesn’t promote the precept that Man live on every word of God. First you have to fix that. Then, when the most prominent and public Church commanders instruct their flocks to follow the precepts of the Church founder (the Christ), then it will be possible to enter into a dialogue with Christians regarding Communion with God through the expression of signs and revelations – whether numerologically based, or “synchronicity” based, or of some other form. Most people don’t know how many humans presently dwell on the planet. They don’t understand how much oil the United States consumes compared to the rest of the world. People are simply let to dwell in ignorance, and this stems from the fact that the political system – that governs the leadership of our universities, churches, Intelligence community and corporate realm – is based on relative values. Signs and revelations that are based on invoking the Spirit are based on an absolute value system. That is what Tolkien’s “War of the Ring” boiled down to: A secular society that is bent on maintaining the status quo via a relative value system, where every argument is relegated to a matter of opinion. Gandalf’s return from death represented an absolute truth that was beyond doubt. Christ’s death and resurrection represented the same thing, yet we know that the meaning of this has been diluted, even as modern Christians, in general, shun the study of Scripture, and simply tend to reduce it’s teachings to a purely psychological perspective. The poor of this world are raised like cattle, to provide cheap labor. Note that most Americans are kept ignorant of the basics of healthy nutrition. This is godless cynicism on the loose.
The key phrase in this comment is ” First you have to fix that. Then, when the most prominent and public Church commanders instruct their flocks to follow the precepts of the Church founder”
It has been made clear that competence in “fixing” anything is limited. It has been made clear that the “prominent and public” are as much part of the problem as the solution.
The article was an effort to reframe the “fixing” mindset by a leadership which has lost credibility — especially since there are many competing religions convinced of their righteousness — which interfaith discourse has been unable to address fruitfully.
I will not comment further on this exchange
The paragraph that is noted early in the article regarding the instruction from the Deity to multiply is followed by a paragraph (Ge 1:29,30)that states that man and beast are given plant-based substance for their food. My Study Bible note for these verses states that “People and animals seem to be portrayed as originally vegetarian.” It seems reasonable that if we must obey the first command, then we must obey the next one, too. Of course this will not happen among those cultures who only want to obey the first command, so there is some trickery involved here, it would seem. We Westerners tend to lay heavy criticism on our Moslem brothers betimes, yet there is not much criticism leveled at the Vatican for their pronouncements regarding the “immorality” of artificial birth control. It seems as though Protestants have tired of rebelling against inane pronouncements from that brand of religion. And do I stand alone in my criticism of every religion for failing to bring forth a theology based on invoking the Spirit for signs and revelations? Thank you, Mr. Judge, for bringing this element of theology into view for discussion.