| John's Index | Greater Emmanuel | Email John |
Mythical Mathematics Pt 1
By John R. Gavazzoni
It is almost universally assumed that one times one equals one. I say, almost, since at least one person questions that assumption, if not absolutely denying its accuracy. I caught a portion on You Tube of Joe Rogan on his show interviewing Terrance Howard, well-known Hollywood actor. Mr. Howard, as much as I could tell, virtually, or absolutely, insisted that what is presumed to be a mathematical truism is, in fact, not true at all. It seemed obvious to me that upon much analysis, Mr. Howard... himself no slouch in the smarts department... had come to the contrary conclusion that one times one equals two. I wasn't in the mood at the time to watch the entire interview, but in that portion that I did watch, Mr. Howard made his position quite clear.Later I happened upon the interview sequel when Rogan... intrigued with Mr. Howard's postulation...invited Eric Weinstein, a physicist, recognized by Joe to be among the smartest people on earth, to hear Terrance out, and offer his comments and possibly a friendly rebuttal. Again, I wasn't up to watching the entire interview, but what I did watch showed Mr. Weinstein while, of course, questioning Terrance's proposition, did treat him and his theory with respect given that Mr. Weinstein is the kind of intellectual who does not shy back from questioning scientific orthodoxy.
The back and forth between the two gentlemen got beyond what I could understand given my sparse scientific education. But I couldn't get away from Mr. Howard's postulation. Though above, I referred to it as a theory, it was not theoretical to him: he was obviously totally convinced, and even passionately so, as expressed by some of his answers to Mr. Weinstein's questioning. Howard came across as a man worth listening to.
Days have gone by since watching a portion of that second interview, and I think, maybe a couple weeks since the first interview, and I haven't been able to quit thinking about how it just might be possible that one times one can equal two. My intuition seemed to tell me there was something about the issue that was of such importance as to give it serious consideration.
That began a process...to borrow from the KJV Bible....of me "happily feel(ing) after" some resolution to the question. Well, science novice that I am, I finally saw something. Suppose, instead of thinking in terms of one times one equaling one, or one times two equaling two, etc., on up the multiplication table, suppose we consider that from the one, is drawn forth another one that is intrinsic to the first one. I'm not talking about dividing the Primal One into two halves, but of there being in the empirical one another of itself, drawn out of itself to equal two who are yet united as one.
When we speak of one times one equals one, we're saying one, one time, equals one. But...as an empirical reality, not just an abstract idea...what if one is not one alone; is never one alone; cannot by the laws of nature remain alone, but rather has within it another of itself which, by its nature, is destined for fulfillment by coming forth out of the Primal One to be its Another, complementary One?
Those of my readership who are biblically-oriented in their thought processes, might at this point think, Eve out of Adam. If so, we're tracking together, but with the need to remember that the Adam/Eve complex of relationship, according to Genesis, was in the image, and according to the likeness of God. Pretty clear, I think: Think carefully what is said of God creating Adam: "And God said, let US create man in OUR image, and according to OUR likeness. So, God created man in His image, male and female created He THEM. Not pretty clear, but actually very clear: the image of God turns out to be, fully revealed, as male and female. The image of God reveals the what, and the who, of God.
This principle of one out of one equaling two... but two in perfect unity... traces to the very ontological unfolding of God Himself. My preferred explanation of divine plurality over and against the concept of trinity, is that God is a Father to Himself as a Son, and a Son to Himself as a Father. Think of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, including in His prayer that He was in the Father, and the Father was in Him. I think my preferred explanation of the plurality of Deity is more parallel to that declaration by our Lord than does the doctrine of the holy trinity.
Out of the Father came the Son: One out of One becoming two, yet united as One God. That Another One within the Primal One is the very radiance of God's glory, the exact Image of His Person. He, the Eternal Word, who was WITH God, was also GOD, having come forth out of God, eternally-begotten. Deity, by eternal-begetal, became a Father and a Son.... a Father to Himself as a Son, and a Son to Himself as a Father. God spoke and What He spoke was with Him and was Him.
This necessitates a Divine reproductive union within God, since God is imaged in the first reproductive couple. As Adam knew His wife, and she bore a son. Based upon the first couple being in the image of, and according to, the likeness of God, likewise, first, Deity knew Itself in holy conjugal union as Gender-complementary, and They brought forth "the Son of His love." (But keep in mind, that "His" must include "Hers" since a father cannot beget without a mother).
Not two Gods, One God in complementary union. Deity has within Its Oneness an Another. God's Oneness is not Aloneness. God is ontologically, inwardly, relational. All communion with God opens to a participation in the relational essence of Deity which is the dynamic within all things. I think that this truth may be at the heart of Jesus being the firstborn of all creation.
Everything about God is according to this principle including the unfolding of His eonian purpose within the created dimension. This is the principle in regard to the church being both the body of Christ and the bride of Christ. Out of the former has come, and continues to come, the latter: out of One is drawn One equaling Two who are One. Limiting ourselves to thinking of one times one equaling one, blocks our perception of how the Being in which we have our being unfolds.
I think Terrance Howard has uncovered something in the field of mathematics that gives us a peek into the Mystery of God. While it might not be the best way of saying it, nevertheless, one times one does equal two when we understand the nature of the Primal One; when we understand that there is another One within the first One which drawn forth equals Two as One. I dare say the scientific community might do well to seriously consider Terrance Howard's postulation, strange as it might seem within the limiting and deceptive context of institutional science's equivalent of the Roman Catholic doctrine of "ex cathedra."
That Great Romance, That Great Love Story, is the theme hidden in plain sight in the progressive revelation within our canonical Bible. When, as Paul wrote, God will become All in all, all shall participate in "the Marriage of the Lamb." But I've left one thing unaddressed. What about the Holy Spirit?
One of Paul's benedictions includes the fellowship/communion of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the very Spirit of that union within God that I have attempted to explain. The Holy Spirit is God: Jesus said, "God is Spirit," but that same Holy Spirit, is identified as "the Spirit of Christ," and "the Spirit of His (God's) Son," "the Spirit of Him Who raised Christ from the dead," which would be the Spirit of the Father, since Jesus was raised up by the glory of the Father, and Paul wrote of Jesus, the Last Adam, as a life-giving Spirit. Every reference is to the same Spirit.
Conceptualizing the wonder of the above as the holy trinity just doesn't cut it. The concept of the trinity presents to the mind a picture of Divine Plurality that hides, more than reveals, how wonderfully Relational God is. The Holy Spirit is the communion of shared Deity within and among God which unites God as One. One Another sharing One Another with One Another. Right out the gate this is imaged by God saying of Adam and Eve that "the two shall be one flesh." A physical image of a spiritual Reality.
Mythical Mathematics, Part Two
[Reading Part One is a necessity for understanding this, Part Two, of our subject]
This part two of mythical mathematics may turn out to be little more than an addendum to part one, but I'll proceed and we'll see how that turns out:
The material universe can be thought of in terms of the infinite and the finite; the immeasurably large vs the infinitesimally small. Science takes to itself the challenge of probing into both the expanse of the large and into its micro-substructure. Paradoxically, the search inwardly into the seemingly infinitesimally small seems to be as endless as the search outwardly into seemingly infinitely large. The former is the primary interest of this study.
Continuing the postulation that there is a sense in which one times one equals two, because the Primal One has within it a complementary One by nature meant to be drawn out of the First to be the Second of the First with both destined to turn toward One Another in passionate union. Deep-diving down into the infinitesimally small to discover the substructure of the infinitely large, I'm convinced we would discover that very dynamic to be the beginning of the material universe in the image of, and according to the likeness of, the expansion, spiritually, of the Family of, and which is, God.
In both dimensions, the spiritual and the material, it is from that passionate union by which the Family of God is birthed, and the universe is created. Not too long ago, a journalist coined the expression, "the God-particle" for what seemed to be what science was zeroing on in its quest for finding what is the source of all materiality, i.e., what is it within all materiality that makes it what it is. The union of the One out of the One is explosively creative, and would be the beginning point of what science has come to call, The Big Bang.
One of my passions has been to explain that the love of God goes far beyond being benignly-nice. The love of, and which is, God is full of gloriously-imaginative passion. (My thanks to Jonathan Mitchell for pointing out that the Greek word for "glory" has within its expanse of meaning, the characteristic of imagination). Imagine God imagining. It's at the very heart of the Divine Purpose. "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath it entered the heart of man what God has prepared for those who love Him." That, from Paul, says essentially what I'm trying to lay out in this study. God has passionately imagined being gloriously good to us beyond what we can imagine.
And, by the way, when Paul wrote, "all that love Him," in that verse, the "all," will turn out to be all mankind, since "we love God because He first loved us." Therefore, since God loves all the world, all the world of mankind will, in due time, love Him. Repeat, for clarity: God loving man is the cause of man loving God, and since God loves us all, we will all end up loving Him.
Love as a noun, needs Another to be love as a verb. God, as love, needs Another to love. He drew out of Himself that Another, the Two united in Divine spiritual coitus by the communion of the Holy Spirit, and then imaged the same in taking Eve out of Adam. It's really true that "it's love that makes the world go round." It keeps going round in the face of the most vicious attacks against it, which only serve to further fuel the fire of Divine Love.
If by any chance, the above proposition gets the attention of anyone in the world of science, I invite you to proceed in your search for the ultimate beginning of all things, to consider how it might be possible that Terrence Howard was right: one times one equals two.
| John's Index | Greater Emmanuel | Email John |
