PASTOR DAVE’S MUSINGS FROM THE HEARTLAND

July 30, 2023

GOLDEN ELLIPSE

In mathematics, an ellipse is a plane curve surrounding two focal points, such that for all points on the curve, the sum of the two distances to the focal points is a constant.  A circle is a special case where the two focal points are identical.

For many years Leonard Sweet lead “Great Book” discussions for pastors of the North Indiana Conference of the United Methodist Church.  While the books were not always that great, the discussion was.  The continuing education sessions provided an opportunity for Sweet to share his latest talking points.  One that I especially remember is the distinction between the “modern” and the “post-modern” worlds.  Central to the “modern” world was “either/or” thinking.  In today’s post-modern world this has been replaced by “both/and” thinking.  Two competing ideas can both be true even though they might seem to be in conflict.

On the one hand, a circle might be taken to mean “either/or” thinking.  There is only one possible position.  On the other hand, an ellipse might be taken to mean “both/and” thinking.  For any situation there are at least two possible positions that might be taken.  Very often they would seem to be contradictory. The question is which is most appropriate for the particular situation.  If the two focal points of an ellipse represent the two competing positions, then one can determine which is most appropriate by determining where any particular situation lies on the curve.  The focal point closest to the situation is the one which is most appropriate.  However, for many positions on the curve both positions may have some relevance.

Sometimes in doing Euclidean geometry there is no direct way to prove a theorem.  Thus, one uses indirect proof.  This is done by showing that the opposite of the theorem is false.  Therefore, the theorem must be true.  A variation of this logic is a favorite of political thinkers today.  If I can show my position to be correct, it then follows that any contradictory position must be false.  Such logic represents “either/or” thinking rather than “both/and” thinking.  It is trying to think logically in a post-modern world using modern logic.

Up until 451 C.E. there was a great debate in the church about the nature of Jesus.  Some argued that He only gave the appearance of having a body and was not truly human (Docetism).  Others argued that he was not divine but in some fashion was a channel for the divine to speak.  There was much disagreement on just how.  Up until the Council of Calcedon in 451 C.E., it was an “either/or” questions.  The two views were drastically different.  The council gave a “both/and” answer.  Jesus was both human and divine.  He had two natures in one person.

Sometimes in the scriptures we see an emphasis on Jesus’ human side and other times his divine side.  Then there are passages which would seem to be a mixture.  When Jesus says on the cross “I thirst (John 19:28)” or cries out “My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me (Matthew 27:46 & Mark 15:34)?” the focus is on Jesus’ human side.  When He tells one of the thieves “Truly I tell you, today you shall be with me in Paradise (Luke 23:43)” the focus is on His divine side.  Jesus is human and Jesus is divine are the two focal points of the ellipse describing His nature.  Context is a good indication of where on the curve we should look for which nature or a combination of the two is most appropriate.

In the coming weeks I will be looking at how “both/and” thinking might be instructive in looking at the public discourse today.  My article for June 11, “Optimist/Pessimist” was an illustration of “both/and” thinking.

(This is the second in a series of articles about the “Golden Ellipse.”)