Chapter 1 — Implications
The Western assumptions about reality are entirely different than that of Biblical Mysticism.
There is no single Old Testament view of the afterlife. We recognize a great many Old Testament figures lacked the full depth of cosmology that became common among Christians later. This study recounts the rather underdeveloped view of Patriarchs taken from Mesopotamian mythology. We also examined the Hebrews’ exposure to the more developed view of the Egyptians. While the majority of the people continued wallowing in various degrees of idolatry and ignorance, it becomes plain some portion of Hebrew spiritual leadership held a much better understanding.
The political rulers of Israel varied greatly in their views. We are treated in Scripture to the glaring difference between Saul’s primitive religion against David’s Psalms, with soaring lyrical expressions of a much more advanced mystical view. Some Old Testament Scripture is mixed, so that Job himself seems limited to something closer to Mesopotamian views, while the narrator is from a much later time with a clear grasp of the Spirit Realm. In other words, we recognize the Old Testament prophets were granted a much more accurate understanding against the common chatter of figures who never quite got it. It appears that Samuel’s School of the Prophets was a primary source of editing Hebrew Scripture. This group was self-consciously mystical for as long as it lasted, which was at least through the reign of Solomon, a self-consciously mystical king.
Meanwhile, the quintessential image of manhood stands close to King David. While obviously fallen, he remained God’s chosen instrument, granted a full mystical understanding. He was easily the most humble of men, waiting God’s time with patience and endurance for a calling that ended up being far more work than anyone could have expected. Charming and intelligent, he often preferred solitude. He was the sacrificially caring and competent shepherd, a signal man of God, an image utterly missing in Western mythology (emulating His Lord in the 23rd Psalm).
There was nothing of the Germanic view of the perpetual man-child against the saintly image of women. There was no mythology of human equality; people were what they were and context was everything. Women were utterly essential in society, but Scripture pointedly notes there is some indefinable thing women don’t have that requires male leadership in moral and spiritual issues. It’s not a question of blaming Eve and not Adam, but blaming each within their respective capabilities. It’s a Western fallacy to think Paul was saying women were spiritually or morally inferior; they have a different role assigned by God. The Biblical Mystic realizes that the divine necessities of womanhood leave her more likely to misinterpret the moral imperatives, while obviously better at some things than men.
Men are just as sinful, but it’s their appointed duty to lead; the primary weakness of men is letting women lead. Women are not to dominate men, yet cannot resist trying. She’ll despise him if she wins, admire him if she fails — all the more so if he is skillful at parrying her folly. There can be no greater joy in her life than willfully and persistently teaming up with her man. The woman’s mission and calling is not so much literal child rearing as the faithful motherhood of everyone while working alongside her shepherd man. So Paul says women do not teach men, implying more than mere instruction. Men lead in spiritual matters and bear some greater moral clarity consistent with their role at the head of society.
No one claims that the Hebrew tribal society was perfect, but even the churches in Greece were taught to regard themselves as spiritual family and organized primarily as ancient Hebrew clans. The tribal government and social structure was optimal and the primitive, simple life was presumed essential to serving God regardless of your national heritage. You did whatever was necessary to get along with your non-Christian social and legal setting, but within the church, you were first and foremost a tribe of the New Israel. You had church leaders who were priestly (pastors) and kingly (elders), the two primary witnesses to God’s Laws, cooperating in their respective duties with the help of attendants (deacons). While women could not be pastors, they were essential motherly advisers to elders and they could serve fully as deaconesses.
Sexual behavior standards were even more strict than under Moses, yet there is no place in the church for the silly schizophrenia of the modern West. The Hebrew people were much more matter-of-fact about human sexual desires while still quite prudish. Many of the social customs of the Hebrews were the best way to handle very real human tendencies.
We expect sorrow in this fallen realm and maintain the otherworldly focus. Our entire human existence is just a temporary tool unworthy of much concern. The only purpose for living is to reveal God’s truth. We consciously understand that every word or action is a revelation of something. We seek to conform to the moral fabric of Creation with a mystical view clearly alien to our world. Because of our moral clarity, we could sagely advise on human politics, but take no real interest. We have no interest or duty to make the world behave except that small portion God has placed in our hands directly. We observe through mystical eyes and offer to inform; we never nag. Instead, we fully expect to suffer the persecution that arises from human political disadvantage in the face of our unconditionally loyalty to a government outside this world.
Indeed, in our Western world, we few Biblical Mystics are often rather isolated. If we are going to have anything to do with our fellow Christians, blind or otherwise, we can’t demand every last detail of the foregoing image of church. There was precious little in this course about theology and very little about churches and denominations. For the record, there is no serious problem with the current Roman Catholic religion as religions go. So long as you take the mystical approach and find yourself at home in any particular church, stay with it. Be warned that if you say very much, they are likely to object. Steer your own course in your own search for the face of God.
You can give intellectual assent to a lot of things as symbols of something far above the intellect. You can engage a wide variety of ritual practices for your own peace. But you cannot pretend to know God nor His requirements for you without that mystical understanding. Whether you perceive a spiritual birth first, and then go back and rediscover mysticism, or whether you struggle through some effort to discover you belong in mysticism and realize that spiritual connection later, one thing is certain: If you aren’t a mystic, you aren’t following Christ.
