(I
have found that this analogy is effective in getting the attention and prying
just slightly open the minds of even the most jaded and cynical members of confirmation
classes.)
A
few years ago there was a minor fad over a book called The Magic Eye. The Magic Eye was a collection of
computer-generated images that, at first glance, appear to be an array of
nearly random shapes and often colors.
A more careful examination reveals certain subtly repeated patterns. But the images don’t look like anything
in themselves, except maybe a kind of abstract art. The viewer is supposed to stare at the image and intentionally
let their eyes relax and unfocus, until seeing a dual image. Then comes the “magic” part. After an indefinite period of time,
gradually a three-dimensional image
resolves into view. Instead
of looking at apparently random colors and shapes, you are viewing an unrelated
three-dimensional form. It is
quite striking.
What
happens, I am told, is that the viewer’s brain gradually decodes the 3-d form
embedded in the image. The image
itself, of course, does not change.
It is printed on the page in ink.
What changes is the perception of the viewer, enabling them to see a
form that is initially invisible… but is always there. Something inside the viewer changes,
and a form appears to emerge out of the printed image.
While
this is happening, that is, while we are staring at the page, all we see is the
blurred, dual image. But then, as
the 3-d form starts to resolve, we might even comment, saying, “It’s coming!”
because that’s what the emerging perception feels like. It feels like something that wasn’t
there is now beginning to “arrive;” something is showing up that wasn’t there
before. This is not what is
happening, of course. What is actually
there on the page doesn’t change.
But we describe it this way because it feels like what is on the page is
changing.
No
amount of empirical analysis, no careful deconstruction of the shapes and
colors on the page, will lead an observer to conclude that there is a 3-d form
embedded in them. Maybe, if
informed that such a form is encoded therein, a person might, with the aid of a
computer to do the esoteric math, discover it. But you’d have to be open to the possibility and then
actively looking for it.
My
point is that in order to see the form, the viewer
has to change. And the viewer
perceives this change as a change in the image, interpreting it as something
coming into it.
This
is an analogy for the spiritual life.
The Presence of God in our world is invisible to the casual, superficial
observer. It cannot even be
deduced from a careful analysis of the empirical data. In order to see it, we have to relax
and be present, allowing a subtle shift in our perception. Then the Presence may appear to
emerge. It is perceives as
something that initially appears to be “coming,” even though it has been
embedded/encoded in the world all along.
Not
everyone actually sees the form when they look at a Magic Eye image. Some
folks can’t do it. For them, it
remains a mystery testified to by those who have had the experience. Seeing the form remains aspirational
for them. Or: they can conclude that the seers of the form must be lying,
delusional, superstitious, or mentally ill. Since they can’t see it, and reality is empirical and objectively
verifiable, they can only conclude that the form isn’t real. They might mock those who claim to see
something otherwise invisible, and dismiss the whole Magic Eye thing as a scam.
Of
course, this is the way many simply dismiss God and the spiritual life
altogether. If they can’t see it,
it’s not there.
But
people need to be reminded that that there could be something real out there
that we can’t perceive until something inside of us changes. And when Christians say something like “Come,
Lord Jesus,” they are not necessarily asking for something that is not here to
arrive. But they are asking for
the ability to perceive something that is already here and always has been.
+++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment