The Opposite of Faith, Part 2: The Paradox of Certainty

If Anne Lamott and Richard Holloway are right (and I think they are) that the opposite of faith in our post-modern era is certainty,(1) then I discern this paradox, especially in the areas of religion and theology: The more certain I am, the less precise I become.

Religious or theological certainty, as I listen to others, tends to be expressed in either-or statements (the parenthetical declarations, whenever unexpressed, are implied by the speaker).

For example:

“Either the Bible says and means what it plainly says and means (and it does) or it doesn’t (but it does).”

“Either this biblical ‘fact’ pertaining to (fill-in-the-blank) is true, good, and right (and it is) or it isn’t (but it is).”

“Either I am right (and I am) or you are right (but you aren’t).”

The paradox or contradiction in certainty, which, on its surface, seems to be precise, seems to sound exact is that its attainment requires the willful elimination of manifold points of view and multiple layers of meaning, thus, being less precise, less exact, less true to its subject, which…who is God.

To put this another way: If God (and I, by faith, believe that God) is the Creator of all that was, is, and is to be, the Supreme and Ultimate Reality, then it is possible to behold who God is and what God does, though never fully, not through the lens of an either-or certainty, but rather only with the eyes of faith.

 
Footnote:
(1) See my previous blog post, The Opposite of Faith, Part 1, March 29, 2019.