Edmund Hillary Sermon                          Taupo                 20 Jan 08

 

OT Reading:                Isaiah 49: 1-7

NT Reading:              John 1:35-42

Sir Edmund Hillary was quoted as saying about religion:

“I’m afraid that after childhood I drifted away from religion.  Although I’m interested in philosophy as such and in many religions, I don’t personally have any deep religious beliefs.  I don’t believe in God in the ordinary sense of God.  I believe that the world is so complex and so remarkable in many ways, the whole universe, that there must be some sort of intelligence behind it all.  But whether that intelligence is the slightest bit interested in some little person down here on earth, I have considerable doubts.”

 

Edmund Hillary was brought up within a Church called the Radiant light.  His father was a strict disciplinarian, and a conscientious objector - his father’s views changing after service in the First World War.  We may speculate whether the young Hillary was put off religion by his childhood experiences.  He would not have been the first child for that to happen to.

 

Once Hillary began mountaineering, it is easy to see how he would soak in the wonder and beauty of the mountains, and have an appreciation of the natural beauty of the world.  Climbing in the mountains in the NZ landscape would evoke awe and wonder.  It is not hard to feel with him an empathy for the natural environment and to sense how remarkable it is.

 

There are many Christians who would have a common belief of this feeling for the natural environment.  Psalm 19, about which I wrote a paper while on Study leave, begins with the verse:

“The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.”

This expresses the sentiment that as we look at the universe, there is something glorious about it. 

 

There is an old argument called the argument from design, which notes how the universe is so intricately put together that there must be a designer behind it.   This argument is not a proof, but it expresses this aspect of wonder and of how we can see the glory of God in the creation. 

 

Edmund Hillary does have a similar reflection about this wonderful world of nature, when he says “there must be some sort of intelligence behind it all”.

 

Now to use the idea of an intelligence behind our world invites a discussion about the nature of the intelligence.  To have an intelligence is to have a mental capacity – a mental capacity that can exercise judgement and has a reasoning ability.  To reason is to provide an explanation to the why questions.  Why is it the case that the universe has this wonderful beauty in it?   Why is it the case that there is something rather than nothing?

 

So the first way to develop this idea of an intelligence behind the world is to say, if there is an intelligence, then we can talk of a mind.  When theists talk of the designer or the intelligence behind the world, we talk of a God who is a creator.  And I suggest to you that an intelligence behind the world invites us to speak of a divine mind, which created the world.  I am not saying the divine mind is the same as the human mind, but there are ways in which we may talk of a divine mind.

 

Now as we think about our world and how it has evolved, we can note that there is suffering and evil in our world.  This seems largely due to how human beings behave to one another, and our inability to co-operate with each other.  There are some theologians who have argued that the presence of evil in our world is the reason why we need a God.  We need a God who will work to overcome in some way the suffering and evil in our world that we human beings inflict on ourselves. 

 

If we believe in an intelligence behind the universe, as divine mind, this mind would exercise reasonable judgements.  The divine mind could evaluate the world and how it is growing and evolving.  If the divine mind can evaluate events and processes, then this creative mind will be able to judge whether things are good or bad. 

 

Now we have to work out whether the intelligence behind the world is good or evil.  The theist would say that on the whole, the divine mind is good, that the created world is by and large a good world.  The theist would say that it is human beings who have mucked it up, and that if the divine mind is good, then we would look for evidence that there are forces of goodness in the created world. 

 

The theist then would make a move in the argument to say that the divine mind is personal, that the divine mind in creating the world is working for the good of the world.  It is of the nature of goodness that it overflows, that it is shared.  Equally it is of the nature of goodness that freedom is connected with creativity.  If the divine mind is creator, and the creation is basically good, then part of that goodness is that those conscious agents in the creation will have the freedom to make their own decisions, and the creator will have to live with that as part of the price of granting freedom. 

 

Let me pause to summarise to this point.

Edmund Hillary has the view there is an intelligence behind the world, but this intelligence is not interested in us personally.  I am suggesting that theists, that is, those who believe in a revealing God will agree with this starting point of an intelligence behind the world.  We would say if there is intelligence there is a mind, and a mind that works for the good of the world.  This intelligence behind the world, if it is good, will grant freedom to human minds to live and act in the world, even at the risk of us making a mess of it.  But the theist would disagree with Sir Ed about no further involvement.  We say that there is an ongoing connection with the world.

 

Is there evidence that we can connect with the divine mind?  Well the people of Israel talked about this through the image of light.  The prophet Isaiah put it that the Hebrew people were to be a light so that the divine mind can work to overcome evil with good.  The Hebrew people were also to be servants.  By that, the prophet means this is not about control, but about bringing light.  

 

Let me draw that out because I suggest it is important.  Parents have a fine line to walk in bringing up our children.  There are particular stages in growing children, when the parents need to be in control.  If the parents are in control, then the child knows what limits are.  A child without limits is a child out of control.  But we don’t want to overdo it.  If we as parents are too controlling, then we stifle the growth of the child.   Just as important as exercising control is the need at certain stages in the development of teenagers for the parents to let go.  We need to back off and let the young person grow into being an adult. 

 

Now if I may use this as an analogy, there are some religions that are into control.  They are very good at instilling in us a moral code and the strict doctrines of the religious law.  In these kinds of religion we are all treated as children.  But inevitably we grow out of such religion.  I am speculating, but I wonder if that is what happened for Edmund Hillary.

 

The apostle Paul put it this way:  “When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned as a child; When I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways.  For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face.”    There is a need for us as Christians to continue to grow and mature in our spirituality, in both our thinking and in our actions.  That is, we are called to live in and be the light.

 

Now there are two more moves in the argument to make.  I have put to you the view that if we believe there is an intelligence behind the world, we can talk of this intelligence as a divine mind, and a divine mind that is interested in the good.  It is the nature of goodness that it is shared, and we can connect with the goodness of the divine mind, by using images of being in the light and being a servant.

 

The first move we can then add is this:

Being in the Light and being a servant is best discovered in community.  It is best discovered in community because it is in being loved that we find what it is to being in the light and to being a servant.  It is in community that we as particular individuals connect with the intelligence behind the universe, and come to find a common purpose between us as individuals, and the purpose of the intelligence behind the universe.

 

The second move is this:

There is a very good example of a connection between ourselves and the divine intelligence.  That example is found in the life and work of Jesus of Nazareth.  He is the model supreme. 

 

To conclude. 

I have put some arguments to develop Edmund Hillary’s thinking about the intelligence behind our world.  I suggest that it is the nature of intelligence for there to be a mind, and for this mind to work for the good, which suggests an ongoing relationship with the creation. 

 

One of the great things about Sir Edmund Hillary was that he did not stop living his life once he had climbed Mt Everest.  Instead of thinking of his own adventures, he began to think of helping and supporting the people who lived around Everest, which is in Nepal.  I think that is what we admire of him – his living for others in simple and humble ways.  He gave back to NZ what it had given him, without being greedy or selfish or in accumulating assets.  In that sense we in the religious community resonate with him about his ethical and humble life. 

 

John Howell