Page 104 - Eclipse of God
P. 104

Religion and Modern Thinking  77

                                                 64
            also expresses itself in his male- femaleness,  is a Gnostic figure,
            which probably is to be traced back ultimately to the  ancient
            Iranian divinity Zurvan (not mentioned, so far as I know, among
            Jung’s numerous references to the history of religions) as that
            out of which the light god and his dark counterpart arose.
               From the standpoint of this basic Gnostic view Jung recasts
            the Jewish and Christian conception of God. In the Old Testa-
            ment the Satan, the “Hinderer,” is only a serving element of God.
            God allows Himself to be represented by Satan, particularly for
            the purpose of “temptation,” that is, in order to actualize man’s
            uttermost power of decision through affliction and despair. Out
            of this God of the Old Testament Jung makes a demiurge who
            is himself half- Satanic. This god then for the sake of his “guilt,”
            the miscarried creation of the world (I now quote literally from
                               65
            Jung’s speech of 1940,  the like of which is nowhere to be found
            in the Gnostic literature to which he refers), “must be subject
            to ritual killing.” By this Jung means the crucifixion of Christ.
            The Trinity, moreover, is enlarged to a Quaternity in which the
            autonomous devil is included as “the fourth.” 66
                                                      67
               These, to be sure, are all, as Jung emphasizes,  “projections
            of psychic events,” “human  spiritual  products to which  one
            may not arrogate any metaphysical validity.” The self seems
            to him the prototype of all monotheistic systems, which are
            here unmasked as hidden Gnosis. But, on the other hand, he
            sees it at the same time as the imago Dei in homine. The soul
                                   68
            must indeed, he says once  in a formulation which so far as I
            know is without analogy in his other statements, have within
            it something which corresponds to the being of God. In any
            case, the self, the bridal unification of good and evil, is elevated
            by him to the throne of the world as the new “Incarnation.” “If
            we should like to know,” he says, “what happens in the case in
            which the idea of God is no longer projected as an autonomous
            essence, then this is the answer of the unconscious soul: the
   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109