Did Jesus Know He Was God?: Game Theory Approach

James McGrath asked the question of Did Jesus Claim to be God? in a recent post that was quickly followed up by many comments and a helpful response from Doug Chaplin.  The question 'Did Jesus Claim to be God?' might better be phrased as 'Did Jesus Claim Divinity?', or even further 'What did Jesus claim about Himself?'. These are all good questions and the response could obviously be turned into a full 500 page book. I could have tried to engage the debate and completely immerse myself in it, but I thought it might be more interesting, and more fun, to try out some applied mathematics in the world of theological questions. First, I had to make sure I was asking the right question.

I think that a significant yet simple way to phrase the question is 'Did Jesus Know He Was God?', forget what he did or did not claim for just a minute in order to allow this experiment to work, and evoke a way of thinking about what Jesus probably knew about his own divinity.

Game theory can be used this way. It is most often used in economics but it also has been found to work in politics, biology, philosophy, sociology, etc. If it can be used in all these areas of thinking, then why not theology, if only for arguments sake. Essentially, game theory is a formulaic way of finding out what is the most advantageous scenario when players are given a number of choices. Its most basic form, the strategic form, is what I used in the to answer the question 'Did Jesus Know He Was God?'.

I will save you the eyesore of viewing my original MSPaint drawing that looks like a freehand nightmare a pre-schooler might have done and share this more legible chart I developed. (which also resmebles that of an artistically inclined pre-schooler)

If your staring in confusion, please don't give up now, it is really very simple and all based on logic, allow me to explain. The 'game' is to find out which scenario (KNOW indicated by K and DON'T KNOW indicated by DK) will be most advantageous to the players (Jesus v. God). Each player is has only two options, in this case either they know Jesus is God or they don't know Jesus is God.

God, being omniscient, must know that Jesus is divine, represented by the green 3 in the bottom left hand corner. (Number 3 represents the most advantageous scenario to that player, and 0 the lowest). If God does not know it is least advantageous, therefore 0 in the top right corner. Now, the strongest scenario for Jesus (in his humanity) is to know he is God, in the top left corner, where both Jesus and God know Jesus is God. God gets a 2 because it is the second best option in God's favor. It is least advantageous to Jesus if God knows and he doesn't so Jesus gets a 0 in the bottom right.

Leaving only the bottom right corner, where both Jesus and God don't know that Jesus is God, to be the third most advantageous option for both players. However, say that the players make this move in an attempt to be harmonious towards one another, they are then in a sense equal in their knowledge of Jesus' divinity. Here is where it gets interesting.

By way of Nash Equilibrium, the players can decide to change their position after the fact of moving into the harmonious 1, 1. Say Jesus decided that he now actually knows he is God, but God does not know, Jesus receives a 2 and God 0. Jesus wins and game over, however, this is illogical in the situation at hand and therefore is an impossibility. Say that God changes his mind that he now knows Jesus to be God, and Jesus remains not knowing, God receives a 2 and Jesus receives a 3.

Solution: The best possible scenario for each player, by way of Nash Equilibrium, is for God to know Jesus is God and for Jesus to not know. Both players end in the box where they each have no incentive to change; and because God is a good God I am sure you can see why he would want the best for both of them. Of course it can get much more technical, and maybe when I have more time I will try a more elaborate method.

Russia Update 2; A Week with Pushkin

Amidst the ever-living excitement of living in another country, I spent a significant amount of time with the Russian poet Aleksandr Pushkin. His writing is the embodyiment and essence of Russian Literature and is most well known for his verse-novel 'Евгений Онегин'. For Literature class on Tuesday we took a field trip to the well known "Bronze Horseman" monument near the Neva River and St. Issac's Cathedral, where we read and discussed Pushkin's widely read poem 'The Bronze Horseman". It's my understanding that if you go to school in Russia, then you would have had to memorize about 50 lines of the poem, of course these are some of the more patriotic lines and not necessarily the aim of Pushkin's overall critique. Anyone interested in the least of how Russian's lived in the 19th century, should start with these works, one scholar even referenced 'Evgeny Onegin' as an "encyclopedia of Russian life". Reading 'The Bronze Horseman' infront of the Bronze Horseman was an incredible expeirence and helped immensly with fitting all the small details together and bringing it to life for us.

My good friend and fellow blogee decided to take things to the next level when it came to 'Evgeny Onegin', we decided to attend the opera of the same name as composed by Tchaikovsky. It was my very first opera, and I left the Mikhailovsky Theatre more then satisfied, thirsting for my next chance to go to another show. The whole night was filled with eloquence and failing to acheive looking classy enough to belong there. It's too bad I don't have pictures of the sophisticated architeture and me in a plain black t-shirt to really put this into perspectie for you, but use your imagination, think, the two foreign kids who look like they are pretending like they know what to do. I also watched the movie 'Onegin' that came out, in English mind you, in 1999 starring Liv Tyler as Tatiana. The director had a strange twist to it, but it was really well done and set up the dark side of Pushkin in a strange and enjoyable way, although this is only one of the sides to be taken. Here is a painting by 19th c. Russian painter Ilya Repin depicting the famous duel scene between Onegin and his friend Lensky:

Phoenix - 'Lisztomania'

One of the most interesting bands to explode onto the music scene this summer, Phoenix continues to impress me the more and more I listen to their album 'Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix'. Lyrically they are influenced by the 19th century classics and it is nice to hear that someone making music has an appreciation for the History of Western Music, and can put this all to an upbeat-dance tune. 'Lisztomania' is referencing the German musician and composer Franz Liszt who worked alongside Richard Wagner at Bayreuth, where the music video is filmed. Apparently when Liszt would perform, all the German ladies would pack the theatres completely out until there was standing room only, and they would scream and shout his name, much like he was a Beatle or Elvis, which is why Liszt is called the first classical "pop" star, hence 'Lisztomania. In my little research I did on this I found that a movie was made about his life in the '70s, so if anyone has seen it, please let me know!

Download The Tremulance Remix of this song which, in my opinion, is even catchier than the original.

If you know me, then you know I am fond of Nietzsche, and if you know Nietzsche or Wagner, then you know the significance of Bayreuth, that so inspired me on this post. Here is a quote from a young Nietzsche who still admired what Wagner was doing at the time, but is still very applicable for us today who love theatre and the arts.

"It is quite impossible to produce the highest and purest effect of which the art of the theatre is capable without at the same time effecting innovations everywhere, in morality and politics, in education and society.”
- Friedrich Nietzsche. "Richard Wagner in Bayreuth (1876)," in Untimely Meditations, trans. R. J. Hollingdale (Cambridge: CUP, 1997), 210.

Russian Orthodox Reflections

Attending a Russian Orthodox Church service is a particularly unique experience for an observably Westernized Evangelical such as myself. The church I attended was ‘Prince Vladimir Cathedral’, erected in 1789, in St. Petersburg, Russia. Sunday morning service begins at 8 am, but I am thinking that some early morning singing was taking place much before that judging from the amount of people who were already there when I arrived. The first thing that any Westerner will notice, even before the elaborate setting, the icons, or the priests, is that there is nowhere to sit down. Rather, you stand for the entirety of the service. This is no easy task; their services can reach up to three hours if you are an ardent follower of the Orthodox Church. Of course, the church is almost always open and you can go to pray before icons at any time. What a Westernized Evangelical individual might also quickly notice is the amount of singing, praying, distribution of the elements, lighting candles before icons, liturgical readings, etc. is all taking place in different areas of the church at the same time.

I really enjoyed this part about the service. Though I couldn’t understand what anyone was saying, I could appreciate the liveliness of the fervent Orthodox worshippers anxious to get their prayers heard and candles lit. I wasn’t alone in not always understanding what was being said, in fact when it comes to the sermons and liturgical readings given by the priests, no one knows. Sermons and readings are all done in the old Slavic language that is no longer used except for in Orthodox services. But even with not understanding, one must admit that there is a certain beauty about all the songs and service structure that to change it now would be a great loss. I cannot express in words how beautiful the voices that filled the cathedral were. At one point, after the service, I sat at the back and simply enjoyed the sounds and smells that advanced my senses from all corners. Incense had been dispensed, candles were continually being lit, and the picture this paints in sync with voices of worship, priests going about rituals, and old ladies crossing themselves a hundred times over, is one of simple beauty.

I cannot say for certain at this point whether or not I would be up for standing another 2 or 3 hours at the early hour of 8 am, but I can certainly say that I thoroughly enjoyed my experience at the Orthodox Church. Matters of theology and ecclesiology are a discussion for another time. If they found out a heretic like me was at their church they might try to burn me at the stake the next time I try to get a peek inside!

Culture Shock: Hardcore/Punk Rock is 'Extremist'

Last Monday, a band from Texas called 'Die Young' was supposed to be playing a show here in St. Petersburg. Amazing dedication for a band like that to make the incredibly diffeicult trip into Russia to play a small club show for about 30 or 40 kids. But instead of getting to play their approx. 30-40 min. set, 50 police and 10 high ranking officers showed up before the show could start and shut the whole show down. Upon hearing this I was shocked. I knew who this band was, had met the guys a couple times, seen them play at a local youth center, and played with them when I was in high school. These guys, though controversial, have a positive message of tolerance, social justice, the power of freedom in speech, and thoughfulness towards all political and social matters. Four boys from Texas who love music, and even more their fans, had been classified as to 'extremist' by the law enforcement here to play to even a small crowd. Please read the article here from 'The St. Petersburg Times'. As someone who is somewhat involved with the music scene back home, I cannot even imagine this sort of reaction taking place. If this ever did happen in Canada, it would be a sure sign of times changing, but here it is put up with on a regular basis and one must commend those kids who stay dedicated enough to put on shows for touring bands even at the risk of being raided by 60 cops.

It's Mickey Marvel!

On August 31st I read the worldview shattering news that Marvel had sold to Disney. Needless to say, it has been a very trying and heavy week since. I can't help myself from forseeing what terrible destruction this will inevitably bring into the Marvel universe, and more importantly the whole medium of 'comic book' in general. The argueably biggest name in comic-books, of which I have been a somewhat regular follower of the past three years, is now owned by the same name that brings us 'The Lion King'. Don't get me wrong, it's a great movie, but the message and story-telling tactis are miles away from that of beloved Marvel characters like 'Deadpool' and 'The Punisher'. It seems to me that these characters will either have had comple make-overs, been pushed to a corner for short side stories, or forgotten all-together. Marvel's unique way to tell story while conveying important messages about politics, psychology, and life will become lost arts. All due to the large $4bn that Marvel sold for (a company of 300 employee's mind you). I predict to see 'Marvel vs. Disney' coming out on the Wii within two years time and a new saturday morning cartoon where 'Goof troop' is always hanging with the 'X-men' trying to look cool.