Time&Eternity

188 chapter 4
a accentuates the discontinuity and inequality of the two axes, model b
more nearly expresses the correlation and equal reality of the two coordinates.
The discontinuity model standing in the foreground appears to prevent
Torrance from completely exhausting the potential of b. By using
model b and a formulation by Torrance himself, however, one can add a
fourth way of understanding to the three ways just mentioned, namely, one
that describes the meshing of the vertical and horizontal dimensionality in
the Incarnation. I am thus assuming that, as Torrance says, in transcendent
relationship to God, Jesus Christ generates “His own distinctive and continuous
‘space-time track.’” 20 The only way to recognize God the Father is
by following this space-time track. 21 I believe that this space-time line can
be mathematically illustrated using the coordinate model. For this, I use the
complex numerical level. The horizontal axis gives the real numerical values,
and the vertical axis, the imaginary. In this coordinate system, a given
complex number z = a + bi corresponds to a given point with the coordinates
(a,b). 22 This number can be represented by the vector from the origin
(0) up to the marked point (a,b). This vector z has as its absolute value
|z|=√a 2 + b 2 ;
|z| is always a real, positive number. By using different calcu-
lation operations with imaginary numbers, it becomes clear how real and
imaginary parts interact, complete each other, and, as a total entity, represent
a highly real meaning. Understood as a vector in the plane of complex
numbers, the conception of an incarnational space-time line that has a transcendent
relationship to God thus results in real, conceivable meaning. This
model could be added to Torrance’s three. It would have the advantage of
overcoming the dualism of top-bottom. It would not first speak of relation
and then—like Torrance—again move discontinuity into the foreground; it
would instead actually make relation the focal point.
This model would therefore do justice to the thought of differentness
and simultaneous relation: Imaginary 23 and real axes are just as clearly different
as imaginary parts and real parts of a complex number, but, jointly,
they nevertheless form a real unit (in the form of a vector). This model
would furthermore have the advantage of being able to express dynamism,
because one can compute with complex numbers in a way that generates
real numbers and causes complex numbers to look like real (if b = 0) or
imaginary (a = 0) ones. Complexity occurs, so to speak, “in, with, and under”
real and imaginary elements. The complex plane allows the presentation
of all combinations of complex, imaginary, and real numbers on a single
relational level (imaginary numbers lie on the vertical axis, and real ones
on the horizontal). It seems to me that this model is thereby able to overcome
the narrow christological exclusivity that one finds in Torrance. The
numbers that are “only” real do not fall outside of the system, that is, an un-