Who's In Control?

In our modern, highly technologically advanced age, it is easy to assume self sufficiency and the ability to make our wishes come true. There is an attitude in this age that if an idea sounds good or works on paper, then it should work in real life.

While some humans have always been tempted by such thoughts throughout history (mostly the young, the powerful, the rich), in today’s America and the developed world, it is easier for more people to think this more successfully more of the time, and all the more so as we have moved into climate controlled urban areas that provide readymade food, water, sanitation and other creature comforts.

There’s just one problem.

Groaning in Travail

“We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.”                                                                                                                Romans 8:22

Someone close to me is continually frustrated in his efforts to complete projects. It seems that products designed to accomplish specific tasks are always insufficient for the job. They are made too cheaply, don’t come with the right parts, the instructions are incomplete or nonsensical, fail to last a reasonable length of time—you get the idea.

I have tried to figure out if these things are so bad, why aren’t their more dissatisfied people? Are their needs different than his, so it works for them, but not for his needs? No, because he doesn’t use them (usually) outside their advertised purpose.

Is it a matter of expectation? In other words, are folks just satisfied with mediocrity, and he still has ideals set to a higher standard of performance? Maybe.

Is he just unlucky in the items he chooses to buy, both mechanical and electronic? I doubt it. I don’t know many people who spend more time researching products ahead of time than him.

As I share similar struggles to him at times (I think most of us do.), I try to understand what seems to be the problem.

One thing is likely he expects things to last, and perhaps many people are more comfortable than him with the idea that most things are disposable today.

Another idea is that he has an engineer’s heart and wants/expects things to move/work smoothly to a high degree of perfection, while others just do the best they can and focus on things with a higher priority in their lives.

I’m not issuing value judgments here either way—just trying to look at potential contrasts to see which ones fit best.

Why?

We live in a fallen world. All of us are more affected by various aspects of that fallen state than others, but we each have some key vulnerability(ies). This may be his. But whatever it is for you, me, or him, it is our reminder that there is something better out there, a hope that is calling out to us from the futility of our struggles. Pain, frustration, despair are things that call us to higher possibilities reminding us that this isn’t our true home. C.S. Lewis wrote in The Problem of Pain that “Pain is God’s megaphone, to rouse a deaf world.”

But, as Christians, we would like to think we are roused, so He can put the megaphone away and quit yelling at us. It is like the sleepy high school student, yelling at mom to pipe down with an irritated, “I’m up! I’m up!”

But are we? Will we fall back asleep the moment it’s peaceful and quiet in our contented lives? Or, perhaps God isn’t yelling through a megaphone anymore, and now that we are awake, we see the mess of the world on our own, and we can’t seem to get away from it, because we are still in that world.

Does it really matter which way it is? It is our reality, regardless. So the question is how are we to respond?

Whether it is a continually buggy computer, or a vehicle that makes that horrible rattle that can’t be located, or a boss or colleague that makes work miserable, or a chronic malady hampering our health, we have to deal with it.

I’m not a self-help guru, so I don’t have “three easy steps” or “90 days to a new you.” All I know to do is to talk with the Lord about it, choose what attitude to have (and ask His help to maintain it!), and keep our attention focused on the important things in our lives, not the loudest.

A friend of mine puts it like this:  “Imagine your right hand is Christ and your left is your problems. If you focus on your problems, it is like you hold your left hand in front of your eyes and your right hand at arm’s length, and your problems are big and overwhelming and Christ seems small. If however, you focus on Christ and eternal things, it is like you are holding your right hand in front of your eyes and your left at arm’s length, and now Jesus is revealed to be bigger than your problems, and they, in turn, are cut down to size.”

A little cheesy perhaps, especially to write out, but there is a lot of truth to that.

“For the joy set before Him, Christ endured the cross.” Ok. That is perspective. What problems are in our lives that compare to crucifixion? That is a BIG inconvenience to one’s life (yes, tongue in cheek). Yet, He saw a joy that made that horror endurable. If our microscopic problems are so powerful that our joy is stolen, how pitiful is that joy?

Perhaps we do still need God to use that megaphone after all.

SDG

Walking Wounded

Tonight, I was chatting online with a friend from high school who just made tenure in another state. We were acquaintances in high school, even sitting next to each other in class sometimes, but never were close, so reconnecting at the last reunion and staying in touch with her and her new boyfriend (also a HS friend), has been a joy. She revealed tonight how unhappy her home life had been all those years ago, having to be the parent, and growing up too fast.

She is taking the time to work through the baggage and heal from that and the dissolution of her first marriage several years ago. She seems to have a fairly healthy perspective, and said that what happened was meant to be because it’s helped make her who she is today.

That comment resonated with something in me. It reminded me of the oft-quoted and misquoted Romans 8:28, “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.”

We often make two mistakes with this passage. 1) that it says all things are good, and 2) it works for good for all people.

#1 is wrong because not all things are good. Sin is sin, evil is evil, and their consequences are real pain, real death, real suffering. Yet, God works blessing out of them and redeems them. Does this make the events ‘good’? No. Would it have been better if they hadn’t happened? It is a dangerous thing to play ‘what if?’ It is mere speculation. God doesn’t have a Plan B—His Plan A is so robust, it allows for and corrects for things that are truly bad and evil, so there really isn’t a place for ‘what if?’

It would be easier for us in some respects if we could take refuge in a Plan B Creation—“well, He wanted Eden, but He got this mess instead and He’s making the best of it along with us.” But this is wrong. It makes God too small. The Bible is clear that the Cross was in the blueprints, not the change order, so this must be Plan A.

Doesn’t that make God some form of capricious, morally imperfect, sado-masochistic or something worse? No. Scripture doesn’t leave that option open for us either. His moral purity, holiness, righteousness, and goodness are trumpeted on nearly every page.

What Scripture teaches is that God is a God of Reality. He deals with the good, bad and ugly, and insists we do as well. Scripture is not sugar-coated. That’s what gives it its authenticity and simultaneously makes it so hard to swallow.

If He created it, and knew what was going to happen beforehand and allowed for it, then why not prevent it in the first place? That is the number one question in all of theology. There are many answers and many more attempts at answers. The answer God gives most consistently in Scripture in many ways is the least satisfying of them, but I’ll stick to it for now.

He says, “I am God. I see the big picture and know the end from the beginning. I love you enough to send My Son to redeem you from the crap. I AM good, true, holy, righteous. This is who I Am, and you will need to trust Me, even though it is hard. My character is what it is and that knowledge needs to be enough to carry you through appearances otherwise, and I make no apology for it. Will you love and trust me anyway? I promise to make it worth your while and to go through it with you if you will have Me.”

#2 is a tricky one. He clearly specifies that He works good only for those that love Him, and/or are called according to His purpose (will someday love Him?). He also says elsewhere that He will work against His enemies and defeat them. So He is consistent. In many ways, he works against His enemies to reveal them as such (even to themselves) and to give them a chance to see the futility of their path so they may turn away. Yet, He says He will harden hearts against Him to accomplish His purposes. Yet, even those are responsible to Him for their actions. To address this properly is above my pay grade! Therefore, see God’s perspective in the last paragraph. It applies here too. Not a very touchy-feely answer, but it is real. Since you can’t do much about others being enemies or lovers of God, what will you do about yourself?

Where does all of this leave us? It means we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. We do not know how God is moving behind the scenes in the lives of our students and colleagues (or even our family members!). Are they vessels of mercy or wrath? Dunno. So love them. As some less charitable souls have said, “Let God sort them out.” Yep. That’s about the size of it. In the meantime, love them.

SDG

Overcorrection

I have often found that the truth of an issue often lies somewhere between the extremes, and requires somewhat of a balancing act to avoid straying too far down a path that leads to a completely incorrect understanding of the issues. Furthermore, sometimes when one encounters a person out of balance, it is necessary to pull them to the other side so they can settle into a proper equilibrium among views. The challenge when doing this is avoiding pulling them too far to the other side or letting yourself go too far in the attempt to help them. Let me clarify with an example.

Let’s look at the problem of evil, pain and suffering (EPS)—the hardest single issue facing any worldview. There are a number of perspectives within Christendom about why God allows His people to suffer. Some say that since God works His ultimate plan through all that occurs, then we should not grieve when we have suffering, pain, evil in our lives because God intends it for good. Critics of this view argue that it implies that God is sadistic, and therefore not good. Others say that God is incapable for various reasons of stopping all EPS. Critics say this view denies God’s omnipotence. Still others say that God is completely sovereign, but has also allowed freedom and therefore cannot lift all consequences of sin upon innocent parties without violating the principles of freedom, and so allows some tragedy. This is often viewed as completely unsatisfactory. There are other variations and theories, but I think these cover most of them. They all have some level of problems with them, which is why there is so much debate about the issue.

Personally, I lean towards the last, but with the understanding that it is at best a two dimensional, flat understanding of what is both paradox and mystery. (Deut.29:29) Scripture deliberately leaves this critical question pretty vague, saying basically, trust God because He is holy, righteous, and good, and that He has established justice and it will be carried out completely and satisfactorily in the end. This is difficult for both the skeptic and the thoughtful believer alike to accept, especially in the midst of such times. Yet, repeatedly in Scripture, we see God grieving over EPS, even when He is about to relieve it. The account of Jesus raising Lazarus is a key example of this. He allowed the tragedy of Lazarus’ death, but in His sovereignty restored him to life.

An example of the first view was related by a friend who did college missionary work and stayed with a pastor and his family, which included the couple, their kids and the wife’s mother. The routine was he would get up, play with the young kids until breakfast, join them for breakfast and then go do his missionary work. One morning at breakfast, the wife announced with a smile that the night before her mom had passed to be with the Lord. My friend instantly shared his condolences and apologized for the normal rambunctious antics he’d done earlier in the morning with the children. The wife jumped down his throat, rebuking him for grieving her mother because it was God’s will that she go, and if it was His will, it must be good and therefore grief had no place in their hearts. I fear for this woman and her family and hope that deep psychological wounds did not arise from this attitude, but I am not optimistic.

 If Jesus grieved over both Lazarus’ and His own deaths and tribulations, then I feel very comfortable in doing the same in an appropriate manner. When we have surgery, we take pain medicine post-op because the pain is real—our bodies have been insulted, regardless of whether it was for good or ill. We don’t refuse the medicine and pretend the pain doesn’t exist simply because the surgery was for our benefit. That is foolish and nonsensical—the pain is real and must be dealt with appropriately as a real issue, even though we know it will eventually go away. The same is true for emotional pain. We do have hope, and so the grieving is tempered by it, but the loss is still a real loss.

 I have an acquaintance who is internationally known in Christian circles. In his objection to what he views as the Pollyanna-ish, psychologically disturbing view that we should refuse to grieve because it shows God’s Hand moving in our lives, he attempts to pull people over towards the idea that God is limited, that He is not really sovereign and wishes you well, but is unable to protect you from all wrong. I agree that it is sometimes helpful in convincing people of wrong attitudes or beliefs to present a stronger case than it exists in reality, but it is also incumbent on the convincer to be able to recognize when they are stepping beyond what is acceptable and true doctrine and moving over to an unbiblical extreme. My acquaintance doesn’t just merely argue a view that is beyond typical understandings of the Biblical perspective, he actually believes it and holds to it firmly and vociferously, going so far as to saying that God is not sovereign and there are things He is unable to do. He developed this view in reaction to the Pollyanna view, but in my opinion goes too far with it.

In our academic fields, much the same dynamic occurs—people hold differing views on controversial issues and, in arguing with those of different persuasions, hold their arguments more and more firmly until they wind up at the extreme view out of sheer stubbornness or defensiveness. Logic and reasoned thought no longer reign, but dogma.

Once we lose the teachability of humility, and descend into blind dogmatic insistence, we lose much objectivity and reduce the effectiveness of our authority on the topic. We also tend to lose the ability to discern between primary, secondary and tertiary issues—we make mountains out of molehills.

It is one thing to be emphatic or even dramatic in helping to correct others. It is quite another to over correct, and thus need correcting ourselves.

SDG