Evil on Christmas

An acquaintance was diagnosed with cancer earlier this year. In spite of aggressive treatments, she was steadily declining, but still able to get around and live life somewhat. Saturday was her son’s birthday and they had a party for him, but she was kind of out of it. Her husband gave her morphine for the first time ever that night. In the morning she was worse, so they took her to the hospital. After examining her, the doctors gave her 2-24 hours. She died that afternoon, Christmas day.

Another family that many of my friends know had a 17 year old son with a congenital heart problem and several close calls and near death experiences, which he shared on YouTube one week before Christmas. He also died Christmas day.

Christmas night, I watched the news with my folks to see three homes destroyed by fire, several robberies of some of the few businesses open on Christmas, and various shootings. And on it went.

And on it goes. Day after day.

ADVENTures Before Christmas, Week 2

Each week of Advent has a number of symbolisms, and the following table will be filled as the weeks progress.

Week	Scene	Attitude	People	Action
1st	Journey on a Donkey	Hope	Isaiah/OT Prophets	Expectation/Prophecy
2nd	Bethlehem	Peace	John the Baptist	Annunciation
3rd
4th

Last week I mentioned how Advent starts off in a spirit of penitence. Not only is purple symbolic of royalty, it is symbolic of suffering. Yet, the attitude of this second week of Advent is peace. How do these reconcile?

The Cost of Joy

In Bible Study this week, we looked at John 16: 16-24:

“Jesus went on to say, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.’”

“At this, some of his disciples said to one another, ‘What does he mean by saying, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me,’ and ‘Because I am going to the Father’?’ They kept asking, ‘What does he mean by ‘a little while’? We don’t understand what he is saying.’”

“Jesus saw that they wanted to ask him about this, so he said to them, ‘Are you asking one another what I meant when I said, ‘In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me’? Very truly I tell you, you will weep and mourn while the world rejoices. You will grieve, but your grief will turn to joy. A woman giving birth to a child has pain because her time has come; but when her baby is born she forgets the anguish because of her joy that a child is born into the world. So with you: Now is your time of grief, but I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy. In that day you will no longer ask me anything. Very truly I tell you, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.’”

Here, and throughout Scripture, God seems to bind fast together sorrow, grief and suffering inextricably with joy. It seems to be a divine, spiritual version of “no pain, no gain.” This spiritual truth is particularly troubling for the affluent mind.

Joy is not an emotion; it is an attitude, as state of the mind and heart. It is a promised fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22), just like another popular fruit of the Spirit:  patience. As most of us know, ‘it is a fearful thing to ask the living God for patience.’ That is one prayer He often joyfully answers…by giving us trials that test and stretch our patience. It is very much like a gym workout, and you know it’s working when you can ‘feel the burn.’ If that is what He does for one Spiritual fruit, it stands to reason that He will do similar for the others.

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.

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