Maybe I just want to continue to pick on Christian music
from the 80s and 90s, but as I sat down to write about providence, the one
thing that kept running through my mind was Michael W. Smith's 1988 release,
"The Hand of Providence".
Here's the truth. The lyrics don't
really say much, and neither "hand" nor "make" are five syllable
words, but I digress...
I'm currently enrolled in a theology class that led me to
read two essays about providence from opposing points of view, yesterday. The thing is, friends, it is so much
"easier" to be a Calvinist.
I'm not one, but it is easier. I understand that there is some degree of
comfort in believing that everything that happens in the world is happening for
the purpose of some greater good, namely the glory of God, and that not only
does God know every detail, but God
is also planning these details, orchestrating them. It takes all of the pressure off. What you ate for breakfast, this
morning? God chose that for you. Which college you attended (or will
attend)? That choice was God's. The job you landed (or didn't)? God did that.
When you got fired? Yep, God was
sitting on the throne cheering your boss on.
When you got really sick? Guess
who had that all planned out. The fact
that you can't have children or that you have lost your children? Don't worry, God's got this. After all, this was what God wanted all along. WAIT!
WHAT? JUST STOP! (and when I can't yell anymore, I'll
whisper... just... stop...)
Something that caught my attention in the essay on the
Calvinistic view was this quote, "God orchestrates attitudes and behaviors
that actually conflict with his moral will but that do so for the greater good
of displaying his glory throughout history" (Boyd, 2009, 37). Does anybody actually believe this? Please, please say, "no". Please tell me that it does not make sense to
you that God would intentionally force people to make decisions that are
contrary to God's moral will in order to bring more glory to Godself, because
last I checked, one of the attributes of God was love, and one of the attributes
of God was not pride.
Maybe this is simply further deconstruction, but I would
like to add, "God is not cruel," to my list of things that God is
not. I know there eventually has to be
some positive reconstruction. I get
it. But can we start with a God who just
isn't mean?
In my lectionary reading, today, I ran across the Scripture
from John 1 where Nathanael asks, "Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" (v. 46, NIV). I thought of
Joseph and his words to his brothers, "You
intended to harm me, but God intended it for good" (Genesis
50:20, NIV). I thought of my sweet
friend who grew up in an abusive home and who stopped to give a complete
stranger absolutely everything in her car that belongs to her toddler son,
yesterday, because the woman's baby didn't have shoes on, and she didn't want
anybody to hurt like that in the cold.
Please don't misunderstand me; I know, firsthand, that God can use
absolutely anything to bring about good.
Kingdom principles are upside-down.
God can use our pain and turn it all on its head, and quite frankly it
feels pretty good to look back on difficult life circumstances and to be able
to say, "Now I see how this will be useful in helping others". But I'm going to dig my heels in and say that
God does not cause pain in order to
create something better, later. We could
choose to partner with God in redemption, without the disasters. In fact, I would venture to say that's what
God intended all along. The world
doesn't work like that, though, and so we find ourselves choosing to partner
with God in redemption, despite the
disasters, because God is good, even when life is hard.
I hope we also remember that God is good
when life is good, too...
L.
Source Cited: Boyd, Gregory A., and Paul R. Eddy. Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment