Good God?

 


Good God?

It turned out to be one of the better Bible studies. A group meets, mid-week, before the midday Holy Communion service at an ancient Anglican church, in a coastal village near where I live. It is lively, relaxed, well-facilitated and collectively comfortable enough to ask questions, query responses, and always, challenge BS (especially, religious BS) in anyone’s “answers”.

So as we tucked into what, I guess, is a pretty standard (and somewhat well-worn) text in the current catastrophe that is global news, right now (and, particularly, in the Holy Land [sic]): 2 Chron 7: 12-14; 12 Then the Lord appeared to Solomon in the night and said to him: ‘I have heard your prayer, and have chosen this place for myself as a house of sacrifice. 13 When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command the locust to devour the land, or send pestilence among my people, 14 if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, pray, seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

I’ll skip the inevitable discussion about humbling, praying, seeking and turning, along with the shoal of personal-to-Palestine red herrings that swirled around the group, and focus on a question raised by a participant - most familiar with the Bible and firm in faith – who, in essence, queried the kind of God who would inflict on a people drought, locust infestation (and consequent famine), along with plague for good measure.

This is the kind of brave question that everyone wants to ask, right, but, in far too many “Bible Studies”, folks are too scared to posit.



It’s the kind of question the late Rachel Held-Evans posed as a young Christian and recounts in the introduction to her book on Bible study, Inspired (Nelson Books, 2018). She writes,

“The more I learned about Scripture, [my professors] said, the more confident I would grow in my faith and the better I would be at answering the world’s questions.

But their assurances, however sincerely intended, proved empty when, as a young adult, I started asking those questions for myself. Positions I’d been told were clearly “biblical” – young earth creationism, restrictions on women’s roles in the home and church, the certainty of hell for all non-believers – grew muddier in the midst of lived experience, and the more time I spent seeking clarity from Scripture, the more problems I uncovered…

How could we insist the Bible is morally superior to every other religious text when the book of Deuteronomy calls for stoning of rebellious children, committing genocide against enemies, enslaving women captured in war (Deut. 20:14-17; 21:18-21)? What business do I have describing as “inerrant” and “infallible” a text that presumes a flat and stationary earth, takes slavery for granted and presupposes patriarchal norms like polygamy…” (Op.cit pp xvi – xvii)

(Dr Brad Jersak)

Our Bible Study questioner was clearly tracking the kind of trouble that traditional dogmas about the Bible cause faithful, Jesus-loving followers. I am not going into all the issues raised here concerning the Bible – what it is, what it means to us, why intelligent, faith-filled people wrestle with it, or how to resolve these matters as others have done a far better job. (I recommend A More Christlike Word by Brad Jersak; The Bible Tells Me So, by Pete Enns; What is The Bible? by Rob Bell and What Do We Do with The Bible? by Richard Rohr – as starting places.)

To the woman’s question about the 2 Chronicles passage, I had the bones of a response that would explain that the Hebrew Bible (that we call the Old Testament) was written long after its time as an oral tradition; was written by (mostly) men, who were people of their age and culture, and certain assumptions lay behind what was written. Like, God is omnipotent, the cause of all things and, above all, on Israel’s side! Like, the Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic Covenants are different. That life was centred on Obedience/Blessing; Rebellion/Punishment. Like, God’s love and grace allows Their people to tell their story/history/religion as they understand it. And, above all, the “Old” Testament needs to be read inside a New Testament Christology whereby, Jesus the Christ is foreshadowed, incarnates and explains what was written beforehand. (See Luke 24:13-49 and John 5:39, for example).

But I didn’t have the opportunity to infiltrate the discussion, so addressed it at home and in an email to a man I trust: Dr Bradley Jersak, via his Q&A page in Christianity Without Religion. I was surprised to get a response very soon afterwards. And this is how he explains it:

"Great question. That passage certainly represents God as the direct cause of temporal blessings and curses. That said, between the lines, we also see that the cause of these blessings and curses is the obedience or disobedience of the people.

That speech says a lot about both the worldview of those who recorded the account, but also, just how the language of "cause" works in normal language. For instance, what causes a wooden chair? (1) The need to sit somewhere, (2) the tree that provided the wood, (3) the tools used to assemble the chair, or (4) the carpenter who built it?  

So too, what caused a disaster such as a tsunami? (1) Human sin? (2) the Laws of nature? (3) the tectonic plates and the wind and the waves? (4) God? 

The big problem with such language is that it's partly right, but it also easily blames God for sin or blames sin for nature, etc. Lots of sloppy finger-pointing going on there!

But on the other hand, aside from the cause, any disaster or blessing can be an occasion to reorient our lives toward God and to open our hands in praise and receptivity to divine grace. 

In all of this, Jesus' brings his own perspective in Matthew 5: 

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Jesus saw his Father as the ultimate cause of all good things, regardless of how we bring good things or bad things on ourselves. For him, the Father is the "first cause" of every good thing (which is different than micro-managing every breeze or sprinkle). And his point is that God is generous and gracious without favoritism. As the Psalmist said, "He is good to ALL and has compassion on ALL that he has made." 

I forwarded this to the people concerned, and they tell me that it was most encouraging.

I hope you are encouraged (and educated!) as well.

Grace and peace to you all. Go well, Wayfarers.


Comments

Popular Posts