Originally
I was going to stay silent on the blogosphere concerning the tragedy in
Connecticut. The last thing I thought we
needed was a bunch of pastors and wannabe theologians (like myself)
theoretically waxing on why God would allow such a tragedy to happen. As the days progressed though explanations
began to surface that to me seemed contradictory, unbiblical, and even cruel.
First, there was the “free will” argument that goes something like this:
First, there was the “free will” argument that goes something like this:
God will not force us to love
and follow him. We are not his puppets
therefore he allows things like Sandy Hook to happen. Although this is the case it breaks God heart
or as Rob Bell says, “God Cries.”
The problem with this argument is ultimately the buck
still stops with God. In refusing to
intervene during tragedies like Sandy Hook he’s still making a choice. If it were in my power to stop someone from
killing my loved one, what would you think of me if I chose to let the homicide
happen? The same could be said about
catastrophes like Sandy Hook. According
to the “free will” argument it was in God’s power to stop it and he made the
choice not to. So God is still carries
some degree of blame. More than this it
ignores rough Scripture passages like Isaiah
45:7 which says, “ 7 I form light and create darkness,
I make well-being and create calamity, I am the LORD, who does all these
things.”
The
other explanations that floated around the web throws the responsibility back
on us. Here’s a classic variation of
this argument:
Dear
God,
Why do you allow so much
violence in our schools?
Signed,
A Concerned Student
Dear Concerned Student,
I’m not allowed in schools.
God
As if God is some angry bullied middle school kid going
“I’ll show you. You’ll miss me when I’m
gone…” Although pundits like MikeHucakbee offer a somewhat more “refined” version of this argument with some
grains of truth, they still paint an inaccurate picture of God. In her insightful post, blogger Rachel Evans
writes:
God can be wherever God wants to
be. God needs no formal invitation. We couldn’t “systematically remove”
God if we tried. If the incarnation
teaches us anything, it’s that God can be found everywhere: in a cattle trough,
on a throne, among the poor, with the sick, on a donkey, in a fishing boat,
with the junkie, with the prostitute, with the hypocrite, with the forgotten,
in places of power, in places of oppression, in poverty, in wealth, where God’s
name is known, where it is unknown, with our friends, with our enemies, in our
convictions, in our doubts, in life, in death, at the table, on the cross, and
in every kindergarten classroom from Sandy Hook to Shanghai.
I couldn’t agree more.
In the words of the Psalmist, “Psalm 139:7-8 7 Where can I go from your Spirit?
Where can I flee from your presence? 8
If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you
are there.”
The worst thing though about the
“we’ve systematically removed God” explanation is its cruelty. Imagine if you were a parent of one of the
slain, grieving over the corpse of your child.
Here’s what this argument says, “Your child died because God wasn’t
given a formal invitation to his kindergarten classroom.” What would you think of such a God in that
moment?
Ultimately,
all these explanations boil down to one thing: we feel the need to make excuses
for God. Instead of letting God be God,
we feel the need to be his publicists and make him in our own image. Like Job’s friends in the Bible, we think we
can peer behind the curtain and ascertain God’s divine plan forgetting that, “Isaiah
55:9 As the heavens are higher than
the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your
thoughts…” and “Romans 11:33-34 How unsearchable are his judgments and how
inscrutable his ways! 34
"For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” The reasons we do this are many, but the
outcome is the same: we make excuses for God when he never asked us to.
This
being the case, how do we let God be God in the face of tragedies such as Sandy
Hook? We start by both acknowledging the
terrifying, mysterious, and oddly comforting sovereignty of God while at the
same time focusing on those places where God has made himself clearly
known. Let me explain. One does not have to read Scripture long to
be confronted with God’s sovereignty.
The word sovereignty points to the reality that his dominion is total: “he
wills as he chooses and carries out all that he wills, and none can stay his
hand or thwart his plans.[i]”
One does not have to search Scripture real long to see this reality affirmed
again and again. Here’s a sampling:
Proverbs
16:9 9 In his heart a
man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
Proverbs 19:21 21 Many are the plans in a man's
heart, but it is the LORD's purpose that prevails.
Proverbs 21:30 30 There is no wisdom, no insight,
no plan that can succeed against the LORD.
Lamentations 3:37 37 Who can speak and have it
happen if the Lord has not decreed it?
Ecclesiastes 7:14 14 When times are good, be happy;
but when times are bad, consider: God has made the one as well as the other.
Isaiah 45:7 7 I form the light and create
darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these
things.
Lamentations 3:38 38 Is it not from the mouth of the
Most High that both calamities and good things come?[ii]
In these Scriptures we are confronted with the terrifying
and oddly comforting fact that nothing occurs outside God’s decree. It’s terrifying because when we’re faced with
tragedies like Sandy Hook we’re left with the question, “If nothing occurs
outside of God’s sovereignty, then is he really good?” It’s comforting because at least we know that
Sandy Hook didn’t take him by surprise.
Martin
Luther referred to this aspect of God’s sovereignty as the hiddenness of God. In his classic, “The Bondage of the Will,” he
writes:
We must discuss God, or the will
of God, preached, revealed, offered to us, and worshiped by us, in one way, and
God not preached, nor revealed, nor offered to us, nor worshiped by us, in
another way. Wherever God hides himself,
and wills to be unknown to us, there we have no concern.[iii]
What Luther means is that when we talk about God in his sovereignty
we must be careful how we speak. We
acknowledge his sovereign dominion over everything, while at the same time recognizing
our limitations in understanding of how and why calamities like Sandy Hook
occur. In the simplest sense, it means
we stop being God’s publicists. We stop
making excuses for God which remake him in our own image. We stop trying to make up reasons as to why
it occurred. Instead we let God be God
and allow him to speak where he has spoken.
When it comes to tragedies like Sandy Hook and the countless troubles in
our own lives we are often not given a reason.
It is at these points that we must be very careful not to try and peer
behind the curtain to ascertain the mind of God, because unless he chooses to
reveal himself, our explanations will be wrong.
It is
here that we point to where God has made himself known: the life, death, and resurrection
of Jesus Christ. Tullian Tchividjian
writes:
The most vile, treasonous,
darkest moment in the history of the world—the very event that appeared to be the
most brutal defeat and failure—turned out to be the most gloriously life-giving
event in all eternity. The salvation of
the world taking place under the auspices of the most grotesque and tragic
crime in human history.[iv]
Simply put, if God’s plan for salvation culminated in the
death of Christ on the cross, then he is surely present and working out his
salvation even in the midst of something as heinous as Sandy Hook. Gerhard Forde writes:
Since the cross story alone is
their story, they are not driven by the attempt to see through it, but are
drawn into the story… So theologians of
the cross look on all things ‘through suffering and the cross.’ They, in other words, are led by the cross to
look at the trails, the sufferings,
the pangs of conscience, the troubles—and joys—of daily life as God’s doing and
do not try to see through them as
mere accidental problems to be solved by metaphysical adjustment.[v]
In the terms of our current crisis this simply means that
we stop trying to look behind Sandy Hook to discover the reasons why, but
rather understand and believe that even in something as unthinkable as this
tragedy God is still present working his promises to completion. Because of this, when someone asks, “How
could God still be good and allow Sandy Hook to happen?” or “Why did this
happen?” you can say, “I don’t know.
Ultimately God has chosen not to reveal that to us, but let me tell you
what I do know. God showed his love for
us in that while we were his enemies Christ died for us. Therefore, we can cling to that goodness even
in the midst of this tragedy. I know it
hurts, but trust me, God is moving. He
showed that on the cross.”
This
approach to calamities like Sandy Hook is best expressed by a poem/hymn written
by the ever depressed William Cowper. In
it he holds God’s sovereignty and goodness together in beautiful tension. I can think of no better example to finish
this post off with. He writes:
God moves in a mysterious way
His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea
And rides upon the storm.
His wonders to perform;
He plants His footsteps in the sea
And rides upon the storm.
Judge not the Lord by feeble
sense,
But trust Him for His grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.
But trust Him for His grace;
Behind a frowning providence
He hides a smiling face.
Blind unbelief is sure to err
And scan His work in vain;
God is His own interpreter,
And He will make it plain.
And scan His work in vain;
God is His own interpreter,
And He will make it plain.
Ye fearful saints, fresh courage
take;
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings on your head.
The clouds ye so much dread
Are big with mercy and shall break
In blessings on your head.
[i]
Packer, J.I. “Concise Theology” pg 33
[ii]
Scriptures compliments of Jerry Bridges “Trusting God: Even When Life Hurts”
pgs 36 & 51
[iii]
Luther, Martin. “The Bondage of the Will” pg 170
[iv]
Tchividjian, Tullian “Glorious Ruin: how suffering sets you free” pgs 150-151
[v] Forde,
Gehard “On Being a Theologian of the Cross” pg 13
No comments:
Post a Comment