Do I hate God?

You know how sometimes a really simple, and basic idea can impact you in an embarrassingly significant way? Oh... um.... neither do I. Okay, yes I do. And this is a tale of just such a scenario.

I've been reading "Bold Love" by Dan Allender. It's a good book so far, but one part has hit me particularly hard. I read his chapter "Taking our hatred out of the closet". It's all about how, even as Christians, we still find ourselves in situations where we hate God. Now, I realize (as does Allender) that hate is a strong word and that it seems completely out of place in this context, but bear with me. (almost typed "bare" with me... um... please don't.) Anyway, Allender suggests that since sin is, in itself, hatred for God, and we still sin, we still hate God. Granted, it's in much lesser frequency and it is resolved by our recognition and repentance much more quickly, but it's still there.

Allender states (my paraphrase here) that sin is a defiant movement, sometimes unintentional and other times very intentional, which refuses to depend on God for His direction and strength. It's the ultimate toddler temper tantrum. Shoving God's hand away in anger and insisting that our way will work much better than his "doo doo head" way. (sorry, couldn't resist) Sounds like hateful rage to me!

I didn't give this chapter too much thought until I got into the first page of the next chapter. It's here that Allender really nails the significance of this realization. He suggests that if sin is just a failure to conform, a mistake to do what is right, then forgiveness is cheap. It may yield appreciation, "Gee thanks God! That's swell!", but not worship. However, if sin is a failure to do what is right AND a deep, insidious energy that desires to eradicate an affronting and meddlesome God from our existence (Mostly Allender's words there), then forgiveness is breathtaking. And there it was... the simple idea with the massive impact, because, well, this blew me away.

Now, obviously in the heart of a Christian a struggle is born at regeneration. Paul describes this struggle as "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak". Basically, we're torn... but as we grow, we desire God and His ways more and more and want less of our own ways. So, it's just occasional rage.

This is a hard thing for me to grasp. Honestly, I've spent most of my Christian life building thought patterns (deep ruts) that consider my sin as "doing wrong", but not really considering too deeply my hatred of God. It takes work for me to process this now... and it's sad and pathetic. Consider a human analogue for God: a powerful world ruler.

Let's say you were to spend some time around the most powerful world ruler ever known... we can debate who that would be, up to this point, but maybe one of the Caesars or something. Anyway, not important. Say you're spending time with them... How do you think they would respond if you were to rebel? To scoff at their guidance? To suggest that they weren't loving because of all the evil going on in their kingdom? To push their hand away? To lash out at, harm, or kill, their close friend or relative? Hmm... I think we'd expect a quick and violent death for most all of these. And what if their response, instead, was mercy, forgiveness, and sacrificial love towards you? That'd be pretty impacting... and so it is with God...except our rebellion is about 1 million times as bad and God's response is 1 million times as unexpected and amazing.

Seriously. The Creator of the universe is going to sacrifice His son for our rebellion against Him? No wonder Paul calls God's plan "foolishness" to the world. It makes no logical sense by human standards. Love so amazing and un-human.. truly does deserve my life and my all.

Contextualized vs. Contaminated

I think that Christians are always being challenged, or at least they should be, to walk the line of being "In the world, but not of the world". Driscoll does a good job of addressing this delicate balance in this brief blog entry.

Since I believe that Christians are most effective, and pretty much always have been, when they are a part of their culture rather than an elite, separatist, sub-culture, I have a hard time getting with so called "Christian" coffee shops and book stores. I mean, first of all, and most obviously, a coffee shop cannot be a Christian... but I do recognize that the intent is that it be a place which is free from all of the worlds evils. But that's exactly what I can't get with. Why? Because I don't feel that it fits with Jesus' pattern of behavior. I mean, Jesus was accused of being a drunkard and a glutton... a friend of hookers and traitors (tax collectors). If Jesus came today do we really believe that he'd spend His time hanging out at Christian bookstores?

Now, that said, I do see value in having access to things like Christian radio stations... it's great to have these kinds of resources to enjoy and be encouraged through... but in moderation. As Driscoll points out, we need to be in tune with the culture around us so that we can be relevant and able to carry on coherent conversations with those around us. But additionally problematic to me is what I perceive as a tendency for Christians to see "worldly" music, movies, parties, or whatever, as "sinful" while they see "Christian" radio and coffee shops as somehow pure and spotless....and THAT is ridiculous.

I guess, for me, it comes down to contextualizing vs. contaminating. What I mean is that I believe the best way to show Jesus to the world is to show them how the gospel applies to their place in life... their situation. This is called "contextualizing the gospel" and it's exactly what Paul had mastered. Read the sermon on Mars Hill. Paul shows the Greeks how the gospel applies to their situation by referencing things familiar to them and by quoting their poets. Some Christians have a problem with contextualiztion, but, as Driscoll points out, the gospel is always contextualized:

Practically, this means doing what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 9:22–23, “I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” The truth is that every ministry is contextualized, the only difference is to which culture and which year of that culture. Everything from pews to chairs, sound systems, projectors, suits, and a printed Bible in the English language are very recent missiogical contextualizations in light of the two thousand years of Christianity.

Now, this is contrasted with contamination. Contamination is what I'd call it when a Christian becomes SO into the world that they abandon the truth of the Bible, compromise the gospel, and embrace the lusts of the world around them. Essentially this means that they replace God with His gifts (idolatry) and find their joy apart from Him.

I think this fear of contamination drives some people to abuse verses like Phil 4:8 to mean that we should disconnect from the world completely for fear of being "soiled". While I do see the value in not immersing myself in sin, because then my mind DOES become saturated, I don't believe that's what this verse means. Focusing on what is pure can often get twisted to mean that we shouldn't listen to "non-Christian" music at all. As if the only place you can find anything of beauty or value is in the Christian sub-culture.

We should be discerning with what we listen to and view, but just the same with "Christian" content. Christians sin and put out inappropriate content. Christians put out heresy. I think Driscoll said this well in his post when he said the following:

"Sadly, a theology of “garbage in, garbage out” remains quite popular but has numerous flaws. First, there is no such thing as a pure culture untainted by sin and sinners, including Christian entertainment, which has had its share of scandalous behavior. One such example is the fact that as I’m writing this blog, the leader of a major Christian television network has publically confessed to adultery. Second, it is uncertain what distinguishes clean “Christian” and unclean “secular” entertainment forms and why Bibleman is so much better than Spiderman."

Again, I think it has to be reiterated that evil comes from the heart. Humankind is humankind and ALL, whether Christian or not, are capable of beauty, and evil. It's just up to us to be able to guard our hearts and minds without extracting ourselves from the culture. After all, we're all called to spread the gospel, and that's hard to do if we're locked away in a compound of Christian culture, inaccessible to the world around us.

As always, these ramblings are more to clarify my own thoughts than anything else, but please feel free to drop me a line to agree, disagree, or discuss.

The problem of evil

I often hear that one of the toughest questions faced by a Christian is “Why does a good and loving God allow evil in the world?” Here’s my suggested answer(s)...

1. God allows us to have freedom. We have the ability to make choices and decisions. As such, man chooses to commit evil. Now, certainly God could judge and punish evildoers right then and there.. but that leads us to the second reason God allows evil.
2. Where should God start? Should He start by judging the most heinous evils and move down from there? Or start small and move up? We’re all evil. We all do evil... so if He were to eradicate evil, he’d have to eradicate mankind. I’m sure the response to this would have something to do with the existence of ‘varying degrees of evil’. So maybe God should stomp out the big evils, but let the others slide. But what’s a big evil? Even our ‘small’ evils can have devastating consequences. A harsh word or lack of love from a parent can help to create a child that grows up to be a serial killer. That ‘small’ evil would have big consequences. (all this is not even considering the fact that God cares about the individual heart and not about the severity of the evil) Really the question of evil must be rephrased to something like “Since I commit evil, how can a good and loving God allow me to live?”. But instead, we like to turn it and make it man-centered. How can God, who is obviously here to cater to our needs, allow extreme evils, which impact us humans negatively, to exist? It comes back to our religiousity and our belief that man is inherently good and that, if not for a few bad apples, our society would be doing pretty well. Unfortunately, sociological studies disprove this. In almost every instance where people are given power over others, they abuse it. It’s our nature. God is perfectly good and perfectly just and if He is to eradicate evil, He must eradicate mankind.
3. Evil allows us to know more about God and about the very existence of true good. Light cannot be known without darkness. By God allowing evil, we are able to see His goodness, grace and mercy more fully.

I really think all three of these points work together, but not alone. For example, if I believe that God allows evil just so we can know His good qualities more fully, then what about Adam and Eve? They wouldn’t have known God fully and God’s creation, which was initially good, would be incapable of representing Him fully. But, because we were allowed freedom of choice, and chose to commit evil, the best available response from God is to allow evil and to demonstrate His love, mercy and grace in spite of that evil.

I can’t help but think that if this played out how many people think it should, it would go something like this:

• A man commits murder, and is vaporized by God. People fear God and try to be good.
• A woman abuses her children, and gets vaporized by God. People fear God more and try to be good.
• A man steals from a charity, and gets vaporized by God. People begin to live their lives in fear, trying to do good.

The problems with this are many. 1) This is not the gospel and it’s not what God wants. God doesn’t want people terrified of Him who try to do good to avoid being zapped. There’s no way people would desire a relationship with this God. They would NOT feel at peace. They would NOT feel safe or protected. They’d feel terrified about what they might do to kindle His wrath. This is similar to the Twilight Zone episode where a town lives in terror under the reign of an omnipotent child who can even read peoples minds.

But again, the biggest problem with this is that evil is done by everyone. In reality, the above example would look more like this:

• A man commits genocide, and is vaporized by God.
• A woman commits murder, and is vaporized by God.
• A man molests a child, and gets vaporized by God.
• A woman abuses her children, and gets vaporized by God.
• A man steals from a charity, and gets vaporized by God.
• A teenager bullies another student, and gets vaporized.
• A woman commits adultery, and gets vaporized.
• A man loses his temper, and hits his wife, and gets vaporized.
• A 14 year old child tells his 10 year old sister she’s stupid, and gets vaporized.

These are all evil, are they not? I mean, they definitely have varying degrees of impact upon other people and society, but they are all a form of evil. So... who should God judge? Where does He start and stop?

Evil is an ongoing, ever present problem that is perpetrated by humankind and which is dealt with by the cross of Christ. We all commit evil, and Jesus fixes it by taking our place when it comes time for God to dole out judgment....because don’t be mistaken, God WILL judge and punish EVERY instance of evil. EVERY instance... He is perfectly holy and just... but He’s also perfectly merciful and gracious and He has given us a way out. That way out is made available by simply acknowledging the evil in our hearts, desiring to turn from that evil, and placing our faith and hope in Jesus to take our place when punishment is due and to change our hearts in a way that helps us to turn and follow Him. That is, in a very simple explanation, the gospel.