I am sitting in ST100-systematic theology and we are talking about whether or not God can suffer. For me, this gets at the heart of my earlier questions because while I hear what the great theologians have said and I have a response of my own, I have a hard time seeing how this matters in the grand scheme of things. I see why people want to understand and I see how people could be comforted by the knowledge that God suffers with and for them. However, I think about all the people that walk into the coffee shops where I hang out. I think about how lost many of them are and I think about the conversations I have had with them (when I say lost I mean lost in the sense of the lost sheep or the lost coin; I mean it in the powerfully compassionate way that God means it). The doctrine of God's suffering does not seem like it is going to communicate Christ's sacrifice and God's love to them. It might play a part, but only the warm loving hand of the Father can really communicate that. It is only the bright light of God that will welcome them into the Kingdom and hopefully our faces will reflect a little of that light when people see us and when people speak with us.
So, as I continue to pursue an MDIV degree I will continue to wrestle with whether it is a noble pursuit or simply "puffing myself up." I pray that I will be faithful and that I will follow God's lead in everything I do. I believe this is where I need to be at this point and that is enough confidence for now.
...Wow, what a culture clash. I spoke to my professor about these thoughts. About why this is important in light of the fact that the Gospel is something the simplest person can receive. His response was very valid, but I have had a hard time digesting it. He used an example of a pastor speaking a sermon at a funeral for a young child. How does someone communicate the truth and light of the Gospel in such a situation without addressing if and how God suffers? I don't have any children and I do not presume to be able to understand that level of suffering, but I know when I suffer I am not that concerned with whether God suffers or has suffered or is suffering as much as I am concerned with His compassion and His love. As that pastor I am concerned with how I can communicate that same compassion and that same love. Now I understand that there is a direct connection between suffering and compassion, but whether or not I understand how God suffers does not affect the fact that he does have compassion for any painful situation and it is a compassion that I can receive without the "proper" knowledge of his suffering.
Law, Gospel, and the Great De-Churching
3 hours ago
3 comments:
My friend, the heart that is expressed through your writing is powerful and sincere. I genuinely hope that this discussion is a fruitful one for both of us.
First, a question about process: I realize that self-contradictory statements are the norm for "postmodernity;" however, I hope we can agree that while the existence of these contradictions might be a "fact of life," that doesn't give us the excuse to be intellectually lazy.
Ok, now on to your post. . .
First of all. . from a general perspective, I would like to know exactly how your definition of "sin" relates to other religions. . . if sincerety of the "search" is what is important, then what does the cross signify?
you said: "The doctrine of God's suffering does not seem like it is going to communicate Christ's sacrifice and God's love to them. It might play a part, but only the warm loving hand of the Father can really communicate that."
What does that mean? What is "christ's sacrifice" and how is it to be communicated? . . by someone looking lovingly at a person and saying, "Don't worry about ________, God loves you?". . I don't' think so.
People who have looked into the face of human depravity or those who have been crushed by the "randomness" of life (ie: cancer, natural disater, etc) need more than platitudes. . . they need the reality of the "god who is there" . . .
I think that the teacher who asked about the funeral of the baby was spot on. . .people in that situation need more than others to comfort them, and the reality of the "suffering servant". . and the "one who died in our place" is necessary
You wrote, "There is no higher purpose in the death of a young wife and mother. This wasn't God's plan to better anyone's life. God mourned her death too."
The only people who should be afraid of your thoughts are not only those who care about you, but those who believe in God at all. This God who is powerless is not God at all. . .
In the cross we find God's answer to the pain and suffering in the world. . . He looks down and says that the world is so screwed up that the only answer is that someone has got to die. . . and he looks at Jesus and says it's either you or them.
THAT is not a trite answer. The scandal of the cross legitimates the outratge of the newly widowed husband, or the parent of a lost child. . .
Saying that "It wasn't God's purpose. . or God didn't want that to happen" is equally as trite as saying "Everything works together for Good". . .
The Cross dosen't give us, necessarily, the immediate answers we are looking for. . but it does give us hope.
I have responded to these comments in a regular post.
Post a Comment