Biblical Framework
Charles Clough
Lesson 15
We have introduced a lot of
different topics that flow out of the content of Scripture. The reason this class is structured the way
it is, is because I am concerned that we, as Christians, understand where we
are in our culture. It’s hard to deal
with an opponent that hits you from the darkness and not know where it’s coming
from. We have an English teacher in our
class and I have asked her to share with her some insights from her perspective
as a public school teacher in the classroom.
She has worked with the issue of literature. I have said language is key; God spoke the universe into
existence with language. And wherever
Satan can he always tries to confuse it, he tries to use words wrongly,
basically he’s a liar and liars misuse language. Language is also the vehicle for ideas. Basically what’s going on is an agenda, and it’s a pretty potent
agenda.
Cindy: I have been amazed at the number of things
that fit into everything I learned in my college and graduate studies. I have a Masters in English and we did
extensive literary criticism, and deconstructionism is a pervasive idea in the
world of literary studies. What happens
in the universities eventually trickles down into the high schools and to some
extent the middle schools. American
literary studies are completely fraught with paganism and humanism. You’re probably thinking I don’t remember
American lit classes containing paganism and humanism, but if you look at the
works of many dominant American writers that we study you find this is
true. The reason is that literature
across the board is heavily influenced by world philosophies and sociology. We don’t think of that because we tend to
think of literary studies as being character analysis, looking at the conflict
of the plot in the novel, but that’s just the basis. When you get to the heart of literary studies you’re really
looking at the world view that’s contained in a piece of literature. This is what you do in higher level classes,
so we’re not talking about basic English, we’re talking about classes where you
deal with our most intelligent, gifted children. Literary critics, those who look back on works of literature
analyze text in light of various world views.
For instance, Marxist
critics are totally seeped in sociological theory and look at things in terms
of social construct and the economic basis of everything, looking for Marxist
theory. Feminist criticism is really on
the rise and feminist critics examine the treatment of women in various works
of literature, look at how they’re subjected, what kinds of roles they play in
literature, and obviously the end product is to see that women are downtrodden,
that the patriarchy is the ruling dominance of society and how horrible that
is. In the late 60’s, early 70’s,
deconstructionism began with a Frenchman; the deconstructionists are very
interesting. They attempt to show how
all language basically has no inherent true meaning, it only has meaning that
we give it, and because of that any text will deconstruct itself, it will fall
in upon itself because the meaning of it is relative as to who’s doing the
interpretation. What happens is the heart
of paganism, man creates his own order and meaning in the literature he
produces. It’s ironic because we tend
to look at literature as great works of art, etc., but really they are trying
to validate themselves and give themselves certain meaning. That’s just the root of paganism and humanism.
It’s not just the critics
that do it either. I want to take you
through a brief stint of American writers you’re familiar with. What happens is that even writers hearing
these world views accept them, take them into their own consciousness and produce
literature that conveys all of these ideas? For example, Walt Whitman, at the
heart of most of his poetry is pantheistic ideology where man and nature are
one; Thoreau, Emerson, there were a whole series of transcendentalists, who did
this. Walt Whitman’s greatest work, Song of Myself, is all about praising
humanity and mankind, how wonderful I am.
Jack London who wrote The Call of the
Wild, She Wolf, a
number of books that we think are great adventure stories, but at the heart of
them is Darwinism and the survival of the fittest, how things regress, they go
back to their primordial nature. Ernest
Hemingway considered a wonderful paragon of what America is all about, but the
heart of his text is existentialism, he was part of the “lost generation” that
didn’t know where to go, what was life all about, life has no meaning, what
meaning can we give it, why am I existing.
He wound up committing suicide.
Later texts are even worse, just filled with human fights and how
wonderful that is, and supporting Christianity with Buddhist ideology, it just
gets worse and worse. I had to go back
to the mid 1800’s to find a dominant American writer who had Christian values
at the base of his literature, and that was John Green Whittier and someone
like Harriet Beecher Stowe. Whittier is a poet but Stowe, even in her time, was
a very popular writer, but she’s not read very widely today.
Where am I going with this?
What happens is those of us who are Christian teachers in the public schools
face a dilemma. How can you discuss any
kind of Christian ideology or values when you’re dealing with this
literature? The only thing you can do
is set up something about comparative lit studies and do some comparative
contrasts but even that you’re dealing with the values that the kids bring to
you, unless there’s a Christian student in your classroom you can’t mention
anything because teachers cannot initiate anything in the form of a religious
discussion, a student has to do the initiating. The other side of this is the student themselves, for the
Christian student there’s at least that home base where they’re learning
something but many students have never heard of Jesus Christ, or have no idea
what He is all about or who He really was.
One student, when I was talking about the question of the Holy Grail and
I said something about the cup that Christ was supposed to have drank from at
the Last Supper said “who’s that.” I
said He’s the one who died on the cross, they put nails in His hands, and she
was horrified, she’d never heard of it before.
It blew my mind, and there was nothing I could do unless she said tell
me more. I can’t say “let me tell you
all about it.” What happens to students
like that is you get a continuation in their writing that reflects the whole
fruitless search of trying to find some kind of meaning in life.
Secondly, their writing
reflects valueless characters and plot lines and story ideas, because they
haven’t got any idea as to the difference between right and wrong. You would be amazed, we take the difference
between right and wrong for granted.
There are 13 year old children who really aren’t clear on the fact that
if you copy someone else’s work, that’s cheating, they’re just helping, I’m
just sharing, they have no concept.
Lastly is that there is an intense anger and rebellion toward Christian
values and beliefs because it’s seen as something very confining. I was in a graduate class where a number of
the women were lesbians, and one woman got so angry, we were talking about
Christian values were being subverted in this text, she went on a tirade about
being so sick of Christians…. It’s unbelievable the anger they have. [She puts
two poems on overhead that apparently students wrote] a high school student
that can find no meaning in life and the ultimate conclusion he comes to is you
doom yourself to wasteful thought while the universe ticks on. Obviously there was no one there to tell him
what the reason was. The other one is
more incredible, it’s called The Cure, and it’s obviously a boy who feels he’s
homosexual because it’s sort of the “in” thing to be gay, so he starts with
this little blurb that is taken from a minister’s prayer or sermon or
something, and there’s this “in your face, excuse me preacher,” you can just
hear the attitude as you read it. This
is a teenager in who obviously has some serious issues.
Clough: I hope this was a
sobering example that what we’re talking about here is not theory, don’t kiss
this off. What we’re talking about is
not theory, we’re talking about how the universe runs and what happens when it
malfunctions and how creatures rebel against the Creator, what happens and the
cause/effects. Cindy has shown us an
example, and this is not a professional philosopher writing this. What you want to see is that these are
students who don’t have to be professionals, they’re already bought into the
world view, and they bought into it not because they sat down… and this is how
ideas are translated, these students didn’t buy into this by deliberately
studying a lot of the great authors.
Most of the time it’s just caught in the air, in the environment, and
that’s why we as Christians can catch the viruses of paganism also. So the way
you protect your brains, and your heart, against this kind of stuff is to
interconnect truth. We said one of the
things that Christianity gave the world was systematic theology. Why were those church creeds, like the
Apostle’s Creed, created? It was to systematize thought and tie it
together. So you want to learn how one
Biblical idea is linked to another Biblical idea.
So we are approaching things
as we go through the Bible event by event so that these events become concrete
illustrations and they become anchors in your head. We dealt with creation and how
creation teaches us about God, man and nature.
Now we’re looking at the fall.
We showed the difference historically between how paganism treats evil
and how Christianity treats evil. We
said there are basically two views, the paganism starts out with this
continuum, this impersonal continuum, by that we mean that the Creator/creature
distinction isn’t there, that all of reality is one great mystery and inside
that mystery is God, the gods, the goddesses, man, rocks, animals, plants and
everything else. So even God Himself in
that case, they may use the word G-o-d, but it’s not the God we know from
Scripture. That god is a god who
himself is surrounded by ultimate mystery.
Out of these two world views come different ideas of how evil
started. The pagan answer never gave an
answer for origins because the universe always was there in some form or
another. The same thing happens when we
start looking at the origin of evil.
Ultimately there is no answer, and that’s what we tried to show by
looking at an ancient pagan text and then you can come to modern Darwinianism
which holds that the universe has always been in a state of struggle, there’s
always been suffering, misery, it’s not “blessed is the meek for they shall
inherit the earth,” it’s blessed are the fittest for they shall survive. There’s a totally different ethic involved
in this picture.
But good and evil, good and
evil together, are normal, and something within man is revolted by this, and
this is why the existentialist, these men are furious. One of the things that upsets them is that
ultimately they are made in God’s image and there’s that inside us called
conscience, and the conscience testifies that something’s wrong out there. It’s not right that death, sorrow and
suffering happen. But on this basis
they can’t see any answer. So on their
basis evil always existed and so there always this awful thing. If you really believe this you’ve got a real
problem, talk about despair, this will send you into despair every time. What’s so silly and unnecessarily trivial
among educated people in our generation is that they’re wondering why young
people blow their brains out, can’t understand why teenagers blow their brains
out. It’s probably because they
understand very well where ideas lead, and this isn’t going to be solved by
some government program, this is only solved by the revelation of the truth of
the Word of God. On our basis we want
to be clear as Christians that right at this very point of suffering, sorrow,
evil, and death we are miles and miles apart from the world around us. The world around us has no answer to this,
they laugh at our answer. Our answer is
that there was a fall, an historic fall that occurred at a moment in time, and
that there was a creation in a moment, and between those two points we had
existence without any evil, without any death, without any suffering, and
that’s our argument that existence does not have to be evil existence. That’s
the test case. Of course, in the future
when God creates the new heavens and the new earth it will again be a universe
without evil, suffering and sorrow.
They will be excluded to an eternal junkyard called hell.
The point is that our answer
is radically different. We as Christian collide with the world at a fundamental
point, and this collision is as powerful, as total, and as intensive as the
collision over creation. This is
equally as powerful. We want to note
this basic point, where as Christians we are in a collision course with the
world, there’s no compromise, it’s one answer or it’s the other and there’s
tremendous and powerful ramifications from it.
Ernest Hemingway blew his brains out with a shotgun. Was he just depressed that morning? No, it
goes deeper than that, he bought into his own world view, that’s what
happened. He might have been depressed
that morning but we all have mornings when we’re depressed. The problem is that that day he just went
further on a trend that had developed all through his life.
On page 55 you see a
diagram: A B
x--------------x…………
creation fall
The “A” is the difference
between the creation, the point in time when there was a creation, and the
point in time when evil began. I am not
distinguishing at this point between the fall of Satan and the fall of Adam,
that’s disputed among Christians, but it doesn’t make any difference for the
point I’m making now. The point I’m
making is that those points are separated.
Evil originated after creation was complete, and why do we know
this? What was God’s evaluation of the
universe when it was finished in Genesis?
It was very good, and there was no evil present. Now we have evil present, so how did it get
there? That’s why the Christian answer
is “Responsible Creature-choices that originate evil.”
That leads us into the
problem of suffering and evil. This is
the heart of a fundamental aspect of our faith. This is where we are tested ourselves, in our personal lives as
Christians. This is where the
unbeliever in his fury…Cindy mentioned there’s this antagonism to Christianity.
What’s so peculiar about that is Christianity is if Christianity is a myth, why
should you be bothered by it? It’s the
intensity of the hatred for Christianity that betrays the fact that deep down
they know it’s true. You’re not upset
by something that’s insignificant. If
your dog barks at you you’re not insulted, it’s just a dog, but if somebody comes
up to you and insults you personally, now you’re ticked off. What’s the difference? Because you have been
evaluated by another human being and that hurts. The hatred against Christianity is itself evidence that it’s
being believed.
Let’s look at the
ramifications of this and I think the best way of doing it is to go to Job 38
because this is a classic passage in Scripture, and I want to mention something
that is a habit that you ought to get into if you aren’t already. When you face a problem, such as this kind
of a problem, the origin of evil, instead of going out and speculating on it,
before you do that just back off a minute and ask yourself where in the
Scripture does God deal with this problem?
Let’s watch how He does it, maybe we’ll pick up some tips. The one book in the Scripture that’s known,
even by literate non-Christians, is the book of Job. That is the book
that deals with suffering in the Canon of Scripture. Here’s the question we want to ask.
It’s in the notes on page
56, “In the interval ‘A’, there was existence without evil, something denied in
all forms of paganism. This is not
speculation. It is true history. So the question, then, doesn’t directly
concern creation itself. Rather, it
concerns post-creation history.” And
here’s the question. “Was it ‘right’
for God to have created creatures with responsible choice who, though created
without evil, would certainly originate evil after some interval ‘A’?” That’s
fundamentally the question. Next
paragraph: “God could have created creatures with responsible choice who would
not ever originate evil (everlasting ‘A’).
Angels had choice, but not all of them rebelled with Satan. Men had choice, but one (Jesus) did not
rebel. Heaven and the New Universe
contain responsible creatures without any further origination of evil.” We come to the last sentence of this
paragraph; I’ve tried to funnel the question to make it as tight as I possibly
can, get as precise as we can. “Because
in the Bible evil is limited under God, the question arises why He did not
limit it down to the point of elimination altogether.” If God could limit evil, and He has, why
didn’t He zero it out? Why did He let
it happen?
That fundamentally has been
going on throughout the chapters in the book of Job, why this suffering. He goes back to something that you’ve all
experienced in your personal lives; it’s just part of life. We, human beings in general, can take an
awful lot of suffering and pain if we can just be convinced there’s a purpose
in it. But take away that purpose and a
relatively trivial level of pain will destroy somebody. During the Korean War the communist had
gotten propaganda schemes to a very high finesse level, and one of the
startling things that came out of analysis of the Korean War was what happened
to some of the young men who were trapped in POW camps? What they found was that the communist
interrogators were so skilled at removing hope and meaning from those young
boys that they didn’t have to kill them, our guys would go off into a corner
and in 36 hours they would be dead.
Dead in despair, not wounds, not because they were tortured but because
they had been psychologically psyched out into total meaningless. They went over, rolled up in a little ball
and gave up. They didn’t resist, never thought of escape, never thought of
deception, they gave up because they gave up all hope, there was no meaning
left and when there’s no meaning left you can be knocked off with very little
pain and a very little push.
So the issue here is it’s a
quest for where do we get meaning in the middle of sorrow, suffering and
evil. Very practically, when you look
at a dying baby, or a loved one who is dying of some horrible disease, that’s
what we’re talking about. Does that
have meaning or is that just an accident that’s happening? We want to come to the Scripture and see how
the Scripture answers it and when we do we’re somewhat frustrated, and I want
to deal with that little frustration tonight.
In Job 38 God
intervenes. For 37 chapters Job and his
counselors have cried out for meaning in the middle of their suffering and
sorrow. All kinds of answers have been
suggested. Then God says this: Job
38:2, “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? [3] Now
gird up your loins like a man, and I will ask you, and you instruct Me!” What
kind of an answer is this? Think about
it. This isn’t addressed to a
philosopher sitting in an ivory tower.
This is addressed to a guy that lost his family; this is a guy who just
went into bankruptcy. That’s his
situation. And you might say God has
some nerve coming to him and hitting him with verse 2-3, “gird up your loins
like a man and I’ll ask you, and you instruct Me?” [4] Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth!” and
it goes on, “Who sets it firmness, since you know?” Do you sense a little sarcasm there? In other words, it seems that when we ask the question about the
meaning in life, the meaning in suffering, we get this almost hostile response
by God. How do we explain this
one? He comes up and He says who do you
think you are? And the questions go on
and on, verse 16, “Have you entered into the springs of the sea? Or have you
walked in the recesses of the deep? [17] Have the gates of death been revealed
to you? Or have you seen the gates of deep darkness? [18] Have you understood
the expanse of the earth? Go ahead and
tell Me, if you know all this.” Why
does God do that to this poor, suffering guy?
This is not what you’d find in a Get Well card.
It goes on, Job 39:1, “Do
you know the time the mountain goats give birth? Do you observe the calving of
the deer? [2] Can you count the months they fulfill, or do you know the time
they give birth?” Verse 5, “Who sent
out the wild donkey free?” And it goes on and on and if you look at those
questions God is asking a question about every area of the universe. There’s geological questions, biological
questions, philosophical questions, literary questions, anthropological questions,
bam, bam, bam, bam, like a machine gun, one after another, striking this poor
suffering guy. Why does God come on
like this to this guy? Job 40:2,
another theme you wouldn’t want to see on a Get Well card. “Will the
faultfinder contend with the Almighty? Let him who reproves God answer it.”
Now we have something
happen. You would expect Job to really
get furious at this point, I’m the one that’s suffering here and why are you
coming on to me like that? But notice
what happens, something is happening in the depths of Job’s heart. Job 40:3 “Then Job answered the LORD and said, [4]
Behold, I am insignificant: what can I reply to Thee? I lay my hand on my
mouth. [5] Once I have spoken, and I will not answer; even twice, and I will
add no more.” Then it starts all over
again, verse 6, “Then the LORD answered Job out of the
storm, and said,” and notice the Theophany, the form in which God appears to
Job, it’s a great whirlwind, it’s a storm, it’s a picture of chaos in
life. Here the guy has suffered, he’s
lost his family, he’s lost his finances, he’s lost his health, and there’s this
awful storm and this voice booms out, that he knows is God speaking to
him. Verse 7, “Now gird up your loins
like a man; I will ask you, and you instruct Me.” Lesson two continues.
Where is the mercy and the love in all this? We have to believe it’s there. I’m just leading you through the
Scripture. This is what happened to Job
and we can’t kiss it off. It’s not a
sentimental answer being given here.
God does not come out of the cloud and pat him on the head, which is our
tendency to do in these kinds of situations, we want someone to comfort us, and
frankly this doesn’t sound like much comfort.
Job 40:8, “Will you really
annul My judgment? Will you condemn me
that you may be justified? [9] Or do you have an arm like God, and can you
thunder with a voice like His? [10] Adorn yourself with eminence and dignity;
and clothe yourself with honor and majesty. [11] Pour out the overflowings of
your anger; and look on everyone who is proud, and make him low.” It goes on and on and on, through chapter
40, chapter 41, until we get to chapter 42.
God lightens up a little bit and then Job answers in 42:2 and he said “I
know that Thou canst do all things, and that no purpose of Thine can be
thwarted.” Watch that, because there’s
an answer in here and we want to play with it a little bit until we pull it out
of the text. The answer is right here,
the only answer we’re going to get, and it doesn’t at first glance look at all
like it’s a comforting answer. “I know
that Thou canst do all things, and that no purpose of Thine can be thwarted.
[3] Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge? ‘Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand,
Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. [4] Hear, now, and I will
speak; I will ask you, and you instruct Me. [5] I have heard of Thee by the
hearing of the ear; but now my eye sees Thee; [6] Therefore I retract, and I
repent in dust and ashes.”
Think about what happened in
this encounter. This is a strange
encounter, it’s not something you’d forecast of a perfect counselor. What is going on here between Job and
God? Before we push on further, turn to
a similar passage in Rom. 9. Paul was
grieved when he wrote Rom. 9, and as one scholar said, all the scholars of the
world have been grieving ever since he wrote the chapter. He was a very upset man when he wrote
chapter 9 and he tells you how deeply he’s upset in verse 2. Paul was a Jew and he had a natural bond and
love racially with his fellow Jews, and he said “I have great sorrow and
unceasing grief in my heart. [3] For I wish that I” would go to hell, that’s
the force of what he’s saying here, “I wish that I myself were accursed,
separated from Christ for the sake of my [racial] brethren, my kinsmen
according to the flesh.” He’s in agony, to the point where he actually says I
wish I were in hell rather than see what I’m seeing in my brethren.
He goes on to describe why
this has happened, and the answer that he came up with, somewhat in the same harsh
tradition of the book of Job, verse 14, “What shall we say then? There is no
injustice with God, is there? May it never be! [15] “For He says to Moses, ‘I
will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have
compassion. [16] So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who
runs, but on God who has mercy. [17] For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For
this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My
name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.’ [18] So then He has mercy
on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. [19] You will say to me
then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?’”
And then this strange answer
again, it is an exact mirror of the conversation between God and Job, verse 20,
“On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded
will not say to the molder, ‘Why did you make me thus,’ will it? [21] Or does
the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel
for honorable use, and another for common use?” In verse 22, “What if God, although willing to demonstrate His
wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath
prepared for destruction? [23] And He did so in order that He might make known
the riches of His glory….” etc.
In verse 22-23 you have a
suggested answer, basically the glory of God.
But the question we want to work through and realize that the Scripture
does say this very bluntly, is that God does not see fit to give us a complete
answer, what He’s got going, and we have to deal with that as Christians. Why does God not now give us a complete
answer? Let’s go back and look at
something we learned weeks ago. Here’s
God, here’s man. We were careful to say
God’s attributes have analogs with man; God has sovereignty, holiness, love,
omniscience, and answering to those man has choice, conscience, love, and
knowledge. [blank spot] God has a rational and just answer for what
He does. The problem isn’t that the
answer doesn’t exist. The problem is
where it exists. It’s the location of
the answer. Unfortunately for us the
whole answer isn’t located down in the creation. It’s located up here in God Himself, and He has pieces of this
answer come down in the form of revelation here and there about His
character. But the whole answer hasn’t
come yet.
Notice two things about this
that are very important, that set the Bible over against all other
positions. One is that there is an
answer after all. In the existentialist
position there aren’t any answers. What
has happened there is by blotting man out of the equation… the existentialists
really have taught us something; they are good thinkers. The existentialists have realized that if
man is all there is, and man is limited in his capacities, he can never
generate universals. Therefore there
is no universal meaning. And there is
no ultimate meaning. This is why, in a famous book he wrote, Walter Kaufman,
famous atheist professor at Princeton wrote that when confronted with the issue
of suffering he said we have no real answer for suffering, so the best we can
do is make up an answer for the moment that seems good. A pistol in the mouth might seem good; drugs
might seem good. So the existentialist has
led up to this. This is what we get in
literature classes, but the point is you don’t just react against that and say
ooh how bad that is, you understand what’s going on, look at the game that’s
being played out, it makes sense, if there is all there is and there is no
other answer, doesn’t that imply a certain behavioral response. If you really believed that, wouldn’t you
act a certain way? Of course you would.
You understand if they think this way they can do that. It goes back to world view, and that’s what
Cindy said, the writers are articulating a world view and that’s the end result
of the world view.
In our position, in the
Scriptural position we say there’s an answer. The problem existentialists had,
years ago it was thought before they came along, that man could generate the answer. That’s why you had the
struggle in the early philosophers to generate the
answer, that’s why one guy would come along and say I have the answer, then the next guy 50 years
later would write a book and say no, I have the
answer, until finally you come to the 19th and 20th
centuries, nobody has the answer. In
that paganism has progressed, because it’s realized that finite man can’t
generate the answer because
finite man can’t generate universals.
But in the Bible we have a person who is infinite, who has
universals. So now the point is that
there is an answer, but the answer is in His mind and in His heart, and we will
learn of the answer only on His terms, if He chooses to share the answer we
learn it, and if He does not choose we don’t know it.
Let’s see two Biblical
examples that give you just a crack, the door opens just a crack so you can
kind of peek through into the heart of God.
One is John 11:30, it’s a little scene, but to make sense of this passage
we have to presuppose Jesus is who He is, Jesus is who He claimed to be, i.e.
God incarnate. So what we now have is
God Himself walking the face of this planet and He sees the death of a friend. “Now Jesus had not yet come into the
village, but was still in the place where Martha met Him,” because the brother
died. [31] “The Jews then who were with her in the house, and consoling her,
when they saw that Mary rose up quickly and went out, followed her, supposing
that she was going to the tomb to weep there.
[32] Therefore, when Mary came to where Jesus was, she saw Him, and fell
at His feet, saying to Him, Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not
have died. [33] When Jesus therefore saw her weeping,” now watch this response,
this is the same God who comes on so heavy to Job, this is the same God who’s
the potter who says I can make the pot any way I want, but watch this. “When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and
the Jews who came with her, also weeping, He was deeply moved in spirit, and was
troubled.” And then, in verse 35 Jesus
weeps, shortest sentence in the New Testament.
Is this the behavior you would expect of a cruel God? The door cracks a little and you begin to
see that however we answer this issue of evil, it is not some omnipotent God
who has no feeling, who isn’t at all affected, who is totally remote from it
all. He obviously isn’t, He’s deeply
moved. This is the God of the universe
who created all things that’s weeping.
That shows something.
We have another little crack
in the door, Rom. 3:25-26. The point
that is being made is that in the Old Testament they had a suffering problem,
here’s the Old Testament Jewish suffering problem. They had a very special problem, I wouldn’t say a suffering
problem so much as an apparent
contradiction in God. On the one
hand in the Old Testament you have the prophets saying that God is holy, and
holiness condemns sin and judges it. On
the other hand in the Old Testament God is merciful, and He promises mercy and
grace. But in the Old Testament there’s
no resolution of those two themes, no where do they come together. If you were a skeptic like the 20th
century skeptics, you could have argued in the Old Testament era, God can never
be merciful, He can never just, if He’s merciful and just He destroys His
holiness, and if He’s holy and He’s got to destroy that which sins, He can’t be
merciful, now the Bible says that but I don’t understand it and He’s never
given us the answer. This is a contradiction
Old Testament saints had to live with century after century.
But now we come to the cross
of Jesus Christ, and Paul suddenly resolves the dilemma. Rom. 3:25, “Whom God displayed publicly
[Jesus Christ] as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness,
because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously
committed,” there are the two greatest problems in the Old Testament. Verse 26,
“For the demonstration, I say of His righteousness at the present time, that He
might,” and here’s the key sentence, “that He might be just,” i.e. that He
might be holy, and at the same time the one who is merciful, “that He might be
just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
Look at what’s happening
here. We have a case in point that from
the time of Moses in 1400 BC down to the time of Jesus, fourteen centuries men
struggled with this apparent contradiction in God, and suddenly at the cross of
Christ it was all resolved, in three short hours it was resolved. If it was resolved so dramatically, let’s
take ourselves back in a time machine for a minute, imagine yourself dwelling
in Israel in 1,000 BC. Would you ever
have dreamed that this would be the solution to the dilemma? I doubt it.
We would have had to by faith accepted that one day God would resolve
it, but we wouldn’t have an idea of how He was going to resolve it. But the important thing for tonight is: Did
in fact the cross resolve it? Isn’t this
verse saying that God is both just and He is merciful, and He can be both at the
same time? How He can be both at the
same time is through this amazing work of Jesus Christ on the cross, utterly
unforeseen in its totality in the Old Testament, forecast in pieces and
glimpses, yes. We see a lot more in the
Old Testament because we’re “Monday morning quarterbacks,” the game is all
over, we can say they should have seen that.
We didn’t live then so don’t say they should have seen that.
The conclusion: if God could
do this to this problem in the Old Testament, and come out with the fact that
He did, after all, have an answer, men just didn’t see it yet, is it not valid
to conclude that one day there will be revealed a total answer, and it will
deeply move us, as we are moved by watching what He did in the cross of Christ,
a deeply and profoundly moving thing that causes us to worship Him. So let’s return to Job, why is the harsh
answer there? Why does God come on so
heavy to Job like that? If the real
answer is in God, what do we have to do down here in order to appropriate that answer
when we don’t know the answer? The only
way we can maintain our sanity in the middle of suffering is to, on the basis
of what God has so far revealed of Himself and His character, to trust Him,
that He is trustable to have an ultimate answer for every detail, every
suffering and every tear. We don’t know
yet, in fact we may spend all eternity learning that, because it may be such an
involved, complicated answer that will unfold and unfold and unfold, and as it
unfolds each time a peon of praise will raise to His name. If you consider this
not to be an answer, then I challenge you, if you don’t accept this answer I
challenge you to come up with any answer.
If you don’t accept the Bible answer you don’t have any answer. You not only don’t have a bad one, you don’t
have any, because you don’t have a basis for an answer.
So you either go along with
what the Scripture says, and come like Job did, I believe this is why God was
so apparently harsh, God is not that kind of a cruel God, God had a point in
coming to Job heavy like that, and that was to make the Creator/creature clear
in his mind. Remember Job’s response? I
don’t know what I’m talking about. It’s
almost like we have this burning question, we’ve written it down, we’ve prayed
about it so much, and when I get in front of God I’m going to ask Him
this. And it’s like you walk in and
suddenly you do see God, like Job did, and suddenly you forget the question,
because of what you see. When Job saw
God for who God was, the question kind of went away, not to deny that there is
an answer, but what happened in Job’s experience and what happened in Paul’s
experience, they were overtaken by the fact that they could look God in the
face and see Him for who He is, and the question sort of dissolved. The hand that was saying I want an answer,
answer me, just kind of went phlouff, and that’s what you get in Job
40-42.
The Christian answer to the
issue of suffering is that God has the answer and we don’t know all of its
parts, and the only way we deal with that kind of thing is we trust Him, we
don’t try a program of gimmicks, we don’t have works, we don’t deal with some
sort of therapy, we trust Him and in order to trust Him we have to come to know
Him. The only place we come to know Him
is through His revelation in His Word and in our lives. And that’s the issue, that’s always the
issue. We do not have all the answers,
so don’t walk out as a Christian claiming we’ve got all the answers. God has all the answers, and we have Him.