I started a new book last week called God at War: The Bible & Spiritual Conflict by Gregory Boyd. I've had a hard time putting it down ever since because it has shed some light on some big questions that believers in Christ and unbelievers alike ask, like "Where does evil come from?" and "How do do terrible atrocities fit into the idea of everything being a part of the plan of a perfect and loving God?" If you're reading this post you've probably seen some of my other posts on spiritual warfare and know that I take the bible at it's word when it talks about satan being the "god of this world" and that I think that many in the church in "the West" are not seeing with spiritual eyes and recognizing demonic activity in regards to the evils in this world, whether they be habitual sin, sickness, mental illness, violence, political powers, etc. We don't recognize or do much about the work of the demonic in the world around us, even though we have been charged by our Lord to battle against the forces of darkness in this world. We explain it all away with natural reasoning or blame it solely on man's sin. Even worse though, the common teaching given for centuries now is that all bad things that happen are to be seen as coming from our Father's hand. Greg Boyd calls this overall perspective "the blueprint theory."
There are a lot of things we are led to believe to be "biblical" just because it's the dominating idea in the theological circles we run in. This blueprint view of explaining evil in light of a good God is one of those things many of us have accepted as true because of it's dominance. Basically, as far as I can summarize, this theory says that everything good and evil that happens in the world is all part of the sovereign will of God and was all planned out/foreknown from the beginning of creation. All evil that happens to us happens as He allows- and allows for a good specific reasons. This idea is largely attributed to the thinking of Saint Augustine and the classical-philosophical line of reasoning. However, this concept, as Boyd tries to argue throughout the book, is not founded in the bible, but rather in the "Hellenistic view of divine omnipotence and providence (viz. as meticulous control)." I'm not going to get into the specifics that Greg lays out in several chapters, but basically he contrasts this view of God's meticulous control with the view that God put angels in control of many elements of this world, and Satan and many others rebelled because they are like man in regards to free will (unlike some views which say angels are all puppet agents of God's will and have no free will). Those forces that are in rebellion against God are where we ought to be directing our blame for evil. One of the major points that this book drives home is that neither Jesus nor the early church asked why God let all sorts of evils happen, and certainly didn't say it was from Him. They had this warfare worldview that saw everything bad that happened in light of the "prince of the power of the air" and his legions of demons that are trying to thwart God's will and cause man to suffer, or worse, to continue rebelling against God.
The "yeah but what about that scripture that says..." example that kept coming to my mind in conflict with Greg's argument was in John 9:1-3 where Jesus heals the blind man. Prior to healing him the disciples ask who sinned that caused this man to be blind, and Jesus responds (in the NIV translation), "Neither this man nor his parents sinned...but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life." Greg notes that a lot of "blueprint" thinkers hinge on this New testament verse as justifying the idea that God's will lies behind even apparently evil events in this world to either punish, build character or glorify Himself. He first points out that even if this man's blindness was from God's hand to glorify himself, that it would be an exception, not an absolute principle based on the fact that most of Jesus' other miracles were explicitly rebuking works of the devil (not God). How often we try to lock God's workings in a box and limit Him to a formula for how He operates based on a few examples from scripture. A further point is that the greek more accurately translated simply says "But let the works of God be manifested" which gives us a picture of Jesus telling us that this is yet another opportunity for Him to release this man from suffering "under the power of the devil" as Peter says in Acts 10:37-38.
This change to a warfare perspective can help a lot of people that have a bad view of God (understandably) because of the idea that evil things come from God's will. Two, singing songs that paint the warfare perspective will help us to see it in the world around us (and thus help us have the right view of what's going on instead of thinking God is doing evil things) and also help to engage us in the battle that we've been called to as the children of light. Some song suggestions are "In Christ Alone," "A Mighty Fortress is Our God," "Sing to the King," "This is My Father's World," I don't like the music but the words to "For This Purpose" by Graham Kendrick are very fitting for this theme, at Christmas time "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen," and I've loved "Shout Unto God" by Hillsong for a while as more of a battle cry, repetitive song.
If you'd like to hear a little bit more about why Gregory Boyd decided to write this book, click here, it is a pretty crazy story. I also found a link that has a debate between him and John Piper on some theological issues that is very interesting, especially since I just finished a Piper book and really appreciate his work.
Surely some of you have some thoughts on this, please share...
2 comments:
The seeming contrast between God's goodness and the presence of evil in His creation was actually the topic of a sermon by John MacArthur last month. (You can download it for free here: https://www.shepherdsfellowship.org/mediavault.aspx under "Why does God allow Evil?) In essence, a Biblical understanding is that God allows evil in order to showcase His own goodness, righteousness, judgment, and mercy.
I think a great example of this is the story of Joseph. In Genesis 50:20, Joseph clearly states that what his brothers meant for evil against him, God meant for good. God uses the evil actions and intents for the good of His own and to display His glory.
With regard to spiritual warfare, I find the account of Daniel helpful. In the second half of Daniel, wherein lies the Messianic prophecy, and angel of the Lord is delayed by the "Prince of Persia"- a demon- until he receives help from the archangel Michael. This battle occurs beyond the sight of men, and is a conflict over the revelation of Truth. Spiritual battle, as demonstrated by this passage and the "armor of God" in Ephesians, is all about proclamation of God's truth, not about any direct conflict between men and demons!
Lastly, Paul describes spiritual warfare: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled." 2 Cor. 10:3-6.
This book actually begins with the example from Daniel that you mentioned. The point Greg makes though is that this type of conflict in the spiritual realm is happening all the time, and that it affects our "natural" world. I don't think the typical reformed view handles all this passage has to say. Daniel 10:12 sure does imply that God was using this angel to come to answer Daniel's prayer, but that the answer was delayed because of the interruption by a bad angel. I have no problem with that idea because it isn't like God wasn't able to accomplish His will to reveal the message to Daniel, but why can't it be that the angelic realm isn't just like the human realm in regards to submission and rebellion to God's will? God still gets his plan accomplished, even though a rebellious angel tried to thwart Him. That doesn't mean we have to perceive the fallen angels actions as being part of God's script, even if He did know it was going to happen.
I don't agree with everything Greg Boyd has to say in this book, but I've definitely come to agree that everything does not need to be perceived as part of God's will. Why else would we be taught to pray "Thy will be done," unless His will was not being done all the time? It's easy in theory for us to say that it's all part of God's plan, but then you are faced with a story like one Greg gives about a little girl during WWII who's eyes were plucked out by Nazi's and then because she was blind, was sent to a concentration camp and killed. Was that God's work? Or was that wicked men, part of a demonically influenced Nazi Germany, doing an awful thing contrary to what God's desire for His creation is? Could you tell that girl or mother that this was all God's will? I think not, because God's plan was to overcome those very evils that they experienced. He knew it was all going to happen, but that doesn't mean it is was His will, His desire for them to happen.
I think John Macarthur on this recording you suggested is kind of arrogant in certain parts, especially when he starts talking about arminians and some of those views different than his. I don't disagree with everything he says in that section, but its an attitude that I don't appreciate, and something I've heard others say they don't appreciate about him, lack of grace and love in how communicates, though this is one of the only messages I've ever heard from him. 1 Corinthians 13 might as well have a paraphrase that says "you can have all your theological i's dotted and your t's crossed, but if you have not love it doesn't count for much."
"God's glory would have been diminished" if he didn't allow evil? I think John's statement actually sounds like the yin and yang concept he spoke against. How can God's glory depend on something other than Himself, especially something that is not "good" like He is? I don't disagree that evil highlights His glory, but I would never say it would be diminished without it. Afterall, the world to come, which will be free of evil is spoken of as much more glorious than the present world because God's glory will be so present there (not needing evil to display it better).
I really think you should read this book Tim, if nothing else, just to get a different perspective, and possibly see that a lot of so called "biblical" perspectives on this ideas that come into play when talking about God's will and evil and all that are not necessarily from a biblical foundation, but a hellenistic one (and other influences that worked in the minds of post apostalic church leaders)
As always, thanks for your thorough comments.
Post a Comment