Today is March 13, 2021 and it has been exactly one year since I drove home from school as I knew it for the last time. It was a Friday, and a beautiful one at that, the kind of day where you roll down the windows and feel the sun gently shining on your jeans as the breeze combs through your hair. Sitting shotgun I had a box full of paint, and in the back, 7 or so canvases. Us AP Art students had raided the art room in a fury during fifth hour, ransacking the reds, blues, yellow, blacks and whites. It was supposed to be enough supplies to last the month, after which, I assumed we’d probably have things figured out and would be back to the usual manner of operations. But we all know where the story goes from there. My fascination about “living through history” dimmed in time as the death count rose and as the months passed by. Many of my friends bought plane tickets back home only to cancel, wait, and worry, wondering when they would ever get to see their families again. We watched the first hundred thousand die, the first four hundred thousand die, the first million, the second million and as of writing this today, the death toll stands at a steep 2.64 million. This last year has been heavy. We watched a virus wreak havoc on the world, and, in my country, we saw unarmed Black Men die at the hands of police, we experienced a grueling election cycle and an attempted insurrection. My own personal life didn’t escape the chaos either. Thanks to the compounding forces of a relentless mind, some interpersonal drama and, oh you know, the general state of the world, I spent a good portion of the mythicized summer between high school and college feeling the lowest I’d felt in a good long while. I feel 5 years older than I did last year. Some days, I still feel rather chewed up and spat out sometimes. In times such as these we are forced to ask questions about what God is doing. Some, albeit a minority, have proposed that God is punishing us for our sins while others have suggested that maybe this is ultimately for some greater good. Some think it best that we don’t try to explain it, because God is so far beyond our understanding. Others view it as proof that God doesn’t exist. I don’t happen to be convinced by any of those options. Sure, I have grown as a person during this past year, and I believe that God is present in that, but I also feel more cynical and jaded than before the pandemic. While I do think that I’ll never fully understand God’s ways, I think appealing to mystery here dodges the question, even if the response comes from a genuine place. I want to take the last proposition seriously, too. If God has to be both all powerful and perfectly loving, I think atheists and agnostics have a point. But maybe God doesn’t have to be both. In fact, maybe God’s perfect love means that God can’t be all powerful. As I see it, the only way for me to continue to believe in a perfectly loving God, one who isn’t at fault for the virus’ death toll, is to deny the doctrine of omnipotence. To many this might sound like a heinous, even heretical idea-- and I can empathize with that. I think that Jacob from 4 years ago could chat with me now, he’d think present day Jacob was a bad influence on him. I’ll also, with slight literary awkwardness, take this opportunity to make the important acknowledgement that I didn’t just one day magically come up with this idea (and subsequent ideas), but rather was introduced to these ideas through appearances of theologian and scholar Thomas Jay Oord on the You Have Permission Podcast. Enough awkward but needed literary diversions for now, allow me to try make a brief case for why I think rejecting God’s omnipotence isn’t such an outlandish idea (and maybe even, hear me out, a Biblical one). Let me first appeal to scripture. Throughout both the Old and New Testament, the Biblical authors claim there are certain things God cannot do, ranging from things that would seem obvious to things that might make you pause and go “hm..” For instance, as Oord notes in a blog post of his, the Bible says things such as “God cannot be tempted by evil” (James 1:13), “it is impossible for God to lie” (Hebrews 6:18) and “if we are faithless, He remains faithful-- for he cannot deny himself” (2 Timothy 2:13). Even in the Old Testament we see the Bible saying that God can’t do certain things. Christopher Fisher, in his essay in the book Uncontrolling Love: Essays Exploring the Love of God points out that in Judges 1:1-2, God tells Israel that He has “given the land [of Israel’s opponent] into [Israel’s] hand” but, alas, in verse 19, even though the text says that “The LORD was with Judah (...)[,] he could not drive out the inhabitants of the plain because they had chariots of iron.” Fisher also notes that a similar thing happens in 2 Kings 3 when Israel is in battle against the Moabites. King Jehoram asks for Elisha to prophecy about the battle, and Elisha prophecies saying, “God will also give the Moabites into your hand” And that all goes according to plan until the King of Moab, in a gruesome hail Mary move, sacrifices his son to his god. After this, the text says “there came a great wrath on Israel. And they withdrew from them and returned to their own land.” While these are but 5 accounts from the whole Bible, and obviously come nowhere close to presenting a bulletproof case for my argument, I think they make a point: there are certain things that God simply cannot do. But why can’t God do certain things? Is it out of the desire to maintain prior commitments not to? Can God not lie, not be tempted, and not deny Himself because He chooses not to because He promised as much? I am in accord with Oord, who would say “no” and instead suggest the best interpretation of these verses to be that God’s nature makes it so that it is impossible for God to lie, impossible for God to be tempted by evil, and impossible for God to deny Himself. This last clause particularly opens the door for a critical idea in Oord’s theory of Essential Kenosis: the idea that God is essentially loving, and that love is inherently uncontrolling. The origin of first part of that claim is simple, and, as far as I’m aware, pretty much unchallenged in Christian Theology: 1 John 4:8 says that “anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.” Simple enough. The second part, however, is less easy to bolster by quoting a quick Bible verse, and is a more contentious theological claim. As far as I know, no Bible verse comes right out and says “love does not control” (although if you’ve found a passage like that, I’d love to hear about it). But this idea not being directly stated in scripture doesn’t worry me. After all, all theology, even that which insists on it’s being sola scriptura or ‘strictly Biblical’ goes beyond the Bible in its use of human ideas, experience and language to make sense of what someone understands the text to say and how someone would apply it to their life. A compelling case could be made that this is the very endeavor of the Biblical authors themselves, both Old Testament and New.. but I’m getting ahead of myself. The point is, while scripture never seems to come right out and say “love is inherently uncontrolling”, I think such an does a good job of making sense of both the text and human history. I want to primarily focus on human history here, particularly the events of the past year and a half, but also on human history at large. If we assume that God is love and that love is inherently uncontrolling, we can logically conclude that the Coronavirus was not and is not part of God’s plan. We can conclude that it is neither punishment from God nor some sort of elaborate ruse for God to glorify Himself. Furthermore, we can also conclude that God isn’t choosing not to stop this virus because God is incapable of stopping this virus single-handedly. This also allows us to affirm theologically what we very well may have been feeling for the last year or more: even though some good has come from it, the world is ultimately worse off because of Covid 19. God mourns the millions dead from the Coronavirus just as God mourned the holocuast, just as God mourns the death of immigrants, the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, just as God mourns rape and miscarriages and so much more because God did not want any of it to happen. He did not and does not will it nor permit it because He cannot control it. At this point, you might be wondering if I believe God does anything at all. I believe God does act in the world. I believe He is constantly presenting paths for us to follow Him by living in love. He prods us to support those who are suffering. He points out the overlooked and unheard and charges us with giving them a voice. He calls for us to love our enemies. He calls for us to lay down our own desires for the flourishing of the wider world (such as wearing a mask, or giving a loved one a phone call). He does such prodding and so much more via scripture, nature and us humans. While this would be a very endearing place to end, it’s natural and good for new ideas to be met with scrutiny and a certain amount of skepticism. One might question if, in this view, it’s possible for God to raise Jesus from the dead. Additionally, what about other miracles or prophesies? And is the nature of love really inherently uncontrolling? These are fair questions that deserve responses, and I’ll take a few of them to task here. Firstly, the resurrection. Oord addresses this directly in many of his books about his theory of Essential Kenosis, including The Uncontrolling Love of God, which I finished reading this summer. Unfortunately for me, I left the book at home, so I’ll be drawing from a blog post of Oord’s entitled ‘Did God Resurrect Jesus Single-Handedly?’ Oord, as you might guess, would argue that God did not. Although he argues that God did not, that’s not to say that God didn’t play the “primary role.” Oord argues that Jesus cooperated with God (I mean, duh, as Jesus says in John 10:30 “[He] and the Father are One.”) Oord goes on to further evidence his view by pointing to things surrounding Jesus’ resurrection that might seem strange, such as an angel opening the door of the tomb (Matthew 28:2), Jesus being initially mistaken for the tomb gardener by Mary Magdalene (John 20:14-16), and Jesus friends’ initially not being able to recognize Jesus on the Emmaus Road (Luke 24:9-16). Oord says “this alone should make us rethink the idea that God has the ability to raise Jesus singlehandedly and then exhibit the risen Lord unambiguously.” I find these texts thought provoking, especially the one about an angel rolling the stone away from Jesus’ tomb. Surely, if God can raise Jesus from the dead, rolling the stone away should be small potatoes. (I’m inclined to think that this is because stones don’t have much agency, if any at all, and therefore cannot easily cooperate with God) While these verses do raise questions about how Jesus’ resurrection happened, a verse that Oord doesn’t mention in this blog post, for me, might make the case more obvious. In Luke 22:42, Jesus, in the garden of Gethsemane, prays to God, “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” I see this as proof of Jesus’ needing to willfully submit to God’s will, and as far as I’m aware (although I could be wrong) that’s not an audacious claim. Oord would contend that all miracles require cooperation from creatures, and I think that this does a good job of making sense of miracles, both in the Bible and beyond. I will, however, admit that Oord’s view has a hard time with nature miracles. But, at the end of the day, it’s more important to me to believe in a God that isn’t culpable for not stopping the holocaust than it is for me to be able to have a detailed explanation of nature miracles. Maybe one day I’ll find a way to have both. Secondly, let me address prophecies. I have to think that Oord addresses this somewhere, but I can’t recall where. Here’s how I reason it out: we do not have to be epistemologically certain that the prophesied events will occur to trust that God will make them happen. Obviously all metaphors are limited, and that’s especially true when we talk about God, but I like to think about it this way: my parents, like many others, have promised to contribute a certain amount of money towards my college tuition. While I can’t know with absolute certainty that they will make good on that promise, I can trust that they will because I have 18 years of experience with them keeping their promises to give me confidence. Are they perfect, well, no, but I think you get the point. Thirdly, “Is love really inherently uncontrolling?” I’ve actually got a funny childhood story for this one. I promise it relates to the point. When I was really young (I forget the exact age), I was playing in the front yard when I had a genius idea “Hey!” I thought, “I should run up the block and cross the highway!” (again, clearly a great idea for someone my age). So I set off, running up the street on an epic journey to cross I-196. My Mom got wind of this plan, and like any good parent would, she took off running to foil my epic adventure. Wasn’t this controlling move that prevented me from trying to cross the highway, a loving move? Absolutely! Trying to cross the highway on my own at such a young age was a stupid and dangerous idea that could have ended in disaster. My Mom’s actions were a demonstration of her love for me, no doubt. But I have qualms with such a metaphor being used to describe our relationship to God. We are obviously not on the level with God, but maybe we’re not young, dumb little Jacobs, and instead, young adults who know how to cross busy streets, even if we’re still temptable and far from perfect. Well, that’s it. I hope that this blog post has at least made you think. If you disagree with me, that’s fine. While the theology I’ve articulated here makes the most sense to me, I’m not under the illusion that people who disagree with me are stupid or thoughtless. In fact, having been raised by people who think this way, I see many people with this view as examples of incredible people of faith.Deterministic theologies offer comfort and consolation to some, and while that’s not my experience, I’m glad that those people find comfort there and I’m not trying to take that away from them. My intent in writing and publishing this is 1) to live more honestly with those around me, especially with those who may disagree with me and 2) to present an alternative way of thinking to those who are struggling to believe, or have given up belief in God because of the Problem of Evil. I guess that 2,600-something words later, it’s time to wrap this up. Frankly, if you’ve made it this far, I’m amazed and am deeply grateful for your time and attention. This has very much been a diversion from the usual 3 to 5 minute song format I tend to share my musings in (more of those soon, by the way). Thanks again, and ciao for now. A Less-Than-Formal Citation of Sources:
(All verses taken from the NIV) https://www.amazon.com/Uncontrolling-Love-Essays-Exploring-Introductions/dp/0692884947 http://thomasjayoord.com/index.php/blog/archives/god_cant_-_and_the_bible_says_so https://www.amazon.com/s?k=the+uncontrolling+love+of+god&i=stripbooks&crid=1PYSWID88NVWR&sprefix=the+uncont%2Cstripbooks%2C165&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_2_10 http://thomasjayoord.com/index.php/blog/archives/did-god-resurrect-jesus-singlehandedly
4 Comments
3/13/2021 03:16:37 pm
Hi Jacob, I did make it through your composition and I am glad you took the effort to write it. You have attempted to understand things I haven't thought about for a long time. Most of all I am glad you wrote it because I feel I have gotten to know who Jacob Hoekwater is. Thank you.
Reply
Jacob Hoekwater
3/13/2021 09:52:14 pm
Thanks so much, Don! Your comment made my evening! I'm touched that you read it all, and so pleased that you are glad because you've gotten to know who I am! Thanks again for engaging my thought and have a stellar rest of the weekend!
Reply
Keith Hoekwater
3/15/2021 07:11:49 pm
Hi Jacob.
Reply
Jacob Hoekwater
3/17/2021 10:48:58 am
Hi, Grandpa! Thanks for suggesting that book. I'm somewhat aware of Dr. Plantinga's work and thought that he and David were kin, but am glad to be able to confirm that now. I will have to check out that book, might have to borrow it from you when I get back home! Thanks again for mentioning it!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |