Our Sense of Senslessness

The vast sufferings of humanity provide a strong argument for the existence of God.  Yes, I did say “for the existence of God,” not “against” His existence.  How so?

The thing that needs to be explained is our sense of moral outrage at suffering.  When a baby dies of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, his parents cry out, “What did we do to deserve this?”  When the mother of two young children is killed in an automobile accident, we ask, “Why now, when her family needs her so much?”  When floods leave hundreds dead and thousands homeless in Central America or Madagascar, we shake our heads in bewilderment.  It seems so unjust.

If we were only intelligent animals, we would not feel this way.  We might feel sorrow at the passing of a loved one.  (Dogs miss, and apparently mourn, their dead owners.)  We might even be angry, but sorrow and anger are not the same thing as moral outrage.  Moral outrage depends on a particular view of the world.  It has no place in a world governed by chance and survival of the fittest.  Gazelles do not lie awake at night pondering why a particular member of their herd was killed by a lion.

Whenever we call something a senseless tragedy, we imply that somehow life ought to make sense.  We are suggesting that there is a rational order to the universe.  If there is no such order, then no aspect of our lives has any meaning.  Falling in love, enjoying a beautiful sunset, building houses for the homeless and shoving an old lady out into the traffic are all equally senseless.

Many voices do insist that we are only animals and that the only meaning our lives can have is the meaning we ourselves give to them.  The problem is that the people who most loudly proclaim the absurdity of life are often the very ones most disturbed by the senselessness of suffering.  If they were being true to their theory, they should just shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, well.  The lion got another one.  Maybe I should join a different herd to save my own skin.”  No matter what our lips may say, the idea of ultimate rationality seems to be hard-wired into our psyches.  From where did it come?

The Bible says that our sense of moral order comes from God.  Even people who have never read God’s written word nevertheless “do by nature the things of the Law. . . in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them” (Romans 2:14-15).  Irrationality entered the world through sin because sin is an irrational rebellion against God.  Sin is the direct cause of senseless work place murders by disgruntled employees.  It is also a more remote cause of natural disasters and disease because sin has taken away our ability to obey God’s command to rule wisely over the earth and its creatures (Genesis 1:26).  When Adam sinned, God cursed the very ground so that it would not easily yield its fruit to his labors.

Still we may wonder why God does not do something about the mess we have made of His world.  The Bible’s answer is that He has and He will.  God sent His Son Jesus into the world to undo the damage caused by sin.  By His death, He paid the just penalty of sin.  By His resurrection, He gives eternal life to believing sinners.  When He returns visibly to Earth again, He will reverse God’s curse on the natural world.  The Bible says,

“For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.  For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God.  For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (Romans 8:18-21).

Finally, we may ask, “If God is going to end all suffering in the future, why doesn’t He do it now?  Why has He waited for so many years?”  Again, the Bible has an answer.  The day that Jesus comes to renew and redeem will also be the day He comes to judge.  God is waiting until human sin is fully ripe for judgment; He is also waiting to give men and women an opportunity to repent and receive Christ.  The Bible says, “Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?” (Romans 2:4).

Friend, are you outraged by the vast sufferings of humanity?  When you face God, He will say, “Your very outrage is a testimony to My righteous Law.  Why, then did you not repent of your sins?”  If you are not yet ready to answer that question, perhaps you should not be too anxious for God to set things right in the world.

Cold Despair

You wake up in a cave, shivering and barely kept from freezing by a tiny fire. A howling wind drives a mixture of sleet and snow past the mouth of the cave. You want to stay where you are, but you cannot. You must reach the next traveler’s shelter before dark, and it will take you all day.

The day turns out to be much like the one before it and the one before that. You start out walking through slush, slipping and stumbling up the hills, falling and sliding down the worst of them. By late afternoon the temperature has dropped, the snowfall has picked up and the wind has increased to gale force, engulfing you in a terrifying whiteout. If you had been in your own front yard, you would not have been able to find the door to your house. Fortunately, your GPS keeps you on the right track.

Just before dark, you stagger into the next travelers’ shelter. You make a small fire with the wood stacked inside for emergencies and eat a meager supper from the dried rations on the shelf. Sitting on the floor, you lean against the wall and hope to read a bit of Scripture before you fall asleep. But you are too tired, and when the book slips from your hands to the floor, you don’t even stir.

In your dreams, you waken to find yourself bathed in light. The One you love is near, though you cannot see Him, and your heart cries out. “O Father, I feel so guilty. I feel like such a failure. I used to spend half an hour, sometimes an hour, reading Your word, praying, and journaling about my walk with You. You were so close to me then, but now I’m not doing those things, and You seem so far away. I’m so alone. Please don’t leave me. I’m sorry.”

“I haven’t left You, and I never will,” says the Voice. “During the whiteout did you sense the polar bear I turned aside before he could devour you?”

“No” (softly).

“When you took your worst tumble, did you see how I put My hand between you and the boulder that would have crushed your head?”

“No” (with hesitant wonder).

“I have been with you every step of your journey?”

“Why didn’t You make my road easier. I am so sore and bruised. Don’t You care about that?”

“Of course, I care. I love you, my child, more than you can comprehend. The hard road you travel is My road, and it has purposes that extend far beyond you and your family, so you must not think that I am putting you through this only for yourself. There, now. I have told you enough. Go to sleep. Rest in My love.

“Perhaps tomorrow or the next day or the next I will give you the quiet time with Me that you crave, but until then remember what My apostle wrote at the end of Romans 8: “For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Is the Bible just a beautiful story?

(This is the text of a video by the same title. I guess I shouldn't be frowning. Oh well!)

Hello again. I’m holding a delightful collection of stories called Tales of the Arabian Nights. In order to save her life, the beautiful Sheherazade tells her husband the Sultan a string of wondrous stories including “Sindbad the Sailor,” “Aladdin, or the Wonderful Lamp,” and “Ali Baba and the Forty Robbers.” Is the Bible just a story, like the Arabian Nights? Some people claim that it is.

Sometimes critics of the Bible describe it as a collection of fairy tales. If they want to sound a little more sophisticated, they say the Bible contains the mythology of the Hebrews, and they will point to a few story elements common to the Bible and ancient near-eastern myths. Other critics bypass the mythological accusation and say that Christians are naïve because they choose to believe a story with a happy ending—at least for themselves.

With regard to the first accusation, I have to wonder if these people have actually read many fairy tales and myths. I have read many of the ancient near-eastern myths; I’m familiar with Greek, Roman and Norse mythology, and I can say emphatically that the Bible is different from all of these. It is true that there are some points of comparison between ancient myths and the Bible. For example, the number seven is common to the Bible and to several ancient near-eastern myths. There are a few parallels between ancient near-eastern flood stories and the biblical account of the Noahic flood. That would not be surprising if the flood actually happened and if various peoples retained some memory of the event. But Scripture has no tales of quarrelling, murdering, thieving, sexually immoral gods. If anything, the Bible should be described as an anti-mythology. From the creation account onward, it is deliberately hostile to the kind of worldview that lies behind all ancient mythologies. In The Beauty of God for a Broken World, I argue that Jesus Christ is different from all rival gods ancient and modern.

With regard to the charge that the Bible is just a story, I admit—no insist—that it is a beautiful story. Certainly, there is a seductive kind of beauty that corrupts the heart and destroys the soul. But at the deepest levels beauty truth and goodness belong together and depend on each other. Granted, there are some parts of the biblical narrative that seem ugly, especially to modern and post-modern readers, but that brings to mind a line from The Lord of the Rings. When Frodo decides to trust the rough-looking ranger, Strider, he says, “You have frightened me several times tonight, but never in the way that servants of the Enemy would, or so I imagine. I think one of his spies would—well, seem fairer and feel fouler, if you understand” (Lord of the Rings, chapter 10).

When I wrote The Beauty of God for a Broken World I wanted to show something of the beauty of the Bible’s God and the Bible’s story, even in the parts that, like Strider, don’t seem fair at first glance. Because beauty and truth are not enemies, the deep beauty of the Bible’s story is one of the great evidences of its truth.

The "New Atheism" and the Beauty of God

I’ve been reading another of those books by the “new atheists”—the kind of book that the publisher likes to claim will put Christianity into its grave. About the only thing that is “new” is that their voices are more strident than they were a few years ago. Still, I think it is worthwhile commenting in general terms on one of the approaches they use in their attacks.

One section of 23 pages lists about 36 errors, contradictions and myths supposedly contained in the Bible. Some of the charges are so ludicrous that a careful reader of the English Bible should be able to see through them. However many depend on specialized knowledge of the biblical languages, history and archaeology. In most cases, these “errors” are simply listed as well-known facts without any indication of the careful responses made by conservative Bible scholars.

The average reader of such a catalog is simply not in a position to study every accusation for himself, but the authors couple their hit and run attacks with a diabolically clever insinuation: Anyone who cannot answer all the charges leveled against Christianity is engaging in a blind, foolish faith inherited from his culture. If he is not a moron, he is deliberately deceiving himself.

Then comes the cleverly calculated challenge: Practice pretending that you are not a Christian. Just try looking at the world as if you were an atheist. Try it for an hour at a time. Next work up to a day and then a week of unbelief.

What is the likely result of such an exercise? Consider, by way of comparison, what a counselor is likely to tell a married couple who no longer think that they are in love with each other. He will teach them how to listen to each other. He will help them learn how to express love in ways that their partners can appreciate. In short, as they practice being in love, they may fall in love again. So it is too with practicing unbelief.

I have a suggestion for the “new atheists.” Why not spend an hour then a day then a week doubting your atheism. After all, there are numerous intellectual obstacles that a consistent atheist has to overcome. Practice coming to the Bible with a humble, open mind seeking to see what has gripped the minds and hearts of Christians throughout the centuries.

In spite of what the “new atheists” so brazenly assert, the issue is not a lack of intellectual honesty on the part of Christians. Atheism and Christianity represent diametrically opposed views of the world and the meaning of life. The clash between atheism and Christianity is not really an argument over who has the most “facts” to bolster his case—after all both sides are slinging “facts” at each other all the time. It is rather a conflict between opposing worldviews. Which approach provides the most comprehensive, consistent and compelling view of our world and of ourselves?

In my book, The Beauty of God for a Broken World, I did not engage in classical apologetics. I respect those who have capably defended the historical accuracy of the Bible and who have marshaled philosophical arguments for the existence of God. My task, however, was different. I have attempted to answer the charge that the God of the Bible is ugly by applying a Trinitarian understanding of beauty to some of the perplexities regarding Scripture and to the problems of life. I have tried to show that a Trinitarian worldview is ultimately the only truly satisfying answer for a broken world and for our broken lives.

The Essential Doctrine of Original Sin

There is no doctrine so much despised or so much needed by the modern world as the doctrine of original sin. Original sin is well summarized by the first line of a colonial New England primer: "A is for Adam. In Adam's fall, we sinned all."

According to the biblical doctrine of original sin, God made our first parents in a state of untested innocence. Although Eve sinned before Adam, God had appointed Adam to represent the whole human race. Therefore, when Adam sinned, he brought doom on all of his posterity. Just as a king or president can involve his whole country in war, so we are born into this world as enemies of God (Romans 5:10). As a judgment for Adam's sin, God withdrew His Holy Spirit from the human heart, leaving us alone.

The Bible often refers to human nature apart from God as "the flesh," and it tells us that the "deeds of the flesh" are: "immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these" (Galatians 5:19-21). The Bible says that the heart is "more deceitful than all else, and desperately sick" (Jeremiah 17:9).

This, then, is the doctrine that is both despised and needed by the modern world. Moderns have got the problem all wrong, and so cannot find a solution. In the first place, moderns typically exalt "immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry and sorcery" as alternate life-styles or expressions of freedom. In the second place, they assume that the human heart is basically good. The problem is not with the heart, but with educational, economic and social inequalities. If that is the problem, then the solution is obvious. Use the power of government to erase the inequalities, and all will be well.

On the international scene, the problem between warring parties is usually assumed to be a misunderstanding of each other's values. The answer to the problem is therefore diplomacy. When enemies talk to each other, they understand each other; when they understand each other, they become friends.

Let us suppose that on Thursday of next week all inequalities and misunderstandings could be magically erased. The doctrine of original sin says that by the following Thursday the strong would have begun to oppress the weak, and fresh occasions for hatred between races and classes would already have arisen.

Certainly, it is right to help the poor. Certainly, it is right to provide a good education for all of our children. Certainly, it is right to promote dialogue between enemies. These things are right. They are just not enough.

Because the human heart is sinful, there must be sanctions as well as incentives. There must be punishments as well as praise. Governments should exercise their power to protect the weak and to balance the interests of opposing power blocks. For example, many workers are pro-union, because they believe that unions protect the little guy. Many businessmen see unions as evil. The truth is that both big business and big labor, when left to themselves, become greedy for power and profit. Both have shown themselves willing to use ungodly tactics to further their own selfish self-interests.

Therefore, the doctrine of original sin helps us to be realists. We work toward temporary and limited solutions to fundamentally intractable problems, and we thrust aside all dreams of man-made utopias because we see that our social ills have spiritual dimensions.

Finally, the doctrine of original sin sounds the death knell for all forms of self-help religion. Do we want to be better than we are? We need to be rescued by a power beyond ourselves. The Bible says that God forgives our sins when we trust in Jesus Christ. Furthermore, we "receive the promise of the [Holy] Spirit through faith" (Galatians 3:14), and "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control" (Galatians 5:22-23).

That is what the modern world really needs, and that is what we need as individuals. As I point out in my book The Beauty of God for a Broken World, we must understand the Bible’s teaching on sin if we want our lives to be invaded by the beauty of God.

Resurrection

“The resurrection of Jesus Christ does not make sense,” says the skeptic. “People do not spontaneously rise from the grave. It is contrary to history and to the laws of nature.”

I say that history and nature do not make sense without the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Let us begin with history.

The existence of the Christian Church is an inexplicable riddle apart from the resurrection. Many people suppose that the Church arose because the disciples of Christ wanted to carry on the teachings of their dead Master. Later they invented the resurrection to enhance the Master’s reputation. Such a notion is completely inconsistent with the available evidence.

The whole New Testament was written within seventy years of Christ’s death, and its consistent testimony is that the resurrection of Christ is the central fact of His life. The four Gospels, which record the words and deeds of Christ, all present the resurrection as the climax of His story, and in all of them hints of the resurrection are woven throughout the text. It is not possible to rip the resurrection out from the teaching of the Gospels without destroying the literary unity of those books.

In the book of Acts, which describes the early spread of Christianity, every sermon reported in detail deals with the resurrection of Christ. Most of the rest of the New Testament consists of letters, and throughout this body of literature the death, resurrection and future return of Christ are presented as crucial factors for moral and spiritual wholeness. The modern notion—that the early disciples wanted to spread the ethical teaching of Jesus—is simply false. The only morality of interest to New Testament authors is that which flows from His death and His bodily resurrection.

The detailed historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ is very impressive, but in this article I wish to make only three points. First, the Church would never have arisen without a firm conviction in the supreme importance of Christ’s resurrection. Second, this conviction must rest on some historical event. Third, no proposed event is able to explain the conviction and the explosive energy of the early church as well as the literal resurrection of Christ. The disciples saw Him repeatedly after His crucifixion. They spoke to Him. They touched Him. They were on fire with the certainly that He was alive.

In the same way, nature itself is inexplicable without the resurrection of Christ. Most ancient cosmologies, except those related to the Bible, are cyclical. The whole cosmos, and often individual human beings, go through a great cycle of birth, growth, death and rebirth. Some modern cosmologies are also cyclical, but there seems to be a growing consensus that the universe will continue to expand and cool forever and finally become incapable of supporting life.

None of these worldviews sees any rational end behind nature. The world and its creatures simply exist. That is all. There is no reason for their being and no purposeful direction for their destiny. Ultimately, nature itself does not make sense.

The resurrection of Christ, however, assures us that the God who created the world and framed its laws came to live among His creatures. He died and rose again—shattering the law that sin leads to death—in order to lead His creation out of death into life. He will come again to complete the restoration of His world to Himself. By His resurrection, Jesus declares that nature is not senseless. It has a goal. Furthermore, by His resurrection He heals the senseless brokenness of human nature for all who trust in Him.

“If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, your faith also is in vain. If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. ‘O death where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?’ The sting of death is sin, but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 15).

The Downfall of Self-Esteem

February is the month for love, so I want to discuss a biblical text on love that I have heard abused times without number.  It is this: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39).

The typical abuse of the passage goes something like this.  In order to love others, you must first love yourself.  Loving yourself means having a good self-image.  Positive self-esteem is the secret to happiness and fulfillment in life.  Therefore, the first order of business is to learn to feel good about yourself.

There are several problems with this approach, not the least of which is the fact that pursuing self-esteem is as foreign to the Bible as camels are to Alaska.  What on earth would the modern psycho-babblers do with a verse like Philippians 2:3, "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves"?

Now don't get me wrong.  Those who obey God's word have plenty of reasons to feel good about themselves.  First, they receive the forgiveness of sin through faith in Christ, so they have no cause to wallow in the pigpen of their guilt feelings.  Second, they become the children of God.  What status could be higher than being the King's kid?  Third, the Bible's prescriptions for life are a blueprint for fulfillment and happiness.

Take, for example, the command to love your neighbor as yourself.  There is, of course, a bad kind of self-love.  Selfish self-love seeks happiness by grabbing whatever it can get without regard for the needs and feelings of others.  The Bible, however, also recognizes a proper self-love, a kind of self-love that every human being necessarily has.

This inescapable self-love is the desire to be happy.  It is impossible for anyone consciously to desire his own misery.  Even when people punish themselves for their own misdeeds, their motive is to ease their sense of guilt, and thus to decrease their misery.

The Bible recognizes that we inevitably want to be happy, and we therefore want the things we believe will make us happy.  Our problem is that we are normally confused about how to find happiness.  The greedy child thinks more toys will make him happy.  The work-a-holic thinks that piling up achievements will make him happy.  The flirtatious woman thinks that the attention of men will make her happy.

The Bible has a different prescription for happiness.  It tells us to love God above of all, and then to love our neighbors as ourselves.  To love God above all means to fall in love with the One whose nature is beauty, truth, goodness and love all wrapped up together.  To love your neighbor as yourself means to desire his happiness as you desire your own.

When you desire your neighbor's happiness, your occasions for happiness are automatically doubled.  If God blesses you, you rejoice.  If God blesses your neighbor, you rejoice.  Therefore, it makes sense to work for your neighbor's good in the same way that you work for your own.

People who love their neighbors as themselves are not out frantically searching for more self-esteem.  They don't have time for that kind of nonsense.