Nothing cute. Not even an attempt at clever. Here goes.
So today I’m hangin’ with a bunch of good Christian folks, listening to a Baptist preacher talk about forgiveness. He had many good things to say. I’d venture that we could all stand to hear more about forgiveness and I admit to being much edified by his exhortations.
But, you know me (those of you who know me–and I’m pretty sure you’re most of who reads this blog), I’ve got to pick my nits. Three big ones:
1) In the midst of saying that forgiveness isn’t a one-time event, that we have to continue to forgive the same offense and that we shouldn’t be surprised or discouraged by this fact, he had to go and say that salvation is the one thing that’s once and done. And he even used the language of trusting Jesus: as in, trust Jesus that one time and you’re good. It’s just way too ironic, if you ask me; and if you don’t see the irony, I doubt it’ll do much good for me to try to point it out. I may or may not agree with the doctrine (and, really, my argument with traditional soteriologies goes way deeper than the fluff of eternal security). Here’s the core problem: our distorted preoccupation with it is clearly counter-productive. Born-agains (and I’ll just go ahead and count myself among you) blab all of the time about relationship, but most of our theology belies it. I ask you this: what kind of marriage ends with “I do”? And is this whole God thing just a ruse? Are we mostly intending to use the Almighty as an access ramp (a ballsy maneuver, I must say) to “eternal bliss” (whatever the hell that means), or are we really interested in One Thing? Decide for yourself. I’m interested in God, in relationship, in genuine intimacy. And I’m uninterested in contorting the reality of that relationship to make my systematic theology more comfortable. Completely. Uninterested.
2) I think we spend way too much time talking about the fact that we all deserve death. Maybe that makes me a bad Christian. Probably. Okay, label me. I don’t feel any different.
3) He made some great points about actually reckoning the wrong that’s been done against us. Denial isn’t forgiveness. Here’s my problem, though. It gets back to item #2. People, it seems to me, are relatively easy to forgive. They are weak, ignorant, damaged. They are, in other words, too much like me. If I can’t forgive y’all, well how in heck can I expect to forgive–and be forgiven–myself? Jesus was right (damned irritating habit He has): “they know not what they do.” We act upon our hurt and insecurity, and, God bless us, we’re mostly friggin’ clueless. And it seems to me that too much of our practical theology focuses on holding the clueless accountable. There, I said it. Again, maybe it makes me a bad Christian to feel that way. So be it.
And here’s how all of this fits together, here’s the rub. By my estimation, we spend far too much of our time, as Milton so nobly and foolishly set out (and in the process, joined cause with Job’s “friends,” and brought great, undeserved praise to the accuser) attempting “to justify the ways of God to men.” It’s come up far too often in my spiritual journey for me to feasibly deny: the one I have a hard time forgiving is God. If anyone is accountable, it’s Him. If anyone has what to answer for (and wherewithal to do it, I might add), well, He’s the one. And I’m not righteous like Job, but I presume to ask that God answer for Himself. I’ve not been much impressed by what most humans have to say on His behalf.
And, if I may, I’d like to piss off the rest of you by saying that I don’t want any of your weakass sh*t about God not existing. Yes, it’s probably the case that I’m no longer capable of comprehending such a possibility and maybe that’s one of my weaknesses. And I hasten to add that I have great respect for some atheists. Here’s my problem with the default to disbelief: more often than not, it’s a cop out. More often than not, it’s simply a matter of our not being able to fit God in our heads or make sense of what He does. Let me say it as clearly as possible: that God is nonsensical to me doesn’t mean She doesn’t exist; that I can’t render Her as a wholly palatable idea (and here’s the critical error, I think: we’re committed to God more as an idea than a person) that fits in my puny heart doesn’t mean I should give up on Her. I don’t know about the rest of you, but that just makes the pursuit more exciting.
I close with this. I love God. In my own weak way, I love Him, Her, Hirm. What’s more, I like Hirm a lot. And we have our sweet moments. I consider this journey one toward a truer reconciliation. I don’t expect it to be painless. And I’m not looking for a divorce. But I’m sick of platitudes and easy outs. If we’re going to do this, let do it for reals. I mean to be naked before God. (S)He sees my nakedness anyway, doesn’t S(H)e? I’ve spent too much of my life lying in the name of and for the sake of religion.
So I present for your consideration (of course, as with every topic I introduce, I’ll attack it intermittently; but this, I think, is at the core of all of my considerations of faith and doubt so maybe it’s subtext to all of the other nonsense): the impossibility, the necessity, the quest of forgiving God.
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
Fri - 2009/05/08 at 04:56
Lindsey
I totally get the irony in your first point. I don’t believe that we can work to “earn” our salvation, but I personally feel I work to “keep” it every day. Of course I’m one of those dangerous post-moderns some Evangelicals talk about in the same fearful tones that are used when they mention gays tearing apart the fabric of society.
You know, cause us post-modern spiritualists are tearing at the fabric of organized religion. (Which I do. With relish. And ketchup!)
Fri - 2009/05/08 at 06:15
Brett
I really resonate with your thinking that it’s easy to forgive humans but much more difficult to forgive God. I’ve never been able to articulate this as clearly as you just did. Thanks for sharing.
Sun - 2009/05/10 at 10:51
Ryon
Joel, you are a smart dude. Too bad you’re not a drinker. You’d make a great alcoholic.
So when are you going to come up to CO and see your mountain peeps? We miss your lanky ass.
Thanks by the way for articulating all the piss flavored (to me its sweet like sherry) theology I haven’t had time to dig into, though its been rolling around in my gourd for a while.
Wed - 2009/05/20 at 19:45
Gabriel
Forgiving God… for what?
And did shehee ask for it?
Thu - 2009/05/21 at 13:02
joelmw
@Gabriel:
1) Anything. Everything. Whatever. The Bible itself is unashamed to enumerate a multitude of legitimate accusations against God. Many of these perceived or actual crimes are left unrefuted; many others are, IMO, lamely rebuked for their mere temerity and impudence. I’m not sure there’s much that couldn’t be blamed on Him (especially when one factors in subjectivity–both His and ours).
2) Probably not. Maybe. His failure to do so is likely a big part of the problem. Forgiveness is a funny thing. I’m lol’ing right now.
As I reflect upon forgiveness and the nature and necessity therefor, I repeatedly return to the conviction that many of the reasons I should and must forgive others are just as–if not often, more–true with God. Besides which, reasons that we might feel that it’s not necessary or prudent to forgive His Almighty Always-Rightness are, at the very least, fruitful avenues for exploration. And my saying I need to forgive God doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m sure He did anything wrong–at least not technically, objectively or, yeah, necessarily. I think that’s what trips us up: we reason that God isn’t ever wrong, so there’s no need to forgive Him. Um, sure; there are so many things wrong with that line of reasoning that I daren’t get started. And with the fact that we’re always “reasoning” our way through these things.
Anyways, worthy questions, which I hope to explore in future ramblings. I do kinda think this is there in the kernel of my nascent theology. I almost said “emerging” theology but, damnitall if that word hasn’t been thoroughly co-opted, compromised and commercialized. Christians. Bless their hearts.
Thu - 2009/05/21 at 20:25
Gabriel
lol’ing — that would be the action of typing an LOL, right? Shouldn’t it be ellingol</em?? 😛
1) I am, personally, still very unhappy that He ever bothered to create the universe. I’m not thankful for life. To put it blunt: Why is He putting us through all this crap? For some hobby? Because He was bored? (***)
2) Maybe everyone is spending so much time jumping to God’s defense because He isn’t. He’s not asking for our forgiveness or approval. Even in Job, in the end, after all of Job’s accusations at God, we are left with: (a) Job’s OK and said what was right, (b) God didn’t apologize. He didn’t even explain. (“You see, there was this bet….”)
“Stop helping God across the road like a little old lady.”
— “Stand Up Comedy” by U2
We might start off by calling it forgiveness, but when we dig deeper, that’s a dead end. To forgive God will be to, literally, give Him grace for a wrong that he’s done to us — and at that, one that He won’t confess. That’s why it’s hard to forgive God. It makes us more righteous than God, and doesn’t do anything to mend the relationship.
Might I suggest that what we’re seeking to do is stop resenting God?
(***) – If anyone is freaking out here, don’t freak out too much. 🙂
Fri - 2009/05/22 at 13:53
Joel
Technically, you’d be right about the lol’ing. Yes, “L-ingOL” does make more sense. And now I’m a little embarrassed, thank you very much. But I’m not too embarrassed. I’m going to say that my form is acceptable. “LOL” is pretty wrong to begin with. Conjugating a verbal acronym is an ill-fated enterprise. And, really, even if we do agree that “ell-ing-oh-ell” is better, try to convince me that you’re sure how that should be spelled and punctuated. W-ingTF. ;-p
Okay, this isn’t going to be a complete reply. I just want to respond to the last bit. Practically speaking, I’d have to say that “stopping resenting” and “forgiving” are close enough that, for our purposes here, they’re pretty much identical.
Well, alright, one other thing. I think that the assertion of superior righteousness is a fundamental flaw in our plans of forgiveness. One might argue that it’s an inevitable byproduct of our spiritual affliction. Still, that doesn’t make it right. Maybe that’s one of the things I most dislike about the forgiveness business in the first place: it can be (not just imply) a kind of arrogance. It shouldn’t be, but I’m gonna say that it probably usually is.
Maybe that’s part of my agenda too: redeeming forgiveness. Yeah, I think it is. May our discomfort forgiving God force us to face the ugliness of our pretense at forgiveness.
Which leads me (via a couple of steps) to the question: does being a Christian intrinsically require that one has a messiah complex?
Well, shoot, I’ve written this much; might as well cover the rest.
re 1) I am thankful for life. I’m frustrated that we don’t get more of it (I’m not talking duration, not primarily at least). God is a tease.
re 2) Nicely put. Yeah, and then some. Job. Job has lots to say about various dimensions of this. But I’d say that one of the biggest things I have to forgive God for is the inadequacy and/or absence of explanation. Yeah, yeah, sure: it’s there; it’s out there–somewhere. But what good is it if no one quite understands it?
Mon - 2009/05/25 at 06:18
Gabriel
Ha! I’m LOLing right now. 🙂
I think the difference is important. “Forgive” implies an indictment against God. That God has offended us, and that He was wrong to do so. The whole concept has several fundamental problems:
(a) It implies a moral standard. But if God is not the moral standard, who is? You are. That’s how it makes you above God.
(b) God isn’t playing this game. He’s written it down plainly: “I’m not changing! :-P”
(c) God has provided no means to be reconciled to man for His sins. So, if you’re trying to get closer in your relationship to God… this won’t help.
On the other hand, “stop resenting” drops the indictment. It changes the problem from “I’m right and God is wrong” to “Ok, I have an attitude problem.” And this has a solution, can restore the relationship, and (I’ve been learning) God even offers help in this. FWIW, this appears to be what Job learned about the subject (“Um, OK. I don’t know what I’m talking about.” Job 42:1-6).
All of this assumes, by the way, that we trust God — or that we aspire to trust God. Without that assumption, all this is just silly noise.
As for thankfulness for life — I wasn’t trying to narrow down the nature of God’s crimes against humanity. I was really just pointing out that I’m not an adversary in this conversation, but a fellow pilgrim. 🙂
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 09:12
Lindsey
@ Gabriel: but isn’t one of many definitions of forgiveness “releasing the right to hold accountable?” By that definition, we’re actually putting ourselves back in our proper place, by saying that God can be God and we will no longer judge His right to do as He please.
As wrong as we may be to do so, humans often DO judge God and find him lacking by our faulty standard, so forgiveness is necessary on that account- forgiveness and repentance for ever having judged.
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 10:20
Joel
@Gabriel: What Lindsey said. 🙂 Thanks, Lindsey.
And stuff.
I generally feel like you’re using the term “forgive” technically and narrowly. Which is something I eschew assiduously. Um, more or less.
I was contemplating a response (not full-time, but intermittently; wouldn’t it be sad if that’s all I’ve been doing for the last week; I’m sad but not that particular way). I had decided to just put it into another blog eventually. And I will.
But I do want to say this: Bro, I don’t consider you an adversary–except perhaps in the friendliest sense, a sense I would apply to any human decent and brave enough to engage in discussion and fruitful disagreement; in that same sense, I would consider my wife to have been and my daughter to be, along with just about everyone I respect. But, really, I don’t use the term often in that sense, so I wouldn’t use it often for you.
In any case, you’re one of the people most willing to disagree with me. That’s something I like a lot. Well, I like it when people disagree with me and don’t hate me at the same time. Christine pointed out recently that this, is indeed, something I require in a life partner. Not, um, that I look at you that way. You’re cute and all, but, yaknow, you’re taken. And I like women. 🙂 These days it seems necessary to clarify such things.
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 12:05
Lindsey
@ Joel: You make me laugh. You and your eschewing assiduously. Kinda.
When I originally read this post, I thought of my own relationship with my parents. I’ve had to forgive them for a lot of stuff they did that was the right thing to do, things that they felt God had called them to do. As a kid all I thought of was the effect it had on me, not the greater good or even my own long term welfare. So I do believe that it is totally possible to need to forgive someone for doing the right thing. Like a kid who is bitter over their parents forcing to do their homework instead of seeing a movie with friends (all though my personal issues weren’t so trite). So often forgiveness really isn’t about judging something based off of an objective standard of good, it’s about releasing one’s own emotional ballast and our emotions just don’t think logically.
I probably should’ve commented more in depth on that at the time, but, well, I like to stew on these things.
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 16:20
Gabriel
“eschew assiduously” — love it!
@Lindsey: Yes, forgiveness is “releasing the right to hold accountable.” What I’m saying is that “forgiveness” has in it “I was owed something” (a right). By forgiving, you’re releasing your claim to that right. But you’re not denying that you ever had the right… in fact, you’re establishing it.
@Joel: I don’t think this is a narrow understanding of forgiveness. In my own mind, I can’t divorce “forgive” from some “right” or “debt.” — and any time I see the word used by others it always bears this burden.
To me, it’s nonsense to say: “Joel, I forgive you for carrying around a man-purse.” But you guys seem to be saying that it does makes sense to say something like that. 🙂
With respect to forgiving God: You didn’t have a right. You weren’t owed. There is no offense. And using the word “forgive” will hinder this truth. [So, then the debate becomes… is this really truth.]
Now, that said — if you can really think of the word forgive without any such baggage, then IMHO you are redefining the word. And generally, I’m OK with redefining words (really)… but you gotta make room for others to catch up. 🙂
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 17:44
Joel
@Gabe: Yeah, I still think you’re putting a burden on “forgiveness” that is by no means necessarily there. I’ve even looked in a couple of dictionaries and I don’t see that it has to carry that weight. In any case, I would argue that perception is still a part of the equation and that even if we were to submit to your arbitrary definition ( ;-p ), you’d still be ignoring that factor.
Moreover, I’ll stick my mortal, fallible human neck out here and say that you’re operating under the assumption that God is right and that that assumption comes from a recognition of God’s power. His holding the power and being therefore ipso facto right about everything is one of my big grievances that He still hasn’t redressed.
Again, I’m not presuming that I’m correct about this. What I am doing (and you might have an issue with this; and I’m okay with that) is at the very least entertaining the possibility thereof and the legitimacy of the feelings that I might be. The greatest likelihood is that I will be wrong. But I think there’s value in just considering that I might be right and what the feelings and perceptions are that give rise to that sense of rightness and, indeed, of having been wronged.
Another aspect that I think you’re ignoring is accountability. To me, it’s often much less important whether someone actually did something wrong (and even in that, their being wrong is important in direct proportion to my being injured by their wrongness and not by the wrongness per se) than what they intended and are able. Well, especially by the absolutist terms from which you’re arguing (which, I confess, are probably orthodox–so you’d win by that criterion), God knows and He wills and, ultimately, what He intends comes to pass. If anyone is worthy of a “The Buck Stops Here” sign, I’d think it’d be the LORD.
And I don’t think a sense of genuine accountability (or, in other words, comprehension, intent, ability and clear causality) is idiosyncratic to my understanding of forgiveness. I think that’s an aspect that many, if not most of us, consider important. But, well, even if I’m in the minority, if necessary, I’m willing to make the argument that the majority is wrong. Consider an infant vs. an adult. The infant might do more things that are “wrong,” but we don’t hold that infant to the same standard of judgment as the adult. Seriously, if a 3-month old pees on your furniture does that carry the same judgment as when the adult does? I’ll more likely hold myself (or, hmm, the attending guardian; see where that leads?) responsible for the infant’s actions. Do I need to forgive the child? Maybe (though I’m not entirely sure there’s anything to be forgiven). But I would definitely need to forgive the adult. And that holds (especially in the immediacy of the moment) even if I later discover some virtue in the peeing.
Yeah, the more I think about it, the more important comprehension and power–and my perception of them–are.
But, don’t worry, bro: whether you’re acting from ignorance or willful obstinance, I forgive you. ;-p
Mon - 2009/06/01 at 18:52
Gabriel
I accept your forgiveness. I also forgive you for disagreeing with me. Really, I won’t ever hold that against you again. 😛
Seriously, though. I forgive you.
No… really… seriously… I think you’ve pretty much said what I’m getting at. I think that before you can forgive God, you’ve got to wrestle with whether or not he actually did anything wrong. And what that means.
BTW, I’m not trying to impose my conclusions on you (even though some of my comments might seem to be so). I think it’s a personal struggle.