Toward the end of this semester of the Life Span Development class I teach, we were discussing Erikson's middle adulthood stage of Generativity vs. Stagnation. Simply put, it is in this stage that 40-somethings begin to reflect on their life and see what kind of legacy they are leaving behind. As a part of this discussion we address the existential issue of meaning. Since HSU is a Christian University, as a part of this chapter I introduce the notion that the idea that "everything happens for a purpose" might be a bit off-base. What I believe to be true, is slightly, but importantly different. I believe "from everything a purpose can come." I don't want to take too much time clarifying and explaining the difference (I already did that in a previous post a while ago). As I offered my reasoning for the difference, a student raised her hand and asked me if I believed the saying, "there is no such thing as coincidence." I thought for a moment formulating a response because I know how fervently some people can cling to such cliches as theological "shortcuts." I decided the best route to follow was the frankly honest route.
No, I don't believe that there is "no such thing as coincidence." Simply because of the absolute nature of the statement -- "NO such thing..." I understand and appreciate the sentiment of the cliche which is to illustrate how God can work covertly to bring about "divine appointments" that others might simply explain away as simple coincidence. It is the notion that every thing is connected and predetermined for a deeper meaning that only we can know in hindsight in this life or ultimately revealed to us in the next. Again, I take issue with the absolute nature of that sentiment. As an example, I shared how the other day my boss and I coincidentally wore the same color scheme to work (melon green polo shirt and khaki pants). We don't have a uniform at work and we didn't call each other and arrange to be "twinkies" it just happened by coincidence. To believe there is "no such thing" would be to assign some type of deeper meaning to the unwitting coordination of colors. I simply don't believe that to be the case. Therefore, I do believe in coincidence.
However, I have had experiences that many would chalk-up to coincidence that I believe is true to the spirit of that cliche. There have been numerous times I have had a random thought about an old friend or a former client who have not been an active part of my life for months or years and this friend calls out of the blue or the client returns to therapy within days of that seeming random thought. It is almost like retrospective foreshadowing and I immediately believe there is a reason and orchestration to this "coincidence".
God still works in mysterious ways.
Showing posts with label faith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label faith. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Saturday, November 27, 2010
More Than We Can Handle
The following is an unedited copy of an article I wrote for the Abilene Mental Health Association's series on integrating faith and psychology that will be published sometime in December in the Abilene Reporter News. This subject has been a pet-peeve of mine for some time.
=========================================
I know why we do it. We know and love someone who is experiencing grief related to a death or surviving a trauma of some sort and we want to offer words of encouragement and hope to let them know we love them and are hurting for them. For many people, being around those who are hurting is an uncomfortable experience so they reach for something to say that might break the tension they feel. One of the most common offerings given to those grieving is common Christian clichés that many believe are grounded biblically and therefore can bring comfort. One of the most common clichés given is “God will never give you more than you can handle.” This statement is going to be examined along two levels. The first level is looking at the biblical basis for the cliché and the second is following the logic of the cliché and assessing whether or not we are expressing what is true and helpful to those grieving.
“God will never give us more than we can handle.” The only place in scripture I can find any semblance of support for this sentiment is in 1 Corinthians 10:13 that reads: “No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it” (NIV, emphasis mine). This text speaks of temptation and not trial. James’ epistle speaks of trials as a testing of our faith, not a testing of our own strength. The life of faith is a life to be lived dependent upon God’s work in and through us. In fact, it seems to be a central theme to the whole of scripture that God consistently gives us more than we can handle because when we recognize we cannot handle our circumstances, we are open to recognizing our God who can handle any and all of our suffering and pain. Consider the Old Testament account of the 12 spies sent to investigate the Promised Land. Ten of the spies returned discouraged believing the land would never be theirs as God had promised because the men were like giants. Two of the spies, the faithful spies (Caleb and Joshua) focused rather on God’s ability not man’s inability. The message of this cliché seems to be that it is God’s role to filter through trials, protect us against those that are too tough for us, and allow only those we are strong enough to bear. While God is in the equation of this cliché, the focus of the cliché is on us and our ability which, again, seems contrary to a life of faith.
Evangelist Richard Jackson has said that God often does not get enough credit for things he is responsible for, and often gets too much blame for things He is not. It is this sentiment that fuels my examination of these cliché’s. If we are to offer words of comfort, let’s make sure they are genuine representatives of God in our suffering. The place of God in our suffering is with us and in us via His Holy Spirit. In this example of God’s presence with us, that we can find how to truly be a comforter in the lives of those we love. Honestly, the best comfort most people can give is not in their words of wisdom, but in their presence. The Jewish people have a tradition of “Sitting Shiva” for those who are grieving. In this practice a person is simply being present. There is no pressure to speak or act, simply to be. The presence of one person who cares is more powerful than a book filled with clichés.
=========================================
I know why we do it. We know and love someone who is experiencing grief related to a death or surviving a trauma of some sort and we want to offer words of encouragement and hope to let them know we love them and are hurting for them. For many people, being around those who are hurting is an uncomfortable experience so they reach for something to say that might break the tension they feel. One of the most common offerings given to those grieving is common Christian clichés that many believe are grounded biblically and therefore can bring comfort. One of the most common clichés given is “God will never give you more than you can handle.” This statement is going to be examined along two levels. The first level is looking at the biblical basis for the cliché and the second is following the logic of the cliché and assessing whether or not we are expressing what is true and helpful to those grieving.
“God will never give us more than we can handle.” The only place in scripture I can find any semblance of support for this sentiment is in 1 Corinthians 10:13 that reads: “No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it” (NIV, emphasis mine). This text speaks of temptation and not trial. James’ epistle speaks of trials as a testing of our faith, not a testing of our own strength. The life of faith is a life to be lived dependent upon God’s work in and through us. In fact, it seems to be a central theme to the whole of scripture that God consistently gives us more than we can handle because when we recognize we cannot handle our circumstances, we are open to recognizing our God who can handle any and all of our suffering and pain. Consider the Old Testament account of the 12 spies sent to investigate the Promised Land. Ten of the spies returned discouraged believing the land would never be theirs as God had promised because the men were like giants. Two of the spies, the faithful spies (Caleb and Joshua) focused rather on God’s ability not man’s inability. The message of this cliché seems to be that it is God’s role to filter through trials, protect us against those that are too tough for us, and allow only those we are strong enough to bear. While God is in the equation of this cliché, the focus of the cliché is on us and our ability which, again, seems contrary to a life of faith.
Evangelist Richard Jackson has said that God often does not get enough credit for things he is responsible for, and often gets too much blame for things He is not. It is this sentiment that fuels my examination of these cliché’s. If we are to offer words of comfort, let’s make sure they are genuine representatives of God in our suffering. The place of God in our suffering is with us and in us via His Holy Spirit. In this example of God’s presence with us, that we can find how to truly be a comforter in the lives of those we love. Honestly, the best comfort most people can give is not in their words of wisdom, but in their presence. The Jewish people have a tradition of “Sitting Shiva” for those who are grieving. In this practice a person is simply being present. There is no pressure to speak or act, simply to be. The presence of one person who cares is more powerful than a book filled with clichés.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Brickwalls and Trampolines
I learned a long time ago, but not soon enough, that debate and dogma bear very little fruit worth consumption. I used to be the guy who would welcome the Mormon and Jehovah's Witness folks into my home so I could argue with them about how wrong they are in the hopes that my strong argument would somehow win them over to my side. What I realized in every instance was that they were as passionate and steadfast in what they believe as I am in what I believe. Now, don't interpret what I'm writing to be a relativist acceptance of all religions as truth, just an observation that all religions have passionate followers and debate does nothing more than solidify people in their belief. It had the reverse effect of what I was hoping for. Just like the parent of the adolescent who forbids his/her son/daughter from dating someone. So, I have given up on passionate debate. Until the other day...
I got rooked into one of those stupid "comment" debates on Facebook over a couple of people's assertion that pastor/teacher/author Rob Bell is a heretic. Notice in this case it was not someone from a DIFFERENT religion which makes this all the more sad. I won't bore you with the details. The summary of the exchanges is that I was simply trying to note that I had been listening to Bell's podcasts for over a year and never heard anything I would consider heresy. This other guy, (we'll call him "Dwayne" because I like the way that name sounds, say it out loud, "Dwayne!") chose to make his argument about the "postmodern movement in Christianity" and the need for its demise and the advocacy for more apologetics. "Apologetics" is Christian code for "debate." Fortunately, when I realized his over-generalization, I stopped commenting because it was getting off the point. The point being, one man, one fallible man, doesn't seem to be teaching heresy. I am not and do not idolize or hang on every word of this man. I find him engaging and his perspective fresh because he and I agree that increasing debate will only increase division (within our own faith) which does nothing but distract from doing good (Eph. 2:8-10) and decreases our efficacy in society as a whole.
Just as with every debate I have ever been in, the result was further solidarity to my view point and while I had only listened to Bell and never read any of his books, I ordered Velvet Elvis on my Kindle and have begun reading. In his first chapter, Bell uses two metaphors to illustrate the two sides of this Facebook debate. In speaking of doctrine (which is important but not more important than the object of that doctrine)Bell writes of trampoline springs and brick walls. One is much more flexible and pliable than the other and there is room for growth. The other is inflexible and unmovable. Those in favor of brick walls make faith about doctrine and derive meaning and confidence in their inflexible doctrines. Bell notes that walls have to be defended and when was the last time anyone had to defend a trampoline. Trampolines are about enjoying and inviting others to enjoy. A defensive faith is not a welcoming faith.
All of this is summed up in the famous words credited to St. Francis of Assisi, "Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words." I want my life and how I engage this world to be my witness, not my defenses. I want to spend more time jumping and inviting others to jump, and less time dividing -- especially among our own faith. I want to be the guy who welcomes Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in my home for a cup of coffee and conversation, not an argument.
I got rooked into one of those stupid "comment" debates on Facebook over a couple of people's assertion that pastor/teacher/author Rob Bell is a heretic. Notice in this case it was not someone from a DIFFERENT religion which makes this all the more sad. I won't bore you with the details. The summary of the exchanges is that I was simply trying to note that I had been listening to Bell's podcasts for over a year and never heard anything I would consider heresy. This other guy, (we'll call him "Dwayne" because I like the way that name sounds, say it out loud, "Dwayne!") chose to make his argument about the "postmodern movement in Christianity" and the need for its demise and the advocacy for more apologetics. "Apologetics" is Christian code for "debate." Fortunately, when I realized his over-generalization, I stopped commenting because it was getting off the point. The point being, one man, one fallible man, doesn't seem to be teaching heresy. I am not and do not idolize or hang on every word of this man. I find him engaging and his perspective fresh because he and I agree that increasing debate will only increase division (within our own faith) which does nothing but distract from doing good (Eph. 2:8-10) and decreases our efficacy in society as a whole.
Just as with every debate I have ever been in, the result was further solidarity to my view point and while I had only listened to Bell and never read any of his books, I ordered Velvet Elvis on my Kindle and have begun reading. In his first chapter, Bell uses two metaphors to illustrate the two sides of this Facebook debate. In speaking of doctrine (which is important but not more important than the object of that doctrine)Bell writes of trampoline springs and brick walls. One is much more flexible and pliable than the other and there is room for growth. The other is inflexible and unmovable. Those in favor of brick walls make faith about doctrine and derive meaning and confidence in their inflexible doctrines. Bell notes that walls have to be defended and when was the last time anyone had to defend a trampoline. Trampolines are about enjoying and inviting others to enjoy. A defensive faith is not a welcoming faith.
All of this is summed up in the famous words credited to St. Francis of Assisi, "Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words." I want my life and how I engage this world to be my witness, not my defenses. I want to spend more time jumping and inviting others to jump, and less time dividing -- especially among our own faith. I want to be the guy who welcomes Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in my home for a cup of coffee and conversation, not an argument.
Monday, May 19, 2008
A Prayer for My Daughter
On April 2, my daughter turned 13. That's 13 YEARS old. I'm not handling it very well.
I understand that this is just the beginning of many years where my baby girl is less and less a baby and more and more a lady.
To top it all off, on May 16 she had her first "date." Well, it wasn't a date, date. She went to a banquet with a boy and afterwards she, he, and all her friends stayed for a dance at which I don't think they ever danced together. I can handle that, OK.
These adolescent years are so critical, and I know she will be faced with choices and situations that will have a hand in defining who she will be.
All this has me thinking more and more of the lady I want her to become. I want her to be a woman of deep faith and love for God that spills over into her love for people. With all the choices she is facing I want Christ to be her first consideration and final word. There will be mistakes and there will be hard times. It is in those she will come to understand and appreciate grace. It is going to be difficult for me to see her hurt with her first heart break and struggle with regret.
I want to be the hands, feet, arms, and ears of God to her through all this to demonstrate our Father's love and grace.
As I was waiting for our Sunday morning Bible Study to begin, I was reading through the first chapter of Phillipians and ran across a passage that immediately caused me to think of my daughter.
And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in
knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best
and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of
righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ -- to the glory and praise of
God. (Philippians 1:9-11)
Paul sums up what I have in my heart for my daughter as we enter into this phase of her life. I want her love of God to abound through her increased knowledge and understanding of Him so that He will provide her witih the ability to make Christ-centered choices and ultimately point others to the same God she is following and loving.
I still can't believe she is 13... years... that is...
Thursday, February 28, 2008
One more thing...
In my post yesterday, I did not address the issue of how my faith is influencing this opinion. I agree again with Christine that as followers of Christ it is imperative that we "care for the widows and orphans" and in today's society that includes equal access to health care. I filter this imperative with the understanding that God typically gives us a choice to obey or not to obey. There will be consequences respective to our choices. Therefore, since God does not force us into obedience, I don't deem it appropriate for government to do so with regard to this issue.
Let me again explain that I am not in favor of keeping the health care system the same, nor am I in favor of Canadian-style "socialized medicine" there has to be a medium-ground solution.
Let me again explain that I am not in favor of keeping the health care system the same, nor am I in favor of Canadian-style "socialized medicine" there has to be a medium-ground solution.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)