Pakistan, Denying Them Answers, Job & God Overwhelmed

Fatal Tragedy / Beyond This Life

Pakistan is still reeling from the destruction of the floods. I have personal friends who are struggling through and offering their presence to these families. I think that’s the key, not offering them answers; answers can be destructive. Peace isn’t finding an answer to your problem, its knowing that you’re not alone.

The last thing we should do is offer the victims answers. We can’t control nature. If anything, nature reminds us time again that we are exiled from our illusions of power. Nature reminds us that we are truly unsovereign beings. Powerless, without answers to fix it all.

I recently watched 2012 with John Cusack, another apocalyptic narrative of humanity rescuing the world from the end of itself. But, I think that’s where the movie errs. I think we need to the world reach the end of itself. The more we sustain the world in the matrix of its empty promises, the more we become the sentient beings who exist only to insure its survival.

Much like the woman in the CNN footage who is mourning the tragic loss of her ‘Golden Boy’, I think Christianitys’ golden boy is the idea that we are meant to offer answers. If anything, we are more like the local fisherman who are there ‘fishing’ out the dead bodies. Our presence has more influence than any answer could. that is the dangerous assumption within the matrix of Christianity, that we have all the answers, and that the answers will fix everything. Sometimes the truth will imprison you rather than set you free.

If we think of truth as something that itself leads to an end, than truth will demonstrate its inflexibility by creating bars that we eventually will call home. I think that we have to come to a place where realize Christianity isn’t about offering answers, but rather presence. The answers negate the experience. Salvation in the orthodox sense is an answer, rather the idea of the incarnation was a helpless, powerless baby coming not to give answers, but to be present.

Salvation means healing, not healed.

There is a direct difference in those words, the semantic structure of each word says a lot about the intentions of who is bringing the salvation. Maybe, we can embrace truth as something that progresses and evolves, much like the ancient Eastern religions. Rather than trying to colonize truth and offer it others, maybe we can invite others to race with us discovering the speedily pace of truth that leads us into our own personal evolution.

Much like in the story of Job, God doesn’t respond to Job’s deep struggles with answers, in fact, he avoids them. Maybe like philosophe Slavoj Zizek posits, God is overwhelmed by how messy her creation really turned out. So, rather than offering answers to Job, God sits in the unrest with Job, God doesn’t rail at Job, God shares in the frustration. God and Job are overwhelmed by the experience — Together.

I think the last thing the gospel was meant to be was an answer.

Maybe a reminder that we’re not alone through the junk we go through. Maybe like the fisherman, we are looking for those moments of deadness and picking them up and sadly letting them go.

Notice when Jesus utters the words “I have come to give you life to the full” – he doesn’t say: ” I have come to give you a life filled with answers, with peace, with more money than you can handle, or anything the American dream can offer. The word for full or abundant in the Hebrew means overwhelming, more than you can handle.

A life consumed by life.

But in life, there is sadness, there is struggle, there is pain, there is hope, laughter, friendship, betrayal, and beauty. But, most of the beauty we experience is in the breakdown. Jesus offers consummation. Offers a space where can experience the overwhelming confusion and beauty all at the same time. If we offer people answers, than we deny them the experience of a life to the full.

Creation is Dying – What Can We Do?

This week I have read several articles about the impact of the oil spill that is now hitting the Louisiana coast.  Looking at some of these photos this morning  filled me with despair and left me feeling helpless.  But the impact of this catastrophe goes far beyond what is happening on the Gulf coast and the solutions we need should go far beyond the endeavours to still the flow and clean up the coastline.  For many of us this problem though horrible seems far away and disconnected from our lives.

Sojourner’s fundraising email this morning and the post Jim Wallis recently added to sojonet about the oil spill challenged me to think beyond the immediate disaster to the deeper question – the need for all of us to reconsider our lifestyles.

With every headline, I am challenged again – as I’m sure you are as well – to reconsider my own lifestyle. Where do I draw the line on my energy consumption? How can I educate others about the effects of energy greed? How do I advocate for strong climate change legislation?

The questions they ask are important for all of us to grapple with.  Our daily decisions about driving, flying and eating all contribute to the huge consumption of oil that is the accepted norm in our world today.  I grapple with this everyday as so much of our ministry is dependent on flying across the country and around the world and I am not sure that carbon offsets really make that much difference.

So what can we do?  Here are some great suggestions from this Grist article 10 Ways to Kick the Offshore Oil Habit for things that all of us can do to make a difference.  We don’t need to be politicians to see the world change in fact I am sure that change is more likely to come through the small and seemingly insignificant mustard seeds planted by ordinary people everywhere.

Creation does indeed groan waiting to be set free from the curse of death and decay (Romans 8:20 – 22).  And part of that groaning I think is that creation waits too for humankind to recognize its responsibility to be good stewards of the world that is entrusted into our care.

So what can we do – apart from the usual efforts of using public transport, eating local food & getting rid of gas guzzling cars what creative solutions have you found that cut your oil consumption?

Christine Sine blogs at Godspace.

The Cosmos is all that is…

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/upload/2010/01/i_am_not_afraid_to_believe_in/bigbang.jpgDoes a finite universe that creates itself eliminate the need for a Creator God? Stephen Hawking answers with a yes. He pulls no punches again Christian creation theology in spelling out the implications he sees in his scientific work. A universe that started with a boundless sphere from which time emerged would need no extra Creator. The sphere sufficiently plays that role.

Hawking was always bothered by the popular picture of the Big Bang in which there is absolutely nothing and suddenly a brilliant explosion of matter and energy followed by rapid expansion. It seemed to be a scientific end-game because it had unscientific implications in his eyes. A singularity and Big Bang that appeared from nowhere begged scientists to accept the theological idea of creation ex nihilo. Astronomer Robert Jastrow’s frequently quoted conclusion to God and the Astronomers drives Hawking’s fear home:

Now we would like to pursue that inquiry farther back in time, but the barrier to further progress seems insurmountable. It is not a matter of another year, another decade of work, another measurement, or another theory; at this moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; and as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries (107).

Hawking’s no boundary proposal covered last week is his explicit attempt to overturn Jastrow’s sort of thinking and keep scientific theories about creation alive. He has calculated the math required for a curved four-dimensional space-time that is finite with time contained within it, but boundless like a sphere. If this theory holds (likely in some modified version since Hawking’s theory is highly speculative), Hawking thinks that he will have achieved his goal of avoiding a singularity in which the laws of physics do not apply and before which scientists have nothing to say. This means that philosophers, theologians, and scientists would no longer “have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time” (Hawking, A Brief History of Time, 136). In short, arguing from the presence of a temporal beginning of the universe to the existence of God is specious because “the concept of time has no meaning before the beginning of the universe” (A Brief History of Time, 8).

The reason this cosmological picture looks bad for theologians is that a boundless sphere can persist “forever” before expanding via the Big Bang because it persisted when time did not exist. However, lest I be accused of making astronomers into angry mean-spirited people who like to eliminate meaning in the universe, it is worth mentioning just how captivating and beautiful this Godless picture can be. I can think of nobody better to give that sense of beauty than one of the world’s greatest public scientists for whom Hawking has taken over in the realm of astronomy after his death, Carl Sagan. I’ll let him speak for himself, as he is far more poetic than I am:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7n71pm0K04