Who Is Really In Control?

Recently I read the story of an Army Chaplain who had lost his faith. He served the troops in Iraq shortly after the invasion of 2003, witnessing the horrors of war. When he got home he discovered that his marriage had exploded in his absence. He concluded that God, who could have prevented any or all of this, was cruel and immoral, that God was not love, that God did not care. And so he gave up any real faith in God or a desire to serve God.

The story brought up the old question of "theodicy" and the sovereignty of God. What does is really mean when we say that God is control? And what difference does it make?

For some, the sovereignty of God amounts to little more than philosophical determinism. It's just really a matter of fate. What will be will be. Human free will and choice are illusions. Everything that happens is simply a matter of God's sovereign will. Therefore, we are not really accountable - no matter what we do, we will in the end live out God's irresistible plan for our lives.

For others, God himself is still learning, growing. Nothing is pre-determined. The future is what we make of it. Although God has overall authority in God's creation, he has set it up so that he is not (and can not be) in control of the details along the way - just final destinations. 

The problem for us - as is often the truth - is that the Bible can be used to justify both of these positions. Since the Bible is not a collection of philosophical principles but rather the story of God's purpose for and interaction with God's creation, you can't settle a philosophical argument with Scripture. 

The fact is this: When the Bible says that "God is love," it teaches us that God is a personal, relational, dynamic, interactive God. The divine characteristic of "love" determines everything God does and the way God does it. We are not pieces on God's chessboard, and we are not living in self-determined chaos. Or as Albert Einstein once said, "God does not play dice with the world." At the very least, the sovereignty of God means that God has the first word and God has the last word, and that God personally and relationally oversees the process in between. And yes, we do make real choices along the way. 

Which brings up the subject of "faith." You would think our understanding of faith would be fairly simple, but it is one of the most debated ideas in Christianity. Your perspective on the sovereignty of God will literally determine how you define "faith," and how that works out in your life. For some, faith is simple trust and acceptance of God's sovereign will. For others, faith is the metaphysical force God uses to work, and by learning the proper ways of saying things (and perhaps visualizing things), we can use that same force to get God to work in the way that seems best. 

The fact is this: faith is the ability to trust God, no matter what. Faith also involves the powerful, dynamic, personal ability to discern God's will in a situation, and by agreeing with God, see God's will actually accomplished. Faith is a human response, but faith is also the gift of God. However, faith is never a process we initiate or control. Faith is always our response to God's initiative. There is not a magic method guaranteed to work every time. We may have our favorite methods (of prayer, confession, etc.), but the sovereignty of God means that God always has the last word. God alone gets to choose when it works and when it does not work. Any attempt on the part of human beings to be in control of the process is magic, not faith. If God is not in control, then God is not God.

So my question for the Army chaplain is this: What would you have God do? Do you want God to reprogram the minds of the political leaders so that we could never go to war? Would you want God do simply destroy all the enemies of the American Army? What if God placed an angelic shield over all of the American troops so that bullets and bombs simply bounced off of them? If all of God's works and all of God's methods are relational, designed to facilitate opportunities for men and women to be reconciled to him, and for the reconciled to grow in Christllikeness, what would be the best way for God to work in a situation? 

Fortunately, the end of the story for our Army chaplain includes his own healing, restoration with a new family, and a return to Christian vocational ministry. In the end, he learned something new about God and something new about faith. It reminds me of Psalm 73. Read it and share your thoughts with me.

Community Shepherds

Recently I had a discussion with my dad about his community work with community leaders. Dad is a retired pastor who loves the local church and local pastors. After telling me about all the community leaders who were effectively representing God's Kingdom in their sphere of influence, he expressed disappointment that local pastors seemed to be preoccupied with the typical three concerns of "buildings, bodies and budgets." They were more focused on maintaining their authority in their local congregations and with competing with other congregations than they were providing redemptive leadership in the community.

As we shared and prayed together I remembered the ministry and message of the Old Testament prophets. They were faithful, in the context of God's covenant, to remind the local leaders of their responsibilities before God. In the words of Dr. King, it was their responsibility to "speak truth to power." And they didn't just address their message to the local priests but to all kinds and levels of local leadership:

• They addressed their message to Kings, to civil, governmental leaders (e.g., Isaiah 7 & Jeremiah 13).
• The prophets spoke to the Wise or Sages, to the local educators and counselors (e.g., Jeremiah 8 & Hosea 14).
• The prophets were faithful to deliver the word of the Lord to Priests, to local religious leaders (e.g., Isaiah 28 & Ezekiel 22).
• They also called False Prophets to account, those who only spoke what those in power wanted to hear in order to gain influence for themselves (e.g., Isaiah 44 & Jeremiah 50).

What strikes me as significant in these prophetic passages is the fact that God (and God's prophets) did not consider one kind of leadership more significant than another. All were governing with God's delegated authority. All were equally accountable to God for the nature and results of their leadership.

In fact, the prophets used one word to describe all community leaders: Shepherd. The Lord viewed every leader as someone God had appointed to shepherd - to lead, feed, guard and care for God's sheep. The Kings were to faithfully shepherd God's people (Micah 7:14). Even the future Persian Emperor, Cyrus, was referred to by God as a "shepherd" (Isaiah 44:28). God's view of God's own leadership was that of a shepherd (Jeremiah 31:10; Ezekiel 34:16). All leaders were judged by how effectively they shepherded the flock God had assigned to them (Ezekiel 34:2-10). If people and communities thrived under a leader's governance, it showed they had shepherded well. If people and communities suffered as a result of a leader's influence (usually because they were using their authority to benefit themselves), they were judged by God (Zechariah 11:17).

In my conversation with my dad my conclusion was simple: God requires all local leaders - civil, educational, business and religious - to faithfully shepherd the citizens of that community. While it might be frustrating getting local pastors to see the big picture, when the mayor and the superintendent of schools, and even local business people, lawyers and judges, are all committed to being faithful shepherds as representatives of King Jesus in the community, there is much to celebrate! In fact, if local pastors spent more time exercising a redemptive influence in the broader community among the other community leaders, their prayer to see God's kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven, might come closer to fulfillment! Well done, Dad!