Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to this people? Who will go for us?” I said, “Here I am. Send me.” And he said, “Yes, go, and say to this people, ‘Listen carefully, but do not understand. Watch closely, but learn nothing.’ Harden the hearts of these people. Plug their ears and shut their eyes. That way, they will not see with their eyes, nor hear with their ears, nor understand with their hearts and turn to me for healing.” [Isaiah 6.8-10]
What I get from this passage today is that healing comes from a soft heart toward God as well as open ears and eyes toward God.
Is it safe to conclude then, that when we are in need of healing it is necessary that we soften our hearts and open our eyes and ears to God? I think so.
However, many disagree with my conclusion above. Many have adopted a belief that God is unpredictable and random in doling out sickness and hardships for their good (to somehow bless His people) but these people give no consideration that all through the Bible these bad things were indicators of the need for repentance. They were clearly defined in Deuteronomy 28 as curses for disobedience. The problem with this "suffering-blessing" theology is that leaves the poor sufferer helpless to know whether he has sinned or his suffering is God's blessing. In other words, he doesn't know if his hard times are a blessing or a curse!
Here is the real danger of the suffering-blessing theology: if a person considers hardships as blessings from God, then what if they are wrong? Then they have un-confessed sin in their lives - the outcome of which is not good.
If, on the other hand, a person does not adopt the suffering-blessing theology, and responds to all suffering with repentance, if he is wrong, he at least has no un-confessed sin over his life.
For me, I would rather go with the latter option.
Along with the real danger of embracing the suffering-blessing theology is the even more prevalent danger of pride in one's self-declaration of innocence. Do we dare contradict Deuteronomy 28 to say our hard times are no fault of our own?
I will address the "Full Gospel" group here as well... While the consequences for disobedience are the functional work of our enemy (Satan), we cannot proudly rebuke the enemy claiming our deliverance without first purging ourselves of responsibility for our trials (ie. repenting). Pain and suffering have a specific design: to make humans see the error of their ways (again, Deut. 28). If we run past the obvious indicators of the need for repentance and start rebuking the enemy, we have, just like the suffering-blessing adherents, exhibited pride and arrogance before our Holy God.
The irony of this is that both theologies discussed here, as vehemently as they oppose one another, have this common denominator: neither side wants to repent.
Repentance requires a humbling of ourselves. Frankly, I just don't see a whole lot of this in either theology discussed above. Both sides of the discussion would argue that "Jesus paid it all" - but neither will recall that Jesus' consistent message to people was: REPENT (for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand)!
So, while we persist in our arguments about who is right and who is wrong on this topic of suffering and hardships, we sail right past the perfect opportunity to "humble ourselves and pray and seek God's face and turn from our wicked ways..."
The argument seems kind of silly now, doesn't it? Eternally silly. Even worse, damnable. God help us.
Father, forgive me for pride and arrogance. Forgive me for embracing innocence in the face of guilty-indicators. Forgive me for being so stubborn.
No comments:
Post a Comment