Subject: Suffering and God's providence |
Bible Note: Mark, please see my response to Tim. That God allows suffering, I can agree. I cannot agree that God causes suffering, at least, not to believers. That is not to say suffering is not a result of God's actions or that believers never suffer. I agree, “Jesus was made complete through suffering,” however, that is not necessarily the case for believers. They can choose to rebel. Regarding your analogy with the tabletop: (1) God would rather we learn by just obeying his word. (2) However, there is no disagreement that our state as fallen may require “sanding”. (3) Again, Jesus’ suffering can only be taken so far as an example. It was God’s specific purpose for him to be a sacrifice for sin and, therefore, suffer and die (John 6:38; Heb 10:7-10). I have already discussed Isa 53:10. Again, I am not denying a “theology of suffering” or that believers never experience it. I do deny that suffering itself is God’s will and intention for his people. Regarding the man “imprisoned for 70 days”, if, as it is here asserted that suffering itself is God’s will, then he would now be out of God will. Ten Boom is no lightweight! But still, her experience does not mean that it was God who wanted and intended for her to suffer. Under the circumstances, if God wanted her to be a witness in those terrible times (and I believe he did), then she would have to go through the suffering. But I think God placed her there, not to suffer per se, but to be a witness; in spite of suffering she needed to go through it in order to fulfill her commission by God. A possible reason why God choose suffering – to break us – was because we are already broken? He wants to break even more what is already broken (cf. Isa 42:3)? |