I agree with Teragram too.

I agree with you both that there’s mystery here that’s way beyond what we can hope to understand, and that we should avoid neat systematic explanations.

We all definitely agree that shrinking God to make him less powerful and transcendent is not a good way to resolve the mystery.

Teragram has highlighted some downright shoddy carelessness in my language. I think if I change one word and say “This is not the way things ARE meant to be” she might let me away with it…? I was trying to convey the sense that we have fallen away from some kind of original goodness, so that we live between a good beginning and a good end. And that feeling we have that things are warped and out of sync and “not as they should be” is right.

And I think we agree that having a strong view of God’s power and kingship doesn’t necessitate believing that he is the direct cause of all that happens, including sin and suffering. As you both imply, he allows these things to happen for reasons we can’t fathom, though if I had to hazard a guess I would do it in the same “freedom” ballpark as Zoomie.

It seems to come down to what we mean when we say we believe God is “in control” of the universe. Does it mean that he plans every detail that happens, or that he has a plan to bring all things to a good ending? I’m going to post some comments from Freddie Buechner in which he suggests that it’s more helpful to think of God as the director of the play, rather than as the puppeteer. That kind of sums up my feelings. Let me know what you think of it.

But I understand the early Christian tendency to declare heresy anathema best when we think about Openess Theology. We have to be able to say God was free to stop the Stephen’s Day tsunami, for example, if we are to have him as God at all.

That he didn’t presents us with a considerable problem that should not be smoothed over with some 5 point systematic response, whether it is named after a flower or not. My inclination is the problem is caused by our under-estimating the dramatic and mind-boggling implications of us being free, truly free.

That’s as far as I’ve got really.

I don’t believe God is “taken by surprise by suffering as much as the rest of us” (that would be inconsistent with the portrayal of Him in the Bible, in my opinion), He is sovereign and _outside time_. His only direct experience of linear time is Jesus’ lifetime. This is a source of a lot of confusion for us poor humans who can’t possibly comprehend what His point of view is like.

So what does it mean to say “this is not the way things were meant to be”? That’s almost (if not actually) saying “God wanted things to turn out better for you, but despite His best efforts, things went wrong”. That’s not the God I serve.

I don’t buy into the “suck it up, it’s part of the plan” argument either though. I don’t think we’re meant to be grateful for cancer and earthquakes and all the other evils you could name. God doesn’t allow them to exist for their own sake, but He *does* allow them to exist, and He does so tearfully.

The only conclusion I can draw is this: God is eternal and sovereign, He knows more than I ever can. Things are the way they are because He allows them to be so, and whatever His reasons are, they are Good.