Jim Pace

The orthogonal approach applied to the issue of why God allows so much suffering in the world…

October 18, 2010 | 1 Comment

I have shared before that I am a fan of the orthogonal approach, especially in debates that can get intense, that trigger strong emotion and call on deeply held beliefs.  For those who aren’t familiar with that term, it applies best to issues where there can be a strong “you versus me” mentaility.  I win or you do.  It becomes about voicing your opinion more effectively than someone else might be able to.  If you do, you win.  If you don’t, they win.

The orthogonal approach would suggest that instead of letting it go that route, a tug of war if you will, you put a right angle in there somewhere and take the discussion a new direction.  Approach the interaction differently.

This approach doesn’t mean that both sides give up what they believe, that isn’t the case at all.  It just means we seek to reframe the discussion in a way that gives it some hope of avoiding the typical roadblocks.  This approach also isn’t new.  We are reminded in scripture to be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.  This isn’t suggesting we don’t share truth, not at all.  It is more how we approach the interaction.  We are told that we can be absolutely right, but if we don’t communicate our views with love and respect, we drastically reduce the impact we can have.  So, this isn’t new.

As I have sought to apply this approach in the myriad of discussions about intense issues I find myself in I have learned a critical step in navigating them.  Not only should I seek to understand before I am understood, but I should take the additional step to reflect carefully on what about my life and my experiences would make it harder for me to truly understand where the other person is coming from.  I try to look at my filters and see if they are making things more difficult.

Hear me again, just because I look at my filters and reflect on them, doesn’t mean I drop them.  Our filters are born out of who we are; our beliefs and experiences, the aspects of our world that we understand, the things we have learned.  So, we don’t drop them, we simply ackowlege them and look to see if they impact the discussion we are in.

So… [nlcf] has been involved in a series called Show Us Your Buts — our reasons for not getting closer to God.  The idea is that most people in our culture today, if asked, would say some semblance of this statement:  I would be closer to God/Jesus but… this keeps me away.  Whether the issue of God’s reality or presence is a central one in their life, or a very distant one,research shows most would have some version of this phrase somewhere in their mind.

On October 17th, [nlcf] dealt with this but… I would be closer to God but… He allows far to much suffering.

When we asked the members of [nlcf] and others to contribute their ideas for what we should cover (and over 250 people did) the issue of suffering was one of the highest requests on the list.  And it was one of the most intensely emotional categories as well.

So, how does the orthogonal approach impact the issue of suffering that God allows?

It would cause us to take a step back and look at our filters.  Honestly there are many, but let’s start with this one.

Ready?

We expect those with great power to use it to help those in need.

I specifically mentioned great power to distinguish it from the power we typically have access to.  The reason for this is that we often can put more emphasis on entities that are more powerful than we are (fictional superheroes, the government) to use that power for the good of others, than we place on our own personal responsibility to use the power we have access to for the same purposes.  But that is a whole other discussion.

Let me explain using an example I used in Should We Fire God?.  Consider our approach to superheroes.  Superman, Spiderman, even Iron Man and Hancock.  In each of these instances we see a character that has access to great power.  Inevitably, because we like a flawed hero, that hero will show the wear and tear of constantly serving others.  They will walk away for a bit.  Stop helping.  But inevitably they will come around, see that their lot in life is just that, to serve.  To help.  And so off they go.  They give up the relationship if they must, they give up their vision for their life.

My point is that when they temporarily walk away from that service, we almost categorically view that as their time of weakness.  Having access to that kind of power, well, you just need to use it to help others.

What do superheroes have to do with our issues we have with God over the amount of suffering he lets through?

The reason that superhero plot lines are written that way is because that is how we view significant power.  If you have it, you use it. It typically isn’t very complicated, if you can protect, you do so.  To not use it is seen as selfish and wrong.

We take that view to God.  It can be awfully hard to look at the ugliness that is such a common occurrence in our world and align that with a view that God is doing the right thing to let it happen.   If you have the power and see a problem where the innocent are suffering, you get in the game.  Fictional superhero or real God.  Same idea.

In most polls I have seen in my research for the book, when asked what God’s main jobs should be, our protection was consistently listed as #1 or #2 (even among those who don’t believe in God)!

My point in bringing this up is not to say whether I think this is right or wrong.  At this point in the discussion, it almost doesn’t matter.  My point is that when you bring a strong opinion like this one to God over an issue like suffering, it can make hearing or accepting God’s truth even harder.   We need to at least be aware that for many cultures, our main issues with God aren’t their issues with God.  For some European cultures a thousand years ago it wasn’t the fact that God allowed so much suffering to get through that was so upseting.  For them, Jesus’ call to forgiveness when you are betrayed was a key sticking point.  For other cultures it is less that than Jesus’ challenge for his followers to be more devoted to him than their family.  I could go on and on.

Again, my point isn’t that those cultures were right or wrong.  My point is that every culture is going to struggle with some aspects of God, and those aspects shift.  This means, we need to keep our filters in mind.  And for those of us who are followers of Jesus, we need to ask if our filters align with God’s.  If, and more likely when they don’t, they simply make understanding God or communicating his truth to others harder.

What do you think?  Am I missing something?  Clearly the illustration of our view of superheros is an oversimplification.  But as a metaphor, does it work?

Categories: Church, Culture, General, life, Mission, NLCF