Forgiving God

[Ian Leyda]

I would like to start a discussion of "Forgiving God."

I suppose this question deals with the nature of relationship with God. We understand as Christians that our relationship with God is formed within the context of forgiveness, that God forgives us for our sins through our faith in Jesus Christ. Thus, we are enter into a covenant relationship with God in which we continue to sin and which God continues to forgive. Forgiveness preserves and restores relationship.

It is forgiveness that overcomes estrangement. And once relationship is formed, it is forgiveness that prevents estrangement.

In human relationships, there is a mutuality of forgiveness born of love. Both parties hurt one another, and both must forgive. But in a human/God relationship, we do not often talk about a place for mutuality of forgiveness. We talk often about God forgiving us, but we have less of a model for discussing the need to sometimes forgive God.

I will give an example from my own experience:

I worked with a 14-year-old girl. Her mother was addicted to drugs and had essentially abandoned her and her younger sister. She told me that for three years, every night she prayed to God that he would help them while their lives were spiraling into chaos. That prayer went unanswered. Just as she had been abandoned by her mother, she also felt abandoned by God.

In talking about it, she told me that she "hated God." She had been faithful to God, but God had not been faithful to her. Their relationship was now broken.

Even Jesus cries out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"

I realize in this example there are a number of theological issues.
-The problem of unanswered prayer.
-The problem of the faithfulness of God. Does forgiving God necessitate God's wrongdoing?
-The problem of innocent suffering.

My question, though, is more of a pastoral one. Can anyone think of commentary by the Fathers or in biblical texts that address the issue of "Forgiving God?" The Psalms are perhaps a good place to start.

Peace,

Ian

[Alex Haig]

God forgives. That's it. What the Church calls for us to do is to repent, to turn from our error back towards Him. Although we ask for God's forgiveness, it is already given unconditionally.

"Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect" (Matthew 5:48). Sin is falling short, or over-shooting, Christ's goal for us. St John Climacus gives us counsel, saying:

"Do not be surprised that you fall every day; do not give up, but stand your ground courageously. And assuredly, the angel who guards you will honour your patience."
Do not despair of sin, but use the Mystery of Reconciliation (Confession) to bring yourself back into Communion with God.

With love in Christ

Alex

[Father David Moser]

My question, though, is more of a pastoral one. Can anyone think of commentary by the Fathers or in biblical texts that address the issue of "Forgiving God?"

I do not know of any such idea. To forgive means that we believe that we have been wronged by the person who we forgive. Do you seriously believe that God wrongs us, that God harms us, that God offends us? I don't and I don't think that I see this anywhere in the Fathers.

Are there things in our lives we dont understand? yes. Do we sometimes suffer without knowing the exact cause? certainly. But to use these circumstances as a reason to accuse God of wrongdoing is twisted. The reason that we want to accuse God is that we are unable to accuse ourselves of failing to trust God and failing to accept with love and confidence all that comes to us, knowing that God will help us. If anything we are the ones who need to beg forgiveness from God for our lack of faith and love. If you go looking into the fathers, my guess is that you will find nothing about "forgiving God" but find a lot about pride and humility; the lack of trust and faith; the need to conform our perception of the world and our environment to God rather than demand that He make sense to us and conform to our way of being. This idea of "forgiving God" is nothing but a spillover from the pop psychology of self (self esteem, self worth, self reliance, self dependence) and has no place in Christianity.



I realize in this example there are a number of theological issues.
-The problem of unanswered prayer.
-The problem of the faithfulness of God. Does forgiving God necessitate God's wrongdoing?
-The problem of innocent suffering.


- All prayer is answered; but not always in the way you think it should be
- see my previous rant; it is not possible that God "wrongs" us, the perception that this is so is a deficit in our own faithfulness
- this "problem" does not exist. It only seems to exist because 1) we refuse to acknowledge that all have sinned and thus there are no "innocents" and 2) we completely misunderstand the purpose of suffering.



Even Jesus cries out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"


This doesn't apply at all to your arguement. It is, in fact a quote from a psalm which was generally recognized as a messianic prophecy. Our Lord's cry links Him in the minds of the people with that prophecy so that they can understand what they are seeing. How can God forsake God. To assume that this happened somehow, that the divine Christ forsook the man Jesus on the Cross is Nestorianism at its worst. This distorts the image of the Resurrected "Christ the Victor" into the idea of "Christ the Victim". The dogma of the Trinity must also suffer because rather than see the Son as of one essence with the Father, one must come to see the Son as separated from the Father - remaining on the cross crying out "My God, My God, Why hast Thou forsaken me." with no hope of an answer.
(see my post (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?p=37561#post37561) on the "sacrament of alienation")

This whole idea is just repugnant to me as an Orthodox Christian.

Fr David Moser

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

Just one very brief thought, as it's rather late. But something to come back to:

I agree with what Fr David has written. Thank you for it.

But without wanting to go to far, we must also recall that our sinfulness, the fractured nature of our being in broken relationship to God and thus to ourselves, means at times that our perception of being wronged, of wrongdoing, of wrongdoers, is hindered. Clear, rational vision is the fruit of ascetical transfiguration. There are times when reason, when rational clarity, spoken into a heart of great disfiguration, can jar and torment. There are times, in this tortured state, when the act of 'forgiving the wrongdoer' is a help in filtering the dirt and anger from one's eyes, which ultimately causes him to see that the wrongdoer has done no wrong; that it is we who need forgiveness; that it is we who, in our sin, have created a vision of God as wrongdoer, a vision that requires repentance.

The patristic sourcebook for this idea is the psalter. David struggles, with great emotion, to come to peace with what God has 'done to' him, with what God has not done, with what God has allowed to be done. And that struggle, however misguided at times its outbursts and self-perceptions, leads to the clarity of confession that opens his eyes to the reality his anger, sorrow and frustration has prevented him seeing: that it is not God he seeks to justify, but his own sin he seeks to have redeemed. It is an awareness that, once it causes him to plead 'Create in me a clean heart, O God', also allows him to say, to understand:


'Against you, you only, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you are proved right when you speak
and justified when you judge.'

INXC, Matthew

[Ian Leyda]

I do not know of any such idea. To forgive means that we believe that we have been wronged by the person who we forgive. Do you seriously believe that God wrongs us, that God harms us, that God offends us? I don't and I don't think that I see this anywhere in the Fathers.


Father Moser,

I am sorry if I have angered you with some of my questions. Please note here first that I am in no way trying to demean the character or God. I am not making an argument that God sins or is unjust. But I do think that Scripture has indeed attempted to deal with some of these issues, particularly in the Wisdom books and in the Psalms.

First, it is not quite true that the Bible considers no one righteous or without sin. I understand that this is considered a basic theological principle, but this is not universally held in the understanding of human beings in Scripture. Scripture does assume that there are "innocents."

For example, OT tradition holds several paradigmatic "righteous" men in Noah, Daniel, and Job (Ezekiel 14:14, 20) and argues that God would preserve them because of it. The Psalter often discusses the way God cares for the righteous (Ps. 1:6, Ps. 37, etc).

In Psalm 26, the Psalter argues that he is indeed innocent and deserves the vindication of God, appealing to God's justice:

26:1: "Vindicate me, O Lord, for I have walked in my integrity and I have trusted in the Lord without wavering." (Trust in the Lord is the very nature of righteousness in the Psalter).

26:6: "I wash my hands in innocence and go around your altar, O Lord...."

26:11: "But as for me, I walk in my integrity. Redeem me and be gracious to me."

Psalm 17 makes a similar case, that the Psalter has a just claim to vindication because he has not sinned but has held fast to the path of righteousness.

Regarding the question of the "wrongdoing" of God, Scripture does deal with this issue. The basic premise of the book of Job assumes that Job has been wronged by God.

In the prologue, Job is described as the epitome of righteousness, one who was "blameless and upright, who feared God and turned away from evil." This statement is repeated from the mouth of God himself (Job 1:8), and it appears verbatim 3 times in the first two chapters of the book (1:1, 1:8, 2:3). The third time, God says also: "(Job) persists in his integrity."

Again and again, in the first two chapters of the book, it affirms the righteousness and integrity of Job before we enter into the dialogues in Chapter 3. We also hear 2 times that "in all this, Job did not sin" (1:22, 2:10).

Job is indeed innocent.

Yet Job's friend Eliphaz makes the same theological assumption, Fr. Moser, that you have made about those who suffer:

Eliphaz asks rhetorically:

"Think now, who that was innocent ever perished. Or where were the upright cut off?" (Job 4:7)

"Can mortals be righteous before God? Can human beings be pure before their maker?" (Job 4:17)

But we learn later that Eliphaz and his friends have not spoken rightly of God:

"My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends, for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has." (Job 42:7).

You cannot read the book of Job and then wink and say, "yes, but we know that no one is innocent. Nobody suffers unjustly." The prologue of Job necessitates his innocence.

The "friends" of Job, then, blame the innocent victim for his own suffering. They say that he is rightly vulnerable to it or has invited it because he has sinned. They blame the victim because they don't want to blame God.

This is not a question of pop culture or pride or pop psychology. It is an important theological question that Scripture wrestles with. Job accuses God of wrongdoing, and God says that he has spoken rightly.

God does rebuke Job, though:

"Will you even put me in the wrong? Will you condemn me that you may be justified?" (Job 40:8).

But oddly, God says that Job has spoken correctly of him. What do we do with this? Shall we say Job's laments and questions of God are unworthy of us?

It is interesting to read Elihu's long speach. Elihu is angry at Job and the three friends. He is angry that Job justified his innocence rather than God's, and he is angry that the four of them have found no answer. (32:1-6).

Along with affirming Job's obvious sinfulness (33:8-12a), Elihu angrily gives the "theological answer:"

"The Almighty-we cannot find him. He is great in power and justice, and abundant in righteousness he will not violate. Therefore, mortals fear him. He does not regard any who are wise in their own conceit." (37:23-24).

Elihu says that Job is a sinner. He says that God is mysterious. He says that God is powerful and just and does not violate righteousness. He says that mortals are prideful in their own conceit.

But God says that only Job has spoken correctly of him. And Job is the one who accuses God of wrongdoing. Job is not twisted. Yes, Job is rebuked. But he is not rebuked because his words are false.

Father Moser, it seems that your argument above is the same as Elihu and Job's three friends.

Peace,

Ian

[Antonios]

Dear Ian,

I would like to add my two cents for what they are worth to your above posts.

First you write: "...it is not quite true that the Bible considers no one righteous or without sin. "
You are right in that. The only one mentioned in the Bible who is without sin is Jesus Christ. Being righteous and sinless are two different things. Noah, Job, Abraham, etc., were righteous sinners.

This is taken from a very informative site (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/bible_books_old_2.htm#_Toc10414565) I recommend.



"At this juncture Eliu, a youth who was one of the company of listeners, is filled by God with the spirit of prophecy (32:18-22; 36:2-4). In a long discourse he solves the problem of suffering, which Job and his friends had failed to explain. He says that suffering, whether severe or light, is not always a result of sin; it is a means by which God tries and promotes virtue (36:1-21), and is thus a proof of God's love for his friends. The sufferings of Job are also such a testing (36:16-21). At the same time Eliu emphasizes the fact that the dispensations of God remain inexplicable and mysterious (36:22; 37:24). Yahweh speaks at the end (38-42:6). He confirms the statements of Eliu, carrying further Eliu's last thought of the inexplicability of the Divine decrees and works by a reference to the wonder of animate and inanimate nature. Job is severely rebuked on account of his irreverence; he confesses briefly his guilt and promises amendment in the future.
(3) In the epilogue Yahweh bears witness in a striking manner to the innocence of His servant, that is to Job's freedom from gross transgression. The three friends are commanded to obtain Job's intercession, otherwise they will be severely punished for their uncharitable complaints against the pious sufferer. Yahweh forgives the three at the entreaty of Job, who is restored to double his former prosperity.

[John Charmley]

Dear Ian,

This is a topic which has clearly aroused strong feelings.

My own small contribution is that I am still at the stage of praying and hoping that my many sins will be forgiven by God. It had never occurred to me that I had any right to stand in judgement on my Creator, and when I have heard people blaming God for various natural and man-made catastrophes, I have never been tempted to join them.

One of the 'signs of the times' is the way in which we in the west find obedience so difficult and seem, at times, to wish to import our conceptions of democracy into spheres where it has no place. The Evil One began, we are told, by questioning the judgements of God; it is enough for me to know, and fear, the final judgement.

He who will judge us all is so far beyond our knowing that we are best occupied coming closer to Him through the Incarnate Lord and the Church which He founded.

Various readings of Job are possible, but when Our Lord says in Matthew 7:


1 Judge not, that you be not judged.
2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

I am content to pray for the spirit of obedience.

As the Incarnate Lord said, even so it is:

15 You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. John 8
Also:

47 And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. John 12

In Christ,

John

[Owen Jones]

Orthodoxy is true, not just because God said so, but because it works. So I think there is a time and a place -- sometimes -- just to do whatever works. Raging against God is justified sometimes for our own sakes. He can take it. Now whether or not the next step is to "forgive" God, well, not in any correct sense to be sure. But at some point we will hopefully arrive at humility and patience with God and others. Just not right now!!!!!

Of course, what we have today is a bunch of psychobabble masquerading as real help. This notion of forgiving oneself is very popular today. Usually I hear it from very angry people. "I just had to forgive myself," they say. But they still are angry...and depressed. It simply does not work.

Perhaps if a person is contemplating forgiving God as a way out of some inner turbulence, it is time to ask yourself, what are you angry about? Then ask, what role did I play? Am I totally innocent? And if I am totally innocent in this case, can I truly say that I am innocent in every case? Haven't I been guilty of the very same thing that I am angry at God about? And am I blaming God for something someone else did or said to me? So while we take a swipe at God, to be fair, I think we also need to be taking a good hard look at ourselves.

[Ian Leyda]

Perhaps if a person is contemplating forgiving God as a way out of some inner turbulence, it is time to ask yourself, what are you angry about? Then ask, what role did I play? Am I totally innocent?

Dear Owen,

Again there is the accusation of psychobabble. But this does not answer the question of my above post. You did not read from the Scripture examples that I listed.

Owen, your comments are the same as Eliphaz (4:7, 17), who is condemned by God and has spoken wrongly of God and Job (Job 42:7).

And remember that I asked this question of a real, suffering, 14-year-old girl who had been abandoned by her mother.

Will you really say to her, "what are you angry about? What role did YOU play in your own abandonment? Are YOU totally innocent?"

This does not make sense.

Peace,

Ian

[Antonios]

Dear Ian,

I have given much thought to this thread and have tried to understand what you are getting at with your notion of 'forgiving God', but I just can't seem to come to terms with it. In fact, like Father David, the more I contemplate on it, the more strongly I disagree with it.

Innocent people suffer in this fallen world. (The recent tsunami comes to mind). This unfortunate 14 year old girl is another example. The fact is there is a problem of evil in our fallen world. This in one of the reasons God sent His Son. His Son, the ONLY sinless and truly 'innocent' one ended up hanging on a tree, bleeding, suffering, until He couldn't breath any more. Where is the justice in that? Where is the logic or rational? We cannot find a suitable answer because we use human justice and human rational. In our pride, we feel that if we can't understand it, then there must be something wrong, hence, someone else to blame. This is how we begin to lose our faith and trust in God. This is when we change our hearts from 'Thy will be doine' to 'Why, Lord, why!?! How could you?' So instead of bearing our cross and following the path shown to us by our Lord and Master, we grumble and doubt and blame, and lose trust in our Creator and His Providence, Who loves us more than we can ever know. Look at Job, how he fell and transgressed, the breaking point being the sores and affliction of his body which finally made him an outcast from society (and not simple someone to sympathize for). He was quickly rebuked by God.

JOB 40:



Moreover the LORD answered Job, and said:

2 “Shall the one who contends with the Almighty correct Him?
He who rebukes God, let him answer it.”

3 Then Job answered the LORD and said:

4 “ Behold, I am vile;
What shall I answer You?
I lay my hand over my mouth.
5 Once I have spoken, but I will not answer;
Yes, twice, but I will proceed no further.”


6 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:

7 “Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me:
8 “ Would you indeed annul My judgment?
Would you condemn Me that you may be justified?
9 Have you an arm like God?
Or can you thunder with a voice like His?
10 Then adorn yourself with majesty and splendor,
And array yourself with glory and beauty.
11 Disperse the rage of your wrath;
Look on everyone who is proud, and humble him.
12 Look on everyone who is proud, and bring him low;
Tread down the wicked in their place.
13 Hide them in the dust together,
Bind their faces in hidden darkness. 14 Then I will also confess to you
That your own right hand can save you.


What finally saves Job is not forgiving God for the suffering and trials he has experience, but because of his true and deep repentance he feels for having blamed or even questioned God. This is what brings him back to righteousness. This is how Satan is defeated. This is how we are also to be. To bear our cross and pray for mercy and forgiveness. Me, being the greatest of sinners.

[Paul Cowan]

As the disciples asked Christ, who sinned him or his parents, Christ said neither but he is so, so the Glory of God might be revealed.

Who are we do second guess Him who made us. God does not send evil. Evil happens to people through sinful people or through temptations of the devil. We are commanded to be perfect as God is perfect. Since we will never be perfect we can only strive for what Christ taught us. Be loving, be compassionate, show mercy to all.

This young girl's pain is very real. Her counselor may never be able to take away her pain. God's Word does not go out and return without fruit. Perhaps this young girl will grow to be a woman of strong character. Perhaps her mother will come to know Christ one day. Perhaps those reading these threads will have more compassion on the suffering. Perhaps there is something we are all missing and only God knows His purpose.

The distance, as I was once told, from Heaven to Hell is only 18 inches. From your heart to your head. We are given an intellect to use wisely, but not at the expense of our compassion to our neighbor. There are so many examples of compassion and nonjudgement...Walk a mile in your neighbors moccasins, the plank and the splinter, do unto others...Love as I have loved you.

I read many posts and am truly way out of my league in understanding them. This one is no different. I do know just as in todays Gospel reading Christ told the ruler of the synagogue he was a hypocrite because He "worked" on the sabbath to heal the bent over woman because it was God's will to heal yet it was no big deal for His accusers to "work" taking their *** to the water trough. He showed compassion on the hurting and did not look for blame in them.

Can we do no less?

Paul

[Paul Cowan]

Sorry, I suppose I should have used the word donkey.

Paul

[Louis A. Morrone]

Dear all,

I agree that people shouldn't blame God for their problems, but
perhaps when a 14 year old girl is angry about being abandoned, what she really means when she blames God is that the society he created allowed it to happen to her. A lot of people could have helped her, and in turn, answered her prayers, but failed to.

I doubt God intended our children to feel abandoned, and I'm sorry, but some of the posts seen to justify the girls anger. But it's our fault, not God's, when a child feels abandoned. Hopefully, someday, the child will forgive society, and understand our shortcomings aren't God's fault.

Sincerely,

Louis

[Trudy]

And remember that I asked this question of a real, suffering, 14-year-old girl who had been abandoned by her mother.

Will you really say to her, "what are you angry about? What role did YOU play in your own abandonment? Are YOU totally innocent?"

Dear Ian (nice name! the same as my son!)

What does one say to a 14 year old young lady who is royally pissed because her mother dumped her like yesterday's garbage? One replies to her, "Yeah, I'd be angry too! Let's stomp our feet about it!" And then mark around the room stomping your feet or beat up a pillow. One allows her to cry her anger out in tears. One allows her to be angry at God and teach/help her to 'sin not' in the context of her angry.

I would ask her to give voice to the anger towards God. I would try to introduce her to the thought that while God allowed these things to happen, we live in a fallen world, and the hurt that His children experience make Him sad too. I would try to help her see that anger is a secondary emotion and help her to figure out what the emotion is that is under the anger. Of course, you know i t is deep hurt. But she needs to figure that out herself. Once there, the healing can begin.

(Now before somebody jumps all over me about the theological significance of what I just wrote, give me a second here.) Ian, her hurt is real, which of course you know. She doesn't give a hoot about theology. She feels abandoned by her mother AND God as you said. What you must teach her (or someone must teach her) is that God never left her. Help her to see ways He has been with her. Introduce her to positive thoughts and aspects of God. Help her turn her eyes from the evil and darkness to the Light of God.


Does forgiving God necessitate God's wrongdoing?

In a word, yes it does in my mind. There is nothing to forgive for He perpetrates no evil. God is simply Love and Love does not wrong as scripture teaches. However, I think what we need to do is try to look at circumstances in our lives through Godly eyes, through His Light. Thus we see how our perspective of God doing wrong to us so we need to forgive Him as nothing short of sinful pride.

But having been angry with God myself, and given voice to that angry in tears and prayers, God turned my heart to tears of repentance for that anger which was fueled by pride. God graciously turned all of it in me to overwhelming love for Him. Help your young friend do that.

Hope this helps.

In Christ, Athanasia

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

The course of this discussion shows, I think, precisely the realities involved in the question.

It is absolutely clear that from a theological perspective, there is no ground whatever for 'forgiving God', as there is no basis on which God requires forgiveness - i.e., there is no circumstance in which he is wrongdoer. In those instances in which it may appear that he is, the appearance is part of the limitation of human perception. This is the real message of God's rather thunderous words to Job: 'Shall the one who contends with the Almighty correct him? He who rebukes God, let him answer it. ... Would you indeed annul my judgment? Would you condemn me that you may be justified? Have you an arm like God? Or can you thunder with a voice like his?'

From a pastoral point of view, there are few instances in which counselling 'forgiving God' would be other than counter-productive. The job of spiritual counsel is to engender truth in the heart.

But there are moments when the true deformity of human perception has to be met and addressed in its debasement. Admitting the absurd is at times the only way to break through the absurdity into which sin draws the intellect. Such counsel in such times is not a withering of a theological truth, but a true and authentic address of spiritual ailment. Rather like an actual instance of which I am aware: in which a young person's mother fell from a great height to her death. To 'forgive gravity' seems an absolute absurdity; but to the state of this child's mind, it was a necessary 'first step' to realising that the reality of the situation lie elsewhere.

It is best not to underestimate the truly illogical, irrational ends to which sin draws human perception. And from my own experience, it is best not to 'stand on principle' too much - even if the principle be wholly and entirely true - when asking such questions in a practical, pastoral context. The scriptures contain the psalter, which is a book filled with prophets and kings railing at God for his injustice, his intemperance, his distance, his lack of care. God is clearly not one who engages in any such things. But this is not the point of the psalms.

INXC, Matthew

[Owen Jones]

A 14-year-old should not be given false pieties, nor treated as a child, nor given some cheap way out of her dillemma, since there isn't one. But you may want to ask her what she thinks her mother would want her to do, and how she would want her to live in her absence. Would she want her to blame God? Would she want her to be angry and bitter? But the bottom line is that we, in such a circumstances, must not compound the error by believing that it is up to us to have the final word in such situations that will make everything all right. Grieve with her. Some times words just don't mean much anyway.

[Ian Leyda]

Dear Antonios,

I very much disagree with your portrayal of Elihu as one who speaks prophetically.

Elihu's introduction (Job 32) forewarns us that Elihu will be speaking folly. Elihu is the caracature of the brash, angry youth that considers himself wise in Widsom literature:

-4 times the word "anger" is used of Elihu before he speaks. (32: 2-4)
-Elihu is the youngest. (32:4)
-Elihu claims that the breath of the Almighty in him gives him understanding in his youth (32:8)
-Elihu says that the old are not wise and do not understand what is right (32:9-10)
-Elihu's speech is the longest of the book of Job, continuing uninterrupted for 6 chapters. Elihu's speech is longer than many books of the NT.

This is how Elihu is introduced, and these are all the hallmarks of foolish speech in the Wisdom tradition. Elihu is the angry young man who thinks himself wise and talks many, many windy words.

Elihu calls to mind the story of Solomon's son, Rehoboam (1Kings 12:6-11). It is the counsel of "young men" that leads to Israel naming Jeroboam king, to the downfall of the kingdom, and to Exile.

Yes, Job is rebuked by God. But Job's words (and not the others) are vindicated by God.

Will we make the arguments of those condemned in the book (Job 42:7-9) and say they are correct?

Peace,

Ian

[Antonios]

Dear Ian,

I am not a scholar on the Book of Job and I hope others more learned than me can correct me, but I think your interpretation is not the Orthodox view.


I very much disagree with your portrayal of Elihu as one who speaks prophetically.

Its not my protrayal, but the words spoken by him himself:

For I am full of words;
The spirit within me compels me. (32:18)
Bear with me a little, and I will show you
That there are yet words to speak on God’s behalf.
I will fetch my knowledge from afar;
I will ascribe righteousness to my Maker. For truly my words are not false;
One who is perfect in knowledge is with you. (36:2-4)
Elihu's introduction (Job 32) forewarns us that Elihu will be speaking folly. Elihu is the caracature of the brash, angry youth that considers himself wise in Widsom literature:


I don't see how you are interpreting it this way. In fact, his introduction displays great wisdom and maturity given his young age.


-4 times the word "anger" is used of Elihu before he speaks. (32: 2-4)
-Elihu is the youngest. (32:4)
-Elihu claims that the breath of the Almighty in him gives him understanding in his youth (32:8)
-Elihu says that the old are not wise and do not understand what is right (32:9-10)
-Elihu's speech is the longest of the book of Job, continuing uninterrupted for 6 chapters. Elihu's speech is longer than many books of the NT.

-the term anger or wrath is not always used in the negative sense in Scripture, such as in 'righteous anger' or 'divine wrath'
-Elihu is the youngest. The Lord makes it fairly clear that it is the youngest who sometimes have 'the ears to hear and the eyes to see'.
-Why are you doubting Elihu's claim that he is full of the Spirit? It is his speech which steers the entire book into the correct direction and sets the stage for the Lords conversation with Job.
-what Elihu says is that the old are "not always wise,
Nor do the aged always understand justice." I think you need to re-read the text...
-I don't see how the length or size of his speech has anything to do foolishness. I would rather say the opposite. His words are in fact quite profitable.


This is is how Elihu is introduced, and these are all the hallmarks of foolish speech in the Wisdom tradition. Elihu is the angry young man who thinks himself wise and talks many, many windy words.

I challenge you to find this interpertation from the Church Fathers (or the Jewish scholars at that). I think this conclusion is unfounded and inaccurate.


Yes, Job is rebuked by God. But Job's words (and not the others) are vindicated by God.

I'm glad you mention this. I find it quite interesting that the Lord clearly rebukes everyone BUT Elihu in the Book of Job. Job is rebuked as well as Eliphaz 'and his two friends' (Job 42:7). Everyone but Elihu is rebuked by God.

Ian, I think a lot of your misunderstanding in the Book of JOb has to do with your inaccurate interpertation of Elihu and his important role in the story. The irony is that he is the one who, despite his young age, has a greater understanding of why bad things happen to good people than everyone else. This, because, the Holy Spirit has revealed it to him.

Please don't take my words as being harsh. I'm simply trying to help you understand where you may be mistaken.

[Ian Leyda]

Ian, I think a lot of your misunderstanding in the Book of JOb has to do with your inaccurate interpertation of Elihu and his important role in the story. The irony is that he is the one who, despite his young age, has a greater understanding of why bad things happen to good people than everyone else. This, because, the Holy Spirit has revealed it to him.

Please don't take my words as being harsh. I'm simply trying to help you understand where you may be mistaken.

Dear Antonios,

Don't worry about me taking your words harsh at all. I appreciate the debate. But I will try again and see if I can convince you. I've done a good bit of study of the book of Job, myself.

First, I will ask this question: Do you think God loses his wager with Satan?

The story begins with the wager between God and Satan (1:8-12).
-Satan says "if you take all that Job has, Job will curse you to your face."

--If Job curses God or sins with his lips, God loses his bet with Satan. And because of the wager, God's integrity is linked to Job's integrity.

God wins the first two rounds of the wager (1:20-22 and 2:9-10). But the third round is just beginning. Job curses the day of his birth, but he does not curse God (Job 3). Close, but no cigar Satan!

The problem with Elihu being correct about Job is this:

If Job does not persist in his integrity or if Job sins with his lips, then God has lost his wager with Satan!

All the characters that argue that Job has sinned are arguing that God has lost the wager. The wager is the key to understanding which statements are ironic.

Antionios, do you think God loses his wager with Satan in the book of Job?

The wager, remember, was that Job would curse God and thus sin with his lips. Job's wife tells him to just do this and get it over with. But Job refuses. Win for God on that one.

Here is but one example that Elihu is on the wrong side of the wager (there are others):

Elihu argues here that Job has sinned with his lips in his presence:
(Job 33:8-12)

-"Surely, you (Job) have spoken in my hearing and I have heard the sound of your words.
-"You (Job) say, 'I am clean, without transgression. I am pure and there is no iniquity in me.
-Look, he finds occasions against me, he counts me as his enemy.
-He puts my feet in the stocks and watches all my paths.'"
-But in this you are not right.

Elihu says that he has heard all of Job's words, and he is accusing Job of sinning with his lips. Elihu, ironically, is saying that Satan has won his wager with God. Elihu thinks he is defending God, but he is mistaken.

If Elihu is correct that Job has sinned with his lips, then God has lost his wager with Satan. Do you think Elihu is right?

Elihu does not know (as the reader does) that God and Satan made a wager that brought this calamity on Job.

This is the key: None of the characters in the story (Job included) know about the wager between God and Satan. The wager is the reason that Job has leprosy and lost everything he has.

But the other characters all think that Job suffers because he sinned:

-Job's wife: "Do you still persist in your integrity? (2:9)

-Eliphaz: "Think now, who that was innocent ever perished? Those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same. By the breath of God they perish" (4:7-9).

-Bildad: "By disease the skin of the wicked is consumed, the firstborn of death consumes their limbs" (18:13).

Elihu and Eliphaz and all the others know that leprosy is punishment for sin. This is a basic principle being challenged in the book. "Who sinned that this man was born blind?" Only the wicked get leprosy and the righteous do not. And the justice of God makes this happen.

But the wager has "suspended" this principle at the beginning. It is not in play in the instance of Job. This fact makes Elihu's grand defense of God, which is indeed theologically sound, incorrect in this case.

Elihu says: "Far be it from God to do wickedness. For according to their deeds he will repay them and according to their ways he will make it befall them. Of a truth, God will not do wickedly and the Almighty will not pervert justice" (Job 34:10-12).

While Elihu's statement is true of God, it is false in this case regarding Job. He speaks words without knowledge, not knowing of the wager. God has not done to Job according to his deeds. Elihu doesn't know he is calling God wicked, here.

The book of Job has noticed the encroachment of God's sovereignty that this principle of justice creates. God "must" respond to deeds of men. Only men can do both good and evil. Only men have free will, in that case. The sovereignty of God lies behind many of these problems.

Job actually agrees with his friends that leprosy and calamity are punishment for sin. This is Job's beef with God! Because Job is righteous, his woes are unfair. Job wants God to repay him according to his deeds and thinks he is entitled to God's salvation. God has failed to give him what he deserves.

But they are all mistaken. None of them know what they are talking about. And this is why all (including Job) are rebuked.

How do we know they are mistaken? The reader knows from the beginning that all this happened to Job because of the wager and not because Job sinned. If you forget that, you get really lost in the dialogues.

Thus, Elihu is mistaken. We know Elihu is wrong because the reader knows that Job has leoprosy because of the wager. The reader knows that the narrator (and God) said at the beginning of the story that Job is innocent. You have to allow yourself to suspend for a moment your assumptions about sin because the book asks you too. Job is an "archetype" not an "everyman."

What is interesting about the book of Job is that many "orthodox" statements about God are made in irony. Theology is true, but here God is working a "new" thing. Elihu and Eliphaz speak the truth, but they do not know what has happened in the heavenly realms (the wager).

The Gospels do this all the time, using "orthodox" statements in irony. Case in point:

In Mark 2, Jesus says to the Paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven!"

But the Scribe makes an ironic statement of "orthodoxy" that all of us would rightly agree with. The Scribe says, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

If the reader doesn't know who Jesus is, how would he understand the irony of the Scribe's words? Wouldn't he tend to agree with the Scribe, b/c the Scribe speaks what is true? The Scribe doesn't know who Jesus is, but the reader does.

The reader knows from the beginning of the Gospels from both the narrator and the voice of God himself (in the Baptism) who Jesus is. Otherwise, we would not understand the nature of the dialogues.

Job is the same. The reader knows from the beginning from both the narrator and the voice of God himself who Job is. The narrator sets the groundrules for everything that follows.

Both the Narrator and God say of Job: "There is no one like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil."

Because of this and the wager, Elihu is mistaken.

[Antonios]

Dear Ian,

I fear I may have gotten way over my head in getting into a debate about one of the books of the Old Testament with a seminarian (and a Protestant one, at that!) :)

I do enjoy this discussion, however, since the Book of Job is probably the most informative book in Holy Scripture about why bad things happen to good people. I'm sure other people could add much more than I can, and I hope they will. I don't pretend to be an authoritative voice, and I would hate to be spreading false information. With that disclaimer, I'll attempt to explain my belief.

You write:


Antionios, do you think God loses his wager with Satan in the book of Job?


One of the conditions you make very clear in your last post is that God cannot lose to Satan. In essence, I, of course, agree. However, we must be careful in what we interpert as a 'loss'. In other words, what may seem like a defeat in terms of our human understanding, may not be the higher truth. The serpent fooled Adam and Eve. Did God lose to the serpent? Judas betrayed Jesus. Did God lose to Judas? With things Divine, we must not always base all circumstances and outcomes in a mere human understanding. So, to set the basis of the teaching or value of the entire story on whether God 'loses' to Satan then relies on our definition of loss and our worldy logic. This may be insufficient, or worse, a distraction in understanding the deeper truth of the story.

The idea that God and Satan had a wager, I think, is a legalistic and somewhat superficial understanding. And what was the wager for? For Job's soul? This, I believe belittles the Almighty. That being said, I cannot deny what is written in the book, and would rather argue that it was not a wager, but rather a challenge. God challenges Satan. Of course, God, in his forknowledge knows what will eventually play out (an ability Satan does not have because of his pride). So, even in the beginning of the book, God knows the ending, just as He knew when He allowed the serpent to be in the Garden.

So, do I think God lost to Satan? No. In the end, Job repents for his ill faith, is restored to righteousness, and lives happily every after, to the scorn and dismay of Satan.

Ian, if I may be frank, I think your condition about a 'wager that must be won by God' is steering the entire rest of your understanding of the story and its moral teachings. The story, in fact, has less to do with God and Satan and more to do with God and Job.

Job suffers calamity after calamity and finally enters into dispair. He begins to regard God as a severe, hard, and somewhat inconsiderate ruler than as a kind Father. He curses the day he was born, he loses his trust in the Providence of God, and finally wishes he did not exist. This is his sin. This is why he is rebuked and why he eventually repents.

As for the others (Eliphaz, Baldad and Sophar), their sin is for blaming Job for the disasters that have unjustly befallen him. Their sin is that rather than comforting and consoling their downtrodden friend, they instead judge and accuse him without cause or knowledge. This is why they are rebuked by God.

Finally, we come to Eilhu... I strongly suggest you reconsider your views on Elihu. His role in the story is so critical, that I cannot understate that enough. To repeat myself, Eilhu is not rebuked in the story. It is quite telling that God specifically mentions "Eliphaz and his two friends", leaving Elihu the only one who has not sinned. He does what neither Job nor his three friends could do. He is the only one who finally solves the problem with suffering, after being filled with the prophecy of the Spirit.

"In three speeches Eliu explains the sufferings which befall men. Trouble is often a Divine instruction, a warning to the godless to reform (32-33:30), thus revealing the goodness of God

It is often simply a punishment of the wicked who are perhaps in no way bettered by it (33:31-35), thus revealing the justice of God.

Finally, troubles can also overtake the just as a trial which purifies and increases their virtue (36-37), thus revealing God's unfathomable wisdom.

He says that suffering, whether severe or light, is not always a result of sin; it is a means by which God tries and promotes virtue (36:1-21), and is thus a proof of God's love for his friends. The sufferings of Job are also such a testing (36:16-21).

At the same time Eliu emphasizes the fact that the dispensations of God remain inexplicable and mysterious (36:22; 37:24).

Finally, God speaks at the end (38-42:6). He confirms the statements of Eliu, carrying further Eliu's last thought of the inexplicability of the Divine decrees and works by a reference to the wonder of animate and inanimate nature." (text in quotations found here (http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/bible_books_old_2.htm#_Toc10414565))

--------------------------

Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. (John 9:3)

And so, Job suffers, and in his suffering, the works of God are revealed. Job repents for having had his faith shaken and his virtue is strengthend; Eliphaz, Baldad and Sophar are commanded to obtain Job's intercession, otherwise they will be severely punished for their uncharitable complaints against the pious sufferer; God forgives the three at the entreaty of Job, who is eventually restored to double his former prosperity. They all end up happier and with greater faith in Divine Providence, love for their neighbor, and knowledge of our loving God.

Glory to God for all things!

[Andreas Moran]

I often think about the so-called 'problem of unanswered prayer', so I did a search and this was the nearest thread I could find about it. I find it a real challenge when one prays for something which, from every angle one can think of, seems to right, yet there is 'no result'. I can think of two prayers which have gone unanswered: our Lord's Prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:39), and His prayer that all who believe may be one (John 17:20).

In this thread, I found these comments especially insightful and helpful:

Antonios:
We cannot find a suitable answer because we use human justice and human rational. In our pride, we feel that if we can't understand it, then there must be something wrong, hence, someone else to blame. This is how we begin to lose our faith and trust in God. This is when we change our hearts from 'Thy will be doine' to 'Why, Lord, why!?! How could you?' So instead of bearing our cross and following the path shown to us by our Lord and Master, we grumble and doubt and blame, and lose trust in our Creator and His Providence, Who loves us more than we can ever know.

Fr David:
Are there things in our lives we dont understand? yes. Do we sometimes suffer without knowing the exact cause? certainly. But to use these circumstances as a reason to accuse God of wrongdoing is twisted. The reason that we want to accuse God is that we are unable to accuse ourselves of failing to trust God and failing to accept with love and confidence all that comes to us, knowing that God will help us. If anything we are the ones who need to beg forgiveness from God for our lack of faith and love.

And, following this, we are led always back to what Alex Haig said:
God forgives. That's it. What the Church calls for us to do is to repent, to turn from our error back towards Him. Although we ask for God's forgiveness, it is already given unconditionally. . . .
use the Mystery of Reconciliation (Confession) to bring yourself back into Communion with God.

The difficulty remains of the unequivocal assurances given in the Gospels that requests will be fulfilled: in Matthew 21:22, and John 15:7 and John 15:16 and John 16:23.

[Effie Ganatsios]

Andreas, the last week has been very stressful for myself and my husband, whose health has suffered because of the stress of the last year or so. I won't go into the details but just say that we were deeply wronged financially by a building contractor. We had a few meetings this week with this contractor and our lawyer. In two instances I was so fed up with the dishonesty and cheating we encountered that I ungraciously put the whole mess at the Lord's feet the night before important decisions were to be made. In each instance things went so smoothly that it was as if we were dealing with another person entirely. I believe that my belief that everything would work out as God willed it to - whether to our advantage or not - helped matters. Yesterday we were finally rid of this nightmare and this man even said how glad he was that our working relationship with him ended so well! Truly unbelievable.

I am happy today, not because God answered my prayers as I wanted him to but because in some way he changed this man's heart and mind and made him realize that he was in the wrong.
I know that the words "Thy will be done" are much more important than the words "God, I want or need this". When we pray "Thy will be done" and believe it, then we relax and are able to function in a much more calm and convincing manner, and believe me this is not lost on the other person.

This has been my experience Andreas.

Effie

Concerning the original question of forgiving God. I cannot even conceive of such a notion. Does God sin? Does he cause suffering and pain? If we believe this then what is the basis of our religion? Let's just go back to a God of vengeance, to human sacrifices, and to absurdity.

[Effie Ganatsios]

A 14-year-old should not be given false pieties, nor treated as a child, nor given some cheap way out of her dillemma, since there isn't one. But you may want to ask her what she thinks her mother would want her to do, and how she would want her to live in her absence. Would she want her to blame God? Would she want her to be angry and bitter? But the bottom line is that we, in such a circumstances, must not compound the error by believing that it is up to us to have the final word in such situations that will make everything all right. Grieve with her. Some times words just don't mean much anyway.


I agree completely. Words are sometimes useless in the face of suffering. It took me years to realize that we cannot be God for our children and for others that we want to protect. We can soothe and help others but, in the final analysis, only stand by while the persons concerned work their own way through their trouble. They might need to go through various stages, some taking quite a long while, to finally find peace. We cannot do this for them.

[Nina]

God Does Not Make Mistakes
Α certain, spiritual daughter of his recalls:
«Years ago, ί n the city where we dwell, something rare
happened to one family: The wife, ί n the space of only four or five years, buried her husband and her three children. And her one daughter had gotten married a few months Ρ ri ο r to her death.
As much as Ι knew that the question which arose ί n me «Why, my God?» was blasphemous, nevertheless at first Ι cultivated this thought. So, Ι confessed this thought of mine. The Elder's response was so simple and simultaneously so wise:
«Know just one thing,» he told me. «God does not make mistakes!»


Facing Death
Characte ri st ί c is the way the Elder faced the announcement of the death by a car accident, of a beloved person, a spiritual child of his:
«Glory to thee, Ο God!» he said three times, and subsequently asked about details about the accident and he consoled the mourning person.

Behold, furthermore, how the Elder announced the sudden death of a father of a spiritual child of his, then a student:
« Μ y child, your father is first a child of God and then your own father. So the Lord, to whom he belonged, called him close to Himself." Link (http://impantokratoros.gr/7D8AF455.en.aspx)

[Owen Jones]

Yes, of course Elihu is dogmatically correct and spiritually obtuse. A good lesson for us (me).

There is another reminder here that Christ does not come to either condemn the law or change the law, not one jot or tittle. Everything He teaches is present in the Jewish tradition. His argument is against those who are theologically/dogmatically correct but spiritually obtuse, who thereby turn religion into a burden and a curse, rather than that which sets us free.

So back to the 14-yr. old girl who has lost her mother. The risk is being theologically correct but spiritually damaging. The other risk is to take the cheap way out and blame God (which is the premise behind forgiving God). This, by the way, does indeed come from modern psychologists. It's good to find out where some of these ideas come from.

[Antonios]

His argument is against those who are theologically/dogmatically correct but spiritually obtuse, who thereby turn religion into a burden and a curse, rather than that which sets us free.


Dear Owen,

Very astute observations! Set us free is correct! I appreciate your input into this old thread.

I believe that the ability to relate to this wonderful and instructive story (and with Job himself) is due to the feelings of abandonment and estrangement we often times face in our daily struggle with sins and transgressions. Except, the scary part is that Job was a much greater saint than you or I! (well, with me at least!)

How else should I feel than burdened and cursed because of my own failings? How could I ever face my God knowing how impure and dark I am inside?

And we are left, in the end, if we allow it, with the most irrational, inexplicable, and greatest assurance of love.

Here, our limits of human understanding are stretched, and God's mysteries are softly revealed.

In Christ,
Antonios

[Andreas Moran]

There is another reminder here that Christ does not come to either condemn the law or change the law, not one jot or tittle. Everything He teaches is present in the Jewish tradition. His argument is against those who are theologically/dogmatically correct but spiritually obtuse, who thereby turn religion into a burden and a curse, rather than that which sets us free.

Thanks for that Owen.


The difficulty remains of the unequivocal assurances given in the Gospels that requests will be fulfilled: in Matthew 21:22, and John 15:7 and John 15:16 and John 16:23.

I was wondering if anyone had some angle on this point specifically.

[Owen Jones]

For the most part, I see promises that are contingent on our prayers being true and being pure. So that what we desire is already that which God desires for us.

[Effie Ganatsios]

Thanks for that Owen.



I was wondering if anyone had some angle on this point specifically.

Yes, requests are answered. No is also an answer. If it is God's Will and your request is in accordance with His plan for you, then yes. Andreas, we are like little children. Today we want this, tomorrow we want that. Thy Will be Done should be added to every prayer and dialogue we have with God. Mother Gabriela, when very sick with cancer, saw these words printed on the white wall of her hospital room. Thy Will be Done. Prayers are answered and we are promised that what we ask for will be granted, but we need to ask ourselves beforehand - is what we are asking for pure, is it honest, is it selfish perhaps, will it benefit only myself or others as well?
It would be absolutely nonsensical if we believed that if we asked God to kill a certain person He would carry out our desire.



Did someone post the following or did I read it somewhere? I'm referring to the monk and the angel who did three things that were unbelievable to the monk. When the angel explained why he did these things - giving examples from the future - the monk understood that he knew nothing and that God knew everything.
A very good example of our ignorance. Some of the fathers believe that we should not ask for anything but just ask that God's Will be Done in our lives. Another question is - "Do we trust God" or rather "How much do we trust God". Do we believe that His love is a mother's love magnified thousands and thousands of times, or do we believe in a vindictive God - sort of like the ones that pagans sacrificed people to or a petty God who is at our beck and call.

Effie

Effie

[Nina]

Effie that beautiful story Unfathomable is the Will of God (http://www.impantokratoros.gr/EBC973A9.en.aspx) is from the same site as the two stories linked above.

I also struggled a lot with the issue of "unanswered prayer", when I knew my mom was going to be taken away from me although I had prayed so much that she may live longer with us (some friends of mine joked that my umbilical cord was never really detached because I am very close to my parents - therefore sorry if this recurring theme is becoming too recurring since that is one of the most spiritually struggling moments of my life). I still do not know why my mom had to depart when only 52, but I know that God knows and I trust Him with that. I prayed so much about it but what the Elder said in the example above: "Μy child, your father is first a child of God and then your own father. So the Lord, to whom he belonged, called him close to Himself". is so true for me as related to the departure of my mother, and reading it was a peace-bringing-revelation since although I am aware of that truth I never thought about it in such perspective as that holy elder.

Do I think that my prayers for my mom went unanswered? Like Effie so rightly says, 'no' is also an answer. And God says who gives to his child a stone when he asks for bread. Maybe we are asking for stone, in the case of the so called unanswered prayers, and God is giving us bread. I can not say that it is bread for me not having my mother still here, however I have come to believe with all my heart that God knows better and what is best for my mother's soul (although three years ago I was thinking that I knew better about where my mom should be).

On the other hand I had a couple of prayers at some moments in my life when I was praying with so much fervor. I never got what I prayed for (in general) and I learned a good lesson that my will is not God's will so I have started to say more and think more that way like: "God if this is Your will let it be done." or "May God's will be done." I see this time as growing up spiritually -not progressing because I have not progressed to leave behind sin- but growing up. Because I associate "hurt feelings" about unanswered prayers with my spiritual immaturity and also with the previously unknown things that I have learned.

What I can say with all my heart though is that there have been moments when I was unaware that there was a need for prayer and God had arranged things amazingly. One such thing happened to me this past December and even today we thought about it with my fiance and talked about how wonderful God is. There is nothing more wonderful than Divine Providence which of course is God's love for us. And yes as the title of the story confirms, unfathomable is the Will of God.

I am closing with one line from a Jewish movie which I think is also a proverb: "when a prayer is not answered, either you did not pray correctly, or you did not pray enough." I am guilty of both. So now I take a shortcut and say: God you know better than I what is profitable for me. May Your holy will be done.