Jonathan
Edwards is not the only one who thinks of God as angry. And not just
occasionally upset or disappointed, but really relentlessly furious. There are
many who hold this view because they think it best represents the picture of
God in the Scriptures. Even more fear that it must be true, not because of
their intellectual commitments but because they can't escape the gnawing sense
that the angry God lingers near ready to vent.
Of course,
some who see God as angry, see the anger directed only at the wicked. This
works out well in evangelism when the preacher, like Jonathan Edwards seeks to
manipulate through fear, guilt and emotional pain. They effectively exploit the
anxieties rooted in the human experience. They promise that these feelings will
vanish because their is a remedy for sin and wickedness.
This has
been a standard approach and deeply ingrained in the American Church. In many
ways it has been successful. But it has not come without a cost. There are
many, maybe most, who are unable to move beyond the idea of the Angry God. So
through the effort to bring people into the Church, the Church becomes
distorted because their understanding of God is distorted.
This seems
almost inevitable. If the first, most essential thing is to get people to
convert then almost anything will become permissible or even necessary to make
it happen. But, of course, getting people is not the first or most important
thing. Loving God is the first and most important focus of te Christian. It is
the guiding principle and all else flows from it.
Loving God
limits what we can do and how we go about it. Loving God leads to loving our
neighbor (in faith or out of faith). Loving God and loving our neighbor limits
how we can approach or neighbor, including what methods and tools of persuasion
we will adopt. Some approaches are not loving. Some are exploitative,
manipulative and even cruel. Some add great suffering to the lives of those we
claim we love.
I can hear
the arguments. If our neighbor doesn't come to faith then they will suffer
forever. We will address this specifically another day. In general, we argue
that our means of persuasion are necessary because the stakes are so high. In
other words, the ends justify the means. We don't have to act in loving ways
now because what we re doing is so good and important. We are saving them from
a worse fate.
But
authentic love demands constant practice. We practice love by showing our
respect. When we manipulate others through emotional persuasion we demonstrate
our lack of respect. When we choose our "ends" for others and bypass
their wishes, we demonstrate our disrespect. We don't practice love by
disrespecting others.
Loving
others necessarily requires that we respect them. Loving them can include our
efforts to reach out to them, to offer information and help and at the same
time allow them to choose without undue influence, manipulation or exploitation
of their weaknesses.
