God on His Terms
Among a handful of daily rituals, I read nearly every article posted on ESPN, The Athletic, and a handful of other sports news outlets before I start my day. Yep; I’m a sports junkie.
Spent a lot of years playing them. Even more years coaching them.
Of course, I like some sports more than others, so I’ll do more of a deep dive on those each day. But, I still catch up on all the headlines for the day, regardless of the sport. While soccer may not be in my top three, I definitely make space to watch World Cup matches, significant rivalries, and I’m slowly jumping on the bandwagon as a fan of St. Louis’s newest MLS team.
A few of weeks ago, I read a headline saying that Megan Rapinoe had torn her Achilles Tendon and that she had said this was reason to question the existence of God. I clicked the link to read the story, not because of her statement about God, but because I was saddened that she had gotten hurt. She tore it in what many presumed to be her last professional match, just moments into the NWSL championship game. It’s a very significant injury, so I can understand why her post-game comments were so loaded with frustration: "I’m not a religious person or anything and if there was a god, like, this is proof that there isn’t," Rapinoe said. "This is f---ed up. It’s just f---ed up. Six minutes in and I eat my Achilles." As is often the case, Rapinoe provided an unvarnished reaction; I continue to appreciate her for that.
I became a Megan Rapinoe fan after her last-second pass to Abby Wambach to save the USWNT’s chances against Brazil in the 2011 Women’s World Cup. Like Rapinoe, the rest of the team, and U.S. Soccer fans everywhere, I went crazy. It was exhilarating. Since then, she has had a remarkable career and will likely be regarded as one of the greatest players in USWNT history, and maybe women’s soccer in general. After all, she has won the Ballon d’Or Feminin, The Best FIFA Women’s Player, The Golden Boot, and The Golden Ball. She’s a World Cup and Olympic champion. Quite simply, she’s an absolutely fabulous soccer player.
Some Christians ignore Rapinoe’s incredible achievements and contribution to the future of the sport because of her life outside the pitch. She is an outspoken LGBQT rights advocate, has kneeled ritualistically during the playing of the National Anthem, engages in all sorts of political activism, and openly talks about her secular leanings. I’ve followed her career, have listened to many of her perspectives, and quite often disagree with her many of her views. None of that minimizes her profound abilities, her advocacy for important issues, or the reality of profound dignity as a human being.
Yes, Rapinoe’s stances are often contrary to many traditionally held, Christian beliefs and she has often been frosty in her remarks about religion (personally, I tend to believe that it’s a response to the way she’s often villainized by Christians or those on the political right). Beyond her opinions, Rapinoe’s lifestyle choices are also outside a historically, Christian ethic. However, what’s not outside the traditional, historical, Christian view is that Megan Rapinoe is an image-bearer of the infinite, personal, triune God. As a result, she has profound value, and her substantial gifting and charisma as a soccer player and communicator should be commended.
I also don’t understand why many Christians tend to re-interpret Jesus’s insistence that His followers “Love your neighbor as yourself” as though it has an addendum: “as long as they are Christian.” Loving Megan doesn’t mean we have to agree with or condone everything she says or does. But, there’s no question that loving her means pointing her to what’s true, beautiful, and good while wholeheartedly treating her with respect, hearing her out, recognizing the good she brings to the table, and rooting for her to flourish.
That’s part of the problem in our cultural moment. We don’t have a lot of models for what it looks like to both disagree with people and truly hope for their benefit. Yet, the world deeply needs to see Christians proclaim the goodness of the gospel among those we disagree with … not against them.
Rapinoe’s statement about her injury and the existence of God is a wonderful conversation starter. Unfortunately, she probably isn’t willing to enter into any conversation about it, because many of those who want to engage her statement will start by pointing out where she’s wrong – not only in the statement’s claims and assumptions, but also because of who she is, and even the language she used.
I’d like to start where she’s right. I fully understand where Rapinoe is coming from in this statement. God is supposed to be good and loving, and quite frankly it’s very difficult to align that reality with suffering. A torn achilles is a horrible injury; it will take a long time for recovery, and I hope that the doctors who worked on her and will oversee her rehabilitation can do so with skill and grace. Not to diminish her injury, though, there are far greater sufferings that make it even more difficult to make sense of God’s goodness.
The $5 word for this conversation is theodicy*. In one way or another, Rapinoe’s claim reflects maybe the single most significant question humans have asked in their attempts to understand God: How do we jive who He claims to be (good, loving, and all-powerful) with the reality of evil and/or suffering. Rapinoe’s not the first to ask it; she won’t be the last. David Hume (1711-1776) was one of the first Western thinkers to poignantly doubt the existence of God, considering evil’s existence. In Hume’s thinking, if God is all-powerful He has the ability to stop evil/pain. But if He chooses not to, He mustn’t be good. Or, if God is all-good, then He would want to stop evil/pain, but He must not be able to. Therefore, he must not be all-powerful. Hume saw the logical conundrum, and it’s essentially the same thing that Rapinoe is saying here. It’s quite difficult to believe God is good when we’re hurting, given that things aren’t going the way we think they should.
It’s not as though the problems of theodicy are modern-era problem alone. Many of the biblical writers struggled with the very same question. In some cases, these writers even stepped beyond questions and actually accused God of ignoring His covenantal love. It’s absolutely remarkable that God allowed people to doubt Him and His goodness … and not just anyone doubting - as though we’re talking about random people walking the streets of ancient Jerusalem or modern-day Portland, Oregon. No, He allowed these doubts and questions to show up within THE primary instrument of His revelation. It’s as though God is saying, “You are going to doubt. It’s part or your existence.” The Bible paints a picture of the same reality we experience (albeit thousands of years ago) and doesn’t ask us to be anything other than what we are in order to believe. Rather, it asks us to bring who we are – with all of our doubts, hurts, and flaws as well as our giftings, hopes, and loves – with us into our belief. Even more amazing, the Bible tells us that God even has a first-hand insight into all of these aspects of our human existence because He actually came and walked among us for three decades over 2,000 years ago.
There are people who can unpack a thoughtful response to theodicy far better than I can, and that’s not my goal here. But, I do want to offer a response to Rapinoe’s claim. As much as I hear what she’s saying, and have often felt like what God’s is doing doesn’t seem right or fair, it’s important to recognize that this specific claim isn’t a valid reason not to believe in God. It also reveals how singularly focussed we tend to be on ourselves and our unique experiences. Think about all of the times that Megan Rapinoe has played soccer and didn’t blow out her Achilles! In the overall percentages of her own life, this specific instance of injury is a fraction of a fraction of one percent. Granted, it was at a really unfortunate time. But, wouldn’t any injury’s time be really unfortunate? What about a championship match of a Women’s World Cup? Wouldn’t that have been more unfortunate? But, it’s normal to think about this specific instance of injury and overlook all of the other instances of health. We zoom in on the immediate and overlook all the other times when nothing bad happened. And, I imagine that there have been countless times when Megan turned her ankle at such an angle that it’s actually incomprehensible that she didn’t get hurt. What about those? It’s our tendency to ignore the good, because it seems normal. But, doesn’t that even suggest that we have a hard-wired notion that there is a way things are supposed to be?
Eventually, we’ll all die. We know it. We avoid the notion, but we all know it’s a reality. It might be the most “normal" thing of our existence. We may not all have five working digits on our hand, but we will all die. Most of us have noses. Everyone doesn’t. Most of us have two legs. Everyone doesn’t. Most of us can talk. Everyone can’t. Everyone will die. But, we struggle with this thing that is most common, because deep down we all know it’s not supposed to be that way. Pain. Hurt. Loss. Death. It’s not supposed to be that way, and we know it.
So, I can agree with Megan Rapinoe. She has every reason to be upset that she got hurt. It doesn’t make sense, and it really stinks. As a Christian, I have great confidence in being able to say that pain and suffering are not the way it’s supposed to be, and I can agree fully with the star soccer player. But, I also believe that the only reason a person can be truly upset is if that person can also say that there is a standard for how things should be. Otherwise, it’s just really unfortunate. But, we can’t complain as though it’s wrong. To say it’s wrong, we concede that there is a way things are supposed to be.
I, for one, tend to believe that one of the single most important aspects of Christianity is its insistence that there really is a way everything is supposed to be, provides a nameable reason why things aren’t that way, and proclaims radical and tangible hope of everything being restored to the way it is supposed to be.
Another thing to think about with Megan’s specific complaint is the larger issue of “humanity” in this instance. Of course, it’s normal to think about our own experience and ignore others’, but we really need to be able to step back and think about the others involved before we make sweeping claims about God. There are nearly always other people involved in these situations, and we have to consider their perspectives as well. Sure, Rapinoe could claim that the unfortunate timing of her injury disproves the existence of God. What if people on the other team were praying for God to do something miraculous to help them win the match that night, and because of Rapinoe’s abilities God brought about this injury in order to answer the prayers of these other players or their fans? Well, that really stinks for Rapinoe, and she concludes that God must not exist. But on the other hand, people could have that much more reason to believe that God does exist precisely because He brought about something that they interpret as answered prayer. The same could be said in the aftermath of a major traffic accident; our immediate thought could be to wonder how a good God could allow us to be involved in a specific event. But what about the other people who avoided the same accident? They may be praising Him for His miraculous provision, while you are grieving its aftermath. Also, consider all of the other times where you made it to your destination safely; are all of them discounted because of the one time you didn’t?
This is the problem with basing arguments for the existence of God on our experiences … it makes us the judge, rather than God. It assumes that our interpretation of those experiences is flawless and more authoritative than any one else’s. I think about this with the current conflict in Israel. People observe the same series of events and make very different interpretations and conclusions. Many of those interpretations result in conclusion about God - what He’s doing or not, or what He wants or doesn’t. Who are we to make these claims!
Ms. Rapinoe, I grieve along with you, and hope you are moving toward healing at a faster rate than you thought. I also agree with you that your injury is a reminder that it’s not supposed to be this way – that something’s wrong.
I also don’t blame you for saying that it doesn’t make sense or suggesting that God must not be good (or in your case, that He doesn’t exist at all). The Bible writers tend to say the same thing; so maybe you’ll find some common language there. But where I do disagree with you is that I think its dangerous for us to make demands of or claims about God based on our interpretation of our experiences. If there’s a God, He should be judged based upon His claims. Considering all of the variables, limited amount of time, and our inability to see outside our own perspectives, it’s unreasonable to make judgements as though we have infinite knowledge and perspective.
Throughout most of my life, I’ve gone through varying levels of doubt … some far more haunting than others. I’ve prayed fervently for God to preserve the lives of dear believers - only to see them die. I’ve experienced personal struggle where I’ve wondered whether or not God even cares. In those times, I’ve thought or even prayed, “God, I just need to experience you. I need something to hold onto that I can see.” These are normal and human emotions, but they once again put God on trial - not based upon what He has said or done, but based upon my very limited interpretations of experiences. It could very well be that God actually has done very miraculous things that I’ve experienced but haven’t seen. But, in these prayers, I want God to do what I want Him to do right now, and I ignore and fail to remember the countless times where He has provided for me in amazing ways. Oh, I wish I could do a better job of holding onto those experiences when I find myself feeling like He hasn’t done enough to assuage my doubts.
I specifically appreciate C.S. Lewis’s definition of faith in Mere Christianity where he suggests that faith isn’t a word we use for all the things we believe but can’t prove. Rather, it’s the art of being able to hold onto what we reasonably have come to know to be true despite changing moods or experiences. Emotions and events vary wildly. We may have lots of good days in a row, have one bad day thrown in, and then all of a sudden act as though God doesn’t care about us. But faith is the art (it’s a skill) of being able to look at this new situation through the lens of what we know.
Faith means that we have to take God at His word and let that dictate our expectations of Him. Who wouldn’t want a God who does everything you want? Once again, though, this would have to mean that He’s only listening to you and no once else, because what you and another person may want are likely quite different at any given instant. To allow our own interpretations of our experiences to shape our demands on God leaves us in even greater selfishness and proves that we don’t even really want a God to do what we want. Actually, we want to be God.
Rather than allowing our experiences to drive our perspective on what God has done, it’s far better to allow them to be reminders that things often aren’t the way they’re supposed to be. And, it’s good to sit in that space – even to be angry about it, because Jesus came precisely for a people who are hurting, lonely, and angry. People who realize that it’s not supposed to be this way. People who often would rather be God than submit to Him. But that’s the good news of the gospel. It’s about rescue. Rescue from ourselves. Rescue from the realities of great loss, hurt, and sadness. But real rescue, because all sad things will be made untrue.
*There are so many resources that can provide great introductions to the major topics within the larger umbrella of theodicy. But, I’d start with some of the chapters in Tim Keller’s The Reason for God , Making Sense of God , and C.S. Lewis’s The Problem of Pain
Other’s I’d highly recommend:
Tom Wright’s Evil and the Justice of God
Alvin Plantinga’s God Freedom and Evil
Gordon Clarks’s God and Evil: the Problem Solved
Norman Geisler’s If God, Why Evil?
