nodes: part II

in my quest to continue to explore this hazy notion in my head of a different point of view i had a thought this week in my Sunday School class. the question was brought up as to why the sinner/heathen/uncircumcised philistine prospered while the god fearing seemed to be wallowing around in poverty. well the typical answer is that if we judge success/blessing on worldly value then we have already missed the boat. and then the second typical response is that god knows what we can handle and that those with money are can overcome the temptation and that the poor would not be able to handle it. now this can be shot down on a bunch of fronts. one that the original question is why the ungodly have the money, from the angle of the previous answer these obviously could not handle the temptation so why did god give them material wealth anyways. it is also an implicit judgment on those that have not, in that not only are the materially poor but their faith/maturity is defecient. the conversation broadened to include health (man Copeland would have been proud with the Health and Wealth going on). is it a lack of faith or a sin if someone is sick or handicapped. now no one would say yes to that and all the pitfalls it included. so what was the answer. the answers given ranged from the sin cursed world to attack from Satan. john 9 was then brought up. and this is where my brain really started churning. (note that i purposefully try to keep my mouth shut in SS so that i dont stir the pot too much, no need to endlessly and fruitlessly argue) here is the text:

1 As he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" 3 Jesus answered, "It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be made manifest in him. 4 We must work the works of him who sent me, while it is day; night comes, when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world."

the disciples question is one of meaning. yes they are presupposing that the man sinned and that idea is shot down, but clearly they are asking why. why is he this way. now the answer that jesus gives is that the man is this way so that the works of God might be made manifest in him. so the man is blind for the express pupose so that jesus/god can make him unblind. nice. but wait. this man has lived his whole life in pain and agony just so that jesus can prove a point. surely there are better ways. why not the feeding of the 5 thousand, why not stopping the wind and waves. why must this man purposefully suffer and be set up just for this. man this could be a game or something a god who hands out pain just so that he can get glory when he comes in and fixes something that seems like it didn't have to be that way to begin with. why not just club him in the leg and then heal it right there. surely a few minutes of pain would be better than all this guy had to go through. (maybe there is something to be said for overcoming human suffering, along with the powers of nature) maybe benevolent dictator is too harsh, but that is what was running through my mind.

but perhaps there is another way. perhaps there was no meaning. perhaps this guy was blind just because he was blind. perhaps the point was the overcoming of meaninglessness (if that is a word). the conflict was not that the guy was blind and suffering. the point was that the guy was blind and suffering without meaning. not that he had been set up before time to be an example, but that jesus (meaning) came across a situation full of no meaning or purpose. now i dont want to sound to rick warrenish here because i dont want to say that the purpose has been laid out from the beginning, but that purpose manifests itself in the confrontation of god and man. what if jesus had never come along. would the blind man have fulfilled his purpose. would it have been his fault if he had not been healed. would it have been jesus' fault.

let me be clear, i am working on the presumption that there are random events. so much so that much of life is governed by these random events. (that could be an ironic sentence) to order the events is an attempt to narrativize and give meaning. and it seems that often that we cannot quite get the story right. following the last post we assimilate some memories, forget some memories, and emphasize some memories so that 'the story' can be complete and we can find some meaning. is this right, wrong, or none of the above. now kick in verse 4. jesus says that we (talk about we in a minute) need to do works now because there is gonna be a time when no work can be done. not wanting to start drawing charts or anything, but the point is that there is an urgency to work while work can be done. the work of giving meaning. so all the ones that live and suffer when no work can be done are suffering of their own accord? or because of a malevalent (sp?) god (kinda like the greek gods of myth)? or is it not a point at all because jesus is always gonna have his people and his spirit around so that the light wont go out. or perhaps they are just on the grind of the meaningless randomness of life. now i am beginning to ramble. i ate dinner half way through writing this, so i lost my train of thought forgive me.

what i do want to say though is that perhaps in the randomness we find ourselves with opportunites, not opportunites that have been set up, but genuine opportunites that we have choice to act and move on. maybe destiny is not discovered, or we become who we are, but it is made/created as we go. there it is in all its illogical coherence.