Is God in Control?

Not that much on Facebook inspires me, but I saw one of those postings from the ever faithful that extoled me to trust in God in difficult times because God is in control.  Really?  That pretty well boggles my brain.

If God is in control, do we have free will?  How could we?  If God decides who will do what to whom whenever how could we argue we have free will?  If we have free will, then how can God be in control?  Are each of us in control of our own actions and our own reactions?  If so, God is not in control.

If God is in control, why do we have difficult times to begin with?  Why doesn’t he or she simply make life smooth and easy?  If he or she is in control and the hard times in my life are the direct result of God’s will then why would I worship such a being who has wrecked such havoc on me?  That is not a picture of a God of love but a picture of some being with a mean and punitive streak.  More, why would I trust him or her to end the havoc when he or she caused the havoc?  Does God delight in my misery?  If God does not cause or allow the havoc, then God is not in control.

If God is in control then does he or she simply choose to ignore the prayers of millions who beseech him or her for some cause, some loved one, some release from pain and misery?  If it is within his or her power to do so and he or she chooses not to do it, we are back to a mean and punitive God.  If bad stuff just happens then God is not in control.

So, if God is in control I see no conclusion possible other than he or she is mean and punitive and not a benevolent God of love.  God is some being to be feared and avoided.

If God is capable of being in control but simply waits in the wings to step in, then what determines his or her decision to step in?  Is it just for the folks he likes and who profess their love for him or her?  No, I see far too many of the faithful beset by terrible things while pleading with God for succor.  I see far too many godless scoundrels doing very well.  If he or she can step in and exercise control like he or she did with the Red Sea, the walls of Jericho, the water into wine, the demons out of the pig, etc., etc., then why doesn’t he or she do more of that these days?  Somehow seeing Jesus’ face on a pancake is not awe inspiring.

If God is not in control, why would we worship such a simple spectator anyway?  He or she must enjoy our pain and our death.  The violence that can wash over me watching professional sports, or clips from the front line in war time leave me feeling sick.  God must love all that as he or she has a full time view of all that misery.  We are all going to die so God gets a front row seat.  Superman, a fictional character, has a nobler mission and accomplishes more honorable tasks than God. 

It makes very little sense to turn to God when times are difficult.  He/she either caused those tough times, allowed them to happen, uses some unknown criteria to decide whether to intervene or not, or is helpless to do so.  In which scenario do we turn to God for help and believe he or she will provide or can provide such help?

I can think of no reasonable answer other than God is not in control.  If God is not in control and/or could be but chooses not to be, why would we trust in such a God?  Perhaps, man created God and not vice versa.  I would love to believe there is a Superman God who will swoop in faster than a speeding bullet to save the day when times are tough.  But there is no such God.  We even make excuses for his or her lack of existence by saying that all this pain is somehow part of his or her plan which we do not know.  If God plans for me to have such pain I have a hard time worshipping him or her while he or she is guilty of such cruelty. 

No, God is not in control.  It appears to me that if God is in control he or she is evil.  It is easier and more logical to conclude that we are in control of what we believe about God. 

A New Biblical Translation

There are at least 50 English language versions of the Bible, and many more if one looks at translations of a portion of the Bible.  That is amazing.  It occurred to me to check this out when a “friend” on Facebook said to me that there is only one infallible word of God.  And I thought, “Really?  Then why do we have so many translations of the Bible, assuming that it is the infallible word of God?  Which version is infallible?

And then it occurs to me that the revisions occur because language use changes and because our translation tools improve.  Newer versions are likely more readable, more understandable and more accurate.  Isn’t that funny, as in funnydementalism?  If we are told God’s word is infallible and not subject to challenge, don’t we need to know which translation that person is following?  Doesn’t the very fact that we need newer translations imply that the older translations are somehow (blasphemy?) fallible?

And if that is true, if we update the Bible based on new use of the English Language and new knowledge of translation skills, why not update the Bible based on other new knowledge.  Knowledge we have gained since the Bronze Age could be used to replace and enhance the limited knowledge base available when the Bible was written?

For example:  We believe that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, but in reality we know that there was nothingness, then the big bang, then everything including time.  When we say “heavens” we are including all the celestial bodies we can observe with a full understanding that from another perspective earth is part of someone else’s heavens.  After the big bang there was no total darkness as stars formed and galaxies formed and planets formed around stars.  The bang separated darkness from light.  Day and night are irrelevant concepts from a universal perspective as every orbiting body faces toward or away from the nearest star at some point.  If not, then there is no separation of day and night on such a planet.  On earth, day and night are separated only because the earth orbits the sun and spins on its axis.

I could go on and insert what we know about the growth of our oceans, the emergence of life forms, the millions and billions of years of development on our planet, even the constant movement of the so-called firmament, etc.  Why don’t we update the Biblical translation with our current scientific knowledge and not just our translation knowledge?

And while we are at it, why don’t we update the Bible with our current social science knowledge.  Why don’t we tweak verses so that we know slavery is bad, so that we know treating women as second class citizens is bad, so that we know totalitarian rule is bad?  Why don’t we address sexual identity and preference instead of assuming the Bronze Age perspective?  Why don’t we update medical knowledge regarding homosexuality, gender identity, abortion?  Why don’t we praise curiosity and discovery and not just strict adherence to dogma?

I suspect if someone wrote a new translation of the Bible that was historically, socially and scientifically accurate we would have a much smaller book and a lot less social conflict.