10 Profound Lessons to Learn from the Long Term Suffering of Job
Page 2 ⇦ Previous | Next ⇨ Page 4
3. FLEE THE FALSE POPULAR THEOLOGY THAT ALWAYS SEES SUFFERING AS RELATED TO SPECIFIC PERSONAL SINS
Now we looked at this slightly in our previous message in this series but I want to spend a little more time on this.
You see, specific and personal sins are not always the cause of suffering. Isn't that the point of the book of Job? It is certainly one of the points. In the book of Job, the righteous man Job is receiving great and grievous suffering beyond human comprehension; and it's not connected to his sin. In fact, his suffering is connected to his righteousness. We are told in Job 1:1 that, "There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil."
So the popular theology of suffering in Job's day was the same as the popular theology of suffering in Jesus' day. So if you would turn just for a moment, let's turn at John 9 and we will see what it was in Jesus' day.
Speaking of Jesus, we are told in John 1:1-2 that, "As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?'"
What the disciples are doing here is that they are asking a question and in this question, they present Jesus with what we call a logical fallacy. They present a false "either" "or". "Was it this man's sin or was it the parent's sin; we would like to know, Jesus.", so runs their inquiry.
And what is Jesus' response? In John 9:3, "Jesus answered, 'It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him.'
Contrary to the disciples' logical fallacy which gave Jesus only two false options to choose from that were in the form of "either ... or", Jesus says that, 'there is a third alternative that you didn't present to me. Those aren't the only options. It isn't just the option of this man sinned or his parents sinned as to why he is born blind. There is another option. God is up to something. God is after displaying something of his glory, something of his work. And it is for this reason that this man was born blind".
And so, the assumption of the disciples that was drawing the conclusion that someone's sin has to be the explanation for his suffering is often our assumption as well. And it is often the assumption of people you talk to in churches.
Doesn't the Bible teach that the fall brought suffering? And that in the New Heaven and the New Earth there will be no more suffering? And of course, the answer is "Yes". So isn't it logical to conclude that there is always a one to one correspondence between your personal sin and your personal suffering? And in response to this question, the Bible says, "No, you can't rush to that conclusion".
Of course, there would be no sin or suffering if there had been no fall. The Bible clearly says that. But this does not mean that God distributes suffering according to specific personal sin in every case! Otherwise, what would we have to conclude about our Lord Jesus? He must have been the greatest sinner in History because he suffered the most.
Well, the truth is the opposite. Jesus Christ was the most righteous. In fact, Christ is the only righteous person who has ever lived. And He suffered not because of His sins, but because of the sins of the many that he bore on his back. So we have to be careful when we try to make applications.
The problem in Job's life is that Job is suffering disproportionately. isn't it? That is his problem. He suffers greatly compared to others but he is more righteous than others. So how can this be? Well, Jesus' answer in John 9:3 is, "It was not that this man sinned, but that the works of God might be displayed in him."
And so, Jesus' answer can be applied to Job. Is this the reason why Job suffered? I think the answer would be "Yes". Does it mean all suffering is to glorify Christ? Is all suffering intended to glorify God and to display His works? And of course, ultimately the answer is "Yes", but not all suffering brings immediate glory to Christ. What Jesus is saying in John 9:1-3 is that there are other reasons besides personal sin that should explain why people suffer; not just one reason. And the reason for suffering is not always readily apparent.
So the warning of Jesus and the book of Job is this: "Don't jump to the conclusion that your suffering or someone else's suffering is always connected to specific personal sin. Rushing to conclude that someone's suffering is always connected to a specific personal sin was the foundational error of Job's three friends, Jesus' disciples and the false popular theology that is so rampant today.
Page 2 ⇦ Previous | Next ⇨ Page 4
3. FLEE THE FALSE POPULAR THEOLOGY THAT ALWAYS SEES SUFFERING AS RELATED TO SPECIFIC PERSONAL SINS
Now we looked at this slightly in our previous message in this series but I want to spend a little more time on this.
You see, specific and personal sins are not always the cause of suffering. Isn't that the point of the book of Job? It is certainly one of the points. In the book of Job, the righteous man Job is receiving great and grievous suffering beyond human comprehension; and it's not connected to his sin. In fact, his suffering is connected to his righteousness. We are told in Job 1:1 that, "There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil."
So the popular theology of suffering in Job's day was the same as the popular theology of suffering in Jesus' day. So if you would turn just for a moment, let's turn at John 9 and we will see what it was in Jesus' day.
Speaking of Jesus, we are told in John 1:1-2 that, "As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?'"
What the disciples are doing here is that they are asking a question and in this question, they present Jesus with what we call a logical fallacy. They present a false "either" "or". "Was it this man's sin or was it the parent's sin; we would like to know, Jesus.", so runs their inquiry.
And what is Jesus' response? In John 9:3, "Jesus answered, 'It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be displayed in him.'
Contrary to the disciples' logical fallacy which gave Jesus only two false options to choose from that were in the form of "either ... or", Jesus says that, 'there is a third alternative that you didn't present to me. Those aren't the only options. It isn't just the option of this man sinned or his parents sinned as to why he is born blind. There is another option. God is up to something. God is after displaying something of his glory, something of his work. And it is for this reason that this man was born blind".
And so, the assumption of the disciples that was drawing the conclusion that someone's sin has to be the explanation for his suffering is often our assumption as well. And it is often the assumption of people you talk to in churches.
Doesn't the Bible teach that the fall brought suffering? And that in the New Heaven and the New Earth there will be no more suffering? And of course, the answer is "Yes". So isn't it logical to conclude that there is always a one to one correspondence between your personal sin and your personal suffering? And in response to this question, the Bible says, "No, you can't rush to that conclusion".
Of course, there would be no sin or suffering if there had been no fall. The Bible clearly says that. But this does not mean that God distributes suffering according to specific personal sin in every case! Otherwise, what would we have to conclude about our Lord Jesus? He must have been the greatest sinner in History because he suffered the most.
Well, the truth is the opposite. Jesus Christ was the most righteous. In fact, Christ is the only righteous person who has ever lived. And He suffered not because of His sins, but because of the sins of the many that he bore on his back. So we have to be careful when we try to make applications.
The problem in Job's life is that Job is suffering disproportionately. isn't it? That is his problem. He suffers greatly compared to others but he is more righteous than others. So how can this be? Well, Jesus' answer in John 9:3 is, "It was not that this man sinned, but that the works of God might be displayed in him."
And so, Jesus' answer can be applied to Job. Is this the reason why Job suffered? I think the answer would be "Yes". Does it mean all suffering is to glorify Christ? Is all suffering intended to glorify God and to display His works? And of course, ultimately the answer is "Yes", but not all suffering brings immediate glory to Christ. What Jesus is saying in John 9:1-3 is that there are other reasons besides personal sin that should explain why people suffer; not just one reason. And the reason for suffering is not always readily apparent.
So the warning of Jesus and the book of Job is this: "Don't jump to the conclusion that your suffering or someone else's suffering is always connected to specific personal sin. Rushing to conclude that someone's suffering is always connected to a specific personal sin was the foundational error of Job's three friends, Jesus' disciples and the false popular theology that is so rampant today.
Page 2 ⇦ Previous | Next ⇨ Page 4
