Devil May Care
by Dr. Jack Hoehn
Devilish Thinking?
Former GC Theologian Ed Zinke writes a curious sort of Devil-may-or-may-not -care article in the Adventist Review titled “Does the Devil Care?” Now when I knew Ed as a classmate in religion classes at Pacific Union College he was always a serious theology student, and in later life has become a leading proponent and thought leader for the theological necessity of a 144 hour Creation chronology.
Although Ed seems to have left denominational employment for a business career, it appears he is still available to promote (as a “senior advisor to the Adventist Review”) those doctrines essential for the preservation of his vision of Adventism.
After the catchy title, Ed’s article suggests that Adventists have but two choices:
DEVIL FAITH or BIBLICAL FAITH.
You might just have an inkling as to which side he hopes we come down on?
But just to make sure his first three paragraphs are all about the Devil.
“Satan tempts…”, “Satan hopes…”, “The devil was….”, and just what is the Devil so busy doing? Trying to get us to use our minds, that’s what! “To establish our minds as the absolute determiner of truth…”; “to test God’s Word by our minds…”; “to trust their own judgment…” .
Opposed to this he offers “Caleb and Joshua who urged faith”, and Hebrews 11 where “By faith we understand that the worlds were created by the Word of God.” (I do note that it does not say “by faith we believe” but “by faith we understand”.)
Bible Faith is above human thinking, and Sister White is quoted to prove that. Abraham’s obedience to leave Ur is the “most striking evidence of faith to be found in the Bible.”
Biblical faith he concludes is “grounded in the power of the Word of God” and is distinct and not compromised with Devil faith which he calls humanistic. Especially dangerous would be to synthesize these two faiths, humanistic and Biblical. Like playing golf with a soccer ball.
Now while playing golf with a soccer ball might improve my ability to hit that little sphere, far be it from me to mix those two sports. Yet both sports do share a common thread, both are played for the same purpose, to put a ball into a specific location. The games do have similar goals, although the equipment players use may be diverse.
So it seems that Satan and God using different approaches are both playing a similar game. They are trying to score a decision by my mind. I don’t see the Bible suggesting I stop thinking and have faith. And I don’t see Satan suggesting think it over carefully and weight all the evidence!
In fact most of what I experience the Devil doing is to stop me from thinking—he distracts me from thought with frivolity, and carnality. He appeals to pride and vanity to prevent analysis. He encourages intoxicants, drugs, and overindulgence to deaden the sacred “sensibilities of the mind”, as Sister White might phrase it.
Abram in Ur was not tempted by Satan to “think it over carefully, and use your reason to not trust your Creator”. It was not “using his mind” that tempted Abram of Ur to stay put. It was comfort, it was wealth, it was family ties, it was emotion, and sloth, and inertia that might have kept him from seriously considering God’s command.
Also God was not asking for Abram’s faith instead of reason. God was not suggesting Abraham take Sarah and move to Arkansas or Patagonia. He was not directed to Mars or Oz, he was suggesting he move to a real and possible place, with roads that could be followed, and travelers who could tell him about the journey. God didn’t suggest he make a time capsule or an ark and wait for flood waters. God suggested a logical and reasonable course of action, and he didn’t just say, “Obey or else”. God offered Abram’s mind real incentives to think this through, to weigh the evidence.
He made him an offer that was actually hard to turn down, if you believed it was the Creator speaking. Listen to the inducements to obedience, “ I will make of thee a great nation.” “I will bless thee and make thy name great.” “Thou shalt be a blessing.” And in case the dangers of the adventure would halt him, God offers wonderful security, “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee.”
Abram departs not in a blind leap of faith, but in the thought-out, reasonable, realistic, mental decision to trust Yahweh.
Obviously we like Abram all make faith decisions with our minds. If Abram didn’t use his mind as “the absolute arbiter of truth,” what in Heaven’s name did he use? He had no scriptures to read, did he decide with his stomach? With his sense of humor? With emotion? Did he head for the Promised Land on warm fuzzy feelings? Did he decide if this was Yahweh or the Devil speaking to him based on throwing dice? I think not!
God was not trying to overcome Abram’s reason by calling him to Canaan, the whole purpose of the call was not the destruction of thinking, but the enhancement of thinking. Listen to what Sister White wrote about Abraham’s call to leave Ur:
“God disciplines His servants. He sees that some have powers which may be used in the advancement of His work…He gives them opportunity to correct these defects and to fit themselves for His service…They are educated, trained, and disciplined, prepared to fulfill the grand purpose for which their powers were given them. When God calls them to action, they are ready…” E.G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, “The Call of Abraham” p.129, 130.
Obedience, Bible faith, is not opposed to human thinking, judgment, reason, it is for the enhancement and purification of these very human “powers” which are to be “educated, trained, and disciplined” to fulfill the grand purpose for which God created human minds, the power to think and to do.
Of course we have to choose Devil Faith or Bible Faith, but we always make this vital choice using the kingly power of reason, this very human power hopefully educated, trained, and disciplined .
If Ed Zinke has some interpretations of Adventist doctrine that require us to not use our educated , trained, and disciplined human minds, then by Biblical faith I will carefully think through and reject interpretations that remain doubtful, debatable, of some private interpretation, or contrary to sanctified human reason. No matter what the Devil may care.
Such Christian faith requires equal belief in God and the Devil. All we know about the Devil is from the Bible, if one reads it as the Word of God. But what about the long time period covered in the Bible writings before the Devil, or Satan was ever mentioned?
There are many suppositions about the Devil but what can positively be proved? He is essential to the Great Controversy theory, not first presented by Adventists but was part of the dualism taught by Zoroaster, Persian philosopher during their exile there. Ellen White was also heavily influenced by John Milton's "Paradise Lost." Satan and the Devil evolved over the centuries following the Jewish Diaspora and into Christian belief.
The Hebrews needed no adversary, as God dispensed both good and evil. With late Hebrew history they adopted this explanation and it was further refined in Christianity.
Welcome Jack! Thanks for the thought provocation.
It seems that Abraham used his mind within certain paradigmatic parameters, as we should.
When Abraham was instructed to take Isaac’s life, surely faith trumped any reasoning or common sense he could possibly have employed.
If we don’t first believe that He is, and that He rewards those who diligently seek Him, and if we don’t use our minds within the “faith in who He is and what He says” paradigm, then we are not using our minds as they were intended by Him to be used; and are then wide open for both self-deception and devil deception.
Abraham knew God. Was it faith, or simply common sense, to follow his command? There is sometimes a difference between obeying God because we know him, and following what the church teaches because we can't be bothered to do the hard work of studying for ourselves. Of course, for most of us there are things we accept on someone else's authority simply because we are not interested enough, or it does not seem important enough to us, to do the work ourselves. There is a big difference between staying within the pardigmatic parameters of there is a God and he speaks to us – through the Bible among a number of other ways – and staying within the paradigmatic parameters that we have correctly understood his communication. I suspect it is the second issue rather than the first that concerns most of us. I have faith in what God says; I do not have faith in our ability to correctly understand what he says at all times – or even most times. Keeping my brain engaged and constantly checking that my understanding at least approximates reality to some degree seems necessary to me.
What I find most annoying about Zinke's article, as presented here, is that it offers false choices – either Biblical faith, which is what I say it is, or Devil faith, which is also what I say it is. This degraded, lazy oversimplification of issues is a stock approach for fundamentalists, be they liberal or conservative.
The authoritarian, anti-reason implications of Zinke's argument are lamentable. But we also need to recognize that there is no realm of human endeavor, thought, or feeling into which evil cannot insidiously penetrate. Faith without rational verifiers, and reason closed to transcendence, are equally circular and sterile. Pope Benedict has put it nicely: "God is reasonable, but He does not always appear to us as rational."
The God I see in scripture frequently upsets the natural, rational order of things. More often than not, He calls those in covenant relationship with Him to actions that defy logic and common sense. So let's be careful, in affirming the importance of logic and experience, not to deify reason or vilify "blind" obedience to a Voice that cannot be verified by human reason.
Abraham was asked to act out a passion play. I suspect that the command to sacrifice his son was given with the same authority as later drove demons out of a man into the pigs, or the moneychangers out of the temple. It was a command that could not be disobeyed. So this story may not be an example of how to choose to obey, it is an example of the anguish of the Father's heart for a sacrificial son. I thank Abraham for making that understandable to all mothers and fathers.
If I am wrong, and Abraham could have declined this command, then we could have had another example of mature faith, if Abraham had said, Oh Lord, I can't do this, but if you need a sacrifice, please take me.
Moses pleased God with this kind of Christ like response hundreds of years later. Exodus 32:32.
Well, speaking for myself, I can’t say that I’m buying this take, Brother Jack.
There appears to be some considerable speculation involved as to whether the power of choice was even applicable in this case; and then you seem to question Abraham’s judgment in choosing to obey the Voice with such high fidelity and absolute precision.
Perhaps Abraham could have offered Himself, but that kind of improvisation would have been along the lines of what He and Sarah had cooked up previously. He had already learned that God doesn’t need help. He “needs” us to trust and obey.
Remember, Moses really didn’t want his assignment at all in the beginning; because he didn’t feel capable, or up to it. Besides his Exodus 32:32 request didn’t involve using intelligence; quite the contrary in fact.
Jesus was on a sacrificial mission for sure, but when he felt the weight of sin and had sampled the bitterness of the cup, He asked to be relieved from duty if possible; BUT was FAITHFULLY willing to yield His will and judgment to His Father’s will and judgment.
Faith and obedience always get rewarded eventually. Now that’s easy for us to say. (For me, doing is quite another matter.) However, with/through faith, all things are possible; even if it actually doesn’t make sense.
Abraham knew God. If he believed this voice was the voice of God, how could he do other than obey? I suspect the reason we can choose whether or not to obey is because 1) we are not sure it is God; and 2) we forget very easily that God is God and not just our friend. As a father, what frightens me most about this story is that in some way I may be asked to do the same. To sacrifice my own life for God is one thing, but my son is another matter completely.
Greater minds than ours have struggled with God asking his human to do an immoral thing.
What I have learned now and didn't know in my youth, is that there is more than one right answer to many questions. I have also seen that God has a plan B ready in evey case. Obedience to morality is a different choice than obedience to a dream or vision and while it might spoil the great lesson God taught us through the offering of Isaac, it could also teach us another important lesson. Something about doing right, though the heavens fall…..
I'm just suggesting that the Bible is a book of experiences, some of which encourage us, and some of which terrify us. Many are terrified by the offering of Isaac story. There are ways of thinking that relieve some or most of that stress and let us be comfortable with Abraham's God again. If you have always been comfortable with God asking Abraham to slay his son, then treasure the Father's love in not withholding his only begotton son. But don't insist that all believers have to see it the way you do. Than's all I'm asking.
God has as many plans as we have ways to fail him. That is good news for some of us. I have never been comfortable with God, and the more I get to know him, the more sympathy I have for Jonah and the less I like Paul's command to seek the gift of prophecy. Perhaps God's silence is sometimes a gift of mercy?
For Christians the whole Bible is really about Jesus and the love of God. The Abraham and Isaac story can, or should, only be viewed holistically in that it was not only about faith trumping reason, but also that faith being rewarded, AND as a type of what God the Father was willing to do (sacrifice His Son) out of love for us.
Prior to the Jesus narrative being recorded it could only be seen as an object lesson in faith—and faith’s reward. We always have to keep in mind that God has the Big Picture View.
In the end, avoiding the wiles of evil or succumbing to good is not a rational process. We are humans and we do not rationalize to act, we act and then rationalize our action. We prefer before we engage the frontal lobes.
Faith happens after we act. Faith appears to justify an action that cannot otherwise be explained.
It is by faith that we come to understand that our salvation, the resolution of what happens when we die, is not the result of our rational processes, nor is it the outcome of the actions that erupt apart from our rationale processes. We are saved by grace.
It is also by faith that we come to understand that our salvation is utterly dependent on our rational processes and their resulting acts against all odds. We are saved by thinking and acting.
How we feel about the last four paragraphs reveals our fath in this moment. The juxtaposition of the last two paragraphs may challenge or may not challenge our faith. Challenging faith is a rational process that arises by reason of doubt with regard to our preferences.
An unchallengeable faith is not a measure of truth underlying such faith. Nor, however, is the rational process.
We inescapably all appear to live by faith.
Unless one postulates that expanding human intelligence is a result of sin (actually, Ellen White repeatedly expresses the view that the antediluvians were far brainier than we are today, after millennia of sin), processing faith decisions with the mind would seem to be a most sanctified Christian pursuit. "Faith" tells us our team is going to win, that's really what it comes down to. "Faith" tells us Team G is going to win and Team S is going to lose—in fact, that it's mathematically impossible for Team S to win, as Rick Santorum the candidate recently determined about his campaign for the presidency. He lost faith, or had to admit that his original faith was ill-founded, in his ultimate victory. Yes, my faith is a bit more "deistic" than some would prefer. I look at the options and cast my lot with one side or the other, then I "think through" how to place "intelligent bets" on my team of choice (sorry, I transgress into diabolical territory for purposes of discussion, but bear with me, we ALL wager our futures every moment of every day on the basis of whom we trust, whom we distrust, and we place those wagers intelligently, thoughtfully).
If a vivid dream tonight commanded me to go over to my son’s house and beat him to death, I would dismiss the nightmare as product of some occult pepperoni on my supposedly vegetarian pizza from WINCO, the evening before. But if instead I dreamed that an email would be coming, inviting me to write a much-needed book—and the actual email eventually arrived just as predicted—I'd take it seriously as a strong recommendation from God, through my subconscious to my intellect.
I do not see God micromanaging my minute choices from day to day, which color shirt to wear, how to organize my day, whether or not to take the wife out to eat tonight, or hold off until Sunday; whether or not the Chevrolet Volt is a car I should test drive and buy. I use my own brain to make those day-to-day decisions, BASED on my overall persuasion that "good is going to win out in the end." Faith makes me less apprehensive about temporary setbacks; more extroverted in my willingness to even "waste a little time" to converse about good things with a friend, a colleague. My faith makes me willing to take a day off from money-making to spend with my family, to spend in meditation, to consider in study with fellow believers in Sabbath school. For me, "losing faith" would be to give up on the winning team. Abraham didn't and others of faith did not. But by and large it takes some brains to walk in faith. God usually does not provide a GPS with verbal instructions for every turn. He may for some folk, and he has every right to do so, but I'm too much a connoisseur of "the road less traveled" to thrive in such a relationship. God knows if He provides a destination, somehow I'm going to be there, and when I’m unsure about an important decision, I’ll take it to the Lord. But faith, in my book, is a two-way street. I tend not to trust people who don’t trust me. I think God understands a bit about that. The Book of Job has always been one of my favorites, for that reason.