God’s Body: Who is Ultimate?

In my last post I suggested that the struggle to reconcile a loving God with the existence of suffering might only be an artifact of our Western Individualism, and that the problem appears to be a non-issue to people of other cultures. Today I shall attempt to explain how this might be the case.

The Ultimate Individual)

Individualism creates the sense that the individual is supreme. The greatest ideal is the empowerment and the well-being of the individual, and there is no tolerance for the harm or deprivation of the individual. Society may flourish, but not at the expense of the individual.

Thus, even a God who hurts the individual is considered unacceptable. If God hurts me, my individualism cries out that this is an injustice, because the highest ideal: my individual well-being, has been thwarted. Anything that thwarts the highest ideal must be evil.

Part of Something Greater)

There are passages of scripture that suggest this view might be flawed, though. Paul speaks at length about the “Body of Christ,” suggesting that we are all but parts within an even greater whole. This suggests some sense of collectivism, instead of pure individualism.

Eastern philosophy has a strong sense of collectivism, informed no doubt by its ancient religions, such as Hinduism. In that theology, ultimate reality is a single, universal consciousness, and the end state that we strive for is to surrender our sense of individual self, being subsumed back into the universal consciousness that we always were.

From either of these “part of something greater” perspectives, the suffering of this world, while still tragic, no longer appears as a violation of morality. Since we are all part of the universal consciousness or God, any suffering we experience is just that supreme essence inflicting that pain upon itself, and who could say that it doesn’t have the right to do that?

An Analogy)

Imagine if I were to fall off a ladder, and in order to prevent greater harm to myself, I threw out my hand to break my fall, resulting in all of my fingers being broken, but the rest of me remaining unharmed.

My fingers, if they had too pronounced a sense of individualism, might say to me, “Why did you hurt me?! My life was going along fine and then you thrust me out in harm’s way and let me take a blow. Why?! What right do you have to hurt me arbitrarily like that?”

To which I might remind the hand, “I didn’t do it to you, I did it to me! You are me. I haven’t asked you to go through anything that I’m not also going through right this very minute! And you could not see it from your local perspective, but I did it to save the greater body, which ultimately is better off for everyone, including you! And now that that’s done, let me tend to your healing, because all of us will be better when you are.”

God’s Body: The Problem of Pain

Yesterday I spoke briefly about Western philosophy and its emphasis on individualism, and Eastern philosophy and its emphasis on collectivism. I spoke of benefits and drawbacks to each, and today I will present another unique effect of Western Individualism. First, though, let us address a problem that everyone will face whatever philosophy they live by.

Blind Spots)

When a large culture adopts a particular philosophy, it quickly becomes ingrained in their lives and shapes the way that they think. Certain perceptions and reactions will be culled from their range of possible responses. Thus, their view is controlled by their philosophy, but they are blind to the fact that they are being influenced at all. They just think their view is self-evident and are incredulous that anyone could feel otherwise.

As I say, this is common for any culture. All people have assumed premises, regardless of their background. This idea is captured very well in the famous joke of a fish that does not realize it is in water, because the water is so ubiquitous that the fish has ceased to perceive it.

Discomfort at God’s Wrath)

Let us keep that idea of cultural blind spots in mind as we consider what is arguably the most controversial aspect of God in Western culture: Him commanding the destruction of certain civilizations. Throughout the Bible there are some instances where God either wipes out a people by His own hand, or He orders the Israelites to carry out the extermination of another kingdom. I recently devoted an entire study to examining this matter, and how I wrestled to resolve my discomfort with these passages.

But the criticism of God goes even deeper. Just the fact that He allows tragic things to happen, even if not by His own hand, is greatly distressing to many. We often hear the example of childhood cancer as the sort of thing that a loving God simply wouldn’t allow. This complaint is so prevalent that renowned Christian author C. S. Lewis dedicated an entire book to it entitled The Problem of Pain.

And this logic seems to be entirely self-evident to us in the Western world, a matter that every religious person would have to deal with, no matter their conception of the divine. I was surprised, then, to learn that this matter is actually not a great concern to people of other cultures. There seems to be evidence that this moral dilemma is a product of our Western philosophical blind spot as opposed to an obvious universal truth.

A Different View)

But how could anyone actually believe that it is acceptable for God to be good and also allow suffering? Why would our Western Individualism cause us to feel this discomfort, and how could another philosophical view dispel it? I’ll answer these questions in my next post.

God’s Body: Individualism and Collectivism

To begin this series on God’s Body, I want two consider different world philosophies, and how they might affect our understanding of God’s Body and our relation to it. Today will only be the introduction to these philosophies.

Western Philosophy and Individualism)

The first philosophy is the predominant one in our Western culture, which places particular emphasis on the individual. We tend to think of ourselves autonomously and hold individual rights as more sacred than societal needs. And there are undoubtedly some great benefits to this view. Primarily, it leads to the rejection of oppression and injustice. Since the worth of the individual soul is supreme, there is no justification for putting another person in a state of indignity. I do not think it is a coincidence that modern democracy and the abolition of slavery were ushered in by the West.

But this philosophy also has its drawbacks, particularly when we take it too far. It increases the chances of developing a sense of selfishness and narcissism. It can be used to justify sacrificing the greater good for hedonistic pleasure.

Eastern Philosophy and Collectivism)

Now let us consider Eastern philosophy, which often places a greater emphasis on collectivism. Here one considers oneself as a part of a greater whole. Indeed, a part of multiple greater wholes, including a family, a community, and a society. One is expected to serve the whole, and to make personal sacrifices for the greater good. Benefits of this are a greater sense of cooperation and it can foster a strong sense of belonging.

Drawbacks to this philosophy are opposite the benefits of individualism. If one feels subservient to the whole, one is less likely to question injustice, allowing bad leaders a long leash to oppress as they see fit. Thus, for both philosophies we see that each comes with its own benefits and drawbacks. Undesirable side-effects are to be expected in all philosophies, for all are seen through the lens of imperfect mortality.

Views on God)

But how do these two different philosophies affect our views of God? I have already acknowledged some of their benefits and drawbacks in regard to the individual, but tomorrow I will detail one that is a great stumbling block to accepting God in the West.

Because of our individualism, we struggle to truly see ourselves as a part of God’s Body, and that leads to an improper frustration when God allows us to experience pain. Come back tomorrow where I will explain this point further.