A mass shooting last night in Seattle left three people dead and four wounded, including a toddler. A barrage of gunshots rang out around 6 p.m. at Seattle Center, where thousands of people had gathered for a food festival. Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson said one person had been taken into custody; another suspected shooter remains at large at this writing.

A police official stated that the two appeared to be shooting at each other. Two guns were recovered at the scene, but no apparent motive has been disclosed thus far.

In other news, a crowd of people in Berlin was leaving an LGBTQ festival at the center of the German capital Saturday night when a white van plowed into them. The small van crashed into a tree; authorities said the driver then attacked passersby with what appeared to be a machete. One person was killed, and twenty-nine others were wounded.

The suspect was shot and killed by police during a confrontation Sunday evening in a suburb of the city. He was known to authorities for his “radicalization and belonging to the Islamist scene.” They believe the tragedy to be an Islamic terror attack.

If then, why not now?

When such tragedies are in the news, I am always conflicted as to how to respond in this article.

On one hand, I want to offer encouragement and hope. Concerning these attacks, I can remind us that our Father walks with us through the fires and floods of this fallen world and grieves as we grieve (cf. Isaiah 43:1–3). When humans misuse the free will God gives us so we can love him and others (Matthew 22:37–39), the consequences are not God’s fault but theirs.

On the other hand, I remember times in Scripture when God intervenes to prevent the consequences of misused freedom. He sent his angel to release Peter from Herod’s prison (Acts 12:6–11). He used an earthquake to free Paul and Silas from their unjust imprisonment in Philippi (Acts 16:25–26). He used Paul’s nephew to alert the Romans to a plot against the apostle’s life, saving Paul from his enemies (Acts 23:12–31).

If then, why not now? If he would act to protect Peter and Paul from injustice, why not the victims in Seattle and Berlin?

I know that refusing to trust God because we don’t understand him only makes things worse for suffering people. Such a refusal exempts us from our Father’s protection and provision and denies us the peace “which surpasses all understanding” he promises to those who rely on him (Philippians 4:7).

But put our situation in human terms: If your human father could have kept you from being attacked in a mass shooting but chose not to do so, would your faith in his future protection be affected?

This is our quandary. On one hand, we want to trust God and know that doing so is for our good and his glory. On the other, when we see news like today’s headlines, a part of us—perhaps forced back into the subliminal realm of unstated feelings—struggles to believe in a God whose benevolence we’re not sure we can trust.

“Blind faith” and “rational faith”

In a Worldview Bulletin Newsletter article published today, the apologist Adam Lloyd Johnson makes a helpful distinction between “blind faith” and “rational faith.”

“Blind faith” is a decision made without evidence or even despite it. Johnson reminds us of Indiana Jones’s famous “leap of faith” when he steps out into an apparent void to save his father but with no reason or evidence to support his decision.

By contrast, “rational faith” is a decision made based on evidence and logic that nonetheless requires a commitment transcending them. To use Johnson’s example, I have more reason to trust my wife after forty-six years of marriage than I have ever had, but I still cannot have omniscient knowledge of her and our future together, so I must trust her beyond what I can prove about her.

Using Johnson’s distinction, it would be blind faith to trust God in the face of innocent suffering if we had no evidence for such faith. But we do.

This is where the times in Scripture when God acts to protect innocent people help rather than hurt our reasoning. Anything he has ever done, he can still do. If he could protect people from the sins of others then, he can protect us today. If he answered prayer then, he can answer prayer now. If he calmed the storm in Galilee, he can calm the storm where you live too.

What the cross proves

So, as I write this article on this Monday morning, here’s where I think we are: the times God does not prevent innocent suffering count as evidence against trusting him with our pain, while the times he does prevent such suffering count as evidence for such faith.

I wish such evidence against faith did not exist, of course, but this is to wish for a world that cannot exist. If God prevented the consequences of misused freedom every time such sin occurred, humans would not be free. If I am on a low-carb diet but order a pizza and the delivery person brings me a kale salad, my freedom was only apparent but not real.

Faced with the dilemma of faith, I choose to trust God to prevent my suffering or to redeem it when it occurs. The less I understand how he could redeem the tragedies with which we began today, the more I must trust him to do what only he can do.

Here’s why I make this choice: the cross proves that no matter what happens in our lives, “God is love” (1 John 4:8). A Father who sent his Son to suffer a horrific death for the sake of my salvation is a Father whose love for me transcends all comprehension and circumstance.

So, I am making a leap today, not into the dark but into the light.

Will you join me?

Quote for the day:

“We should be astonished at the goodness of God, stunned that he should bother to call us by name, our mouths wide open at his love, bewildered that at this very moment we are standing on holy ground.” —Brennan Manning

Our latest website resources:

• BURNOUT: Reorienting our disorientation
• World Cup reflections, Trump’s election speech, Middle East update & “The Odyssey”
• Pilot helps load luggage after flight delay
• Best of: Faith, science, and the call to hospitality with Dr. James Tour
• Hamas elects new leader: What to expect from Khalil al-Hayya

 

 

Denison Forum