Having a God Complex

On a message board frequented by yours truly, I was accused a couple of times (by the same poster) of having a "God complex."

It would be easy to vociferously deny such a charge.  I think most of us readily would.  But, instead of denial, perhaps it might be worthwhile to think such a charge through.

First, let's ask: what is a "God complex?"

Googling the term brings up some interesting definitions.  Apparently, there is no one settled definition:

This website defines it as Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited.

The FreeDictionary:  A popular term for a personality flaw commonly seen in physicians, especially surgeons, who perceive themselves as omniscient—i.e., God-like—and thus treat others as mere mortals.

Definitions: God complex--A god complex is an unshakable belief characterized by consistently inflated feelings of personal ability, privilege, or infallibility. A person with a god complex may refuse to admit the possibility of error or failure, even in the face of complex or intractable problems or difficult or impossible tasks, or may regard personal opinions as unquestionably correct. The individual may disregard the rules of society and require special consideration or privileges. God complex is not a clinical term or diagnosable disorder, and does not appear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The first person to use the term god-complex was Ernest Jones His description, at least in the contents page of Essays in Applied Psycho-Analysis describe the God Complex as belief that one is a god

Wikipedia cites the Definitions.net definition.

It's intriguing to think about these definitions and perhaps put them together in some sort of fashion.  I will do this to formulate my own definition of a "God complex."

Definition: An unshakable belief that one knows how the world operates and should operate, and that others who do not share the same thoughts are unintelligent, ignorant, and contemptible.

How's that for a working definition?  If you do not agree with this definition, then the rest of this post probably will not make much sense.  I invite you to offer your own definitions in the comments section.

For those of you still reading, I now invite you to ponder the accusation as I will.  Do I have a "God complex?"  Do I believe that I know everything and how everything should work.  Do I hold others in contempt when they do not share my view of the world?

Immediately, most of us, including myself respond, "Absolutely not!  I do not know everything.  I profess my ignorance!"

(Yet, do you say this because deep down you know this to be true, or do you say this because you know it is the right answer that one must speak in public?)

Despite my initial rebuke of the accusation, I must also give myself pause.  For do I not oftentimes believe I have the answer to what ails the world?  Do I not believe I have the correct interpretation of data?  Do I not believe if everyone else simply did as I did and thought as I thought, then the world would be a better place to live?

Be honest with yourself.  Brutally honest.

How many of us are guilty of doing exactly these things?  How many of us would like to write a prescription for the world and have it followed to a tee?  How many of us become angry or upset when others refuse to consider our prescription or point of view?

No one that I know escapes doing this.  No one.  

Do I have a "God complex?"  I most certainly do.  I would argue every one of us does, and our self-righteousness is deadly to our relationships, to our society, to the world.

The Christian view of humanity starts with the notion that each and every one of us are trapped by this innate selfishness--this innate desire to be God ourselves.

It was not the action of eating the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden which was the Original Sin.  Rather, it was the desire to be "like God," and not in a good kind of way.  Being "like God" in our ability to love unconditionally, forgive when spit upon, be creative, and so on is a good thing.  But wanting to be "like God" and function as the be all and end all is not.  It is the latter which gets us into mounds of trouble and has gotten us in trouble for generation after generation after generation.

But is there a way out of such behavior?  Is there a way for us to escape our "God complexes?"

Not if you aren't willing to see that you have one.  Not if you aren't willing to see that you try to place yourself as God and tell everyone what to do.  Not if you aren't willing to acknowledge that you at some level believe you know what is best and believe everyone else should be just like you.

Only when you are willing to acknowledge this and believe that it is wrongheaded--and that you are broken in this selfish desire are you ready to hear the message of grace.

And that is another lengthy post. 

How Do You Know You are a Beloved, Chosen, Child of God?

How does one come to know such a thing?

How does one believe one is connected to a Reality above and beyond our universe and is not simply deluded as Richard Dawkins and others say?

I mean, it is one thing to argue for the existence of God--and as I have said, this depends upon assumptions which cannot be proved.

It is another thing to argue for the existence of that God being personal.

It is another thing to argue that this personal God became flesh in Jesus Christ.

It is another thing to argue that Jesus was indeed the Son of God as He claimed to be.

It is another thing to argue that those who communicated to us the life, death, and resurrection of this Jesus were accurate in their portrayal and can be trusted.

But, how does one know in the depths of one's being that this Reality has taken hold in one's life?  How does one know he or she is chosen and beloved--especially without falling into the trap of self-righteousness and self-aggrandizement?

This question is borne out of a discussion on a Lutheran message board which I frequent.  A poster was upset about the situation in Israel and Palestine as Israel and Hamas continue to battle.  The poster has a definite stance on the issue and who is in the right and who is in the wrong--one that I do not completely share; however, the questions raised by this poster definitely are relevant:

Who is to tell if a people is delusional or whether they were somehow "Chosen". (sic)
Remember the Branch Davidians and Charles Manson's followers? Weren't they too Chosen?  How are we to tell? And Does that mean that anything done by the "Chosen People" is the WILL of GOD? 

While the poster refers to Israel and the designation as the Jews as the "Chosen People," I think the questions highly relevant to those of us who are Christian for many Christians believe they too are chosen.  Many Christians believe they are holy--set apart.  And many Christians seem to act as though their actions coincide completely with the will of God. 

And we also see that those Christians who act in such a manner oftentimes leave us to scratch our heads.  How can you say you believe in God and yet go and talk badly about your neighbor?  How can you say you believe in Jesus and yet condemn people and their actions?  How can you say you go to church when your church doesn't welcome certain types of people and seems cliquish?  How can you say you are a Christian when you willingly support businesses who mistreat their workers all in the name of money?  How can you say you follow Jesus when you criticize other Christians and say they are not "Christian" enough?

Now, if I begin to base my response to the original question based upon actions, then I am guilty of doing the very things I raised above.  If I look at people doing the above things and judge them for not being Christian enough, then I am simply falling into the same trap of self-righteousness as if I have the moral high ground.  Which I don't. 

Which may be a key to beginning to answer the question.

For if we are all honest with ourselves, we know we are abject failures when it comes to living an upright and moral life.  Sure, we can say, "I'm not so bad.  I do some good things."  But, really, when you think about the standards of what it means not only to refrain from evil but also for promoting good, then we all fail.  Perhaps we can refrain from doing all sorts of evil deeds, but that does not necessarily make us good for while we may abstain from adultery, murder, hate, racism, and what have you, that does not necessarily mean we work for our neighbor's good at all times and in all places.  In fact, very few folks truly give without thought to how it will affect their financial situation.  Few folks purchase goods thinking about the impact of the workers who made them.  Few folks stand up to injustice and bullying and other such things preferring to allow the "experts" or those we pay handle them. 

In Christian terms, this means none of us stand before God as holy on our own terms.  None of us can approach the throne and say, "I have done good, You must accept me because my actions speak well of me."  St. Paul put it this way, "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

If we truly look at ourselves, we see this.  If we don't, we need only find someone who will really speak the truth to us.  They will show us our shortcomings.  Hopefully, they will be compassionate when they do so.  If we take their criticism to heart and know they are not intentionally not trying to harm us, we do not get an inflated opinion of ourselves.

Yet, there would be quite a problem if we stopped here.  For if we simply look at ourselves and see our brokenness; if we only see our shortcomings; if we know we do not measure up; we can become very depressed.  We can think of ourselves no better than a worm; beggars; dressed in filthy rags.

And this is where the Gospel steps in.  This is where Jesus intercedes by His death and resurrection imparting to us His righteousness as He lived the life we should live and died the death we deserved.  Through His action, not our own, we are justified--this means we are looked at differently.  By ourselves?  Kind of.  But not necessarily.  We are looked at differently by God.  Instead of seeing a condemned sinner, God looks through the actions of Jesus and sees His child.  God sees a redeemed soul.  God sees someone clothed in Jesus' righteousness.  We are accepted by Him.

At the same time we are failures and accepted.  We are chosen and rejected.  We are saint and sinner.

If we find ourselves becoming depressed in our failure, we should remember we are children of God clothed in the righteousness of Christ.

If we find ourselves becoming haughty and thinking we are special because we are chosen, we need to remember we are actually failures.

Only by keeping the two poles in balance does one walk the line.  Only by keeping the two poles in dynamic tension does one find oneself deeply loved without crossing into the line of self-righteousness; self-glorification, and seeing one's self and actions as completely and totally in agreement with God's will. 

The Gospel--Christ's actions on our behalf--brings us to this place.  The world is in desperate need of that Gospel.

There are Certain Things...Part 3

Which put life into perspective.

There are certain things which make you really, really think about the faith which you purport to have.

Internet Arguing

I really should stay away from internet message boards.  I really should.

You see, I suffer from an interminable desire to be right.  I suffer from an interminable desire to get the last word in.  I suffer from an interminable belief that I have the rhetorical skills and debate ability to sway anyone and everyone to my particular perspective.  I suffer an interminable belief that if everyone just listened to what I had to say, then everything would turn out for the better.

In face to face conversation, these desires and beliefs get beaten back into submission.  I am rather able to handle myself.

But when I get into an internet discussion...it's not necessarily pretty.

And if I engage someone who is just like me...it's downright nasty.

Such a thing happened recently as I engaged a particular person on a Lutheran message board run by Thrivent.

The guy was just like me: arrogant, brash, thinking he had all the answers, thinking he knew exactly what was Lutheran and what wasn't.  Any wonder why we ended up clashing?

We met head on in a discussion (read argument, fight) on the Third Use of the Law.  If you are really kind of sadistic and enjoy delving into Lutheran theology which evolved out of the Reformation, you can read all about it in the Book of Concord. 

Basically, the argument boiled down to whether or not a Christian has any free will in following the commands God/Jesus give to us or whether or not we are mere "puppets."

There are some purists who believe every good work is done exclusively by God and humans have absolutely no say so in whether or not we can even do a good work.

The logic is pretty straight forward:

If we are capable of doing good works (following the Law), then we could do enough good works to save ourselves.  If we are capable of saving ourselves, we have no need of Jesus.  Not needing Jesus nullifies grace and God's action on the cross and renders it needless.  Therefore, we cannot do any good works ourselves and everything that is good is done exclusively by God and not by ourselves.  We have no control over the good works we do and no free will.

If you actually took time to read the Book of Concord piece, you will see that orthodox Lutherans reject this thought.  They (and I) believe there is no good work we can accomplish which will attain salvation.  In fact, when confronted with the good works necessary to live the life God demands--i.e. the Law, we recognize our sin and our need for the Gospel (the second use of the Law).   The first use of the Law is a curb on sin--if I break the Law, then I will be punished.

The Third use of the Law comes after one knows one is saved by grace.  One then engages following the Law not because one wants to obtain salvation or fears punishment--such a thing is no longer necessary--however, one follows the Law out of obedience to Christ in joyful thanksgiving for what He has done.

Boiling it down in other words (hopefully understandable and not too heady):

We have no free will as to whether or not God saves us.  We cannot influence Him with any sort of goodness.  God takes care of our salvation.  Period.

We do have free will to reject that salvation AND to engage in doing good works for God's sake and not for our own.

A full reading of Martin Luther's writings exposes this, and he summed it up in his work "Concerning Christian Liberty."

"Here is the truly Christian life, here is faith working by love, when a man applies himself with joy and love to the works of that freest servitude in which he serves others voluntarily and for nought, himself abundantly satisfied in the fullness and riches of his own faith."

We are no mere puppets when it comes to the acting out of our faith.  We can choose good.  We can choose evil.  We can reject God's grace and walk away from Him.

I know I'm right about this.

But a lot of good it did trying to actually discuss (read: argue/fight) it.

Not too many people actually change their minds because of a discussion on an internet discussion board.

It's pretty stupid to continue to try.

I should probably stop posting.

Not likely.

Like the moth to the candle....