Wrestling with God

One of the most interesting stories in the Old Testament is found in Genesis 32. There we hear the story of Jacob wrestling with God. Or is it the story of Jacob wrestling with an angel? Jacob had to face his brother Esau the next day. His anxiety comes through even in that ancient account. The text says that Jacob wrestled “with a Man.” But this is not the end of the matter. They wrestle throughout the night. Jacob has a grip on the Man and refuses to release him.

“I will not let you go until you bless me!” he says.

The Man injures Jacob, “knocking his hip out of joint” (possibly withering it). But Jacob does not release him. The Man asks, “What is your name?” Jacob answers. And then he is told, “Your name will be ‘Israel,’ for you have wrestled with God and with man and prevailed.”

Jacob asks for the Man’s name. “Why do you ask my name?” comes the reply.

And the story concludes by telling us that Jacob named the place, “Peniel,” (“Face of God”), “because,” he said, “I have seen God face-to-face and my life is preserved.”

It is an amazing story. It is not the first time in Genesis that a story shifts between the identity of a man (or angel) and God himself. The same dynamic occurs in Genesis 18 (the hospitality of Abraham). The story, as told, allows for the plausible denial that Jacob wrestled with God. But Jacob himself is under no illusion. “I have seen God face-to-face,” he says and the story only makes sense if we allow that meaning.

And that brings us to the first problem: how can a man wrestle with God?How can the text suggest that Jacob sees God face-to-face, much less holds him in an unbreakable grip throughout the night? I don’t know, but it does.

And this is the striking character of the Biblical witness. What some would dismiss as primitive nonsense, the Bible presents as an unvarnished account. The God of the Christians can not only enter into a wrestling match, He can lose!

Passages such as this should not be taken as some extreme anthropomorphism. They should be taken at face value and allowed to speak the mystery with which they were written. This story was told, and no editor’s hand throughout the centuries has ever sought to fix it or make it more palatable.

Of course, the God of Jacob is also the Incarnate God/Man Jesus Christ. He is not only susceptible to wrestling, He is capable of being nailed to a Cross and suspended above the earth.

And this is so much the point. As one who has spent plenty of time in the middle of the night pondering my life, God, and everything else – I can say that those things worth considering are never just vague generalities. I have never wondered how I might love mankind, but I have agonized more than once over how I might love a single person. We never wrestle in general – real wrestling is quite personal, particular and face-to-face.

The spiritual life, rightly lived, is a constant movement towards the particular. It becomes more specific with every moment. Modern religious thought is rife with vague words. It tempts us with generalized associations and abstract loyalties. At its worst, it marries itself to utility and seeks to “do good” and “help” people – and measures its goodness and help with the yardstick of some vague and noble goal. Utility is the measuring stick of the infernal regions. The generalities of Utilitarianism breed pride. The arrogance of modern man is found in the absurdity of his broad designs: “The War on Poverty.” “Take Democracy to the World.” “Equality, Fraternity, Liberty.” But it is the intricacy and intractability of very specific human persons and their struggles that humble us.

This pattern of action is seen in God Himself. For God, not even a single sparrow falls but He knows it. The hairs of our head are numbered, and He calls us each by name. God cannot be avoided by hiding in the crowd, for He seeks us out and challenges us to wrestle. He waits for us to seize Him and hold Him and demand His blessing. He longs for us to grip Him in such a manner that He can wither a thigh and change our name.

It is specifics that leave us sleepless. Generic Christianity has very few wrestling matches beyond the demands of civility. I recall that my own struggle in becoming Orthodox was deeply driven by its specific demands. “Is this really necessary? Is it not enough to just agree with it and maybe hang a few icons?” But Church is never, properly, a vague generality, a loose associational preference. It is a terrible demand, crushing in its refusal to compromise. Our modern tendency towards generalities, including within the topic of Church, is born of a false set of practices that rob the soul of every edge and boundary. Carried far enough, even God cannot get a good grip on us. Our souls become slippery, able to slip out of every contradiction and inconvenience.

But it is the true God who lies awake at night and troubles the sleep of the anxious and sets the conscience on fire. God is ready to wrestle with us, and even delights Himself in losing.

For the LORD has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel for His special treasure. (Ps 135:4)

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a retired Archpriest of the Orthodox Church in America. He is also author of Everywhere Present: Christianity in a One-Storey Universe, and Face to Face: Knowing God Beyond Our Shame, as well as the Glory to God podcast series on Ancient Faith Radio.



Posted

in

,

by

Comments

34 responses to “Wrestling with God”

  1. Maria Avatar
    Maria

    Hello Father,

    Did God lose? Could it not be seen as a tie broken by a withered thigh?

  2. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Maria,
    The notion of God “losing” is clearly a paradox. But the name “Israel” that was given to Jacob, indicates that he “prevailed.” Remember, this is the same God who says to us, “He who loses his life for my sake we save it.”

  3. Helen Avatar
    Helen

    Thank you for this post, Father.
    The more I think about it, the more it seems that in our time (maybe not just in our time), it might be necessary to enter this arena and wrestle with God. We may be wounded, we may have a new name (how we see ourselves), but we never lose.

  4. Christa Avatar
    Christa

    ” I have never wondered how I might love mankind, but I have agonized more than once over how I might love a single person. We never wrestle in general – real wrestling is quite personal, particular and face-to-face.”

    “But it is the true God who lies awake at night and troubles the sleep of the anxious and sets the conscience on fire.”

    Wrestling with God…It reframes my struggle and tears. Thank you.

  5. Justin Avatar
    Justin

    But it is the true God who lies awake at night and troubles the sleep of the anxious and sets the conscience on fire.

    Ummm, thanks(?).
    I was always under the impression it was my own fault.
    This is a hard saying.

  6. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Justin,
    We are not alone in these struggles of ours.

  7. Margaret Sarah Avatar
    Margaret Sarah

    Thank you for these reflections, Father! One question about the following:

    “Passages such as this should not be taken as some extreme anthropomorphism. They should be taken at face value and allowed to speak the mystery with which they were written. This story was told, and no editor’s hand throughout the centuries has ever sought to fix it or make it more palatable.”

    I’m curious about how we can take some passages (such as this one) and read into its depth, while at the same time regarding other more difficult Old Testament passages (regarding violence) with perhaps less “face-value”. I’m particularly wrestling with the “agential” passages, where God seems to command, cause, etc.

    Any thoughts?

  8. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Margaret,
    St. Gregory of Nyssa once wrote and suggested that certain passages in the Scriptures offer an “immoral” picture of God. He suggests that in such instances we should look to an allegorical reading rather than a literal. Cf. The Song of Moses.

    I’m not suggesting that this be the pattern for reading all the time (but it’s closer to what I myself do), but as an illustration of how one of the great giants of the Church handled certain difficulties in Scripture.

    That’s where simply “residing” in the bosom of the Church helps. It allows us to rest in the consensus of the faith even in “troubled waters.” Another way that I understand this is to always look for Christ within any reading. St. Maximus the Confessor and St. Ambrose of Milan described the Old Testament as “shadow,” the New Testament as “icon,” and the age to come as the “thing itself.”

  9. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Margaret,
    Here’s a quote from St. Gregory:

    [O]ne ought not in every instance to remain with the letter (since the obvious sense of the words often does us harm when it comes to the virtuous life), but one ought to shift to an understanding that concerns the immaterial and intelligible, so that corporeal ideas may be transposed into intellect and thought when the fleshly sense of the words has been shaken off like dust.

  10. Ook Avatar
    Ook

    This passage has been particularly challenging for me from a cultural viewpoint, with the specific choice of wrestling as form of struggle. Wrestling brings up images of Hulk Hogan and other comedic figures from childhood TV programs, I had childhood friends who were wont to say things like “I’ll wrassle you fer it”, generally followed by unpleasantness, and there was that unfortunate high school wrestling team. So I have to consciously remind myself to ignore this cultural overlay when reading Genesis.

  11. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Ook,
    I grew up watching the occasional wrestling match on tv. But, my homelife was dysfunctional enough that I’ve seen the real thing…and was occasionally the object of a bully’s wrestling moves. All quite unpleasant. To wrestle all night is a serious thing.

  12. Tom F Avatar

    How do we continue the wrestling match when we are weary over a particular issue? I myself have been wrestling over a particular issue for years and I am finding it increasingly difficult to continue the struggle to be honest. Every time I want to leave the fight I hear the words, “Where will you go?” But when I return to the ring it feels like I am fighting the immovable object. It’s frustrating to say the least.

  13. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    I have always been highly skeptical at allegorizing offensive depictions of God in order to save myself from confronting the possibility that the OT was written by a tribal society that worshipped a tribal god. I am not saying to toss the OT. No one would even consider the possibility. Even if “great giants of the church” did that, that isn’t very helpful. I believe that when we hear that because the great giants did that we must, too. It anesthetizes a person from feeling the conflict. If you really want to wrestle with God, leave the text as it is and allow yourself to experience the feelings it elicits when you read it. It will tell you who you are.

    I was in a discussion one time with a friend and I referred to my life as one long wrestling event with God. I was rebuffed to the point of silence. I was told that only the Saints are the ones who wrestle with God because they are the only ones that really know him. God wrestles with those whom he calls friends. I am never going to be any saint, but I had always desired friendship with God. It was like learning that I would never be someone that God could be friends with.

    Water under the bridge I suppose.

  14. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    This complements the article on the scriptures and the church.

    My general impression is that the church has told me repeatedly that it is everything and I am nothing. I think that is a fair message. It has everything to offer and I come as a pauper, a beggar, in poverty skinned and thrown about, a sinner laden with shame from having put my sin before God. How could someone as broken as I ever be friends with or wrestle with God? Do I really have so little to offer? The Church and the Saints that we praise so highly…what separates me from them? Am I really so different? I don’t know know…as I digest this it is difficult for me to accept. I certainly would never teach my children to see themselves this way. What kind of father would I be if I did that?

  15. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Tom,
    Without knowing the particulars of your situation, I’m not sure how to respond. I once heard Fr. Thomas Hopko say that “prayer is a struggle to a man’s last breath.” I do not know your issue – but I pray God gives you grace to bear it.

  16. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    I think that all of us wrestle with God – and God calls us friends (it’s good to remember that the primary image given to us is Christ – He specifically calls us “friends”).

    I think that St. Gregory of Nyssa, for example, when He criticizes the account of Moses in the OT, is recognizing a “tribal society that worshipped a tribal god.” His use of allegory doesn’t deny it – it simply instructs us on how we read. I don’t need to become a historian to read the Scriptures – I need Christ – I need to see Jesus. St. Gregory (as in his Life of Moses) is looking for Christ.

  17. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    Nothing separates you from the saints. You did not break yourself. You’ve mentioned before in comments that you experienced terrible trauma as a child. The trauma echoes in us as “pauper, beggar, skinned and thrown about…laden with shame.” Those are not messages from God or from the Church – but from a child who was wounded. I believe that Christ says to us – “You will be with me in paradise.” May the Lord God remember you in His kingdom, now and ever and unto the ages of ages.

  18. Edward D Cleland Avatar
    Edward D Cleland

    Thanks Father for this message. At the age of 73, I’ve been Orthodox for only three years. And, it seems to be very hard for me (in my lazy, sinful nature, I want it to be easy). It seems that every day is a wrestling match, with God and with my new Orthodox faith. Based on some very hard things going on with loved ones; I cry out to God as to why He allows them to go on and on. Yet I love Him in my weakness; Praise Him!

  19. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Edward,
    My parents were 79 when they were received into the Church. (I’m now 71 so I sympathize with any age struggles). I had a couple enter the Church in the 80’s. As a priest, I worked with them to adjust the fast to fit their abilities. At a certain point in our lives, our health will often impose “fasts” on us that are much harder than those of the Church. I no longer eat dairy at any time of the year, related to controlling my blood sugar, etc.

    A key, for what it’s worth, is to give thanks in all things. That, of course, is not easy – but it is powerful.

  20. Ayyeliki Avatar
    Ayyeliki

    I’ve both loved and been confused by this story in Genesis, so thanks for elaborating on it! Isn’t it “ok”, perhaps, even good that we wrestle with God ? It means we’re engaged, have a relationship, and WANT to be close and harmonious with Him. I imagine very few Humans – maybe the Saints- actually stop wrestling and are in complete peace and harmony ( for lack of better words), I don’t know. Just my simple thoughts…

  21. Justin Avatar
    Justin

    Tom, Simon, and everyone,
    Like Fr Stephen says, You all are not alone in the struggle. You are actually speaking my language. After a lifetime of believing the lie that God could never love me–never even like or have affections toward me–unless I completed the Sisyphean task of making myself holy, somehow I have, like St Paul, as one untimely born, been given the gift to glimpse the truth–that God does love me and does forgive me, and even has a place for me in the Kingdom. Not that I don’t struggle to believe it, even now, from moment to moment. But, as St John said, “The light shines in the darkness…”

  22. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Much to ponder here, Father. Thank you for these thoughts.

    It seems the tendency towards generalities is rather ancient. I think of Socrates and his constant questioning: What is justice? What is love? What is beauty? People in that culture answered him with specific, embodied examples of justice, love, etc. Socrates pressed, however, for the general sense of the terms. He wanted knowledge of beauty itself, its meaning abstracted from particular instances of beauty. For him, this abstract meaning was the only true knowledge. Created things, as mere shadows of the timeless, bodiless, unchanging ideas, give no true knowledge of reality.

    Western philosophical thought basically begins here. The New Testament takes up the Platonic concept of shadow/reality also – clearly seen in St Paul and in Hebrews – as do the Church Fathers. Patristic biblical interpretation was approached this way (with slight variations): the Old Testament was shadow, like the earth, while the New Testament in Christ was reality, like the immutable heavenly realm. We are to ascend from the lesser to the greater, from earth to heaven, from OT to NT, from letter to spirit. Such a metaphysical structure is endemic to patristic thought, it seems to me.

    My question is this: do we not also ascend from the particular to the general? For instance, there is the historical Jesus of the synoptic Gospels, and then there is the universal Christ of which Saint Paul speaks in his letters, the One who fills all things through the Resurrection and Ascension. The first is particular, bound to a specific moment in space and time; the second is not. Indeed, “Christ is all and in all,” writes Paul. His presence is ubiquitous. Now, perhaps we only encounter the universal in and through the particular. That is, maybe we only access the infinite through the finite – through my neighbor, for instance. Yet, is it fair to say that “Christ” is the name of that general, universal, infinite Mystery, sometimes called by the Greeks, “the unknown God”?

    Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. (2 Corinthians 5:16)

    Thank you!

  23. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen,
    I’ve thought a lot about this over the years. I think that the Platonism of the fathers is not the one that champions abstractions (the general). The great mystery of the Incarnation turns all of that on its head. We do not know anything in general – we can perceive “universals” – but we only perceive them as they are made manifest to us in the particular. We do not love humanity in general (that is a great error). We can only love in particular. And that is where it is always put to the test. I think people (philosophers included) love to flee to the general and the universal because, in its abstraction, it makes no demands.

    In Orthodoxy, for example, “communion” is never an abstraction – it is also quite specific and describes the boundary of the Cup.

    God is “transcendently particular.” There is not a general God – only Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – and even then – we know the Father through the Son by the Holy Spirit.

    This is an earlier article on the topic.

    I will add that we should be careful about the “general.” We easily mistake it for the “mystical” and “true” and the “transcendent.” We only find those things in the particular. There is no “universal Christ” of St. Paul. That Christ is the same as the Christ in the gospels. Modern Protestant thought has toyed with these things – but fails. I would avoid that path.

  24. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen,
    The “unknown God” is, in St. Paul’s preaching, quickly revealed to be Jesus, crucified and risen. There would have been no scandal, no laughter, from the Athenians had he kept speaking about a “generality.”

    Also, “not regarding Christ according to the flesh” is not a reference to a “Christ as Universal.” The principle and reality of the Incarnation never disappears.

  25. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Amen Justin!

  26. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Fr. Stephen said:

    “I don’t need to become a historian to read the Scriptures – I need Christ – I need to see Jesus. St. Gregory (as in his Life of Moses) is looking for Christ.”

    Fr. Stephen … where do we see Jesus in the most hideous and violent portions of the Old Testament? My feeling is that on the road to Emmaus Jesus didn´t even go to those places in Scripture.

  27. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Fr. Stephen,
    I found this definition: general (adj.) c. 1200, “of wide application, generic, affecting or involving all” (as opposed to special or specific). This is how I understand the term.

    Your response (thank you, by the way) raised several questions for me. First, if God is not merely loving but Love itself – in general – then shouldn’t we think of God in general, universal terms?

    In response to this question, if we say that God is only known in Christ, and Christ is particular and not universal, then aren’t we saying that those who do not know Christ, do not know God either?

  28. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Owen said:

    “In response to this question, if we say that God is only known in Christ, and Christ is particular and not universal, then aren’t we saying that those who do not know Christ, do not know God either?”

    I think Fr. Richard Rohr who writes extensively about the Universal Christ would say that it is possible to have communion/union with God through Christ even if one does not acknowledge Christ as we do in the Church. I think he would support the notion that since Christ is the ultimate Universal, it would be impossible to have an experience of the Divine without it being Christ-centered.

    Not saying I agree with everything Fr. Richard espouses nor am I advocating anyone embrace his teachings. I just wanted to share something I have learned from him as a Catholic, Owen.

  29. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Thanks, Matthew. Yes, but that would envision Christ in a universal sense, which I agree with. I believe Fr Stephen understands Christ a particular sense, not a general one. So, in this case, I would agree with Rohr.

  30. Owen Kelly Avatar
    Owen Kelly

    Matthew,
    I should have said, I tend to agree with Rohr on this. It’s a complicated issue. I seek Christ as the ground and substance of all things. Whether we should classify this fundamental reality as general or specific may not even be knowable.

  31. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    I think I”m with you on this one Owen, though I would like to hear more of Fr. Srephen’s thoughts.

  32. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen,
    If we say God is love – we are not speaking of two things, but one. God is not a universal or an abstraction. Love is not an abstraction. We are not told “to love,” but to “love one another,” “love your neighbor,” “love God with all your heart, your soul, your mind.” We never just “love.”

    I believe it is proper theology to say that there is only One God who has revealed Himself to us in Christ. However, Christ, the Only-Begotten Son of the Father, is the Logos. He is present in all things, through all things, etc. But He is present as Christ the Logos. He can be “known” in the sense of “felt after,” or seen in some manner, but there is no “God” that is not Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I am not saying that non-Christians have no knowledge of God – but that all knowledge of God is and can be of the “only truly existing God” made known to us in Jesus Christ. There is no other.

    Universals are very problematic. Platonic universals are not what we see in the early Christian fathers, or not what we come to see in their works. There is no “love” that is somehow existent, sort of free-floating or something. That which we refer to as universals (beauty, truth, love, etc.) exist in God, or, as some say, “in the mind of God.” Whatever existence they have must be referred in that manner.

    All universals are notoriously poorly defined and have a long history of being abused in language. They come to mean almost anything. As Stanley Hauerwas famously said, “Who doesn’t believe in love?” As a Christian, I live within limits, the definitions revealed in the work and person of Christ. The use of universals, particularly in theology, have a long history of abuse and, in my experience, lead to sloppy definitions.

    I see this as a very important matter.

  33. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen, Matthew,
    I have no trust in a “universal Christ.” It’s a way that a theologian has of advancing an opinion in place of revelation. It is very pleasing to us in the modern world. I reject it. Again, I hold this to be very important.

  34. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Owen, Michael,
    Please forgive me if I seem intransigent in this (universals and the particular). But, I am intransigent – in that I believe it to be an inherent part of Orthodox theological work. It is a place where I frequently find myself parting company with thinkers like Rohr and others. It is not a denial of universals, only an understanding that they are never encountered in a “naked” state. When we start thinking of them apart from particulars, we have launched out into what is easily delusion acts of the imagination.

    On the other hand, a deep dive into the particular is a gateway into a universal – but with an anchor. Again, I recommend this article.

    Thank you for your patience!

    Dogmatically – the Seventh Council was quite specific about the fact that icons portray the particular (not the ideal or general). Christ, they said, can be portrayed in an icon not because He became man, but because He became “a” man (that’s actually hard to say in Greek, but they managed).

    This aspect of icons is brought out quite clearly in the work of St. Theodore the Studite, who is perhaps the most precise and careful writer on and during that controversy. The tendency in the West to paint “abstracts” – such as any number of depictions of a sort of “Christ figure” could never be done in Orthodoxy. It is to be resisted.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Subscribe to blog via email

Support the work

Your generous support for Glory to God for All Things will help maintain and expand the work of Fr. Stephen. This ministry continues to grow and your help is important. Thank you for your prayers and encouragement!


Latest Comments

  1. Owen, Michael, Please forgive me if I seem intransigent in this (universals and the particular). But, I am intransigent -…

  2. Owen, Matthew, I have no trust in a “universal Christ.” It’s a way that a theologian has of advancing an…

  3. I think I”m with you on this one Owen, though I would like to hear more of Fr. Srephen’s thoughts.

  4. Matthew, I should have said, I tend to agree with Rohr on this. It’s a complicated issue. I seek Christ…


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives