Abandon all hope, Christians [an open letter from "Losing My Religion" author William Lobdell]

Since my memoir, “Losing My Religion: How I Lost My Faith Reporting on Religion in America — and Found Unexpected Peace,” was released last week, I’ve received scores of emails and phone calls assuring me that God hasn’t given up on me and that I’ve been put on various prayer lists around the world. So far, it’s not working.

“Losing My Religion” details my journey from a gung-ho evangelical Christian who became a religion reporter for the Los Angeles Times (I thought God had answered my prayers) to a reluctant atheist because of what I saw in eight years on the faith beat. Because the book isn’t a rant against religion — it’s more a story of a love found and lost — I’m seen by many as re-convertable. And if I returned to the fold, my testimony would be a valuable commodity within the evangelical community. Several Christians boldly predict that my next book will be “Finding My Religion Again,” or something along those lines. To that end, I’ve been sent a small mountain of Christian books, pamphlets, DVDs, CDs and workbooks that the senders promise will hook me back up with God.

This super-popular approach is problematic. First, I’ve studied the Bible quite a bit, so it’s not like there’s a passage I haven’t read that will instantly restore my belief in God. And more to the point, I no longer believe the Bible is the Word of God, so passages of scripture no longer hold supreme meaning for me; they’re fascinating from a sociological or literary perspective, but they’re not history. Sending me a Bible passage would be like a Latter-Day Saint sending you — an evangelical Christian — a passage from the Book of Mormon to prove Mormonism is true. It just doesn’t work.

As a Christian, I’ve spent two decades reading the best Christian works throughout history. Like you, I hope, I’ve read Augustine, C.S. Lewis, Thomas Aquinas, Ignatius of Loyola, Teresa of Avila, G.K. Chesterton, St. Theresa of Lisieux and others. If those giants can’t convince me God is real, no other author will.

This is another standard tactic, filled with Christian love. The emailers are usually succinct, writing something along these lines: “I hope you’re prepared for an eternity in hell.” I’m not sure whether I’m headed for hell, but do know that someone can’t magically believe in Jesus just because they are threatened.

“Left Behind.” “Facing the Giants.” “One Night with the King.” Do you understand how awful popular Christian movies are? Any film in that genre would tend to reinforce my atheism. Stop sending them to me.

Asking me to have lunch or to attend a specific church It took me four years of investigation, study and internal struggle before I could finally admit to myself that I had lost my faith. Ninety minutes over a cheeseburger with your pastor isn’t going to bring it back.

Look, Christian apologists (defenders of the faith) can be very intelligent. So can Christian critics. Generally, debate in this area changes no one’s mind. Having read the arguments on both sides, I put in with the critics. For me, there’s no point in rehashing it all — unless someone comes armed with a new argument or evidence.

Perhaps you can sense a double standard here. An army of Christians is trying to pry me away from atheism by any argument necessary, with no invitation or apologies. (An email just landed in my in-box with the subject line: “I have all the answers to your questions.”) But you wouldn’t expect to see a high-profile Christian bombarded by atheists trying to ruin his faith. Unless provoked (conservative Christians’ influence on politics and society sparked the recent New Atheist movement), atheists have a live and let live mentality. Christians can learn from them.

But wait, my Christian friends say. We believe Jesus has commanded us to bring lost sheep back into the fold. It’s our duty. If that’s the case, I’d suggest you follow the words of St. Francis of Assisi: “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”

In other words, make Christianity attractive to outsiders through your actions. And retire the rest of your conversion material.

Thank you for the request for clarification...careful hermeneutics will place the statement, “Go therefore...” at a time following the resurrection. This according to Paul in Ephesians, is after the Gentiles have been grafted in, “...by the blood.”

Jesus is making the second remark at the beginning of the inclusion of you and I. Notice, no more sacrifices to the temple, no more priesthood (except of every believer), no more Mosaic Law. This is slowly revealed to the Apostles and disciples over the next few years. Peter on the roof, Paul in the wilderness, etc. By the time of the Jerusalem meeting, Peter was well-persuaded that the Gentiles were included just by faith.

Now, to your second section... yes, that sounds conditional, if the “commands” that you are thinking about are those He delivered during the 3 years of teaching. If you refer to that 40 days following His resurrection, then no, that is not conditional, at all.

But, again, please be careful with the text. You are implying (or perhaps I am incorrectly inferring that you mean) a man should “obey” something in order to be a Christian. The text is not saying that, at all. It is saying, “Make no mistake, if you do not obey Him, you are a liar and you don’t belong to Him. If you you keep His word, you belong to Him.” But, notice, it does not go on to say what I fear you are implying: So, obey Him and you will belong to Him. That it does not say. Yet, you seem to wish to make that extension. A dangerous extension of the Scripture.

Lobdell could not believe, no matter how hard he tried. He really was sincere, and he really wanted it to work. Assuming that he is just as sincere as you, then why was he left without faith? Because he could not hear His words and obey them and you can. Why then can you hear? Because you obey? No, you obey because you can hear. You are implying you hear because you obey. Please notice how important this distinction is. If you think that you obey in order to hear (a common error in much teaching), yours is a reward system; the Gospel is grace (unmerited favor). Let me say that again... unmerited, unmerited, unmerited favor.

"Thank you for the request for clarification...careful hermeneutics will place the statement, “Go therefore...” at a time following the resurrection. This according to Paul in Ephesians, is after the Gentiles have been grafted in, “...by the blood.”"

My comment was in response to your statement:

"you will find Him telling us the we are not included in His initial mission."

You were making the point that Matt. 15:24 was for the "lost sheep of Israel"

and not the Gentile church, My point to you is that Jesus is commanding his disciples to preach the same message, (i.e. all that he commanded them) to all nations. If that is the case, then Matt. 15:24 applies to us and not just the "lost sheep of Israel".

Look again at the verse...

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

"Now, to your second section... yes, that sounds conditional, if the “commands” that you are thinking about are those He delivered during the 3 years of teaching. If you refer to that 40 days following His resurrection, then no, that is not conditional, at all."

Do you have an accurate record of anything he commanded his disciples during the 40 day period???

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

"The text is not saying that, at all. It is saying, “Make no mistake, if you do not obey Him, you are a liar and you don’t belong to Him. If you you keep His word, you belong to Him.”"

If salvation is truly unconditional, then it must have no condition in the past, present or future.

If salvation is unconditional then the passage cited is ... heretical. It imposes a lifestyle requirement on those who claim to have faith.

If salvation is unconditional, then you could come to faith in Christ then live a life of selfish hatred towards your fellow Christians and enter heaven without anyone giving you a second glance.

The fact of the matter is that the NT is full of verses that put a condition on salvation.

Salvation is never merited or earned, but it must be handled with extreme care.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Lobdell could not believe, no matter how hard he tried. He really was sincere, and he really wanted it to work. "

We know nothing of the true conditions of Lobdell's heart. He may be totally insincere and self absorbed and his rejection of Christianity is a cover for some hidden sin.

Full disclosure: I left a Calvinist Church (PCA) after attending for 7 years. I left because I became convinced that Calvinism requires the radical reinterpretation of too many Scriptures to be a Biblically accurate theology.

The great difficulty with your hermeneutic is that it gives rise to an arbitrary, self-determined theology. For example, the assumption that Jesus meant all that He commanded from the very first time He spoke would have to include, “Show me the coin used for the poll-tax.” Have you done that? In the Sermon on the Mount, He noted that you will not be forgiven unless you yourself forgive. Is that the Gospel you preach when you share this message? When the blind man was given sight, he was told to go and present a sacrifice? Shall we do this, also? Your “all” framework ignores the time frame of the story and has lead to a lot of folks thinking odd things about Christianity (If you eye offends you, pluck it out - have you ever done that?). But, intuitively you listen to some of these “commands” and ignore others. Why?

And, yes, I have an accurate record of what He said during those 40 days. It is the teaching delivered to us Gentiles by the Apostles. That message, if you notice, is quite different than the message of the Gospels PRIOR to the cross.

Your departure from a Calvinistic Church may say more about your own hardness of heart than about the theology. And for you to depart to the Arminian heresy of self-determination, free-will, semi-pelagian error only may only prove my point the more...God might have crowded you out. Certainly, you are teaching error when you tell a man to obey “all that Jesus commanded”.

Nothing we offer from within our lives “proves” anything about the Bible. Thus, we are compelled back to the Bible to prove things about our lives. The Bible reports Jesus saying, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you.”

The great difficulty with your hermeneutic is that it gives rise to an arbitrary, self-determined theology.

And the great difficulty with you hermeneutic is that it puts you in direct conflict with the words of God who took human flesh and walked on earth. He said...

"Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it."

Amazingly, He must have forgotten to add the caveat, "Oh... this only applies for the next year or so."

Sorry, I'll go with His direct words as opposed to some human's theological framework.

+++++++++++++++++++

"In the Sermon on the Mount, He noted that you will not be forgiven unless you yourself forgive. Is that the Gospel you preach when you share this message?"

Yes! Absolutely!!! That is what He taught and that is what I share with others. That is part of repentance and repentance, turning from sin, is a necessary requirement for believing the Gospel.

Now, having said that, the only way people can live up to the Sermon on the Mount is not by human effort of will power by by the power of the Holy Spirit

+++++++++++++++++++

For example, the assumption that Jesus meant all that He commanded from the very first time He spoke would have to include, “Show me the coin used for the poll-tax.” Have you done that?

What a bizarre argument you make!

Have you "greeted Amplias"?

Have you, "done your diligence to come before winter"?

Have you remembered to" bring the cloak, book and scrolls", from Troas?

You see, it cuts both ways. No one will get ahead by reading the NT like an idiot. Clearly you must discern the context. As for your question,

(If you eye offends you, pluck it out - have you ever done that?)

Yes, in fact I have. In my time of following Christ I have, at points had to removed things that were precious to me that inhibited my further walk with Him. Taking the full import of Christ's commands does not necessarily meant interpreting them is a slavishly literal fashion. He made they very point Himself by speaking in parables.

+++++++++++++++++++

"And, yes, I have an accurate record of what He said during those 40 days. It is the teaching delivered to us Gentiles by the Apostles."

That message delivered to the Gentiles by the Apostles the body of epistles AND the Gospels. where do you find any substantial teaching of Christ in the Epistles or Acts that differs in any way from that contained in the Gospels. By that I mean a direct quote of Jesus, something to the effect of , "and Christ said..."?

Quite simply, you can't find that. The teachings of Christ are, for the most part, contained the in the Gospels. The words of Christ, the things He COMMANDED the church are contained in the Gospels. The Holy Spirit had more truth for the Church which He brought out in the Epistles, etc. but it is a continuation of the revelation begun in the Gospels, not a replacement of it.

Look at this distinction...

"Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world."

That's where the division is! Long ago we were spoken to by the prophets, but now were are spoken to by the Son. Once the Son started speaking everything changed. That is the division between the Old and the New and it culminated in the Cross.

Jesus did not have an "interim Gospel". When Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit in His role of guiding the apostles into "all truth" He was not setting aside what he had previously taught them, He was clarifying that the Holy Spirit would further elucidate truth for them.

+++++++++++++++++++

"Your departure from a Calvinistic Church may say more about your own hardness of heart than about the theology. And for you to depart to the Arminian heresy of self-determination, free-will, semi-pelagian error only may only prove my point the more...God might have crowded you out."

Forgive me, but this just the sort of smug arrogance I would expect from Calvinism... and indeed have found to be near ubiquitous in their ranks.

I have found that there's something about Calvinism that engenders a sort of haughtiness and an intellectual pride. That was one of the first this to tip me off that Calvinism might be unbalanced. The other, of course, is Calvinism's need to radically reinterpret the Scriptures in order to ramrod them into the confines of it's theology.

Your example of wanting to cut off the Gospels as "not applying to us" is one of the more shocking examples I've seen. I've heard that there were Calvinists that went to this extreme, but I've never actually spoken to any. I understand that there are a few who would go even further and par down the epistles to just the pastorals.

The fact that the events, life and teaching of Christ are FOR THE CHURCH TODAY is strikingly exemplified in the following passage...

"And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light.

And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. And Peter said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah."

He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him." When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces and were terrified.

But Jesus came and touched them, saying, "Rise, and have no fear." And when they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.

And as they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, "Tell no one the vision, until the Son of Man is raised from the dead."

+++++++++++++++++++

"The Bible reports Jesus saying, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you.”

The Bible ALSO says:

"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

and it ALSO says...

"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me"

These arguments are so full of self-contradictions that it is difficult to know where to start...

One last try. When I said,

“In the Sermon on the Mount, He noted that you will not be forgiven unless you yourself forgive. Is that the Gospel you preach when you share this message?”

You said,

“Yes! Absolutely!!! That is what He taught and that is what I share with others. That is part of repentance and repentance, turning from sin, is a necessary requirement for believing the Gospel.

Now, having said that, the only way people can live up to the Sermon on the Mount is not by human effort of will power by by the power of the Holy Spirit”

Please reread the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is telling them that they need to forgive OR they won’t be forgiven. That is not repentence, but you smear the edges on almost every passage. That is what I mean when I refer to your self-determined theology. The Sermon on the Mount says that if you call your brother a “fool”, you are guilty enough to go to Hell fire. Is that also in your presentation of your gospel? Do you actually believe you are performing to the standards of the Sermon on the Mount? If so, then the depravity of your sinful nature still has not sunken in.

The Gospel is as Paul said, that you would not be found having a righteousness of your own, but clothed in His. Your posts are entirely full of, “How to do it” Religiosity. That is the Arminian perspective and saturates the airwaves and TV. Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, and all of them love to teach, “Here’s is all you need to do.”

These arguments are so full of self-contradictions that it is difficult to know where to start...

That is precisely how I feel about Calvinism!

Try this one on for size: in the Calvinist universe God commands people not to do the very things that He has predestined them to do. Talk about contradictions!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Please reread the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus is telling them that they need to forgive OR they won’t be forgiven. That is not repentance, but you smear the edges on almost every passage."

You place your theology before the Scriptures. This has led you to essentially nullify the Scriptures - to remove their meaning and authority. The forgiveness verse above apparently has no meaning for you - except as a historical curiosity. What is? A sort of interim Law? An 3 year morality?

If Jesus says that if you don't forgive then you won't be forgive --- then you can take that to the bank. No matter what your theology might lead you to believe, if you don't forgive your brother then you will not be forgiven by God.

What does James reiterate for us in his epistle?

"For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy." - James 2

If you show no mercy you will be shown no mercy.

Have you forgotten Paul's admonition (to the BRETHREN incidentally...)

"Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live." - Rom 8

or this...

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. - Gal 6

or this...

"For I want you to know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank from the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not pleased, for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did. Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, "The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play." We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. We must not put Christ to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents, nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come. Therefore let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall."

Sounds rather "conditional" doesn't it.

Sounds like you can do things that will cause God to not be pleased with you.

Now how could that possibly happen if salvation is "unconditional"?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Do you actually believe you are performing to the standards of the Sermon on the Mount? If so, then the depravity of your sinful nature still has not sunken in."

Do I believe that the Sermon on the mount has succeeded the Law of Moses as God's standard of righteousness? Yes I do. That is exactly what Jesus said.

Do I believe the standard of righteousness defined by the Sermon on the Mount can be achieved by human effort? Absolutely not. Paul said: "but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live". It is by the power of the Spirit that the deeds of the body are killed.

Those that are well have no need of a doctor. Jesus said he came not to call the "righteous" but the sinners to repentance.

There is a reason that in Matthew 8 - right after the Sermon on the Mount - Jesus heals a leper, a paralytic, the fever stricken and the possessed. The reason is that anyone hearing and taking to heart the Sermon on the Mount will be left feeling like a leper or a paralytic. In all these cases, the answer to the persons need was Jesus' power. This power became active in their lives via faith. The just shall live by faith.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"The Gospel is as Paul said, that you would not be found having a righteousness of your own, but clothed in His."

What Paul actually said was:

"But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith— that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead."

People that try to attain God's approval by their attempt to keep the Mosaic Law will be out of luck. The real righteousness is one that comes by faith in Jesus and is created in the believer by the power of the Holy Spirit.

This is described by Paul in Gal. 5:

But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Your posts are entirely full of, “How to do it” Religiosity. That is the Arminian perspective and saturates the airwaves and TV. Joel Osteen, Rick Warren, and all of them love to teach, “Here’s is all you need to do.”"

Nonsense. I'm mainly posting Scriptures to you.

As for those two jokers - I completely disagree with them.

Make you a deal, you don't try and hang them around my neck and I won't hand the PCUSA or the Church of Scotland around your neck.

Okay, I have a minute...but of course I think that He predestines people to do things He commands against! Think of Isaiah, “Behold I am going to stir up the Medes against them (the Babylonians) Who will not value silver or take pleasure in gold, And their bows will mow down the young men, they will not even have compassion on the fruit of the womb, Nor will their eye pity children.” Would you agree that slaughter of children is sin? Would agree that they are being stirred up to sin? Would agree that later when God said He would then punish the Medes for doing the very thing He stirred them up to do is a little contradictory in your world? Of course some of this comes across to us as contradictory.

The only other option is yours. That God could have no possible idea what is going to happen in the next ten minutes because your free will could go left rather than right. Mine could go up, not down. Jim’s could spin around and completely fool God. Either all of these events are “open” or they are closed. There is no middle ground. And don’t start the, “He looks down the corridor of time...”Arminian cop-out. If we could find such nonsense in the Scriptures it would still mean that the event is fixed. There is no alternate reality that could happen if God has foreknowledge. If He does and I suspect you think He does, then all things are predestined, in that respect.

And the Scriptures are full of all kinds of references that God brings calamity, evil, suffering, damage, loss, and other dark events upon man. He is guiltless. How? I don’t know, but He says He is and that is the highest court of appeal.

The other alternative is that He stands there wringing His hands trying to bat things back onto the “track” He hoped to make this thing come out with. This is almost a laughable thought, were it not so common among those who envision themselves free of His influence. And, yes that deluding influence is sent by Him, too.

"but of course I think that He predestines people to do things He commands against!"

This is also one of my criticisms of Calvinism. It logically leads to agnosticism. If, as Calvinists posit, God commands you to do the exact opposite of what He has predestined you to do, then in the final analysis, is there anything you can truly know about God? If He says, "Do Not Commit Adultery" does He actually want you to not commit adultery? But if He predestined you to commit adultery (going so far as to actually choose the girl and the room and etc.) then He must desire you to fulfill your destiny.

Let me ask you this--- of course I don't know you, but if you are like most people you probably committed some sin in the last week.

IMPORTANT QUESTION: In the Calvinist perspective, did God, in eternity past, plan, design and inescapably predestine you to commit that sin?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Would you agree that slaughter of children is sin? Would agree that they are being stirred up to sin? "

Nope. It was judgment. And He told Israel that's what He would do if they chose to turn away from Him. They were reaping the reward of their choice.

Remember:

Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known." - Deut 11

and...

"And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Would agree that later when God said He would then punish the Medes for doing the very thing He stirred them up to do is a little contradictory in your world?"

Might you be referring to the Assyrians as recorded in Isaiah 10? They were punished not for fulfilling their role is Israel's judgment, but because they became puffed up with pride. I see no contradiction there. God used the Assyrians to chastise Israel - but the NLT makes the source of Assyria's judgment clear...

"After the Lord has used the king of Assyria to accomplish his purposes on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, he will turn against the king of Assyria and punish him—for he is proud and arrogant. He boasts,

“By my own powerful arm I have done this.
With my own shrewd wisdom I planned it."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"The only other option is yours. That God could have no possible idea what is going to happen in the next ten minutes because your free will could go left rather than right."

Foreknowledge does not require foreordination. I may know you are going to commit a crime but that doesn't mean I planned it out for you.

God knows all things that will occur, but the OT & NT are explicitly clear (in multiple places) that man is judged based on his choices, actions and deeds.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"The other alternative is that He stands there wringing His hands trying to bat things back onto the “track” He hoped to make this thing come out with."

Strawmen again?

Calvinists try to portray the historic Christian position of God and a free will universe as somehow "weak" - much as you have with your image of a dithering, hand-wringing "god". What Calvinists fail to account for is that God might just be wise enough and strong enough to create a universe that:

1. Contains beings that are truly free and therefore truly responsible for their own actions

2. He is manifestly sovereign over and maintains total control of at all times without contradicting #1

To question 1, Yes, precisely. Now we are getting somewhere.

Yes indeed we are getting somewhere.

We are getting to the point where your theology causes you to hold a position in direct conflict with the Bible.

The Scriptures explicitly state that God tempts no one to evil.

"Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change."

Do you see that??? God is not the one behind your sin!

It's not God... it's our "own desire" that leads us astray.

But that can't happen in the Calvinist universe. In the Calvinist universe Got is the author of everything - good or evil. But the fact that things exist in the universe that God is NOT the author of is clearly seen in the following verse...

"... and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.." 1 Cor 14

There are things in the universe that God is not the author of. And there are things that a sovereign God cannot do! He cannot lie!

"Paul, a bondservant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect and the acknowledgment of the truth which accords with godliness, in hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began,"

And He cannot deny Himself... i.e. He cannot act out of accord with His divine nature...

" if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us; if we are faithless, he remains faithful— for he cannot deny himself."

Now having said that, there is the concept in the Bible that once a person has chosen evil in a resolute way, God will cause them to be hardened in their choice (by giving them over to the influences of deceiving spirit) in order that He might show His wrath against sin. This is for the purpose of using them as a warning to others. Examples are Pharaoh, Saul, Jehosaphat, Judas, Roman 1 and the followers of the Antichrist.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.