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

I would never say God tempted a man. Here is temptation... God doesn’t know how a man will respond
God thinks, “Well now, I’ll bet if I did X, he would fall for it and sin.”
God tries something.
It works. That is tempting and He never does this.

So your basic argument here is that you believe the verse is stating that God doesn't mess around with "trying" to do anything. He just does it.

And you would say the verse in James is not about the source of "temptation"--- it's basically telling us that God doesn't attempt to "lure" us into sin. If He wants us to sin, He just predestines it and [***bingo!***] we sin.

If that is the case then you have just provided me with an excellent example of Calvinism's need to radically twist and reinterpret the Scriptures in order to smash it into a theological framework. You have taken the passage and reduced to a nonsensical and meaningless statement - one that is entirely out of step with the plain and simple meaning of the verses.

Really, you would be better off just cutting James out of the canon (as Luther wanted to) then trying to pass that exegeses off as believable. Take off your theological spectacles and LOOK at the passage!

"Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him. 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. Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures."

The passage is describing the process of desire >>> turning into temptation >>> turning into sin >>> turning into death.

This is the formula for how sin and death occur.

And there is a comparison, just to make the point more clear. God cannot be tempted to do moral evil and LIKEWISE He doesn't tempt anyone else to do it either. "for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one".

How should James have written the passage (if he were a good Calvinist)? Perhaps something like:

"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. No, he just flat out causes them to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death."

That's patently ridiculous!

No, the passage is clearly telling believers that God is not behind your temptation to sin, ('Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God,"'). He is not the source of moral evil and sin. "(Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers") but He is the source of goodness and light, ("Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father").

This passage breaks Calvinism. And its just one of many.

Good point. From the other comments on the thread, this writer seems to fall into the Rod Dreher category of “It’s just so terrible that there are bad people who do bad things. God should have arranged things with more sensitivity to my feelings.” Although there could be elements of “I just want to do what I want to do; don’t judge me!” too.

To be fair, it must be hard to go through life taking everything so personally, having such an intense need for the world to be perfect, always so conscious of how bad other people are. I look at how bad I am, say, “Thank you, Jesus!” and suggest everyone have more Guinness and hug a baby or kitten.

I re read this response of yours, puzzled over your blindness to the internal contradictions. Yet, I am reminded that it is God who opens eyes...or not.

If you hold that passage in its simplest sense means that God cannot be tempted, then you must hold that Jesus was not God, for He was tempted by the devil. The kind of proof-texting you use is nonsense. The matters I brought up reach across the entire Scriptures and are explained in hundreds of settings.

If God has foreknowledge, it must mean something. If it does not mean foreknowledge, then in Catholicism perhaps it means apple pie. But, in the real world, this means God foreknows exactly what is going to happen every moment of every day He creates. All events by extension are thus fixed by His mind as they unfold. That is why His predicting the future is so obviously correct.

Just as He said the death of His Son at that precise day, in that precise location, by those particular people unfolded by the “...foreknowledge and predetermined plan.” Yes, PeteMax, He planned for these guys to sin. Is He guilty? No. Go accuse Him and see where you get. But, did He unfold this like a play on a stage? What does the text say?

I am not partial to Calvin. He did some very bad things, probably less so than the Popes in the Pornocracy Period, but bad nevertheless. He is not a hero for believers. Honestly, we have no heros, since every one is really so broken. We would never elevate a man nor give the near-worship that you ascribe to Mary. She was a broken sinner like us that God gave a great gift to. But, she said, “My savior.” You may despise Calvin and Calvinism (whatever that is), which is no big deal. But if what you really hate is the idea you are not in control of your destiny or that true righteousness does not come from you, my ambition all along was to disabuse you, or any reader, of that misunderstanding.

I’ll have to leave now and let you ruminate on these terrible truths, but truths they are.

"I re read this response of yours, puzzled over your blindness to the internal contradictions. Yet, I am reminded that it is God who opens eyes...or not."

I must say, I find your smugness quite entertaining.

(Speaking of contradictions, here's one: how can you honestly say you were saved from hell if, being an elect person, you were never in any real danger of going there? How can you be "save" for something that could never possibly occur?)

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

"If you hold that passage in its simplest sense means that God cannot be tempted, then you must hold that Jesus was not God, for He was tempted by the devil."

That is a mystery of the incarnation that I would hope neither of us would have trouble accepting.

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

"The kind of proof-texting you use is nonsense."

No fair! I used the term "nonsense" first!

It's "nonsense" to you because it breaks your theological paradigm.

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

"The matters I brought up reach across the entire Scriptures and are explained in hundreds of settings."

Exactly my point! There are too many verses in the Bible that break Calvinism for it to be true. One of the prime ones in the verse that started this conversation:

"And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell"

The fact that you can't see the presumption of free agency and the real possibility of two distinct fates in that verse is a sure sign that Calvinism has fogged your vision. Jesus is clearly offering two choices with two destinies and the pivotal point is whether the hearer is willing to deal with their sin.

Why speak of hell to the elect?

Why offer choices to the unelect?

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

"You may despise Calvin and Calvinism (whatever that is), which is no big deal. But if what you really hate is the idea you are not in control of your destiny or that true righteousness does not come from you, my ambition all along was to disabuse you, or any reader, of that misunderstanding."

Personally I couldn't care less about Calvinism or who is in control of my destiny - be it free will or predestination.

What I DO care supremely about is that the truths of the Bible are faithfully held to.

I see Calvinism as an attack on that. Calvinism has partial truths, (i.e. certain events are preplanned, certain people are called to specific rolls, and God foreknows all events, etc.), but it takes those truths out of context and magnifies it's "corner on theology" ---requiring that Calvinism be the lens through which all Scriptures are viewed. In the process of doing so, it make wreckage out of all the verses that should rightfully moderate it's hard determinism.

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

"I’ll have to leave now and let you ruminate on these terrible truths, but truths they are."

They are terrible because they are wrong and they are unbiblical.

There is no question that many, many spots in the Scriptures we are called to a “choice”. In my world view, that “choice” is really much like the call God made to Adam, when He said, “Adam, where are you?” Doesn’t God know everything? But, there it is in black and white, God trying to find his first lost human. Or is it? Neither you nor I would actually believe that God didn’t know where Adam was. After all the garden existed because of God’s continous creative word. Adam was not hidden. God called to Adam to make a point. There are hundreds of places this perspective is set out. God enters onto the stage of human history, but whether as a firey pillar or as Jesus Himself incarnate, we know that He is stooping to allow the finite apprehend something about the transcendent. Paul understood that sooner or later the Italians would ask, “If He knows everything and ultimately plans everything, then just as PeteMax argues, how can we possibly be truly guilty?” Rom. 9.

I return you to this because Paul’s answer subsumes your argument. You claim, if I understand it correctly, that for there to be real guilt there cannot be any influence upon me or I am not the party doing the sin. And there needs to be real guilt for there to be punishment that is just. I agree that in human courts, we would think like this. But, the text says that there is real guilt and He steered you into it. Why are we then “saved”? Because He said so. And at some point of time/space/history you were blind, but then He reached down and quickened your heart and you believed Him...just like Abraham.

The “choice” you make to trust Christ either originated from you alone, or from stirring from God. I am sorry if my remark seemed smug. I don’t feel smug. I feel grateful that He rescued me. I don’t know what you feel, but put yourself in my shoes and re read your remarks. If anyone might be smug it is the one claiming that “they alone” chose Christ. Christ did all He could by wooing, by asking, by preaching, but even God did not know for sure if PeteMax would make the plunge. On, off, on, off, whoops, ON! Yea!!! Whew, that was close. Good thing he came around.

That could really be seen as smug. But, you could have been left as Esau...hated.

Before you dismiss this as too mysterious, please note your second point in this post: You realize some stuff has an element of mystery. Please don’t say that perfect foreknowledge and predestination cannot be true because they just imply too much. I didn’t write this, nor did Calvin. We are simply grappling with what fits what. And heretofore you have ignored the issues of foreknowledge and predestination, hoping to steer the conversation to all of the “choces” commanded. I acknowledge those fully. We are to choose. But, I think my view can subsume yours; but not the other way round. You cannot accommodate foreknowledge and predestination.

But, one of our perspectives must subsume the other. Either all choices are conditioned by God (divine determinism), or God has no idea what you will choose next (true freedom). Would you agree with at least this much? And this is not a trick question.

Soon, Lobdell became drawn to Catholicism.
THE UNRAVELING
In the summer of 2001, Lobdell attended a news conference in Santa Ana to announce to a settlement between a man named Ryan DiMaria and Father Michael Harris and the dioceses of Los Angeles and Orange.
That unprecedented settlement marked the beginning of a national story involving the Roman Catholic Church and clergy sexual abuse — a huge story for Lobdell the journalist, but a dagger into the soul of Lobdell the Christian.

As I read the story of Ryan Dimaria, I just thank God he told his parents the truth and did not commit suicide. The denial of the Catholic hierarchy in Orange County was shameful and no doubt gave Lobdell pause at joining himself to that organization. Of course I come to the opposite conclusion of Lobdell. With so much evil in the world, how can there not be God ?

WashingtonSource: He looks gay to me.

Between the Lines: He may be, but he does have a wife and four children.

All sons, I believe his book says. But he still looks gay.

And my apologies for resurrecting this thread after 8 months and change, but I discovered Lobdell's book at my local library during the summer, skimming through parts of it, (finding it slightly more interesting than Chris Hitchens' God is Not Great). I had to get this off my chest after months of weighing whether to resurrcect this thread.

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.