“Where was God when my 9-year-old son was drugged and raped?”

by John Shore on January 30, 2012 in Christian Issues · 491 comments

This was sent me last week:

Dear John,

I am a secular humanist who practices Buddhism. I am writing to you because I appreciate your writings regarding people like me who do not follow Jesus. I would like to share some of my history with you, and explain why I no longer follow god.

When my son was nine years old, he was raped by his best friend and his best friend’s parents. All together. All in one night. He was drugged, and when he woke up in the middle of being raped, a gun was held to his head. He was told that both he and I would die if he told anyone, or attempted to stop himself from being raped.

Anyone who allows that to happen to a nine-year-old boy, or who has foreknowledge of such an event and does not stop it, is evil, and deserves no more respect than the actual perpetrators.

I had no idea this had happened at all. My son hid it from me because he was in fear for my life.

My son is now sixteen years old, and deeply troubled. He physically lashes out; his behavior became increasingly sexual and inappropriate. Finally, he tried to harm himself. He was admitted to a mental hospital, and has bounced from hospital to hospital ever since. He hasn’t been able to make it on the outside for more than a couple months at a time.

I had always taken my son to church. I prayed over him every night; I read my bible daily (and knew it well). I believed and trusted god with my own life—and especially with my son’s life, since he was born three months early. I dedicated him to god while they held him nearby the operating table so I could see him before they whisked him off to the neonatal intensive care unit.

I also believed god through my first (very young, very brief) marriage, and also throughout my second marriage to a philandering preacher’s son, who beat me and my son, as his father had done to his mother and children before him.

With regards to this second marriage, every single leader of my church—from the head pastor, to associate pastors, to bible study leaders, and all the way down—told me to stick it out. One church leader told me that I should “pray the bruises away,” literally. They said that. And I heard this exact same thing from the leaders of more than one church, because we moved a couple times.

So those are the big reasons why I no longer follow god. I’d rather burn for eternity than follow someone who would allow all this.

Since leaving God behind I have less guilt, and have been building a more solid and secure life for myself. It is hard sometimes to not be able to place all my burdens on Jesus; it would be nice to have someone else carry them for a while. But he couldn’t help my son, so he certainly cannot help me. I believe it is a matter of self-delusion to find peace from faith; I find the same peace nowadays when I practice meditation, which involves no deity.

The little reasons I don’t follow god? They are all ones I find in your articles: the inconsistency of believers, the greed, the judgmentalism. The hate spewed by followers of Christ—or followers of any religion, really—seems to be poisoning the world.

I hope you will take the time to respond to this. I would be interested in your thoughts. Thanks for reading.

Dear woman who has suffered so much I barely know how or where to start with this:

It means more than I can possibly say that you trust me enough to bring this to me. It’s a genuine honor. Thank you for it.

You amaze me. You have ultimately responded to the morass of dark pain that has been so much of your life by lighting your own way out of it. That is absolutely inspiring.

Instead of staying beaten, as most anyone would, you’re rejuvenating. You’re meditating. From all through which you’ve thought and fought you’ve forged an actual, practical philosophy. So I cannot be in anything but sheer awe of your strength.

That said, I pray that you will not find too offensive my saying this: God did not harm your poor child. God did not beat you. God did not tell you to pray your bruises away.

It was not God who did those things. It was ignorant, vile people.

Your complaint against God is that he didn’t stop those ignorant, vile people from doing the ignorant, vile things they did.

What you are in essence asking about God is what throughout time people have always asked about God: Why does he allow evil to exist?

And that excellent simple question has an excellent, simple answer: God allows people to do whatever horrible, vile, evil things they want to, because to do otherwise would be to violate people’s free will, which is something that God’s love for all people absolutely prevents him from doing.

God gave us free will. And he will not take it from us. And we do not want him to take it from us. Free will is what defines us. It’s our most precious attribute. Without free will we are at best animals, and at worst mindless automatons.

God gave us our free will because he wants us fully independent. He so loves us, in other words, that he gave us the power to reject him. That is love, and full respect. We would not want, or stand for, anything less.

The great downside of free will is that it grants each and every one of us the capability of violating the free will of anyone weaker than ourselves. That’s a despicable thing to do, of course: it is what crime is. Ultimately all crime boils down to one person exercising their free will to in some way override the free will of another—which we all understand as such an egregious thing to do that we punish the perpetrator of such a violation by in turn removing, via imprisonment, their free will.

Life is about the exchange and negotiation of relative free wills.

The irreducible truth is that right now, if I want to, I can beat my wife. She is weaker than I; she could not stop me from doing that. I am free to commit that atrocity.

What you would wish is for God to stop me from doing that, to stay my hand. You wish for God to look down, see that I am about to strike my wife, and somehow arrest that action: freeze me in mid-motion, paralyze my arm, instantly replace my crazed fury with peaceful thoughts and feelings.

You want God to in some way directly and purposefully violate my free will. You essentially and explicitly want me, at God’s will, to at that moment transform into God’s puppet.

But the truth is that you do not, in fact, want that. Because you would not want God to also be able to at will transform you into his mindless, will-free puppet. Ultimately you would insist for me what you certainly insist upon for yourself: absolute freedom.

Every blessing carries its own curse. The blessing of free will is the curse of human evil. The two are inseparable. That cannot change.

If you want will that is truly free—if you want everyone to have the kind of autonomy you certainly desire for yourself—then you want stronger people to be able to victimize weaker people. I know that feels pretty distinctly counterintuitive—but, if you think about it, that is where you arrive. It is where we all arrive. No human being wants a God who is constantly busy monitoring their every action and thought, and preventing or suddenly changing those which he feels cross the line between good and evil, between right and wrong, between acceptable and unacceptable.

None of wants to exist on a slope so weird, slippery, random, and out of control. Not you. Not me. Not anyone. We don’t want God interfering with our lives and identity that way. And we can’t wish for others what we don’t want for ourselves.

I’d be the last person in the world to blame you for rejecting God. But the hard truth remains that it was not God who betrayed you. It was people. And God did not stop those people from committing their horrible transgressions against you and your son for the same reason he did not stop you from recovering from those transgressions in the valiant, ennobling way you have. With all my heart I hope that the damage done your son is in time similarly undone.

Below is a video about this very matter that I once wrote and produced via the free online tools available at xtranormal.com. (When you make these things, you have no control over the look of your chosen setting, character, or character’s voice—and you have few enough choices for either those. So you just … do what you can.)

Again, I’m profoundly humbled and honored that you wrote and allowed me to share in this manner your gut-wrenching and ultimately inspiring story. As I say, I’ve zero interest in trying to turn you into a Christian. But, man, I know that if I were Christ, I’d want nothing more than to have on my team someone of your quality, drive, and integrity. I don’t know much about much, but I’m certain of one thing: God would love to have you back.

As, most certainly, would I. Please write me again sometime, and tell me how you and your son are doing. In the meantime all my love to you, and thanks again.

{ 491 comments… read them below or add one }

Gina Cottrill via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 10:23 am

I like your blog, John, and your heart for this woman. I hear brutal, raw truth in her letter. I have yet to hear a response to this problem that feels as real, though.

Reply

sdgalloway January 30, 2012 at 11:23 am

Ok, I’ll go out on a limb here. But what is the problem? The author of the letter gave an honest assessment of why she cannot follow the god she thought she was supposed to believe in. I don’t blame her one bit. Considering what she and her family have gone through, I think she’s done rather well, by stepping away from religion. Like it or not, we faithful can make things worse for the victims of life’s horrors then better.

Do I think God still loves her? Dang tooting I do. Do I think God is still active in her life? Yep. Do I think that her current path is something that could very well be purposeful for her and her son’s benefit? Again yes. She finds comfort and peace in meditation. Even though there is no deity defined there, it works for her, which is good.

Is she finished in her quest? Well, I doubt any of us are when it comes to the questions we have about life, belief, faith and the whole messy conundrum. What I do admire about this letter writer is that she admits where she is, what she rejects, why, and is still willing to look further. An out of the box thinker….Good for her!

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm

Do I think God cares if empty platitudes and beliefs that had been called God get replaced with self-care, meditation, logic, healing, and reality and she makes that her God instead? No, I think the second list are the qualities of God and none of us know his real name beyond them.

Reply

sdgalloway January 30, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Yeah. I think that second list covers some of the attributes of the divine rather nicely.

Reply

Marcey January 31, 2012 at 6:48 am

I like your thoughts, Brena.

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 7:12 am

Brena, would you mind if I copied this and quoted you on my blog? This is a profound comment.

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 6:45 pm

Copy away.

Reply

sdgalloway January 30, 2012 at 10:21 am

My heart goes out to this woman and her son. I hope that both find peace some day. I also understand her thoughts on God having myself questioned why such things are allowed.

I know the advice she was given by well meaning religious leaders, and I finally came to the conclusion that their version of God was not mine. I struggle to grasp the concept of free will, especially as there seems to be no stem to the flow of people doing horrible things to other people. All I know is to exercise my own free will and try to stand as a message to do the opposite. Yeah its a fruitless endeavor…maybe.

Reply

Libby January 30, 2012 at 10:12 am

Wow… just, ya know, wow. John, you are truly gifted, and your heart? Well, I am a fan. I read this woman’s story with tears in my eyes, and then I sobbed reading your response. There is no clearer, compassionate answer than the one you have given. I hope it aids the healing of this courageous woman and her son. Thru dark times in my own life, I have often wondered how these things could be happening… I turned from God at times, ranted at Him at others, and outright cussed Him out some too. I pictured Him then, as I picture Him now with this woman, grieving with her, and saying “I know, I HATE what happened to you and your son too. I hate it so much…” His weeping was genuine then and now, His heartbreak real. His Hope is the same as yours, and now mine. He would love to have her back. My prayers will now include this woman and her son…

Reply

dan January 30, 2012 at 10:11 am

I’ve thought about the free will argument quite a bit when I was a Christian(agnostic now), trying to understand the same questions that this woman asked. I can understand this argument from the point of a deist, who believes that God created the world then stepped back(which doesn’t let God off the hook, in my opinion, but explains his lack of interest) and left us to fend for ourselves, but from a Christian point of view, not so much. The free will argument is contradicted many times in Scripture by a Biblical God who seems quite willing to overrun the freewill of men/women when it suits His purpose. He is either willing to intervene(hardening the heart of Pharoah as one example) in history or not. Biblically, seems that He is. Or, He is so caught up in His program he cannot see to take time for a vulnerable nine year old.
Second — He didn’t have to violate anyone’s free will in this situation. He could have simply put someone in the situation who could have stopped it. Or directed the child elsewhere that night. Hell, take a page from the Sound of Music and have a couple nuns remove the carborator from the car that drove the kid to the house. Anything.
Anyone remember praying “deliver us from evil”? Is this prayer a violation of God’s character and our free will?

Reply

josiah l January 30, 2012 at 10:53 am

Dan,

You, as an atheist, have a better understanding of the Bible and freewill and logic than John. God could have done any number of things that would not violate f”reewill” or man’s responsibilty and yet would have prevented this incident. And yet does God not preventing it make him morally responsible? What is ultimate good anyhow? If God really loves me, why do bad things happen to me. But we know that for those who love God, all things work together for good. That is, even when my brother gets leukemia and suffers for 4 years and then des, God is bringing about good in his life and mine. It was hard, sure, for both of us, harder by 100 times for him, but even he acknowledge God’s soveriengty in the matter and thanked God for it. God works things together for our ultimate joy IN HIM, not in our idols of health, and comfort, and safety, and wealth.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:16 am

Jesus Christ – how about we all leave the “free will” debate off of a thread where a woman just told us her son was raped. Seriously. Is it just me or is this kind of back and forth tussling totally creepy in the midst of this conversation? It might be me, I don’t know, but it makes me sick to my stomach that those of you both for and against free will are using this woman’s experience to debate it but perhaps I’m being overly-sensitive.

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 11:21 am

John Shore’s reply was all about the free will debate.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:29 am

It was a response to her that included “free will”. he did not start a “free will debate”, Gina. Big difference.

Reply

Marcey January 31, 2012 at 6:54 am

I think free will is a big issue here. Either we have it, or nothing really matters. It is difficult to believe in free will in the face of such a tragedy, but to go on, one must find a way. I recounted how I found a way after the death of my daughter somewhere on this blog, but I can’t find it now because John’s page is so popular! Finding free will without blaming the victim is a high wire act over the Grand Canyon on a long piece of thread, but with persistence, and a little help from the holy spirit, your guardian angel, enlightenment, friends, or whatever you want to call it, it is possible.

Reply

dan January 30, 2012 at 11:31 am

Not sure in this case. Normally when someone brings this sort of thing to my attention, my response would be a sincere “I’m very sorry” and an offer to help in any way, if that is even possible. But this woman came to this blog for a reason. She’s struggling with these issues, as are/have many of us.
She is reading these comments, and responded to one, so maybe she can instruct us.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:32 am

Good call. Thanks for the reply.

Reply

dan January 30, 2012 at 11:20 am

I think the belief that all things ultimately work out for the good is a powerful thing and can be great motivation to find change and growth in difficult situations. But trying to apply that Scripture to an abusive, horridly cruel situation is kind of tough. It brings me to the same point as John’s theology does. If God was looking to bring about ultimate good, could he have found another way? Maybe not letting a nine year old be raped? And did things ultimately work out for the good of the nine year old? Not sold.
But that being said, I will continue to struggle to find opportunities to grow in my difficult situations, even though I know that at some point, people will be talking of my demise as the opportunity for their own growth. What is the alternative?

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:24 am

Dan, the very nature of free will means there’s going to be victims of poor choices as a result of free will. Victims and perpetrators are two sides of the same sick, evil encounter – perpetrators choose to be perpetrators which in turn, create victims. The victims have their own free will to draw upon but the damage often incurred from the perpetrator’s choice limits their ability and willingness – their capacity – to do so. Increasing a victim’s capacity to heal from such evil seems to be a worthy focus.

Reply

dan January 30, 2012 at 11:34 am

A hearty agreement on increasing the victim’s capacity to heal(for victim’s that survive). And I do believe we have free will and that it has consequences. I just have problems when we bring in an all knowing, all present, all powerful being into that equation and somehow try to balance it out! Which is why I am an agnostic.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 1:44 pm

First, I apologize if I assigned any ill intent on your part, I have an overt active protective gene that can speak without thinking at times.

Second , I’ve appreciated all you’ve said here and it’s given me a lot to think about. Thanks Dan.

Reply

dan January 30, 2012 at 4:11 pm

Thanks for your encouraging words! I didn’t take offense to your post.

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 11:19 am

“Anyone remember praying “deliver us from evil”? Is this prayer a violation of God’s character and our free will?” Very valid point. That really hits home, doesn’t it. How does God deliver us from evil if evil is the result of someone’s “free will”? And why would we be told to pray that if God is not willing to or can’t do it?

Reply

Lyn February 6, 2012 at 4:05 pm

Perhaps it’s as much a prayer that He would deliver us from our own evil intentions than that He would deliver us from others’. In other words, “Deliver us from our tendency to commit evil.”

Reply

Robert W. January 30, 2012 at 10:10 am

My take is that God is where ever truth and goodness are. The woman realized that she needed to get her son out of this situation and she needed to leave the abusive situation she was in, there was God in action. God moves us to do incredible things, often by upsetting social constructs and illusions. God is that inner strength that moves us to do what is loving and honest, especially when it is at the sake of others. Even if it means flying in the face of some long held tradition. I don’t see God as some sort of superhero or superking who is going to randomly come out of the sky to save us. He is the one that empowers us to be our own hero and to be a hero to others. He empowers us to be loving to ourselves and to others. He empowers us to be honest and honest with ourselves.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 12:50 pm

Fascinating. I kind of like this.

Reply

Robert W January 30, 2012 at 5:29 pm

Thank you. I do believe that God intervenes but it is through us as being willing agents does his will be done. Since his will is based in goodness and truth, it can only be “blocked” or avoided for so long until someone grasps at the nudge being given. If that makes sense. I am aware of Mysteries being out there but it is though people that the Mysteries take form. This is how I reconcile miracles with free will. It’s us as willing agents who must bring the miracles to life, for better or worse. If we don’t try then nothing happens.

Reply

Rachel January 30, 2012 at 9:09 pm

I agree wholeheartedly Robert. I have been reading through the comments with great interest, and tremendous respect for this woman’s bravery in sharing her story, and her son’s story too. Yours is the first posited theodicy that makes any sense to me. When my son died I had the overwhelming sense that God had turned his back on us. It was a Catholic priest who lifted me out of despair when he answered my “Where was He?” cry with, “In every loving embrace, every reaching hand, every tear shed on your behalf, every word of comfort spoken and every expression of tender concern you will find the arms of Christ, the face of Christ, the love of Christ.”

Reply

Don Whitt February 1, 2012 at 8:31 am

Like.

Reply

Russell Mark January 30, 2012 at 10:10 am

Selene,
I fully understand your statement. It is so hard to work through this – how could a loving God allow such hate upon an innocent. It has been a very long journey for me to grasp, but I believe God’s love for the innocent is no greater than God’s love for the perpetrator. I know that justifies or excuses nothing. But it does help me gain some perspective on how God views each of us and the importance we each hold to our Creator. I also feel that all responsiblity for allowing free will and its inevitable consequences – good, bad and even horrible – Christ took upon himself at the cross. That may be small comfort in the grip of horrors we perpetuate upon each other – but for me, it is a light of hope in what can be a great darkness. If enough of us move to take beneficial action in our lives; if enough of us truly open ourselve to all that God created us to be, then we can change the world. We can change a piece of the world right now by beginning to change ourselves. Let me put it this way – I may not be able to stop a war, but I can certainly stop a war within me – and that will change how I deal with the world. The perpetrators of hate – even those in the church – are people consumed by fear – bullies who have been bullied, even to the point of pathological behavior. John is so right in his assessment. God does shoulder (so to speak) the full responsibility of free will and God embraces the pain, the suffering and the accusations we hurl. But God also gives us the will to love and to heal through that love and to teach each other through that love. We are called to be the perpetrators of love, even to those who perpetrate hate and harm against a stranger, against our neighbor, against our loved ones or against ourselves. Can we learn to love as unconditionally as God says we can? That is our cross to bear.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 12:52 pm

I love this too.

Reply

Christy January 31, 2012 at 1:31 pm

And so very similar to what the Buddha understood and taught.

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 10:08 am

The stories in the Bible set the tone for people to believe that God DOES intervene on our behalf and for his kingdom. The Bible does not present us with a “hands off” “leave us to our own will” type of God. Churches reinforce this expectation as well, so then we are left with the apparent randomness of answered prayer wondering why some people swear God intervened in their situation and seeing that he clearly did not act when someone else needed him to. This is the core of my own struggle. Does God act? The Bible says he does, but my experiences are random at best and when things come to a place of crisis for me, I pray and hope and sometimes I think I have experienced answered prayer and sometimes I don’t… I really don’t know if it means anything in the end. I know one thing, I have heard all the answers presented here and in other places and they are never good enough (both the atheist answers and the christian answers).

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:13 pm

Gina, I so admire a person who has a brain and is not afraid to use it.

We may never come up with all the answers,
but at least we can ask the right questions. :D

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 12:39 pm

Will, here’s a new flash. People who come up with different conclusions regarding Scripture also ” have a brain”. They use it to draw some different conclusions than you do.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:51 pm

DR, please present your reasoning as to how you came up with your conclusions. That is how people with brains participate in a discussion.

Reply

Dr January 30, 2012 at 1:33 pm

Sick burn, Will but so far with me you’re 0 for 2 and I sense your ego couldn’t handle strike 3. So I’m going to focus my energy elsewhere but thanks for the offer.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 3:30 pm

Too bad. I would have been interested in your reasons and ideas in a thoughtful discussion.
It’s a shame you would rather withold them and are content to lob spitballs from the kiddie’s table.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:30 pm

Will, hopefully you’ve cycled through what appears to be a temper tantrum. It’s clear that you’ve misunderstood much of what I was saying from the get go (which Gary clarified) and you weren’t willing to actually go back – read – and realize that which is fine, I’m cool with being misunderstood.

I’ll go ahead and allow you to have the last word now – I sense you need it a lot more than I do. It is nice to see you not being an ass to other people though, perhaps we’ll connect better in the future.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:26 pm

Not a burn. Just a fact. That is how thinking works. Feeling is messy and rude.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:30 pm

Well Brena, that’s what the Puritans thought as well and look at where they got us! :)

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 9:46 am

Puritans thought thinking was … I don’t follow.

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 9:59 am

Never mind. This was a really unproductive turn in the conversation and I both allowed it to happen and helped it happen. I have some issues with how people respond to really sensitive topics but it’s my *own* issue, mine to manage without asking others to do it. By adding all of my own concerns with how people respond to posts like these, I made the same bad choice I get frustrated with other people making. So I’m going to refocus on the conversations that are more productive (for me) but thanks for the reply.

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 6:47 pm

Love ya, DR!

carl January 30, 2012 at 10:04 am

John, That was a great compassionate answer. I had tears in my eyes for both her reaction and your response. I hope she responds to you again.

Reply

Maria January 30, 2012 at 10:04 am

This is a hard one because if another child was about to be raped, and something happened to stop it, people would be thanking God for sparing that child and saving them. Why does one child get to be saved and the other has to suffer. I don’t believe that God just sits back and watches. If we want to say he allows bad things to happen because of free will, then we cant really give him credit for good things, can we? I mean, isn’t it just the free will people who allowed a good thing to happen?

I fully believe in God. I do not believe that he wants bad things to happen to us. I do believe that people are who hurt this woman, not God, but I understand her anger towards him. We are not promised lives free from pain, when we follow God. In fact, it seems to me that the bible tells us that we will suffer and there will be pain. The promise of God is that we will make it through and spend eternity with him. That our path could be horrible and suck terribly, but our destination will be amazing and he promises to get us there.

I have no idea what the proper thing to say to this woman would be, but sadly, I feel like this response is lacking something. I hate to say it, because I love everything I read on this blog, but I cant shake this feeling. I pray that her hand her son continue to heal I hope that someday, she finds the answers she needs and deserves.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 1:05 pm

“I have no idea what the proper thing to say to this woman would be, but sadly, I feel like this response is lacking something.”

I think you’re right, but I also think there is no human response that wouldn’t lack something. What happened to this woman’s son is unspeakable. Trying to explain it or why God would permit it is well beyond human thought. Only God can comfort this woman’s heart and heal her son–and she’ll know that when it happens and only then.

In the meantime, I don’t blame her a bit for deciding that God is not worth the time of day.

Reply

Donald Rappe January 30, 2012 at 4:22 pm

I agree with you. It does not mean I think I have a better answer. I agree with the philosopher who said “Evil cannot be redeemed”. I think it was Sartre, so he probably said it in French. If I consider the horrors that have occurred during my lifetime, they cannot be redeemed. Neither can the injury to this woman’s son. To his credit, I don’t think John makes this claim. I cannot accept as my own a faith that is not tempered by this reality. I believe that Jesus really died in horror. I can only “believe” the Resurrection, I cannot explain it. I disagree with my own priest’s heretical idea that the resurrection is a “physical” event. However, the reality is that we (some of us) experience Christ as living and sending God’s instruction (Torah) out to all people.

Reply

LSS February 2, 2012 at 9:00 am

“I disagree with my own priest’s heretical idea that the resurrection is a “physical” event.”
Wait, what?! ours, or Jesus Christ’s?

Reply

Don Rappe February 8, 2012 at 6:48 pm

Both. The scriptures do not portray the event as physical. First, Aristotle wrote his Physics a couple hundred years earlier. The Greek word was available to the writers of scripture, but they do not use it. The Risen and Transfigured Christ is not hindered by locked doors, vanishes and reappears in ways that have no relationship to physical. Paul’s comments to those who inquire about the method of the Resurrection begin (in the KJV) with the words “You fools”. This is the oldest account of the Event. I should clarify, tho, that just holding this opinion is only a mistake, not a heresy. My priest makes it a heresy by teaching that the Resurrection is useless if not viewed as he sees it.

Reply

Matthew Tweedell February 8, 2012 at 7:55 pm

But John the Evangelist seems to make a point of countering the by-then-already-budding Gnostic heresy that the resurrection was but spiritual. And all four gospels concur that the body of Christ had in fact, under its own power, gone out from the tomb. Of course, Paul writes that the resurrected body is a spiritual body, but it is nevertheless an important point—one the denial of which has historically been widely considered heretical—that that body is a human body, constituted of real flesh and blood.

Reply

Christy February 9, 2012 at 5:13 am

I remain open to the possibility that the Gnostics got a bum rap.

Reply

Robert W February 9, 2012 at 6:11 am

The Gnostics did get a bum rap. They were simple other sects of Christianity that some people didn’t like. Yet many of their concepts and practices got appropriated into Christianity. The Gospel of John is a Gnostic gospel. The Gnostics liked Paul and most claimed succession from him. The mechanics of the Trinity is derived from Gnostic thought. Sainthood is a variation of salvation by gnosis.

Also most scholars are wanting to do away with the term “Gnostic” since it’s pretty much just a catch-all term for Christians that St. Irenaeus and Tertullian didn’t like.

Reply

Christy February 9, 2012 at 6:33 am

It is similarly true for the catch all term “pagan”. Which is why I have trouble calling Gnostics heretics rather than another perspective on early Christianity that didn’t win the favor of the powerful and whom the powerful chose to attempt to erase. As is too often the case with the shortcomings of humanity: We tend to dismiss/fear/malign that which we don’t understand.

Reply

Robert W February 9, 2012 at 7:15 am

“Pagan” was a slur used by Christian and non-Christian alike. It was like a nasty way of saying “redneck”, which is why the urbanus religions took offense to being called “pagan”.

Yeah that’s what Karen King, David Brakke, and Michael Williams is saying. They were just a different set of Christians who contributed more to how Christianity developed than is given credit and had a lot of their stuff tucked away and added into what became the orthodoxy.

Reply

Robert W February 9, 2012 at 6:17 am

“Gnosticism” didn’t exist until St. Irenaeus created the term. It was basically Christians he didn’t like. The Gospel of John was used by Gnostics so I’m failing to see how it counters “Gnosticism”.

Reply

Don Rappe February 9, 2012 at 11:38 pm

I suppose I misspoke a little here when I used the word “only”. I accept the Resurrection on faith, but, I can not explain it as I do with physical phenomenon. Our modern notions of physics and biology would be completely foreign to those who first experienced the “coming to stand again” of Jesus. I simply meant to say that Jesus does not redeem evil. The victims of evil do not need to be redeemed. They are like Christ and stand with him in judgement of all things.

Reply

vj February 8, 2012 at 11:07 pm

“The promise of God is that we will make it through and spend eternity with him. That our path could be horrible and suck terribly, but our destination will be amazing and he promises to get us there.”

What a wonderful perspective! This makes so much sense to me, thank you.

Reply

Carl Johnson via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:59 am

Excellent responsive help, John. Sharing this now.

Reply

buzz January 30, 2012 at 9:57 am

That this woman and her child have suffered is undeniable. That she is striving to find a way out of her pain is noble.

But reading her story over, there is one question I have to ask.

I most emphatically do NOT believe in blaming the victim. I absolutely DO believe every accusation of abuse or violent crime deserves to be investigated.

But her story says her son was raped at age 9 by his best friend and his best friend’s parents after being drugged, and now at age 16 her son is bouncing from one mental institution to another.

The question I have is this: Have the perpetrators been convicted of their crime, or have they confessed?

Because if her son has been in mental institutions, it is not unfair or improper to ask if he has mental problems because of his traumatic memory, or if he has traumatic memories because of his mental problems.

Neither answer is comforting for the mother, and if it has indeed been proven her son was victimized then I sincerely apologize.

But she does not provide information in her story as to the outcome of her son’s case. And there are absolutely people who suffer from false memories created by any number of conditions.

Reply

Courtney January 30, 2012 at 10:13 am

Hi, I am the writer of the original letter. My sons experiences have been fully researched and investigated. They happened. I didn’t want to believe it at first either. The perpetrators have escaped justice because they moved before anyone knew this had happened and before they were found the statute of limitations expired. And for the record, it sounds like you are blaming the victim.

Reply

buzz January 30, 2012 at 10:49 am

Courtney, as I said, I apologize in advance, but your post was not clear. We are all aware of the spate of false child abuse cases in the 1980s and 1990s (the infamous McMartin case being the most notorious among many). This is why whenever such accusations are made, they must be treated seriously, neither ignored nor acted upon w/o verification.

I am sorry for all pain you have felt in this and for what your son must be suffering through.

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 10:58 am

The letter is addressing why she is no longer a christian, not the validity of a case. I don’t think it needed to be clear on all the details of the incident to prove it truthful.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:19 am

Buzz, stop it. Seriously. That you even felt the need to ask for clarification when things like this have happened and continue to happen everyday is complete nonsense, it has nothing to do with what she’s asking and what she needs. This happens constantly. Let’s be done with questioning her please.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:20 am

And by the way, buzz. Any apology that is accompanied with a “but you weren’t clear” is fucking bullshit. How about just an apology period. Good Lord.

Reply

sdgalloway January 30, 2012 at 11:11 am

There is a statute of limitations for rape and torture? Considering that it often takes years before victims feel brave enough to tell what happens, that needs to change. Considering that the task of the victim having to prove their story, after the fact knowing damned well that they may not be believed just makes it rougher for them to come forward and report the crime. If they suffered emotional damage as well…

You have my respect for the strides you have made for yourself and your son, Courtney. I find that admirable.

Reply

selene January 30, 2012 at 11:32 am

sadly yes. In some states, the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse doesn’t start counting down until the person turns eighteen. In others, it’s merely __ years after the incident. Unfortunately, by the time a child understands what has happened or has the opportunity/safety to talk to someone, it’s very often too late. Statutes seriously need to be done away with.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 1:09 pm

“Statutes seriously need to be done away with.”

In these types of cases, yes. Just like there is no statute of limitations on murder, there should not be in these types of cases either.

Reply

LSS February 2, 2012 at 9:05 am

i was under the impression that the only crime where there weren’t any statutes of limitations was murder. that’s just a vague memory off of TV detective shows, though.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 11:12 am

May I recommend to you the book Man’s Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl.
Frankl was an Austrian neurologist and psychiatrist as well as a Holocaust survivor. His wife and both parents died in different camps.

“A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth – that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved. In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way—an honorable way—in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment. For the first time in my life I was able to understand the meaning of the words, “The angels are lost in perpetual contemplation of an infinite glory….”
(Man’s Search for Meaning, Part One, “Experiences in a Concentration Camp”, Viktor Frankl, pages 56–57 in the Pocket Books edition)

Courtney, I can’t say I blame you for your anger over the real pain you and your son have suffered. I can’t blame you for being emotionally raw.

I hope you will come to see that Buzz meant no harm and was not challenging your account of the events as you described them.

But, as a self described Secular Humanist you must be concious of human beings foibles, and peccadilloes and more focused on proof when humans say anything.

Just as it is reckless to believe everything you read, it is just as reckless to believe everything that people say. No matter how close we are to that person or how much authority a person has.

Wanting proof that the authors of the Bible aren’t just telling stories is valid.
Demanding that strangers take anything shared in a forum as “Gospel” is unreasonable.

Blaming the victim is a very popular game.
But I am reading Buzz’s post and in no way was blame intended.

My wish for you and your son is peace. :)

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:24 pm

I LOVE that book!

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:17 am

What. The. Fuck.

Reply

Chelse Lang via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:57 am

Powerful argument you make there, John. I always have trouble when my atheist friends suffer some hurt and want to know where is my God… I’ll keep your words in mind for the future.

Reply

Robin Clark Kuppusamy via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:51 am

You amaze me. Every time I read your blog I see the holy spirit in it, guiding you and giving you words when they should fail.

Reply

Mary Ellen Mayo via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:51 am

I think she has taken a good path. There may or may not be a God, it isn’t provable one way or another. I got tired of being treated as an exploitable resource years ago. The current political climate is not encouraging me to believe that the Christian churches care if I live or die, and if I do die, to die as painfully and slowly as possible. I had to walk away to save my sanity and my life, and I’m sure she did too. If I hadn’t walked away from fundamentalist and institutional Christianity I probably would have ended up a suicide statistic.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:04 pm

Mary Ellen, you are not alone.
I also feel that the “current political climate is not encouraging me to believe that the Christian churches care if I live or die, and if I do die, to die as painfully and slowly as possible. .”
Fortunately I have found a loving Unity church where the message is very clear that they do care.

As in Jesus’ time, there is a huge chasm between those who want to exemplify and extend God’s Love, and those who would mete out punishment and condemnation, wickedly misusing the name of God to justify cruelty.

For example Gandhi and the Dalai Lama are far more “Christian” than Jerry Falwell, Fred Phelps or Mark Driscoll will ever be.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:23 pm

Check out the Christian Left facebook page. It might be refreshing.

Reply

Doug Sewell via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:48 am

Very good article!

Reply

Dirgham Tamas January 30, 2012 at 9:48 am

You know…I’ve never thought of God as all-powerful, in the sense that He was able to prevent such things. I always imagined Him watching from afar, weeping, and sending what comfort He can.

Reply

LSS February 2, 2012 at 9:09 am

how is that still God? *a* god, maybe … but not The God.
(i mean no disrespect but i am still struggling with this issue, too, and i am not yet -or rather, no longer- buying the standard and non-standard explanations.)

Reply

Brian Meadows January 30, 2012 at 9:47 am

Tremendous all around. From that mighty woman and from you too, John. If I might use the expression, the choicest of spiritual ‘red meat’!

Reply

Kara January 30, 2012 at 9:47 am

I actually think the answer is even simpler, if not as satisfying. God can’t stop sin, because God’s not omnipotent. Knows all, loves all, works for the redemption of all, yes. But at the same time, literally cannot just make evil go away. The only hands God has are ours, and even then only if we so choose. When folks choose evil instead, God grieves with us and is there as we work to pick up the pieces. God can’t be all-powerful and good. It’s simply not possible. And as hard as it is to lose the idea that God is sovereign, it seems far better than to accept that God condones atrocities like those that this woman has endured. Nothing could justify it.

Reply

Shannon January 30, 2012 at 9:44 am

This is why process theology has become quite appealing to me as I get older.

Reply

Kara January 30, 2012 at 9:48 am

If it weren’t for process theology, I’m not sure I’d even still be a Christian.

Reply

James Pate January 30, 2012 at 9:41 am

If God does not absolutely violate free-will, then why are there places in the Bible where God kills people on the spot (e.g., Er, Ananias and Sapphira), or stirs people to do what he wants (e.g., Cyrus)?

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 9:51 am

1) Keep in mind that the human race was younger than–we are older now, though perhaps no more mature.

2) I have a belief in something that I call leanings (for lack of a better word.) I believe that God works with what is already within us to encourage us to act in the world.

3) Lymis gives a really good answer below–though you may not like it any better than you like John’s answer.

4) All that said, what happened to that poor boy was horrifying and I totally get why his mother feels betrayed by God. She has a right to her anger and pain. If something like that had happened to a child of mine, I might well feel like flipping the double-eagle to God myself.

Reply

Tim January 30, 2012 at 9:58 am

If people surrender their will to God voluntarily, this isn’t a violation of their will.

Also, God does reserve the right to punish, but the few examples in the Word of immediate punishment didn’t prevent the evil from doing their evil, but instead showed the good that God wouldn’t stand for it and set the limits on the early church/Israel. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram come to mind. The Isrealites were already showing a tendency to be fickle in their faith, and God showed them the consequences and stifled an infant rebellion.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 10:31 am

Was it the free will of this 9 year old to be raped?
When he was threatened with death would you say he surrendered voluntarily?
Isn’t the threat of punishment by everlasting hellfire similar to putting a gun to his head?
“I give you free will to disobey Me and burn in hell forever.” ???
Is that what you claim God says?

What you describe as God would be called a criminally abusive parent here in the real world.

I say that the God of punishment does not exist and a person would have to be severely disturbed to worship/praise/glorify him.

I am NOT saying that God doesn’t exist.

But I must say that the opinions of men as recorded in the Bible are no more reliable than the opinions in this or any forum.

Your opinions, my opinions, and Paul/Saul ‘s opinions aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.

“I read it in a book.” does not constitute proof of truth in any way shape or form.
Can we all get that?

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 10:34 am

yes

Reply

Gina January 30, 2012 at 10:35 am

…as in yes we can all get that

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 11:14 am

Thanks Gina. :D

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:43 am

Stunning.

Reply

Tim January 30, 2012 at 8:28 pm

There is a lot of anger or hate or something in that post, Will. I’m not sure what, or at what it is directed.

I don’t see how I impinged on the will of the child. See my above on that.

But the adult (not the other raping child by the way, who is just as much a victim if his parents were involved) has free will. I don’t know why these children were not big enough in the broad scheme of things for God to intervene, although he seems to have largely stopped such grand intervention after the exile and especially after Jesus and his apostles.

Also, I wouldn’t deign to talk about God if I were only referencing the Bible by itself. It is definitely key, but I’ve come to that point of faith rationally, and there are 3500 or more years of tradition and lives impacted by this God.

Are the opinions of the Bible any more reliable? Maybe, maybe not. All I know is that divided right the ideas there have done wonders for me and millions of others, and that divided wrongly they have spelled disaster for a similar number. This says nothing about Moses, Ezra, Isaiah, Jesus, Peter, or Paul. It says a lot about those who read them.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:32 pm

Love this. Thank you.

Reply

Lee January 30, 2012 at 9:40 am

OMG FUCK THIS FREE WILL BULLSHIT! What garbage! If you can’t trust God to intervene, yes, just like he seemed to do all the time through passages of scripture, why in the world would you ever trust this God? If there is a God, that God is not interested in you and can not be trusted. The letter writer did the best thing they could do – they walked away. The curtain has been pulled back, God is not intervening in our lives. Believers choose to ignore it, they scream over the silence that answers their prayers. They cover their ears and eyes at the grave of Jesus and still claim he is alive but alas no where to be seen. Don’t abuse this woman further by saying God just couldn’t intervene because He gave his creation free will. Do you people listen to yourselves? This is sickness at best and just absolute ignorant abuse at worst.

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 10:03 am

Lot of hurt in your words Lee. I can feel the pain and it is raw and honest.

That being said…the truth in your words is in your sincerity and brutal convictions…but not in God. There is no truth in your characterization of Him.

Reply

MJM January 30, 2012 at 10:07 am

Lee is right. The author of this letter discovered the devastating and brutal truth – there is no god watching out for us. This free will defense is a bunch of garbage AND its ZERO comfort to the suffering.

Reply

chrisnu January 30, 2012 at 10:35 am

I agree with the conclusion that there either is no god watching us, or the one which does isn’t specially interested in us humans. Regarding the free will defense, I actually think John doesn’t take it far enough. I think this is because the extent to which it has been used still affords the utility of making moral value judgments which seem prescriptive. I think the truth is, if a god wanted us to be entirely free, universal categories of “right” and “wrong” no longer exist, and value judgments become entirely subjective. Thus, a god would not intervene in any situation because everyone is acting in ways which s/he intended. That may seem horrifying, but that’s just one point of view.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:08 am

Those of you who are actually taking this woman’s experience and actually using it as a platform to magnify your own agenda regarding “free will” is so deeply unsettling to watch. I’m sure you’re “horrified”, right? Ugh.

Reply

chrisnu January 30, 2012 at 2:14 pm

I’m not using someone’s suffering “as a platform to magnify your own agenda regarding ‘free will’”. I’m explaining why I think John’s defense of his concept of god in light of this woman’s suffering isn’t working. It attempts to say that God wants you to have free will, but then doesn’t want you to use it.

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 5:54 am

Well I’m sure she appreciates you speaking on her behalf.

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 5:54 am

And no. It doesn’t say that. I know that’s what you read, but that’s not what it says.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:06 am

Speak for yourself.

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 12:30 pm

Nonsense. You don’t get to speak for all the suffering. And denying that the love of God exists makes you biggest monster of them all…one who would deny comfort to the hurting.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:01 pm

I am confused as to how expressing thoughts and doubts and opinions and beliefs is making anyone a monster, let alone “the biggest monster of them all.” Have we forgotten the family that raped the 9 year old? Let’s keep our hurt feelings in perspective. Denying God is not monster-ish.

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 7:08 pm

If one deliberately leads one away from the very source and author of love…that’s how. I get that not all believe that God exists…and yet I pray that those who are hurting and seeking His love don’t have their search for Him cut off by those who would deny Him.

Reply

Christy January 31, 2012 at 1:26 pm

There’s quite a lot of defense cropping up here. I wonder why that is.

That we cannot tolerate another’s understanding of God and must defend our own is a function of our own short-sightedness and insecurities.

About: “I get that not all believe that God exists”
I’m thinking more along the lines: I get that not all believe that God exists in the same way that I do – but that their understanding is no less God. I’m with Brena, but will add: Denying God is not monster-ish particularly when at the core we may only be denying the way another person understands God.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:34 pm

Brena, it’s possible that it could be for someone who needs to believe in God.

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 9:47 am

So, we throw around the term “monster” for denying God to show God’s love?

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 9:56 am

You’re focusing on the semantics instead of the point behind the semantics.

Reply

Christy January 31, 2012 at 1:27 pm

I don’t think she is. I think she’s showing a great deal of insight.

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 6:50 pm

Words are from the depths of us at most and at least they show our intended thoughts when we take the time to type them. There are hundreds and hundreds of scriptures on the mouth and controlling our mouths. I think keyboards fit those scriptures.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:06 pm

I believe in God. But how can you prove it? Atheists stick to evidence and not beliefs. If we confuse beliefs with evidence then we are avoiding the conversation Lee is having. Many people are discussing how they wrestle with the belief in God’s love and the harsh reality of him not granting wishes. It will only offend Lee to use beliefs as an answer for his expectation of evidence. And there is truth in his characterization of God. God is distant and is no respector of persons. Job sinned not, and yet…

Reply

Christy January 31, 2012 at 1:28 pm

Thank you.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:06 am

Lee, yours is an anger that is undoubtedly rooted in rock solid good intent for this woman. And given you seem like someone who’s committed the truth, I’m not going to mince words.

Comments like these are self-absorbed, they reflect someone who’s already decided what all of this means. And that’s fine – who cares – you get to have the last word on all of this for yourself.

But thats stops at you. This woman *reached out* to John and this community after I’m sure, a lot of experience in knowing the tone and spirit of it. How dare you suggest that his reaction is one that is “abusive” – you’re projecting your own drawn conclusions onto her – onto everyone else *outside* of you – and you’re out of line.

Have your story with Christians. Seriously. I don’t care. I don’t care if you think we’re mentally ill. I don’t even care if you think I’m an asshole, I really don’t, I can live with that opinion (though I wish it wasn’t true, I actually get it). But stop interjecting yourself into a story that’s not even yours to begin with. Have some respect for her and what she hopes to get out of this.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 11:24 am

DR, who are you talking to?
Why is your opinion and input to this discussion more valid than anyone elses?
“using (this forum) as a platform to magnify your own agenda” is no less than what you do constantly.
Please stop using the word “we” as in “we Christians”.
You no more speak for all Christians than you speak for Jesus the Christ.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:26 am

I’m talking to anyone who’d seek to use this woman’s experience as a platform to promote their own agenda or ax to grind regarding the generalities of faith instead of reacting directly to this woman’s need. That’s who.

As for “speaking for all Christians” I have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about. I’m speaking for myself. Try it sometime.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:22 pm

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:26 am; “As for “speaking for all Christians” I have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about.”

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:06 am; “Have your story with CHRISTIANS. Seriously. I don’t care. I don’t care if you think WE’re mentally ill.”

I will agree that you “have no idea what the fuck…” Are you on meds?

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 12:24 pm

Your quotes do not mean what you think they mean. She was clearly identifying AS a Christian in the quote you provided…not attempting to speak for them.

Sheesh…get your chip off your shoulder and grow up will ya!!

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 12:48 pm

Yes, exactly. “I” don’t care what his story is with Christians is, if he believe that we – speaking as a Christian myself – are mentally ill. So I appreciate you underscoring my point I was making to you, ironically as you spew generalities all over the place.

As for being medicated, nice slam on those who actually require medication. Whoa.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:22 pm

Might I suggest that atheists wish to view the world in sharp, realistic focus and the most sane of we believers also want to see what is real and want it in focus. The difference is believers add an extra layer so that when atheists look at what we are looking at it is fuzzy and out of focus. It is the difference between watching a 2D movie and a 3D movie. Same movie, same reality (for sane believers) but without the glasses it is never in focus and even with the glasses some areas get fuzzy. They don’t want to mess with the glasses. They think we look stupid in the glasses. They may not be wrong. We like the added depth. So, we better get used to them thinking we look stupid. :)

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:36 pm

I couldn’t agree with this more. And it also supports my perspective. Everyone’s beliefs do well to define themselves, they serve as the lens through which s/he views the world. We get to choose exactly what that lens is.

That we decide that lens is applicable to everyone and make that both conclusive and declarative is where it stops being rational and starts getting invasive (for all of us).

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 6:19 pm

Who are you responding to…a bit confused.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 9:06 pm

It is sorta responding to heated feelings left over from some of the athiest comments. Just an attempt to cool the temp a bit. But it did not necessarily end up where I thought I aimed it. Carry on.

Reply

Gary January 30, 2012 at 12:22 pm

@ Will – DR is spot on with this comment and I applaud her for it.

@ DR – I often times find that you speak for me quite well…as does John most of the time. I get tired of those atheist bullies insulting and degrading all who disagree with them just as much as I do the Christian bullies following the same behavior pattern. I have found that there are mean spirited jerks (aka fucking pricks) in every belief system.

You keep on bringing your brand of common sense here…I for one find it very refreshing.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:56 pm

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:17 am

What. The. Fuck.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 1:59 pm

Rev Fred Phelps; “God hates fags. Yer all goin ta hell.”

Will; “That’s not right. That’s the opposite of Jesus’ message. You are crazy if you believe that. Get some professional help.”

Gary; “That Will is such a bully!”

DR; “And did you notice how he’s bigoted against people with mental disease?”

:D

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:42 pm

This would be pretty awesome if you actually got the words right, but you even misquoted yourself which I’m sorry, is just making me laugh now at this point. Silly.

Dear Will, consider putting the ego pipe down. You misunderstood me, you overreacted. It doesn’t matter. Life goes on.

OK. Now I’m done. Peace!

Cheers!

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:37 pm

Thanks Gary!

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:15 pm

I think since the woman herself chose to stop believing in God then the atheist opinion is as relevent here as the believing opinion is. As for the Bible based believers in this argument I would remind you that we are instructed to not be easily offended so…

As far as the atheist opinion:
It is a fact that they are in the minority in the U.S. and often feel villified for good reason (maybe not from anyone here, but we all know they are) and so it seems reasonable that they may show ire and fury toward whatever face they encounter that represents a system that quickly calls them monters and incapable of love and whatever else. It is also frustrating for all of us when questions and facts and disagreement is met with a “you just don’t get it” attitude and not a conversation actually discussing points.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:16 pm

*monsters

Reply

Ray McKinnon January 30, 2012 at 9:37 am

John! Great response. I love your heart. Forge ahead in truth, love and the audacity of your convictions. I love you, brother!

Reply

Jennifer Armstrong via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:36 am

This was such a beautiful response.

Reply

Rob Brunner via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:36 am

Sharing this immediately…

Reply

Lymis January 30, 2012 at 9:35 am

John,

I agree with just about everything in your answer, but I think it is missing the next couple of paragraphs. I won’t presume to figure out what you would say next, but I know what comes next for me.

The biggest reason that God allows all of what you point out that He allows is that God sees us from the viewpoint of eternity. He sees our bodies, our emotions, and our memories, but he also sees us as the immortal souls He created. Just as a loving parent stands by while their children win or lose baseball games, fall and get skinned knees, and undergo the angst and traumas of first loves and failed friendships, God knows that nothing that happens to us here in our human lives is the end of our stories.

There is literally nothing that can happen to us while we are alive that God cannot soothe, heal, and redeem in eternity. So it isn’t that God has to allow actual permanent harm to who we really are in order to allow us free will, it is that since nothing can harm who we really are in God’s eyes and in God’s vision of us, allowing us free will, with all its possibility for both good and evil, as much as we feel the pains and deal with the consequences, it isn’t what we really are. Our human experiences are real, and they are important, but they aren’t final, and that makes all the difference.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 9:43 am

Thank you, Lymis. I’m inclined to agree with you.

Reply

Libby January 30, 2012 at 10:17 am

Incredible perspective Lymis… absolutely incredible.

Reply

Jamie January 30, 2012 at 10:19 am

I struggle with the idea of Free Will and Divine Miracle. The arbitraty nature of a miracle to save someone’s life vs absolute free will is a problem for me. It’s a very hard set of ideas to reconcile. I firmly believe in Free Will and I think I’ve witnessed miraculous events. Maybe that latter is just dumb luck. Maybe I on, frequent, occasions would like to offer a nice “Forget You” to the almighty for various things that are allowed to happen to his people here on earth (I believe I’m allowed to be confused and angry at God, humankind has done this forever- and He should be big enough to take it, like any good parent).

I can see the letter writer’s point of view and I grieve for her and especially for her son. I don’t think offering up the pain and troubles she’s experiencing and the hell on earth her son is currently enduring as “it will all be better in the by and by” (as another response offers) is a valid response to her and especially her son’s pain.

I take my faith seriously and have a lot of questions I don’t sweep under a dogmatic rug. I sure hope I’ll get some answers but I can certainly appreciate the feeling the writer poured out to you. I’ll pray and wish for her strength and for her peace as she can find it.

Reply

Barnmaven January 30, 2012 at 11:00 am

THANK YOU for this.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 7:19 pm

Lymis, your answer resonates for my spiritual need,
without dismissing my logical and philosophical needs.

I have wondered the same thing that you have expressed so well.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:42 pm

This is so profound. Man!

Reply

selene January 30, 2012 at 9:34 am

I can accept the idea of not violating free will in some circumstances, but not in others. In the instance of a child being raped, if any person were present, knowledgeable, and powerful enough to stop that from happening to a child, they would be morally responsible for not doing anything. I don’t think God gets an exemption on that one. I can’t accpet a God that would allow an innocent child to be violated any more than I can accept a God that causes an innocent child to be violated. I’ve come to the conclusion that God is only as powerful as people are active. In that sense, I probably fall into the line of humanism. I’d rather believe in a God who’s power is limited to human beings being willing to act than to believe in a God callous enough to withold his protection from a child in the interest of “free will.” I have to agree with this woman that the kind of God that would do something like that isn’t worth worshiping in my mind.

Reply

LizMc January 30, 2012 at 9:50 am

I’m with you selene. The more I reflect on the infinite vastness of the Universe, which could have life in forms we can’t even imagine, light years beyond light years away from us, I have a much harder time believing in a concept of God who is intimately involved in the day to day details of human existence. I do believe in a Divine Something, but I think much more of the responsibility is on us.

Reply

HJ January 30, 2012 at 10:08 am

LizMC, I feel the same. My mind often drifts to the vastness of the universe, and there my mind crashes as it grapples with the God that we of the monotheistic religions are familiar with, involved in individual day by day existence. …There is most likely life elsewhere… Do they have “free will” also? Did God give them a “son” also? Is the life on their planets less evil than ours perhaps, so such an intervention was unneeded?

Reply

Tim January 30, 2012 at 9:55 am

Selene,

As both a man who was raped as a child and as a Christian/semi-professional philosopher (to the degree a BA in the subject gives you a professional opinion) I don’t think you actually mean you want to go there. Much like I assume John does, and I think God does, we wish there were another option. The problem is, Free will is an absolute thing. You have it or you don’t. Philosophers of the non-Christian type largely agree that you don’t, that it is an illusion, but we can get into that in a more appropriate forum for that.

The problem is, if the man that hurt me and my siblings (call him K) didn’t have the freedom to do evil (and he did much more evil than what he did to us, and I would say worse evil eventually) he also wouldn’t have had the option to do good. This is the foundation on which an ethical life is based–the assumption we could have done differently and better.

The problem with evil is that it has the possibility to produce profound power and good, more of itself, or a mix of both. I still have self-esteem issues from that and an otherwise poor childhood, and my sister has physical problems still from it, but all three of us are by far better, more determined, and more whole people coming from the other side. We each got a mixed bag from it, but God uses that to make me the best friend and student I can be, to make my sister an amazing Mom, and my brother the best tech geek I know. K did great evil. I forgive him. He made bad choices. But looking back asking God to prevent that would have violated all the potential for good K could have chosen and maybe a large amount of the actual good I and my siblings do in this world. It is a trade God has to make every single day, and for those most damaged by it the Balsam of heaven (whatever that ends up being) is more than enough to heal.

Reply

Erin D. January 30, 2012 at 10:03 am

“If he didn’t have the option to do evil, he wouldn’t have had the option to do good.” What an amazing statement from a man who was hurt by evil. Welling up for you and your siblings, and all of your tremendous courage.

Reply

selene January 30, 2012 at 10:23 am

I don’t think you meant to sound arrogant, but you kind of came across that way in your first paragraph. I also am a victim of sexual violence and a semi-professional philsopher/psychologist/ex-Christian. I’m not sure what you mean by your skepticism about my “going there.” If by that you think I’m not qualified to question deeply and come up with my own beliefs about how I think the Divine works, then yes, I do want to go there and I, like every single other person on this planet, am more than capable of going there. Again, I’m hoping you didn’t mean that to be condescending and insulting, so I will let it go at that.

I never denied free will. If you re-read what I said, I specified that there are moral responsibilities that even God is subject to, just as much as humans. Since people do indeed have free will (I’m not suggesting otherwise), I choose to believe that God isn’t omnipotent (and there are many philosophers who would agree with that sentiment). I believe the Divine can be powerful, but only when humans are the channel for that power. When humans stand back and say “God will protect them” and do nothing to help, it’s about as effective as me staring at meat saying, the stove will cook it, but never actually turning it on or putting the meat in a pan. If I’m wrong, then I’m wrong and I’m prepared to accept that. I think we all ultimately choose what kind of God we want to believe in. I’ve chosen that both the mean God and the inactive but all-powerful God are not worth my time. If you find a way to reconcile an omnipotent God with your beliefs and experiences, that’s your path and not something I will attack you for. But this is mine. I empathize with the writer of the letter, and I expressed that because I assume she’s reading. I still believe in a Divine. I still believe in the Divine’s ability to interact/influence things. I just think it’s limited to human action/reception. And maybe animals; I’m willing to consider the possibility for animals acting as agents of the Divine. I’m not willing to accept a God who can act but chooses not to. I don’t think that denies free will at all–just God’s omnipotence.

Reply

Tim January 30, 2012 at 8:17 pm

Understood, Selene,

I didn’t understand at the moment how far little power you were willing to grant to a God. This makes me understand better.

Then I guess my argument is on another plane, given we agree largely on free will. The problems are concurrent to this, however. I am curious as to how you come to accept a God who isn’t omnipotent.

Most of the time people who are theists or deists argue that God is all-capable but not necessarily interested or somehow otherwise constrained. I simply don’t see how a God whom isn’t omnipotent is relevant to anything, if we ascribe to this God anything near to the personal value most people (including myself) see as prerequisite for having the discussion.

In the end, I too have various different conditions on what I simply can and can not believe. The God I grew up with (as a Jehovah’s Witness) struck me as distant, defiant, demanding, perfectionist. I couldn’t square that. Both as a deep thinker about things (and I have been since I was 5, for some reason, and I get embarrassed by the video every time I visit my mom) and as a Christian I simply can’t make a God whom isn’t omnipotent, omnibenevolent (not sure how often that is used outside of my school, but essentially all-loving), omniscient, and omnipresent compute. Without all four conditions, I don’t see the biblical mandate met and I don’t see the logical necessity for the being.

Of course, this comes with the caveat that that leads me to make certain assumptions about the morality of God’s actions and the absolute untouchable value of free will. You seem to meet this part way when you tip your hat to receptivity to the Divine in our everyday life. it sounds very evangelical to me to say that submission is a large part of discipleship, but then again, I am as much Pentecostal as I am gay or philosophical, so there you go. I am all in for God having an impact in as many people’s lives through us as possible. I also think that is in general preferable to God’s direct action except in the most desperate of circumstances.

You also have my apology if I sounded condescending. I surely didn’t intend that. You wouldn’t have heard it had I spoken it to you. I find my manner of speaking/writing translates poorly on mediums such as this. We have both been through the same ringer, it seems. I just was shocked by the proposition. Seems more people here agree with you than me, however. And yes, my “go there” assumed some limited withdrawl of free will, which I think really isn’t a plausible or defensible theological or philosophical argument, though I’m glad to see it defended if someone can prove me otherwise.

Reply

Edwin January 30, 2012 at 10:30 am

Without freewill there may no longer be human evil but there would also no longer be human kindness, charity, tolerance, love etc… God created a world subject to chaos and then gave us the tools as individuals to seek out and create order in that chaos and allows us to choose good over evil, to choose to build or destroy, to love or to hate. These dualities exist simultaneously inside of us and in our natural surroundings. We can choose to follow the light inside of us, we can choose God (LOVE), we can look inside of ourselves and allow ourselves to live in God. Your Buddhist philosophy may not call it God but it is God that you are seeking and God that you have found inside of yourself.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:10 am

Perhaps those of you could take a moment, step back and consider how debating the conceptual and theological merits of free will on a thread where a woman is simply sharing her story and is looking for some support is totally and completely making it about *you*.

Reply

selene January 30, 2012 at 11:29 am

DR, I understand your trepidation that this woman is not getting proper support. I don’t think anyone intends to be callous, but I do think that her purpose for writing in was very likely to get some sort of perspective on the issue of why God didn’t protect her son. Do you think John is as wrong in his response as the rest of us who dare to give our points of view on God? You seem to be under the impression that we are out of line, but we’re merely responding to John’s thoughts with our own. And in turn responding to each other’s thoughts as well. As long as it remains respectful with no one assuming superiority over another or diminishing the others experiences, I don’t think discussion on this topic is harmful.

I truly feel for her, and I’ve been in similarly painful circumstances. I can’t fix the situation or tell her what to think, but I can express my experience as it has been and hope that she finds something to draw from that. It’s a tough subject, no doubt. But if I were in her shoes, I wouldn’t want platitudes, I’d want answers. And while those answers can only ultimately come from herself for herself, it may help to hear how others have dealt with similar questions. I’m sure if she is truly bothered, she could ask John to take the post down or submit a comment/response asking for a different mode of interaction. Everyone would respect her wishes on that if she expressed them as such.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 11:39 am

I think there’s a big difference between John sharing a letter that contains some seriously, seriously emotionally-laced stuff to it and his response vs. a bunch of people jumping in and starting to debate the theological merits of it (as well as calling his response ‘abusive’). For me (and I’ll specify that), both responses lack a certain kind of emotional intelligence.

Is it also a triggering mechanism for debate? Sure. I some of that appropriate? I don’t know, I guess. But I’m just weary of these responses from people who laser in one one, minute aspect of a response and then latch onto it, making “free will” the point of the conversation instead of this woman. I find that it uses the people in question.

But all this to say, I don’t really know what she needs which is her call. Perhaps understanding different perspectives on free will is exactly what support looks like for her, Dan was right it’s up to her to outline that. That people jump right in and start slamming away at the theological concepts without nary an acknowledgement of her suffering? I have a big problem with that and I suspect I’ll continue to.

Reply

Tim January 30, 2012 at 8:21 pm

Your views are respected, DR.

I’m not sure John’s opinion on this or his motives. I’m not sure of this woman’s beyond explanation or support. The letter seems to be making an argument, a point. That triggers the discussion of her conclusion and why that does or does not hold water naturally, and without violating her grief. We all feel for her. Many of us have been through a lot of the same. (see Selene and I) and some of us find the debate healing in and of itself. often times the best way to get over unwanted feelings is both a large dose of logic and a large dose of love: reaffirmation and refutation.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:44 pm

Could be. Appreciate this. Thanks Tim.

Reply

Diana A. January 30, 2012 at 1:26 pm

True. I’ve been really thinking about my responses to this blog post and the comments therein before responding, exactly because I don’t wish to cause more damage where damage already exists.

My hope for Courtney and her son is that they will find the peace of God that passes all understanding and that they will be healed from the pain of this horrid event.

Reply

Christy January 30, 2012 at 1:09 pm

I find Selene’s original post supportive of the letter writer while expressing a difference of opinion about free will and have to agree with her.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:47 pm

I get it but have a problem with it. Would we do that in a room of people with her sharing her story? Would we take over the conversation and turn it into a debate about concept and theology? There is a sensitivity chip that’s missing there for me – it just is. But certainly also know that it could just be my own issue and my own reactions, of course, debate and dialogue are both excellent things. It’s probably my issue with this forum and why my participation is dwindling. We read of an agonizing story and then it becomes reduced to a bunch of opinions which no one will really ever remember. I don’t think I want to be about that.

Reply

DR January 30, 2012 at 9:49 pm

(the short of that is that it’s my own issue, not anyone else’s. But I do need to reduce my participation when that occurs, it’s just way too objectifying for me).

Reply

Christy January 31, 2012 at 6:59 am

I think people write in to get guidance and support from John as well as express themselves – share their pain – because there is healing in that: “This happened and it was really shitty.”

I think they also have come to anticipate guidance and insights from his readers. “We” have no control over what others are going to feel is useful or insightful with regard to that process nor how they choose to express it (both the letter writers and the readers). Some readers are going to disagree with John’s answers sometimes, even those who agree with him most of the time. Without disrespecting the letter writer, I think the community has to be open to receiving those commenters who have a different point of view on his responses, and realize that sometimes those disagreements ARE supportive of the letter writer, as I believe is the case here: Sticking up for God based on the free will argument – not so warm and cozy and just not doing it for some people. This time I happen to be one of those people. Ultimately in this space, I think we can do both: offer support to those in pain, challenge the wrongs that continue in our world, and debate and critique John’s answers as well as those who disagree with him….for as long as John is willing to allow us to do that.

I agree with your sensitivity chip. You have a lovely one.

Reply

DR January 31, 2012 at 7:10 am

I don’t know Christy, for me timing is everything and sensitivity is pretty simple. But again, mine is only one opinion of many, including yours. Thanks for the reply!

Reply

Steven Tedesco via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:34 am

Great letter and response.

Reply

Robert Wood via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:33 am

You seriously have some balls and a lot of faith man. I quite honestly don’t know if I would have been capable of addressing that question to someone in that situation.

Reply

Gary B. Mann via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:31 am

He was the same place when His Son was beaten and crucified.

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm

“He was the same place when His Son was beaten and crucified”

I’ll buy that. But the question is still “where”?

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:47 pm

Will, think quantum where, not physical where.
Consider that Hebrew mysticism said that YHWH (the four symbols representing God) were the four energies of God. There are four forces in the Universe: electromagnetic, strong force, weak force, and gravity. Short-hand it all (because I am tired) and you get active, neutral, passive, and transitional energy. Hold that thought.

Jesus said that as the Way (success, why success, because it is the way that works, duh. which way to the restroom? that way the other way has no success in it, etc.), the Truth, and the Life and no man gets to the Father but by that path.

Then we have the ultimate divine experience: when we are manifesting success in truth while encouraging, supporting, and nurturing life and we experience that in active, neutralizing, pacifying, and transistional ways. That is what we believe Christ brought us online for and so that is a place where all of this DIVINITY came together. So that was a place God was.

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 4:47 pm

*Jesus said he was the Way…

Reply

Will January 30, 2012 at 7:47 pm

LOL! Brena, you are so sharp!
You answered the question behind the question behind my question!

My simple mind was asking where? as if the answer might be…

A. Hunched over, sobbing in helpless agony and sadness.
B. Stalking about, fists clenched in impotent fury.
C. Out to lunch with His buds, kibbitzing over bagels and lox.
D. Some undisclosed location known only to those with top secret clearance, on a need-to-know-basis.
E. None of the above or all of the above.

Clearly I am anthropomorphically & anthropomorphously confused!
Silly Wabbit! :D

Reply

Brena January 30, 2012 at 9:22 pm

The spirit of God is in us and on us. I hesitate to say this but there is zero blame in my statements. The spirit of truth speaks the truth to us always. We catch what we comprehend. Unfortunately, in a religious power mad system we have taught obedience to proper authority and neglected the 2,000 yrs we should have been using to find out how that spirit communicates with us. (Oh, please, do not think I am promoting a certain doctrine, denomication, or whatever.) I have no doubts that alarms went off with the poor child. I have no expectation that a young boy would question the authority of baby sitter even with the alarms unless he had been taught to listen to himself. In that regard the mother has made a great growth step in listening to the internal truths and abandoning faith in the man in the sky who leads us like we are little children. It takes the faith of a child to see heaven but Jacob cheated and wrestled with God and was renamed Royal. Child-like faith but wrestling with truths like a Boss is the pattern we see in the Bible. No one but the offenders are to blame, but I am sure human conditioning to “be good” gets in the way of actually being excellent sometimes. And, I would say this: Samson was dangerous and wild and God’s man. I think it is reasonable to see that he fell for Delilah (sp?) not as much because of sex, but because it is easy to see that she thought she was doing the right thing in stopping him. (He ripped people’s heads off if they argued!) Delilah did not seem like a bad person, maybe?
It might have been hard to see the babysitter as a predator if she was from a family that used guns to the head to rape people. It’s harder to see when the victim joins the bad guys than it is to spot the bad guys themselves because it happens first as another forced layer to their vicimhood and then later by giving up to the dark side.
Am I defending abusers? No! While most who abuse have been abused, it is also true that most victims never abuse. But if we encounter someone in the midst of shifting loyalties we can all be duped.

Reply

Brena January 31, 2012 at 6:52 pm

*doctrine, DENOMINATION (oops, it was late) :/

Reply

Joshua Salmans via Facebook January 30, 2012 at 9:26 am

That is a delicate question and needs a delicate answer that only a few can provide.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post in Christian Issues:

Next post in Christian Issues: