I can't believe someone would say this.
(NOTICE: This contains a couple mature themes, but nothing that someone who is able to read this shouldn't be able to handle. I apologize in advance if the nature of what is discussed offends anyone.)
While reading through my daily blog list, I came across this at The Evangelical Outpost. Joe links to an article written by Bart Campolo, son of the well-known evangelical Tony Campolo. From a theological perspective, I just can't understand how someone could come to these conclusions. Go a read the whole article first, because I'm just going to sample a few things.
Campolo writes about a letter he received from a young person, who recants a story Campolo told about how a nine-year old who was gang-raped rejected God because her Sunday school teacher told her that God allowed it to happen for a reason. He goes on to discuss how this person would go to Hell because she rejected God, and he does not want to believe that God would allow that to happen to her. He responds by saying this.
Perhaps, as many believe, all who die without confessing Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior go to Hell to suffer forever. Most important of all, perhaps God’s sovereignty is such that although God could indeed prevent little girls from being raped, God is no less just or merciful when they are raped, and those children and we who love them should uncritically give God our thanks and praise in any case.
My response is simple: I refuse to believe any of that. For me to do otherwise would be to despair.
Here is the first flaw in his argument. God does allow things to happen on this earth for a reason, and it is difficult for us with our finite minds to understand that reasoning. Because of our fallen nature, things happen that are not directly of God. If humans had never strayed into sin to begin with, then maybe there would be an argument there.
Ephesians 2:1-2 specifically states that
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in
which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of
the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in
those who are disobedient.
We live in a world where the ruler of the kingdom of the air (Satan) accomplishes things through those who are disobedient to God. We are outside of God's control because He gave us free will to decide what we want to do. God would not stop someone from doing something merely because it would be bad, because then He would be controlling a person's life. That free will which allows us to believe also allows Satan to work in those who do not believe.
The second thing I want to point out is, to me, much more egregious of a statement. In this simple phrase, he should not be allowed to publish any Christian commentary again. Campolo says,
What I know with certainty, however, is the one that makes me want to go on living, the one I choose for my own sake, the one I deem worthy of my allegiance. I may be wrong in this matter, but I am not in doubt. If indeed faith is being sure of what we hope for, then truly I am a man of faith, for I absolutely know what I hope to be true: that God is completely good, entirely loving, and perfectly forgiving, that God is doing everything possible to overcome evil (which is evidently a long and difficult task), and that God will utterly triumph in the end, despite any and all indications to the contrary.
This is my first article of faith. I required no Bible to determine it, and—honestly—I will either interpret away or ignore altogether any Bible verse
that suggests otherwise.
After reading this, my mouth dropped open. Let's put aside the hubris and arrogance contained in the first sentence and concentrate on the last one. Campolo openly states that he would ignore anything in the Bible which would compete with what he has decided God is. Not only has he put God in a box, he will not entertain any Biblical evidence which would change the shape of the box. By saying this, he is denying the authority of the Bible. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Correcting is the key word there. Campolo is not open to any correction from the Bible as he states. I have always been honest with anyone that I come into contact with about the Bible that I don't know everything. I may think I have a certain point down and really understand it, but I may not. If the Bible disagrees with what I say, take the Bible's word for it, not mine. If my blog lasts 2000 years with nothing but grammatical changes to it, then by all means show respect to it, but don't for a moment think that it's anything but words of a man. The Bible is a collection of works inspired by God, written by men through His Holy Spirit.
Should I really be attacking Bart Campolo on this? I don't really feel like I'm attacking him, more just pointing out what looks to be poor theology. I don't know the man, have never read anything else by him, and have never read anything written by his father either. I'll be happy to accept the same back. Am I wrong on this? Let me know.