We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
How do you respond to 2 Thessalonians 2:11–12?
Of those who disobey the truth Paul says, “…God sends them powerful delusions, leading them to believe what is false so that all who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned.”
This passage is sometimes cited as evidence that the delusions that unbelievers embrace are as much a part of God’s sovereign will as believers’ enlightenment. Yet, compatibilists insist, this occurs in such a way that unbelievers are responsible for their delusions though believers have only God to thank for their enlightenment. But there is a less paradoxical (less contradictory?) interpretation of this passage available to us.
First, we should note that the passage says that God “sends…powerful delusions…so that all who have not believed…will be condemned” (emphasis added). The delusions God sends aren’t an explanation for why unbelievers don’t believe. They are instead the way God responds to their unbelief: he condemns it.
Second, it is not too difficult to surmise how God might “send powerful delusions” in response to unbelief without directly attributing deception to God. Sometimes the intentions of evil spirits fit in with God’s intention to judge people (e.g.Judg. 9:23; 2 Sam. 24:1, 1 Chron. 21:1). There is a certain poetic justice in letting deceiving spirits delude people who have already demonstrated that they want to believe lies. It’s significant that elsewhere Paul says that Satan, “the god of this age,” blinded the minds of unbelievers (2 Cor. 4:4). I believe that this conception lies behind Paul’s word to the Thessalonians.
Category: Q&A
Tags: Q&A, Responding to Calvinism
Topics: Providence, Predestination and Free Will
Verse: 2 Thessalonians 2
Related Reading
Revelation 13:8 refers to “everyone whose names have not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life.” How does that square with open theism?
Three possibilities exist in terms of reconciling Revelation 13:8 with open theism. 1) First, the “from the foundation of the world” clause can attach to either “everyone whose names have not been written” or to “the lamb that was slain.” For example, the TNIV translates this passage “All inhabitants of the earth will worship the…
What is the significance of 2 Kings 20:1–7?
The Lord tells Hezekiah “[Y]ou shall die: you shall not recover” (vs. 1). Hezekiah pleads with God and God says, “I will add fifteen years to your life” (vs. 6). If everything about the future was exhaustively settled and known by God as such, his prophecy to Hezekiah that he was going to die would…
What is the significance of Genesis 2:19 ?
“So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was the name.” God wanted Adam to have authority over the animal kingdom…
Why do you claim that everybody, whether they know it or not, believes that the future is partly open?
Whatever a person may theoretically believe, they act like the future is partly open. For, as a matter of fact, there’s no other way to act. Think about it. Every time we deliberate between options on the way toward making a decision, we assume (and we have to assume) that a) the future consists of…
What do you think of “confrontational evangelism”?
Question: In The Myth of a Christian Nation, you emphasize our need to sacrificially serve others. But you didn’t emphasize our need to “preach the Gospel to every living creature.” I’ve been intrigued by the movement known as “confrontational evangelism,” associated with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron. They stress the need to get people to…