An Almighty Predicament: A Discourse on the Arguments For and Against Christianity

by Steven Colborne

An Almighty Predicament is the perfect book for deep thinking people who are trying to decide whether or not they should commit to Christianity.Christians will tell you that there is only one way to have peace with God — a relationship with Jesus Christ. But for many people, the Christian worldview is not intellectually satisfying, as there are so many aspects of Christian doctrine that don’t seem to make sense.In this 70 page essay by philosopher and author Steven Colborne, the arguments for and against Christianity are weighed up and scrutinised, with passages of Scripture cited and personal testimony expounded. At the heart of the essay is the free will problem, which for Colborne is the make-or-break issue when it comes to deciding whether or not one should accept the Christian worldview.Written from an agnostic viewpoint, An Almighty Predicament examines the Christian worldview respectfully and with an open mind. After reading all of Colborne’s arguments on both sides of the debate, readers will feel better equipped to make a decision about Christianity for themselves. Download a free sample or buy your copy today.

Genres: Religion, Philosophy, Spirituality, Nonfiction

76 pages, Kindle Edition

First published July 17, 2012

About the author

Steven Colborne is an author, musician and counsellor from the United Kingdom. After graduating from the University of Westminster with first-class honours in Commercial Music in 2003, he began his career in the music industry. A season of profound anguish followed, sparked by the breakdown of his family and the death of his mother and leading to an explorative spiritual journey which eventually led him to read the Bible. He became a Christian and returned to university to study Philosophy and Religion, proceeding to embark upon a career as a self-publishing author of philosophical theology books. To date, Steven has self-published sixteen books related to philosophy, religion, and spirituality and they are all available exclusively through his website StevenColborne.com on a pay as you wish basis. To God be the glory! ❤️

Reviews

[Robin Morgan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Before I began trying to be a good Christian woman, which came about shortly after I had published my first two Christian books on January 11, 2020, during my working career, I got told often that I should never talk about three topics in the workplace, these three things were: Politic, Sex or Religion.

Regarding the prohibition of talking about politics in the workplace, it all boils down to the simple fact that it's capable of destroying any business relationship you might possess with your boss. This is especially true if your political beliefs don't mesh with those of your boss. The milieu of your workplace will become quite caustic, resulting in your failure of receiving a promotion or being delegated duties with fewer responsibilities for your job.

Moving on to the discussion of sex in the workplace, the discussion of this prohibited topic can be the most precarious since workers need to know better and more seriously the possibility of it being considered a form of sexual harassment. For this and other reasons, the best way of dealing with this topic is to distance yourself from any and all discussions.

The main issue regarding the discussion of religion is that it can be like revealing your political party relationship where the opinions of others towards you can change instantly. If you discuss religion in the workplace, beware as it might give the appearance of you badgering or categorizing against a co-worker based solely on their individual religious beliefs. And like sex, this topic can become quite volatile.

In my trying to be a good Christian woman now, while I have no problem sharing the words of the Lord in writing, I have difficulties expressing this speaking face-to-face with another individual in public. I came across this book by author Steven Colborne while searching Amazon for another nonfiction book I could read/review and found it to be an insightful guidebook for individuals like me to be able to speak to others during ordinary everyday conversations.

Through each one of the fourteen short chapters in this book, Mr. Colborne presents to his readers a unique thinking as to the vernacular we utilize in expressing ourselves. And with this knowledge in place, the possibility of it transforming itself in recognizing the dominion of the Lord and other divine characteristics becomes self-evident.

In the end, after reading this book, I’ve begun to feel better equipped to incorporate the words of the Lord when I speak to others in ordinary daily conversations, which is why I’ve given Mr. Colborne the 5 STARS he has garnered from this reviewer of nonfiction Christian books.

[J.C · Rating 4 out of 5]

For work such as this, there is no need for worries of spoilers, as rather it is less a narrative and more philosophical. However, I implore you to read the work in-depth as my musings on the subject may be contrary to the views of others. Even that of Colborne himself. However, as he says in his work, this is how God wanted it. Some knowing of his existence, and those of us waiting in the wing for divine interaction.

So Colborne introduces himself first and his story was not an easy one to read. In his contemporary life, he has discovered a type of stasis, however, with illnesses inherent to him, he proclaims this may be taken away at any time. Such is the will of God.

It is also important to me that you do not mistake Steven for a man of blind faith, who have never known anything else. From reading his blog alone you would know this, and in his introduction, he explains his deep interest with all things spiritual since his teens.

In Part 1 we are introduced to the nature of God. Which can be summoned up by His omnipresence. He states his case quite clearly through the lens of scientific endeavours:

“Even scientists, who are very successful in describing how things happen, generally agree that they cannot say why things happen.”

The argument here for Colborne is linked with the philosophical paradigm of determinism. God is all there is, we are a part of God, however, he exists outside of us. Therefore he is all-powerful and knows how our lives will play out.

In Part 2 we are guided through the human experience, in which Colborne is certain is curated by God. Why he is certain of this is simple. We are used to experiencing things in a certain way, through a certain set of laws.

When something outside of these perceptions happened, rather than chalking them down to anomalies or mistakes, Colborne assures the reader that this is through the desire of God. It is because God is a higher being, that we cannot experience everything he does. In certain cases, he allows us a small window into his nature. Colborne asks that rather than dismiss these anomalous experiences we should accept them as God’s outer life.

Scientist have grappled for centuries with the concept of ‘thought’. Where does ‘thought’ come from? How does it arise? Now with modern science researchers have pinpointed the moment the brain sends the signals to, for example, move an arm. They have not, however, pinpointed the decision or the why.

Colborne makes it quite simple, this is God’s will. He is managing our every movement.

“If we consider the nature of God, particularly His attribute of omnipresence, it makes sense that He is controlling our conscious experiences because His being permeates every atom in existence and every cell of our bodies.”

For someone who has studied anthropology and humankind so closely, I cannot help but agree with Colborne to an extent. Although humans have spread ourselves across the planet, we have things that are so unique to us as a species that it appears wherever we are. The concept of God is universal and in favour of Colborne’s argument, this may be God’s own way of showing himself to us.

In our modern world, the war between science and religion has gotten us nowhere. I have often been an advocate for the inter-disciplinary cooperation of scientists and theologians. For many centuries now, scientists have been doing the work philosophers in ancient Greece once had the pleasure of.

Now more than ever we need to listen to, and read about experiences had by human beings such as Steven Colborne. In my opinion, his belief in God is not a dirty secret or an unfortunate quirk. There are many people I love who both believe in God and many who do not. With all the varieties in between.

There is no denying that Colborne has done his homework, and he entertains the philosophies of those who would be considered his opposite. In Part 4 he discusses the American Philosopher Sam Harris, who is a prominent figure surrounding materialism and free will. Harris believes that all we are is physical, and this matter is calling the shots. Whereas of course, Colborne argues this is nonsensical. How can inanimate matter create the diverse realms of thought that humans enjoy?



“How something that is purely material could create awareness of the kind that human beings experience is an area of ceaseless confusion for neuroscientists.”

There is also the espousal of the major world religions, (not discounting the thousands of others he would not have had time to mention). Colborne is not dismissing your version of God. His simple truth is this. God is omnipresent and God is our creator (at birth and each and every moment of our lives).

Colborne wants what I think is lacking in the Christian faiths (among others) of the day. A modern church were a scientific debate is not only welcomed but part of the general practice of religion. A church of God which has thrown off the shackles of the cruelness of human doctrines, and allow only love to flow. An inter-faith dialogue, a safe place for everyone, in which to look at God from all unique perspectives and experiences of the human condition.

There is room for everyone in the debate so I would ask for the comments to be respectful, and I implore you to read this book. There is more benefit here than you realise.

[Debbie Young · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was unsure what to expect from this intriguingly titled book but I was quickly engaged by the author's simple,candid style and his clear intention to help others gain from his challenging personal experiences, which include losing his mother and one of his best friends to cancer and developing mental health problems that were sufficient to have him sectioned.

Having always been somewhat in awe of philosophers, I really liked his attitude: the democratisation of philosophy. "I would hate the idea that you would consider yourself to be any less of a philosopher than Aristotle or Plato,than Kant or Descartes, or any of the other philosophers studied throughout the world." When he expounds his own philosophy, he makes it both accessible and acceptable. It was a privilege to share his thoughts and I really appreciate the courage and conviction that it must have taken him to do this.

Without aggressively preaching, but rather by reasoned, very sane argument, he persuaded me to reconsider my self-professed atheist status. I'd now think twice before choosing that tag rather than agnostic. It's that powerful a book.

[Becky · Rating 2 out of 5]

Contradiction

While the ideas presented are interesting, the author contradicts himself. If God is in control of everything we do how can we choose to use this language? Perhaps he explains that but I have up after about five chapters; the book was not for me.

[Q* := Q - {0} · Rating 1 out of 5]

Philosopher Steven Colborne’s self-published book God’s Grand Game: Divine Sovereignty and the Cosmic Playground seeks to reconcile God’s sovereignty (e.g., omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, etc.) with human agency in the service of proposing a “Church of the Future.” (Apparently, each of the world’s major religions suffers from terminal flaws, and Colborne proposes what he believes to be the singular path forward.) It’s a Herculean task birthed from a seductive theological problem that has attracted many of history’s greatest minds, yet it doesn’t take long for readers to realize Colborne won’t provide an intellectual return on their investment. His nearly half-serious attempt fails at everything but contradiction, which makes it extraordinarily difficult to appreciate God’s Grand Game (GGG) as anything approaching a serious work of philosophical and theological exegesis. Most of the 45 chapters rehash the same basic concepts, and Colborne’s quotidian writing style feels less like an attempt to simplify complexities for the reader than a betrayal of some alarming vacuity. Think “self-published diary” rather than Summa Theologica.[1]

Colborne claims he is neither a Calvinist nor a pantheist {40}. I’ll take him at his word, though his worldview, as expressed in the book, aligns with those positions in incredibly intimate and multivalent ways. What he can’t deny, however, is his unshirted embrace of an uncompromisingly hard-determinist position that makes absolutely no room for anything else—not human agency, not mental creativity [2], not physical processes, and not even basic notions of perception {37, 49, 53}—and this belief motivates every one of his epistemological and ontological moves. The most charitable characterization of Colborne’s argument might be that we’re living in a supernal, spirit-based version of the Matrix, where an impersonal “God” informs and controls and imparts all experience and action, from our physical senses to the most nuanced mental states.

If defending fatalism were the entire project, however, then one might envision an alternate universe where GGG wasn’t so bad. Bring in Nick Bostrom, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and John Searle, layered above a comprehensive overview of relevant historical thought (e.g., Aquinas, Augustine, etc.), and Colborne could have uncovered a substantive discussion concerning the intersection of free will, consciousness, and the potential for (either God- or computer-based) simulation. Instead, he fumbles for a prescription of theology that leads to many kinds of embarrassing errors, including faulty hermeneutics, straw-men attacks, confirmation bias, and circular reasoning. I won’t do a deep dive into every single non-sequitur, but I hope readers will be largely (if not completely) persuaded by the following examples:

(1) God is omniscient, yet the future is uncertain until He decides what comes next {35}.
(2) Our “modes of mind” can influence the “modes” of others {55}, yet causation is a fallacy {168} and all mental states—including psychoses—are a function of God’s design {37}.
(3) The proof of randomness (i.e., the fact that we’re not in control of our own thoughts) is randomness (e.g., of choice, of word association, etc.) {59}.

Of course, there are straightforward (theo)logical problems as well. To wit:

- God is the reification of both love and hate {25}
- God controls Satan’s actions {87}, but Satan doesn’t exist {119}
- God causes us to sin and imparts to us sinful desires {51 ff., 74}
- God created all the religions {79 f.}
- God possibly forgets things {237, fn 2}

. . . and so forth. These are obviously absurd claims, yet Colborne has no choice but to admit them because his initial conditions demand their inclusion. It may be God’s “game,” but Colborne makes the rules.

Perhaps the most significant deficit of GGG, aside from the disqualifying problems of circular reasoning and self-contradiction, is Colborne’s failure to engage in real theological debate when opportunities do arise. For example, he asserts the predestination doctrine of orthodox Calvinism simply because it aligns with his first principle of hard determinism. This means Colborne must ignore the myriad biblical scriptures that qualify salvific theology as an engagement with (and of) subjective will, while also failing to address the obvious fact that “preordainment” inexorably leads to the nullification of God’s existence.[3] This was a wonderful opportunity for Colborne to conjoin his theological and philosophical positions in a powerful and convincing way using a “real world” problem, and he punted. Of course, considering the above examples, one would expect Colborne to be unfazed by the problem of a God who makes people sin and then destroys them for sinning, and the reader is not disappointed. Examples like these are littered throughout the text.

One should certainly applaud Colborne for conquering the difficult process of writing and self-publishing a book, but in the end, GGG is internally inconsistent and commits the most fundamental errors in logic; unfortunately, that’s reason enough to dismiss it as a spasmodic, pseudointellectual exercise. There are other problems too (e.g., the complete lack of academic research and references, etc.) that give the reader the distinct impression this should be a very first (and very rough) draft rather than a pristine product ready for publication—though, even then, there should be cause for serious concern—but those issues would have been overlooked had Colborne crafted a logically consistent and compelling narrative.

In God’s Grand Game, we all lose.

Footnotes:

[1] Numbers in square brackets indicate footnotes; those in curly brackets denote page numbers within the text.

[2] This is known as occasionalism whose endgame is pantheism.

[3] According to Colborne, God chooses “one of the innumerable worlds” that “veils” preselected minds from knowing Him {75}. So, if God causes everyone to sin—because all human behavior is really God’s invasive action operating through us without our consent—and then punishes a preordained subset of those fully determined persons (i.e., the non-elect) with eternal damnation for ostensibly rejecting Christ (when they possessed no free will to do so), then God must be unjust. But if God exists, He must exist as a perfect, and perfectly moral, being, a state that requires He adjudicate justly and righteously. Therefore, God cannot exist.

[Ethan Cross · Rating 5 out of 5]

Some books ask questions. Others challenge everything you think you know.

God’s Grand Game is a bold and thought provoking exploration of faith, free will, and the idea of divine control. It dives into complex questions about God, suffering, and the nature of reality with a clear intention to make readers reflect deeply.

What stands out is its willingness to confront difficult topics without hesitation. It invites readers to question long held beliefs and consider new perspectives on religion and philosophy.

A challenging and reflective read for those open to exploring big questions about existence and belief.

[Tara Caribou · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book as an ebook.

While I don’t agree fully with all of Steven’s philosophies or conclusions, I admire his journey and his willingness to ask the hard questions. He never takes anything at face value, instead he digs in deep, searching for answers with an openness to ‘being wrong’. Often we dogmatically hold on to our personal set of beliefs due to tradition, laziness, or pride. Steven is none of these. He is fairly open about his past, his present, and his journey. This, of course, comes with struggles, stumbles, triumphs, and blessings. I’ve been following along on his personal blog for several years and I must say that there have been a number of times he has raised a question within faith and philosophy that has made me.. uncomfortable. I like that. I like it because it challenges me. What DO I believe about that? Why do I believe it? What if…? …I’m wrong? I’m right? His questions causes me to question. Sometimes I have meditated on my own answer and stood firm. Others I have altered my perceptions. There have been times I have felt, nope, he’s way off base and others where I know we stand in a minority and yet I have faith in Truth.

So here’s a collection of blog posts spanning several years. It’s an interesting set and one I don’t regret reading. Again, I don’t agree with it all, but that’s okay! The main take-away is he has once again “got me thinking”. In this day, so often philosophy is given in pre-chewed bites which don’t really offer a lot of substance. This isn’t it. If you really take your time and read each chapter and meditate on the implications, you find a treasure trove of deep thoughts. May your faith be challenged and strengthened. I rate this with 4.5/5 stars. Easy to read chapters that are neither sophomoric nor bloated and pompous. Prepare to be challenged!

[As an additional side-note, I will add that I do Not identify myself as a Christian, as by the apostles’ creed, I do not fully agree with, nor any other named religion, though I do personally adhere to the Bible, the Book of Enoch and other Holy Scriptures.]

[Gerald Wilson · Rating 1 out of 5]

An outline of the author’s philosophies looking particularly at what he thinks God is like and looking at how a Sovereign God couldn’t possibly give his created beings any free will. If you’re familiar with Christian thinking and biblical teaching on this topic you won’t find much to agree with here. He goes on to say that any belief in a God would give common ground whatever background or belief system you have. The only good thing is that the chapters are short. If you sat down to come up with a new way to think about a creator God without reference to anything from a “revealed belief system” is this really the best you could do? Is it theology? Only in the sense it talks about God. Is it philosophy? It seems to be a personal way of thinking. Do I find anything to interest me? Sorry, no. Had to give one star because I couldn’t give less.

[Efguirguis · Rating 1 out of 5]

Infantile

Writing a whole book about ones faith is both boastful and infantile.
It is understandable that someone who is as emotionally disturbed as the author and someone who underwent a psychotic breakdown might wish to celebrate their recovery. Certainly this only happened because God is great and compassionate but it hardly requires a book, when a silent prayer of thanks to the Almighty is what is required.

[Suzan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Let me say this is just my opinion. I promised myself that I would always leave an honest review but that doesn't mean this book will not touch you differently. Steven and I have different outlooks on most things but that is not why I left a one-star. I found the book so hard to finish. It is a series of posts from a blog and I did read that in the description. Yet I thought there would be some consistency in the writing but sadly I didn't see it.

[Stephen Mitchell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Appreciate but don't share his beliefs

The author is clear about his beliefs (e.g., God is all powerful and playing a game with people, who have no free will). I appreciate this, but don't share this belief. I find Adam Hamilton's arguments in "Why?" more persuasive (or comforting). That said, I welcomed the comparisons between Islam and Christianity, and found many of his statements thought provoking.

[Leah Boschert · Rating 5 out of 5]

Steven's explanation of the presence of God in all things (all that exists is, in essence, God) as the reason we do not have free will is clear. Though I don't agree with all of his points (I challenge any two philosophers to agree on all matters!), I found his logic clear and appreciated the way he addressed various counterarguments and alternative philosophies. Clearly written and an enjoyable read. :)

[jeff stratton · Rating 1 out of 5]

Awful

This book takes potentially big ideas and tries to diminish them through the lens of fundamentalist Christianity. It is a silly book of no intellectual worth, badly written. I would expect any of my students to do better. I only gave it one star as a rating was required.

[J · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was not what I was expecting at all. I was looking for more information about the different religions and how they compare, but this was not that. It was one man's thoughts on God, essentially, which made me think at times, but mostly I was a little bored and disengaged.

[David Catron · Rating 4 out of 5]

One man's take on the divine. Rather perfunctory, brief chapters. Thoughts could have been further developed. Not conventional. Interesting concepts, however. I would recommend giving it a read.