Are Non-Christians Predestined to go to Hell?

[rnmomof7]

So doesn't that mean that even non-Christains can be saved? For example, the Jew or the Muslim that cannot fully grasp the gospel of Jesus Christ, but lives his life in obedience to God to the best of his understanding will be saved by God's grace.

Abraham was a pagan from a family of idol makers when God revealed Himself to him. He believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness.


Elizabeth was a Jew, but the child in her womb knew Christ when he was in His presence.

The issue is not a nationality one, it is a faith one.

If the Muslim or Jew is elect of God, God will make sure that He hears the gospel and is saved.


The Bible is clear that there is no salvation outside of Christ.

 

[CCWoody]

But for this example let us say that a person that is sufficiently mentally incapacitated from birth enough not to be able to possess a faith in Jesus (A mental vegetable, not just an inability to speak) and that a child that has not reached an age of reason enough to possess a faith in Christ that dies. Are they predestined by God to go to Hell?

Why is faith and the work of the Holy Spirit limited to human ability? Does the Roman Catholic Church view some people beyond God's ability and therefore give them a free pass?

 

[CCWoody]

But from the Calvinist point of view (if I am correct), A person that is predestined to salvation would not die in infancy or be born severely mentally disabled, because that would prevent them from having a faith in Jesus, which you need for salvation.

Calvinists do not limit God's ability by human ability. Neither do we elevate man above the will of God. Always in balance. We do not hamstring the Holy Spirit because someone seems from a human perspective to be unable to express faith.

If that were the case, then it would be logical to prescreen people with an IQ test before giving them the gospel.

Salvation is of the Lord and his blessing is on his people.

 

[CCWoody]

The reprobate Jews are, yes.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Just as Reprobated Christians. There will be quite a few people thrust out of the kingdom because they thought that they could approach God on their terms instead of his terms.

The interesting thing here is that babies always seem to be a favorite kind of whipping boy against the ideas of Election & Reprobation. The assumption is that babies are innocent when the core issue is not "Do Calvinists think babies, who cannot express faith, are Reprobates" but is "Why do you deny Original Sin and the inherent depravity of man in the spirit of Pelagius?"

 

[Bob Moore]

If, hypothetically, an elect person were to die prior to being regenerated and brought to faith, that person would still go to hell. That does not happen,...

Hi Fru, long time no see. I'm glad to see you are still in the trenches.

I know your statement above is hypothetical, but I submit that it is impossible even hypothetically. Since the elect were chosen before the foundation of the world their number can not change. It will be, as we see in the Revelation, "complete", but the number can not change. So then an elect person is basically invulnerable to death until the gift of saving faith is received. If that were not so, then an elect person could wind up in hell, which we are doubtless agreed is not possible.

but the point being illustrated is that while we can say that Muslims who do not believe in Christ are unsaved, we cannot say that they are not elect unless they have persisted in that unbelief to their death.

Exactly.

 

[Jon_]

I know your statement above is hypothetical, but I submit that it is impossible even hypothetically.

Just like a square circle is hypothetically and actually impossible.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[frumanchu]

Hi Fru, long time no see. I'm glad to see you are still in the trenches.

I have plenty of help these days

I know your statement above is hypothetical, but I submit that it is impossible even hypothetically. Since the elect were chosen before the foundation of the world their number can not change. It will be, as we see in the Revelation, "complete", but the number can not change. So then an elect person is basically invulnerable to death until the gift of saving faith is received. If that were not so, then an elect person could wind up in hell, which we are doubtless agreed is not possible.

Yes, but the impossibility of it lies in the immutability of God's decree, not in election itself. Logically speaking, it is possible that God could elect an individual but then fail to bring that person to faith and preserve them in it. Since election in and of itself does not confer salvation, that elect person would perish. Theologically speaking, it is impossible because of the immutability of God's decree. God will not elect someone and then not bring them to faith and ultimately save them.

The surety of our salvation rests not simply upon God's decree of election, but upon His immutable will whereby He will not fail to bring to pass that which He purposes.

Election is the formal cause of our salvation. Faith is the instrumental cause by which it is accomplished. The two are inseparable, but nevertheless distinct.

 

[CCWoody]

Just like a square circle is hypothetically and actually impossible.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

I guess that you haven't been around some of the Arminians that I have. They seem to think that a square circle is possible.

 

[bertie]

ACTS:10 :34-35- any one who reveres(acknowledges Gods sovriegnty )and lives the one true law has a shot at eternity .....There is the promise in writing.
I think the Millenium is where the souls of the people who were truly humble before their God,and endeavoured as much as is humanly possible,to respect life by their lights,will get a chance to accept Christ as their savior
This is why satan gets unbound to test the faith of all one final time,at the end.Those who were wicked and callous all their lives will not even get ressurected for the chance but will sleep till they get judged and sentenced to the fiery lake and the second death

 

[frumanchu]

Just like a square circle is hypothetically and actually impossible.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Bad analogy. See above. A square circle is a manifest absurdity because it violates the law of non-contradiction. One cannot even hypothesize it without changing the definition of one or both.

Hypothesizing about elect people not being saved is not the same because they do not, strictly speaking, refer to the same thing.

 

[Jon_]

Bad analogy. See above. A square circle is a manifest absurdity because it violates the law of non-contradiction. One cannot even hypothesize it without changing the definition of one or both.

Hypothesizing about elect people not being saved is not the same because they do not, strictly speaking, refer to the same thing.

Actually, the analogy is a great one because the terms "square" and "circle" are contradictory by definition. In the same way, someone who is elect never coming to faith is by definition contradictory. If "elect" does not entail faith, then the term loses its meaning because faith is the alone instrument of salvation, which precisely what the "elect" are elected to.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[frumanchu]

Actually, the analogy is a great one because the terms "square" and "circle" are contradictory by definition. In the same way, someone who is elect never coming to faith is by definition contradictory. If "elect" does not entail faith, then the term loses its meaning because faith is the alone instrument of salvation, which precisely what the "elect" are elected to.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

You are correct with respect to the manner in which "square" and "circle" are contradictory. This is because we are speaking at the same time and in the same relationship.

In the case of the elect, they are elect when they are born but they do not necessarily possess faith when they are born, and thus Christ's righteousness is not yet imputed to them nor are their sins expiated. Election is they decree that God will save that person (formal cause), but faith is the means by which that decree is carried out (instrumental cause) and it does not occur at the same time as election.

Jon, what I am hypothesizing is the very same thing Peter speaks to in 2 Peter 3:9. It is hypothetically possible from a logical standpoint that He could come in judgement before the full number of the elect had been brought to faith and repentance, but practically (and theologically) impossible that He will do so because He is not willing that any should perish.

 

[seekingpurity047]

Might I add... if a politician is elected, he, therefore, becomes part of government. If a politician is elected... there is no way (in a democratic society... that is) that he can't be part of government. Same thing with salvation. If someoen is elected, they are going to be saved, when is up to God, but it has to be in the elected person's lifetime...

To the glory of God,

Randy

 

[Jon_]

In the case of the elect, they are elect when they are born but they do not necessarily possess faith when they are born, and thus Christ's righteousness is not yet imputed to them nor are their sins expiated. Election is they decree that God will save that person (formal cause), but faith is the means by which that decree is carried out (instrumental cause) and it does not occur at the same time as election.

I figured that this is what you meant and I almost thought to talk about it in my last post. I understand what you mean and where you're coming from. I just think there's a bit of a misunderstanding with regards to time and eternity. Time is a product of a finite mind. We conceive of time because we are not eternal. In the mind of God, there is no time. God's mind is eternal, which is why his decree is eternal. All of God's decrees are immediate. He does not decree that we will be saved and then wait around and direct the course of the world so that it will happen. It is already complete in God's mind, we are the ones working out the details (which have also been ordained by God). Faith and election only seem disconnected to us because we only understand faith in a spatio-temporal, finite sense. God's decree of election entails faith and as we are eternally elect, we eternally have faith. The concept of the "time" at which we became saved is only present within our finite minds.

Consider it from God's point of view. God knows we are elect, right? God has decreed the elect have faith, right? If God knows one is elect, then God knows that one has been given faith. If God knows this, then it is so. If God knows it, it is eternally true, for if truth changed in the mind of God, he would not be immutable. It is impossible for God to "know" that we will at some point have faith. He does not "know" in the context of time because he is eternal. Eternity is the absence of time and time is a product of the finite mind.

In other words, the elect are eternally elect, eternally have faith, and eternally have Christ's righteousness imputed to them. This must be true because God knows it and God is eternal. It is one of his essential characteristics and, as a logical predicate, it attaches to everything he knows and does.

Within the context of God's decree, everything is immediate and simultaneous. Within the context of our finite minds, the two are something quite different. So, it therefore depends on what sense, or what "time" you talk about faith. If we talk about the faith of the elect, then election logically predicates faith, which is predicated by God's eternal decree, which means we are speaking of the eternal faith of the elect, which leads us to the problem of definiton when we say that it is hypothetically possible for someone to be elect but never have faith and thus go to hell. It's not even hypothetically possible because it is logically contradictory.

Jon, what I am hypothesizing is the very same thing Peter speaks to in 2 Peter 3:9. It is hypothetically possible from a logical standpoint that He could come in judgement before the full number of the elect had been brought to faith and repentance, but practically (and theologically) impossible that He will do so because He is not willing that any should perish.

Because of the confusion regarding time and eternity above, I do not think 2 Pt. 3:9 is in context.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[frumanchu]

I figured that this is what you meant and I almost thought to talk about it in my last post. I understand what you mean and where you're coming from. I just think there's a bit of a misunderstanding with regards to time and eternity. Time is a product of a finite mind. We conceive of time because we are not eternal. In the mind of God, there is no time. God's mind is eternal, which is why his decree is eternal. All of God's decrees are immediate. He does not decree that we will be saved and then wait around and direct the course of the world so that it will happen. It is already complete in God's mind, we are the ones working out the details (which have also been ordained by God). Faith and election only seem disconnected to us because we only understand faith in a spatio-temporal, finite sense. God's decree of election entails faith and as we are eternally elect, we eternally have faith. The concept of the "time" at which we became saved is only present within our finite minds.

Consider it from God's point of view. God knows we are elect, right? God has decreed the elect have faith, right? If God knows one is elect, then God knows that one has been given faith. If God knows this, then it is so. If God knows it, it is eternally true, for if truth changed in the mind of God, he would not be immutable. It is impossible for God to "know" that we will at some point have faith. He does not "know" in the context of time because he is eternal. Eternity is the absence of time and time is a product of the finite mind.

In other words, the elect are eternally elect, eternally have faith, and eternally have Christ's righteousness imputed to them. This must be true because God knows it and God is eternal. It is one of his essential characteristics and, as a logical predicate, it attaches to everything he knows and does.

Within the context of God's decree, everything is immediate and simultaneous. Within the context of our finite minds, the two are something quite different. So, it therefore depends on what sense, or what "time" you talk about faith. If we talk about the faith of the elect, then election logically predicates faith, which is predicated by God's eternal decree, which means we are speaking of the eternal faith of the elect, which leads us to the problem of definiton when we say that it is hypothetically possible for someone to be elect but never have faith and thus go to hell. It's not even hypothetically possible because it is logically contradictory.


Because of the confusion regarding time and eternity above, I do not think 2 Pt. 3:9 is in context.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

I recognize the difference between time and eternity. Keep in mind the context of my original statement. There is a difference between knowing if someone is saved and knowing whether or not they are elect or reprobate. This conversation is obviously taking place from the human perspective. I can say with certainty that an individual who says they do not believe in Jesus Christ is not saved, but I cannot say they are reprobate because I don't know whether or not God has elected them and simply not yet brought them to faith in Christ.

This is the same context in which Peter makes his statement. Indeed, Peter's statement would not make any sense were he to be speaking of it from the vantage point of eternity. Of course God is not willing that His elect should perish. But the explanation is given from the human perspective as to why Christ has not yet come in judgement. The reason is that He has not brought all the elect to faith yet.

We're approaching the same subject from two different sides, but I'm sure we are in agreement.

 

[Jon_]

I recognize the difference between time and eternity. Keep in mind the context of my original statement. There is a difference between knowing if someone is saved and knowing whether or not they are elect or reprobate. This conversation is obviously taking place from the human perspective. I can say with certainty that an individual who says they do not believe in Jesus Christ is not saved, but I cannot say they are reprobate because I don't know whether or not God has elected them and simply not yet brought them to faith in Christ.

This is the same context in which Peter makes his statement. Indeed, Peter's statement would not make any sense were he to be speaking of it from the vantage point of eternity. Of course God is not willing that His elect should perish. But the explanation is given from the human perspective as to why Christ has not yet come in judgement. The reason is that He has not brought all the elect to faith yet.

We're approaching the same subject from two different sides, but I'm sure we are in agreement.

It would seem that we agree. I think the hypothetical just threw me off a bit. I tried to work it out in my head, but concluded that it couldn't follow.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[aisling7]

Jesus Christ showed compassion for young children. See Mark 10:14 People of the day thought that children's intellect wasn't sufficient for the gospel. We do not have faith with our intellect. Our Faith comes when God turns our heart towards him. See also, Eph 2:8,9 Many people see this verse and say that God's Grace is not of ourselves, but it is also the Faith that is not of ourselves! Romans 3:10,11 Without God turning our hearts, we are all equally incapable of finding and believing in God.

Jackie

 

[daughteroftheking1983]

The parable of the talents is quite relevant in this post. Luke 12 v 42-48

I believe wholeheartedly that God will judge us individually according to how much of Him we have had contact with. For example, an adult living in the West who has had the gospel clearly explained to him or her will be accountable for their response. A child or person with severe learning disabilities will also be judged according to what they have been given. If they have not yet reached the age of understanding, or if they will never reach it, I believe that God in His mercy will save them. On the same line, a person living in a place that has had no gospel infiltration will be judged according to how they have lived their lives. I believe that the glory and goodness of God can be seen in all of creation and there are numerous stories of God appearing to true seekers, without using people. I personally know a number of former muslim people who, after searching the koran, sought to know more about Jesus and God led them to believers, or spoke directly into their lives, bringing them to faith.

Luke 12v 48 "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

 

[BBAS 64]

The parable of the talents is quite relevant in this post. Luke 12 v 42-48

I believe wholeheartedly that God will judge us individually according to how much of Him we have had contact with. For example, an adult living in the West who has had the gospel clearly explained to him or her will be accountable for their response. A child or person with severe learning disabilities will also be judged according to what they have been given. If they have not yet reached the age of understanding, or if they will never reach it, I believe that God in His mercy will save them. On the same line, a person living in a place that has had no gospel infiltration will be judged according to how they have lived their lives. I believe that the glory and goodness of God can be seen in all of creation and there are numerous stories of God appearing to true seekers, without using people. I personally know a number of former muslim people who, after searching the koran, sought to know more about Jesus and God led them to believers, or spoke directly into their lives, bringing them to faith.

Luke 12v 48 "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

Good Day, Daughter of the king

Luk 12:42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?

Luk 12:43 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.

Luk 12:44 Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath.

Luk 12:45 But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;

Luk 12:46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.

Luk 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

Very intresting use of this parable. But this parable is about believers.

His Household is the church. His sevants are not unbelivers.

The old age of accoutability , surely that is unbiblical.

Judged by how they lived their life.. then they condem themselves and God will justly find them quilty. There are none that seek after God, zip, nada, none.


Peace to u,

Bill

 

[hlaltimus]

Are Non-Christians Predestined to go to Hell?

For example, say a man who lived in Saudi Arabia (where Christianity is illegal to be taught) as a devout Muslim all of his life and died. Is he predestined by God to go to Hell because of the place and culture that he was born into did not allow him to be taught the Gospel?

Thanks,

If God is a truly eternal Being, then He must be acknowledge as an antecedent Being, and must then in some way be before all things and that is why the scriptures declare, "...He is before all things..." Colossians 1:17 The question can only be answered by being further complicating it with a second question, "What is the difference between an act of foreordination and an act of ordination? The terms, by way of translation, are both used in the Holy Bible and therefore both are allowed for. My feeling is that foreordination, or predestination, is always in a particular sense and always positive in objective. Even the foreordained death of Christ was positive in that it's objective was to save, while such passages like, "...They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed." in I Peter 2:8b refer to in-time ordination. Judas stumbled over the Rock of Christ, and this scripture in I Peter would seem to indicate that God appointed that stumbling, but since all scriptures dealing with foreordination are positive in nature, we must conclude that God appointed Judas to this fate based upon his willful choice of disobedience in time.